Robin Scott-Elliot: This could be a body blow to the reputation of the Games
Comment
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.One of the most impressive features of six years of preparation for the Olympics has been how smoothly the £9.3bn project has run.
Aside from a rumpus over ticket sales that ended with an all-but-sold-out Games, there has been little for critics to latch on to. Now a relatively trifling sum in the context of such an immense budget (the wrap around the £500m publicly funded stadium will cost Dow £7m) threatens to strike a body blow to the London Games' reputation. India matters little in Olympic sporting terms – the country's sporting stars are consistent underachievers – but if their athletes choose a boycott (a word that brings Olympic organisers out in a cold sweat) the message will resonate beyond sport.
Lord Coe and Locog, the London organisers, may have felt their hands were tied to an extent by Dow's standing as a sponsor of the International Olympic Committee, but it has become a mess of their own making. Locog raised £700m in sponsorship in the middle of tough economic times towards running the Games – public money is spent only on the construction of the venues and infrastructure – and to fall down over a fraction of that is an error of judgement, especially as there is no need for a wrap around the stadium. It's a cosmetic addition that threatens to cause some lasting damage.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments