Absolutely. That is why we say that all those factors will be taken into account. The memorandum of understanding states:"““amounts to be agreed at the time.””"
That is what the MOU is all about, and the way that it has been interpreted by some hon. Members is fundamentally wrong. We believe that this is the right approach. It would not be prudent at this stage to close off any of those funding options to meet a hypothetical future shortfall by capping the amount of council tax that the Mayor may raise. The GLA takes exactly the same view.
In the event of cost overrun, the Government and the Mayor will need to consider all the options available to them. It is right that council tax will fund some of the games, as they will bring a great many benefits to Londoners—again, that has been explained already this evening—but we have no intention of making a dramatic raid on ordinary council tax payers. If cost overruns were to occur, we would want to balance any possible costs sensitively to avoid imposing punitive costs on individual households. Nevertheless, the Olympic project will be overseen jointly by the Government and the GLA. Under the existing funding and governance arrangements, we have shared interests in running things properly and keeping down costs. That is the right way to do things.
We must ensure that we retain a shared interest in keeping down costs, but it would be entirely imprudent to cap the liability of one of those parties at this early stage in the process. It is therefore vital that everyone involved should have the maximum incentive to remain hawkish about keeping down the costs. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already called in the aquatic centre proposals because of the possible cost overrun. I send a very clear message to all those who will be involved in contractual agreements that we will expect them to keep to those costs. That can be done—it can be done by the type of management that we have at terminal 5.
The Government feel that it would be irresponsible to place a statutory limit on council tax funding at the outset of the Olympic project. I reassure hon. Members again that in the unlikely and unfortunate scenario in which costs run over budget, we would sit down with the Mayor to work out a sensible solution that would not cripple the average household. The Mayor and the GLA are content with that reassurance, so I hope that hon. Members will also accept it and that the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid-Kent will withdraw the new clause.
London Olympics Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Richard Caborn
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 December 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on London Olympics Bill 2005-06.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c779 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:32:34 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_284242
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_284242
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_284242