Can't be bothered to copy this rubbish!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/19/london-olympic-park-cleanup_n_1283071.html

http://www.judyhan.com/otherwise/?paged=3

I suppose some people are very excited about this, but I’m not exactly feeling celebratory. Here are 3 reasons why.
2018 Winter Olympics Go to South Korea

Yet, corruption involving high-ranking Olympic officials from South Korea has also brought embarrassment to the I.O.C. Kim Un-yong, a former I.O.C. vice president, resigned in 2005 after being convicted of embezzlement. Lee Kun-hee, the chair­man of Samsung, an Olympic sponsor, relinquished his duties as an I.O.C. delegate in 2008 and was convicted of tax evasion; he was later pardoned and resumed his role with the I.O.C. last year.

Park, the head of South Korea’s Olympic Committee, was con­victed of embezzlement but pardoned in 2007. Cho [Yang-ho], the chairman of Pyeongchang’s bid committee and of Korean Air, was charged with tax evasion in 1999 and given a three-year prison term, but settled with the government for $12 million.

Reason 1. Pyeongchang Winter Olympics committee was led by convicted corpo­rate criminals, but that didn’t seem to matter. This picture says a thousand words:




South Korean President Lee “Bulldozer” Myung-bak shakes hands with Lee Kun-hee, the former chairman of “No Labor Union” Samsung. When LMB pardoned Lee Kun-hee in 2009, it was explicitly so that LKH can help Pyeongchang in its bid to host the 2018 Winter Olympics. So what if LKH had been convicted of evading tens of millions of dollars in taxes and embezzling corporate funds to secure his son’s position as his successor at Samsung? And so what if LKH had pissed off LMB since the pardon by criticizing the President’s economic policies? They’re making nice, clearly.

Arguably, Samsung kills workers. They may make pretty microwaves and LCD TVs, but Samsung is also known for incredibly horrific labor practices and com­plete disregard for workers’ health and safety. As the state kowtows to (or shakes hands with) the insanely powerful and wealthy Samsung, critics are outraged by South Korea’s future as the “Republic of Samsung.”

And that’s far from a good thing. Corruption and labor repression aside, a series of suicides by injured, ill, and desperate assembly workers in Samsung’s semiconduc­tor plant has recently led to a court ruling that Samsung must pay compensa­tions to workers injured and killed on the job. Duh. But knowing them, they’ll spend more money on attorneys to fight the ruling than pay the workers and their families. Especially poignant: there was a young college student who jumped from the 13th floor of the company dormitory in January 2011 after suf­fering from undiagnosed and untreated medical ailments and depression result­ing from working with toxic fumes and chemicals at a Samsung LCD plant. Just read this blog, and you’ll see why so many are determined to bring Samsung to justice.

Reason 2. Without a strong resistance from local residents and activists, Pyeongchang Olympics will devastate the environment. The best known contro­versy is the ski resort construction on Gariwang Mountain, a heavily protected old-growth forest full of (Mongolian) oak, yew and birch trees and home to sev­eral endangered species like martens (I don’t know which ones, exactly), wildcats, and flying squirrels that depend on these trees. MBC reports that PyeongChang is counting on “special legislations” to allow development in protected areas, and have apparently suggested that trees and endangered vegetation can simply replanted elsewhere — yikes! The environmental activist group Green Korea now has the daunting task of opposing not only the insane destruction of Korea’s major rivers and streams (here and here) but also one of the few protected forests in the country now designated as a likely site for Olympic ski resorts. If the previ­ous Olympics in Korea resulted in massive urban displacement, development and gentrification, I think this one will likely highlight growing concerns for environ­mental justice and sustainability.

