This article is thankfully not the opinion of The Mill but just of its author. Sadly, the idea of chasing after money which will be filled with branding (Coca-Cola, Nike, etc) and the ethical issues they bring is not what Mancunians should embrace. Nor should we even think of ourselves as a brand to be sold. Getting Greater Manchester to Olympic levels will mean, as before, more land grab from council housing and green areas, money mostly channelled to big business and not mainly to residents who will suffer the inconvenience and loss, more pollution from building and traffic, sweeping aside brand-incompatible issues like homelessness and poverty, massive crowding in an infrastructure which can’t handle the influx of hundreds of thousands or millions of people, and diversion of funds away from what our city needs to fix first for its residents. History provides mountains of evidence that we residents will not actually benefit; only a small minority of already well-positioned businesses will be able to extract even more wealth. Come on, Mill: don’t let this neoliberal style argument of “big money could soon be yours” replace what is in your heart of fact-based journalism.
Just saw the point about arts funding below and think that's a whole separate point. Tories started putting cuts into arts from the minute they came into government in 2010, and it's clear they did not value the arts (sheer number of culture sectaries we had over their tenure is a good example of this).
Really enjoyed this article. Thought it was worth mentioning the impact that hosting the Olympics can bring in terms of international tourism. Many London venues suffered over the Olympics with visitors staying away in 2012, however London (and the cultural venues within it) hugely benefitted from a significant increase in international tourism as a result of the Olympics. It was essentially a massive advertisement to visit and the 'halo' from the Olympics was in evidence until the pandemic put an end to it. This brought a huge amount of additional revenue into London over 7-8 years.
"Nicholas Hytner, director of the National Theatre, said: "There is a spectacular lack of logic in using money earmarked for the arts to plug the holes in the Olympics bills. The money raided from the lottery will largely affect small, innovative, experimental organisations and individuals who are the lifeblood of creativity in the UK. Pulling the carpet out from under them and nobbling their money is undermining the future of our major arts institutions."
As the costs escalated, there were more raids on lottery and other public creative sector pots to fill in the gaps—and for what? An overpriced month-long jamboree from which most British creatives, especially those in the regions, derived no benefit.
It appears that if creatives want to really benefit from the Olympics, they should surrender their artistic ambitions and divert their energy into the hospitality and service sectors.
I do see your point. Although there was a programme of cultural funding that accompanied the Olympics funded by the Arts Council, which provided 97 million pounds of funding for cultural events and unique commissions (for London
What I was trying to get at is any diversion of funding for the Olympics is a drop in the ocean compared to the overall drop in funding for arts and culture since 2010. Most of the decline in funding is at a local authority level, which impacts local / grass- roots organisations the most
I remember seeing the criteria for those Olympiad funding schemes, and they were ridiculous. The only creatives who benefited were those who had a knack for form-filling, yet the majority of their work was forgettable piffle ("Oh, look five rings everybody! Funding criteria satisfied!"). Those who lost out were artists with unique individual voices who had to either find support elsewhere or give up any creative ambition.
One tends to forget how much lottery funding has impacted the creative sector on a regional level. For example, I remember speaking to UK Film Council staff who told me, pre-election, that the DCMS had told them that even if Labour won the next election, there was no chance that arts lottery funding would go back to the level it was pre-Olympic selection. One could see this with the resulting fall in number of projects being funded in the regions.
Was the Olympics a wise investment? Not really, in 2022 it was reported that the The National Lottery Community Fund was still owed £425 million from the Olympics. That was 15 years ago.
What may be a drop in the ocean to some people could mean the difference between a creative carrying on in their vocation or giving up. I prefer the long term strategy of talent development over corporate jamborees that only benefited those that could comfortably afford tickets and holiday time to attend.
I don’t think you could fit a 400m track where the pitch is at the Etihad Stadium. After the Commonwealth Games the stadium went through major further works to dig down to create what is now the bottom tier and the football pitch and one of the stands was moved in, as the footprint for an athletics track doesn’t suit football where the crowd needs to be close to the pitch. I also very much doubt United would want an athletics track (or wait until 2036 after which the new stadium could be reconfigured). The London Stadium (West Ham) has an issue of the fans being a long way from the pitch because of the athletics track. So the reality is that a new athletics stadium would likely need to be built.
