No, I will not.
The right hon. Member for Witney (Mr. Cameron), the Leader of the Opposition, chimed in:"““It was the right decision that it went to the north and actually is going to have a regeneration impact. I’ve nothing against ""Greenwich at all, but, after all London did get the Olympics, and so I think that Manchester or Blackpool probably made more sense.””"
[Hon. Members: ““Or Blackpool.””] Well, at least I give the full quotations: some people do not.
On the podcast from the Greater Manchester chamber of commerce, we come to the crème de la crème: the shadow Minister for Manchester. [Hon. Members: ““Who is that?] It is the hon. Member for Tatton (Mr. Osborne), the shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer. He said:"““There is clear evidence that it would bring in revenues and so on and could along with other things””"
regenerate the east end of Manchester. He went on to say:"““I am delighted that Manchester won the competition.””"
Several weeks ago, three senior Opposition Members welcomed everything in the report. What do they then do? They come back and predicate an argument on a Committee that met in the House of Lords for 16 hours.
Betting Gaming and Lotteries
Proceeding contribution from
Richard Caborn
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 28 March 2007.
It occurred during Legislative debate on Betting, Gaming and Lotteries.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
458 c1595-6 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:18:44 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_389152
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_389152
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_389152