And Reason 3. The Olympics have a terrible track record in terms of actual eco­nomic benefits for the host community. There are some intangible benefits, I sup­pose, since the organizers are hoping for more international profile and increased tourism and civic pride, but time and time again, the Olympics have proven to be ruinous for the host city. Famously, Montreal’s 1976 Olympics left the city with $2.7 billion of debt that it finally paid off nearly 30 years later in 2005. The Barcelona Organizing Committee in 1992 supposedly broke even, but the public debt incurred rose to $6.1 billion. Athens budgeted $1.6 billion to host the 2004 games in 1997, but the final public cost ended up being around $16 billion—10 times the original budget. Even if the PyeongChang Olympics turns out not to be a total financial disaster, I can think of a few other places where public funding like this could do tremendous social good. Like offsetting college tuition, improv­ing welfare for the poor and the working poor, and building the much-needed care infrastructure for the rapidly aging society that is South Korea…

http://www.wafb.com/story/16972326/uk-calls-up-military-reserves-for-olympic-duty

LONDON (AP) - Britain is planning a massive Olympics security exercise this week centering on a mock emergency on the London subway system - a test that evokes uncomfortable reminders of the deadliest attack on the city since World War II.

The security test announced Monday envisions that an emergency takes place on the busiest days of the 2012 London Olympics. Authorities declined to reveal the exact scenario that emergency services will be addressing, since dealing with a surprise is part of the test.

"It is testing communications right from the very bottom from the constable or fire officer who is responding right the way up to Cobra, (the government's emergency committee)," Assistant Commissioner Chris Allison, the national Olympic security coordinator, told reporters at Scotland Yard.

The public will see police and emergency services hustling to the shuttered Aldwych Tube station starting at midmorning Wednesday and people being "evacuated" from the stop as part of the test, dubbed "Forward Defensive." The Aldwych station, located on the Strand in central London, has been used in art exhibits, plays and films - offering a venue complete with dusty platforms, narrow staircases and aging electrical systems.

The two-day test is a part of a multifaceted security operation aimed at creating confidence in the safety of the games. Some 2,500 people will take part, though much of the action will be taking place behind closed doors.

"We need to be confident that we have the right people in the right places, that we understand how others operate and that we are talking to each other at the right levels and in the right way," Allison said in a statement.

He said this was part of series of Olympic security exercises they have run but "the first with such a significant response from the emergency services on the ground."

The test Wednesday and Thursday will be staged as if it is Aug. 8 and 9 - the two busiest days projected for the Olympics, which run from July 27 to Aug.12.

One of the primary areas under review is the communication capacities of emergency workers, different police services, government ministers and transport officials.

London emergency workers have experienced communications problems before. Rescue and police efforts after the July 7, 2005, transit bombings that killed 52 commuters in London were severely hampered by emergency workers' inability to communicate underground. Many have wondered whether more could have been done for the injured if communications had been better.

The attacks came a day after London was awarded the Olympics, linking the two events forever.

Security has a long been a critical concern for the Olympics, particularly since 11 Israeli athletes and coaches died in a terror attack at the 1972 Munich Games. British authorities have planned for a threat level for the London games of "severe," meaning an attack is "highly likely."

British authorities have refused to discuss whether there has been any particular risk to the London Olympics, but a huge international media presence gives the Olympics a ready platform for any terror group intent on wreaking havoc at live events broadcast worldwide.

Britain's defense secretary, meanwhile, announced that about 2,100 military reserves have been called up to help protect the event. Philip Hammond confirmed in a written statement Monday that the reservists would be part of up to 13,500 U.K. troops on land, at sea and in the skies guarding the games.

Typhoon fighter jets, helicopters, two warships and bomb disposal experts will also be on duty to guard against Olympic security threats.

http://voices.yahoo.com/was-pyeongchang-right-choice-winter-olympics-8762745.html

The International Olympic Committee selected Pyeongchang, South Korea, Wednesday as the host for the 2018 Winter Olympics. Pyeongchang received an astounding 63 out of 95 possible votes. Munich, Germany, came in a far second with just 25 votes. Third place went to Annecy, France, with a mere seven votes. You can say that the third time is the charm for the small town of Pyeongchang; it applied for the 2010 and 2014 Winter Games but lost to Vancouver, Canada, and Sochi, Russia.