This situation isn't unique to the UK. Other countries have also had to cut back on arts funding in other areas to placate a month-long sporting jamboree, for which those uninterested in such things have to pay the price long after it's over. It's there for bragging value but not much else. Greece and Brazil also suffered cuts in their arts programmes when it came to supporting creatives in film and theatre and what did those countries get for it? Abandoned sport facilities and buildings that are crumbling from vandalism and neglect.
The Olympics is a white elephant, great if you're a sponsor or a corrupt IOC official looking for a bung and there are plenty of countries and cities who are happy to appease those appetites. Then we have the demands from corporate sponsors on who is and isn't welcome and increased security and policing regime. Remember during the Commonwealth Games when Manchester's homeless and other "undesirables" were at risk of arrest if they were caught in the city center during events? Well expect that to increase and the definition of "undesirables" to be widened out.
If you want to nurture the publicly funded arts sector, the best approach is to prevent this parasitic event from ever returning to UK soil.
Totally agree. I admire athletics and athletes, but the Olympics is a big tub-thumping hormonal event which makes three winners at one specific moment for the dozens of losers for each event. And the biggest losers are always, always the residents of the host city.
The comments here are as interesting as the article - thank you for generating this discussion! Although I agree with the critics of chasing the money, I also remember the legacy of the Commonwealth games. That wasn’t just beneficial to sports infrastructure but it also had a marvellous volunteer programme, was an inspiration for art projects, promoted youth sports development, enabled Manchester residents to watch the sports events and much more.
I think a bid for the olympics offers the Manchester population hopes and dreams for Manchester which the present business and property projects will never inspire.
More chance of getting the government to cough up £20bn quid to build a giant golden rotating statue of Frank Sidebottom than this particular fantasy vanity project.
I’m afraid that our rivals would do what Sydney did last time - show films of the most deprived areas, crime stats and the weather, interspersed with glorious shots of Sydney or wherever - it was humiliating.
I don’t want my city to go through that again.
I was in the city centre for the announcement of who had won the games last time we bid.
I was so sure we’d win.
Of course we didn’t, and for an instant there was a silence, then someone started singing ‘Always look on the bright side of life’. The crowd relaxed, had a laugh.
I think that boat might have sailed - Barcelona was the last city that wasn't a capital or mega-city (L.A.) to win the summer games and that glamour is now a key factor in deciding where they go.
The arts did lose lottery funding (as did the other good causes) which was redistributed to the Olympics for a few years but did benefit from two major national cultural schemes. There was a four year programme funded with left over money from the Millennium celebrations and the North West hosted three major schemes including Lakes Alive - free outdoor events across Cumbria and the Lake District. The official Cultural Olympiad was also nationwide and there were four opening spectacles - one each in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as well as the English which took place in Windermere. These and many other events in both programmes were free and/or community based attracting hundreds of thousand of people who didn't normally attend arts events.
This was similar to (insured by?) what happened in Manchester for the Commonwealth Games with a six month N.W. programme leading up to the games and a free festival during them.
I do not think that being trafficked as a child, as described by Sir Mo Farah himself should be airbrushed as ‘escaping from genocide’. Mo Farah’s story is remarkable, even more so given the trauma and damage inflicted upon him as a vulnerable child. He did not speak of this until 2022. We owe him his truth at the very least.
This article is thankfully not the opinion of The Mill but just of its author. Sadly, the idea of chasing after money which will be filled with branding (Coca-Cola, Nike, etc) and the ethical issues they bring is not what Mancunians should embrace. Nor should we even think of ourselves as a brand to be sold. Getting Greater Manchester to Olympic levels will mean, as before, more land grab from council housing and green areas, money mostly channelled to big business and not mainly to residents who will suffer the inconvenience and loss, more pollution from building and traffic, sweeping aside brand-incompatible issues like homelessness and poverty, massive crowding in an infrastructure which can’t handle the influx of hundreds of thousands or millions of people, and diversion of funds away from what our city needs to fix first for its residents. History provides mountains of evidence that we residents will not actually benefit; only a small minority of already well-positioned businesses will be able to extract even more wealth. Come on, Mill: don’t let this neoliberal style argument of “big money could soon be yours” replace what is in your heart of fact-based journalism.