Is Pyeongchang the best selection for the 2018 Winter Olympics? In order to host the games, the city needs a total of 13 venues. It currently only has seven, and these seven will have to be renovated in order to be ready for the games. While renovating those seven, it also has to build six more. The city of Pyeongchang is not certain when it will have these venues completed.

Jeong Hong-sub, a member of the bid committee, released a statement in which he said, "Each venue has different conditions and a different building schedule, so it is difficult to give exact completion dates," according to Korea JoonAng Daily. So there is some uncertainty about the country's ability to complete the venues in a timely fashion.

Transportation is also a very important concern for Pyeongchang, especially when it will be hosting an event of this magnitude. In order to keep up with the demand, it has to improve the transportation system. In order to fulfill the needs of the tourist boom that comes with the Olympics, it will have to spend an estimated $5.4 trillion to do so.

Location is also a big issue that the Pyeongchang local government and South Korea will have to tackle. The city of Pyeongchang is about 158 miles from Incheon International Airport. This is about a two-hour drive. This is not the ideal journey for the weary, jet-lagged traveler. After spending hours and hours on an international flight to South Korea, you then have to travel two hours by car or train in order to reach your final destination. The city is going to attempt to construct a high speed rail system that will hopefully cut down that trip by an hour, but again, this is still not the most ideal situation for the weary traveler.

When selecting Pyeongchang, one is curious to know whether the selection committee considered these conditions or whether it was kind of glossed over. It will be interesting to watch and see whether Pyeongchang and South Korea can step up to the task.

http://londonist.com/2012/02/road-rage-over-olympic-charge-for-cycling-spectators.php

First the good news – thousands more tickets are set to be released for this summer’s games. The bad news? They’re for the two cycling events which many assumed would be free. The London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOGOC) has provoked the ire of the British Cycling Association by announcing plans to charge spectators to watch critical stretches of the cycling events.

The plans will see two prime viewing areas flagged for charging. The first is along 2km of Box Hill, comprising the tough zigzag road component of the race. The second is at the summit on Donkey’s Road, likely to be a good place to see breakaways, attacking manoeuvres and potential pile-ups.

LOGOC had been applauded for negotiating with the National Trust and increasing capacity at Box Hill from 3,500 to 15,000 after protests from spectators and cyclists, the current Sports Personality of the Year Mark Cavendish among them. Yet there is much anger at the proposal to charge spectators for the first time to view the critical hilly sections. It’s particularly disappointing that the event was offered as a consolation for those who missed out on tickets in the ballot last year. When the race route was launched, cyclist Bradley Wiggins himself said of the summer’s course: “It’s free for spectators so they can come along and poke their heads over the barriers.” Such head pokers can now look forward to being escorted away by security.

LOGOC stresses that 120km of the 140km of the race is still free to view for spectators. British Cycling President Brian Cookson said that while he understood “You can’t have an unrestricted free-for-all like the Tour de France”, he lamented LOGOC’s plans, musing: “It would be absolutely better if it was free of charge because cycling is a sport that is traditionally free to watch.” London Assembly Chair of the economic, culture and sport committee Dee Doocey called the proposals “Dreadful and most regrettable”, adding, “it is totally against what LOGOC has been saying all along.”

LOGOC has yet to announce prices for tickets, but claim they will reflect the cost of erecting grandstand seating, toilets and the all important refreshment areas. The announcement follows reports this week that tickets will be required for those entering the Olympic Park without a specific event ticket. Those thinking of avoiding the hassle entirely and watching it at home should be warned that they’ll incur the company of celebrity crisp merchant Gary Lineker.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9098320/London-2012-Olympics-ticket-sales-the-cruel-engine-of-disappointment-as-Boris-Johnson-demands-transparency.html

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has labelled the sale of London 2012 Olympic tickets as "the cruel engine of disappointment" and called for greater transparency of the controversial process.