Just saw the point about arts funding below and think that's a whole separate point. Tories started putting cuts into arts from the minute they came into government in 2010, and it's clear they did not value the arts (sheer number of culture sectaries we had over their tenure is a good example of this).
Really enjoyed this article. Thought it was worth mentioning the impact that hosting the Olympics can bring in terms of international tourism. Many London venues suffered over the Olympics with visitors staying away in 2012, however London (and the cultural venues within it) hugely benefitted from a significant increase in international tourism as a result of the Olympics. It was essentially a massive advertisement to visit and the 'halo' from the Olympics was in evidence until the pandemic put an end to it. This brought a huge amount of additional revenue into London over 7-8 years.
Cuts in other art sectors to fund the 2012 Olympics were being protested in 2007.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2007/apr/23/voluntarysector.artsfunding
"Nicholas Hytner, director of the National Theatre, said: "There is a spectacular lack of logic in using money earmarked for the arts to plug the holes in the Olympics bills. The money raided from the lottery will largely affect small, innovative, experimental organisations and individuals who are the lifeblood of creativity in the UK. Pulling the carpet out from under them and nobbling their money is undermining the future of our major arts institutions."
As the costs escalated, there were more raids on lottery and other public creative sector pots to fill in the gaps—and for what? An overpriced month-long jamboree from which most British creatives, especially those in the regions, derived no benefit.
It appears that if creatives want to really benefit from the Olympics, they should surrender their artistic ambitions and divert their energy into the hospitality and service sectors.
I do see your point. Although there was a programme of cultural funding that accompanied the Olympics funded by the Arts Council, which provided 97 million pounds of funding for cultural events and unique commissions (for London
and regions). So it wasn't purely that cultural funds were plundered for the Olympics. Evaluation of the Cultural Olympiad can be found here: https://www.beatrizgarcia.net/projects-newer/london-2012-cultural-olympiad-evaluation/
What I was trying to get at is any diversion of funding for the Olympics is a drop in the ocean compared to the overall drop in funding for arts and culture since 2010. Most of the decline in funding is at a local authority level, which impacts local / grass- roots organisations the most
I remember seeing the criteria for those Olympiad funding schemes, and they were ridiculous. The only creatives who benefited were those who had a knack for form-filling, yet the majority of their work was forgettable piffle ("Oh, look five rings everybody! Funding criteria satisfied!"). Those who lost out were artists with unique individual voices who had to either find support elsewhere or give up any creative ambition.
One tends to forget how much lottery funding has impacted the creative sector on a regional level. For example, I remember speaking to UK Film Council staff who told me, pre-election, that the DCMS had told them that even if Labour won the next election, there was no chance that arts lottery funding would go back to the level it was pre-Olympic selection. One could see this with the resulting fall in number of projects being funded in the regions.
Was the Olympics a wise investment? Not really, in 2022 it was reported that the The National Lottery Community Fund was still owed £425 million from the Olympics. That was 15 years ago.
https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/none-425m-borrowed-15-years-ago-lottery-fund-olympics-repaid/fundraising/article/1797796
What may be a drop in the ocean to some people could mean the difference between a creative carrying on in their vocation or giving up. I prefer the long term strategy of talent development over corporate jamborees that only benefited those that could comfortably afford tickets and holiday time to attend.
I don’t think you could fit a 400m track where the pitch is at the Etihad Stadium. After the Commonwealth Games the stadium went through major further works to dig down to create what is now the bottom tier and the football pitch and one of the stands was moved in, as the footprint for an athletics track doesn’t suit football where the crowd needs to be close to the pitch. I also very much doubt United would want an athletics track (or wait until 2036 after which the new stadium could be reconfigured). The London Stadium (West Ham) has an issue of the fans being a long way from the pitch because of the athletics track. So the reality is that a new athletics stadium would likely need to be built.
Plus why would City be interested in losing half the season whilst the stadium is converted, then reconverted back? Total duffer of a plan
Apart from all of the above the prospect of driving a motorway through the Peak District to Sheffield doesn’t bear thinking about.
The last time the United Kingdom had the Olympics, the rest of the public arts sector suffered:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/mar/31/theatrenews.olympics2012
And under the coalition and Tory government, public arts funding decreased further.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/26/culture-labour-plan-save-the-arts-tory-cuts
This situation isn't unique to the UK. Other countries have also had to cut back on arts funding in other areas to placate a month-long sporting jamboree, for which those uninterested in such things have to pay the price long after it's over. It's there for bragging value but not much else. Greece and Brazil also suffered cuts in their arts programmes when it came to supporting creatives in film and theatre and what did those countries get for it? Abandoned sport facilities and buildings that are crumbling from vandalism and neglect.
https://www.businessinsider.com/abandoned-olympic-venues-around-the-world-photos-rio-2016-8#the-olympic-golf-course-is-mostly-deserted-there-are-sometimes-only-three-or-four-groups-playing-at-a-time-12
The Olympics is a white elephant, great if you're a sponsor or a corrupt IOC official looking for a bung and there are plenty of countries and cities who are happy to appease those appetites. Then we have the demands from corporate sponsors on who is and isn't welcome and increased security and policing regime. Remember during the Commonwealth Games when Manchester's homeless and other "undesirables" were at risk of arrest if they were caught in the city center during events? Well expect that to increase and the definition of "undesirables" to be widened out.
If you want to nurture the publicly funded arts sector, the best approach is to prevent this parasitic event from ever returning to UK soil.
Totally agree. I admire athletics and athletes, but the Olympics is a big tub-thumping hormonal event which makes three winners at one specific moment for the dozens of losers for each event. And the biggest losers are always, always the residents of the host city.
The comments here are as interesting as the article - thank you for generating this discussion! Although I agree with the critics of chasing the money, I also remember the legacy of the Commonwealth games. That wasn’t just beneficial to sports infrastructure but it also had a marvellous volunteer programme, was an inspiration for art projects, promoted youth sports development, enabled Manchester residents to watch the sports events and much more.
I think a bid for the olympics offers the Manchester population hopes and dreams for Manchester which the present business and property projects will never inspire.
As well as a velodrome, we also have a big aquatics centre that could be used!
More chance of getting the government to cough up £20bn quid to build a giant golden rotating statue of Frank Sidebottom than this particular fantasy vanity project.
I’m afraid that our rivals would do what Sydney did last time - show films of the most deprived areas, crime stats and the weather, interspersed with glorious shots of Sydney or wherever - it was humiliating.
I don’t want my city to go through that again.
I was in the city centre for the announcement of who had won the games last time we bid.
I was so sure we’d win.
Of course we didn’t, and for an instant there was a silence, then someone started singing ‘Always look on the bright side of life’. The crowd relaxed, had a laugh.
I’ve never been so proud to be a Manc!
How old will the Gallaghers be in 2036?
I think that boat might have sailed - Barcelona was the last city that wasn't a capital or mega-city (L.A.) to win the summer games and that glamour is now a key factor in deciding where they go.
The arts did lose lottery funding (as did the other good causes) which was redistributed to the Olympics for a few years but did benefit from two major national cultural schemes. There was a four year programme funded with left over money from the Millennium celebrations and the North West hosted three major schemes including Lakes Alive - free outdoor events across Cumbria and the Lake District. The official Cultural Olympiad was also nationwide and there were four opening spectacles - one each in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as well as the English which took place in Windermere. These and many other events in both programmes were free and/or community based attracting hundreds of thousand of people who didn't normally attend arts events.
This was similar to (insured by?) what happened in Manchester for the Commonwealth Games with a six month N.W. programme leading up to the games and a free festival during them.
As well as the velodrome, we also have an aquatics centre that could easily be reused!
I do not think that being trafficked as a child, as described by Sir Mo Farah himself should be airbrushed as ‘escaping from genocide’. Mo Farah’s story is remarkable, even more so given the trauma and damage inflicted upon him as a vulnerable child. He did not speak of this until 2022. We owe him his truth at the very least.
Accomodation will be much better in Fallowfield this time.....
https://www.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/preferred-bidder-selected-for-approved-university-of-manchester-fallowfield-campus-redevelopment/#:~:text=Viridis%2C%20a%20consortium%20of%20Equitix,Campus%20redevelopment%20under%20a%20Design%2C