Johnson, a member of the Olympic Board, told the London Assembly he fully supported their damning report, Sold Out?, published last week. The report called for the release of greater details about how many tickets in each event have been made available for sale to the public.

The Mayor said he would be pressuring the Board to release ticket details.

"I fully share the desire of the Assembly for transparency and yes, we will be raising this at the Olympic board, the whole country wants to see transparency," Johnson said.

The London Assembly has raised concerns that the number of public tickets available for highly sought after events, such as track cycling, swimming, the ceremonies and athletics finals, is far fewer than the 75 per cent of all tickets organisers Locog say were made available to the public in general.

 Locog have already revealed that just 29,000 seats of the 80,000-seat Olympic stadium have been made available for sale to the UK public, while public tickets in some categories for the Velodrome are believed to be in the hundreds, rather than the thousands. 

The fear is that many more tickets to less popular Olympic events such as football are available to the public in order to achieve the goal of 75 per cent.

Previous Games have seen similar controversies. In Sydney, in 2000, organisers revealed they had just 14 tickets for sale in one price category to a diving final when they released their detailed ticketing information.

London Assembly chair of the economic, culture and sport committee, Dee Doocey, said she was encouraged the Mayor would pressure the Olympic board to release the ticket information immediately rather than after all the tickets had been sold.

"I am delighted that the Mayor supports the London Assembly's call for transparency from Locog," she said.

"In particular I welcome the fact that he has agreed to try to persuade Locog at the next Olympic Board meeting to immediately release the information.

"We need to know now how many tickets have been sold for each event, and at what price. If this information is not provided until all the tickets are sold it will be too late to do anything about it.

"Locog’s excuses for not publishing information are indefensible from an organisation that only exists because of a huge investment of public money."
Share:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24037591-cameron-and-boris-rethink-plan-to-close-the-mall-for-three-months.do

The Mall is due to shut for more than three months for the Queen's Jubilee and the Olympics, prompting fears of a summer of traffic gridlock.

The road's unprecedented closure is part of a wider lockdown because of the Games, with half of St James's Park also within a 32-acre no-go zone in the heart of the capital.

Mayor Boris Johnson today spoke of his anger over the restrictions, which were given planning consent last year by Westminster council, and ordered London 2012 organiser Locog back to the drawing board to minimise disruption.

David Cameron, whose Downing Street home overlooks the affected site, has personally stepped in and told Olympic planners to keep any traffic disruption to a minimum, Whitehall sources disclosed.

The Prime Minister was so concerned at the closures that he raised the issue while chairing a Downing Street meeting of key officials in charge of Olympic planning.

A source said: "Mr Cameron said that he wanted everything possible done in order to reduce disruption.

"He was very clear that London residents and businesses must be able to carry on normally as much as possible."

Games chiefs will seal off The Mall and park from June 20 witha 10ft-high security fence. The London 2012 workforce will then move in to erect a 5,000-capacity grandstand finish on The Mall for the marathon, cycling and race-walk finishes.

The team will also be setting up the 16,000-seat beach volleyball court, the third largest Olympic venue, in Horse Guards Parade.

Before that The Mall will be closed from June 3 for the Queen's Jubilee celebration, followed by Trooping of the Colour at Horse Guards.

It is not expected to re-open until up to 10 days after the Paralympics, which finish on September 9. Games chiefs suggest that The Mall could in theory re-open for the two weeks between the Olympics and Paralympics. But this is thought to be unlikely because of security concerns.

Full details of the planning application show that the entire western half of St James's Park will be off limits to local residents for much of the summer. It will be used for six beach volleyball practice courts, broadcast compounds and various "back-of-house" Olympic facilities.

The park attracts almost seven million visitors a year and is a lunchtime haven for Whitehall civil servants. It is also where Mr Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne take their morning runs. The Mayor, who as chairman of Transport for London could torpedo the plan, told the Standard "I have flatly rejected these proposals. They are unacceptable."

A mayoral source added: "The onus is now on Locog to come back with something acceptable.

"Mr Johnson wanted to know if there was a way of partially leaving this open or staggering it in some way."

A Locog spokeswoman said: "We have a short period of time to build two big sports venues and are working with the Mayor and Transport for London to minimise disruption. We are looking for solutions to reduce the impact for vehicles where we can."

The meeting at which Mr Cameron expressed his concern was the second special "Cobra summit" of key Olympics personnel called in to update the Prime Minister on progress.

As well as Olympic organisers, the gathering included Transport for London and police and military commanders.

Officials are now working on a range of ideas to reduce the disruption. A spokesman for the Department for Culture said: "We are staging what will be an amazing summer of events in London.

"That will mean that some disruption is inevitable, but we are working with Locog and TfL to ensure that it is kept to a minimum."

Locog has chosen the sports arenas in central London to beam historic backdrops such as Buckingham Palace around the world.

But the significant concerns have been expressed as a result of the sheer extent of the planned shutdown.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/21/the-bitter-taste-of-brazils-world-cup/

“The people believe that they will prosper with the arrival of the World Cup, but the truth is that they will be brutally repressed,” warns Roberto Morales, advisor to Socialist Liberty Party Representative Marcelo Freixo. The agreements between the Brazilian government and the Federate International Football Association (FIFA) restrict merchandise sales around the stadiums and ban vendors from coming within two kilometers of the events.

“The World Cup will be great business, but only for the big sporting goods companies and those authorized to sell food and drinks,” Morales laments.

Morales is part of the Popular Committee of the World Cup that was created when people decided to resist being forcibly evicted from their homes to make way for new facilities for the Panamerican Games in Rio de Janeiro in 2007. “We began to see that evictions aren’t the only problem with hosting big events– we also saw other problems, such as corruption. The new facilities for the Panamerican Games were supposed to cost 300 million reales but they ending up costing 3.5 billion.” That’s a total of nearly two billion dollars.

This situation is especially visible in Rio de Janeiro–one of the main sites for the 2014 World Cup and the host of the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. Popular Committees have been formed in all 12 of the cities that will host games for the World Cup, and they are mobilizing under the banner that demands that “The World Cup and the Olympics must respect human rights.”

On Dec. 12, the committees presented officials of the twelve site cities with a dossier entitled “Mega-events and Human Rights Violations in Brazil.” The documents analyze issues ranging from the right to housing, to labor rights for the workers who build the new facilities, to the lack of environmental impact studies on projects that are running up against the clock.

The Right to Housing

Brazil has a housing deficit of 5 million units. The construction projects for the World Cup, from the new stadiums to airport and highway renovations, will cost 20 billion dollars—all for a tournament that will last less than a month. To put this amount in context, that’s nearly half of Uruguay’s annual GDP. This colossal investment will be extracted from all tax-paying Brazilians for the benefit of a few select corporations.

Even though the government hasn’t given out any information on how many families will be evicted by the new projects, it is estimated that they will affect 170,000 people. The group of Popular Committees has detected a pattern that is repeated in all of the cities where evictions will occur. They claim that “The lack of prior information and notification generates instability and fear with respect to the future,” which paralyzes the at-risk families and puts them at the mercy of speculators and powerful interests.

Nearly all who will be affected live in poor neighborhoods and often times in precarious, informal housing arrangements. In the metropolitan area of Curitiba, 1,173 properties will be affected by the construction of the new 52-kilometer Metropolitan Corridor, new rail access points, and the reconstruction and widening of various avenues and highways. The expansion of the airport and its parking lots implies the removal of 320 homes, but not a single one of the inhabitants has been informed about the compensation they will receive or where they will be relocated.

In Belo Horizonte a giant real estate development is being built that takes up a full 25,000 acres of fertile land to construct 75,000 apartments. This development will be called Cup Village and will originally serve as the lodging place for the different delegations, tourists, and journalists attending the World Cup. In the city of Fortaleza, 15,000 families will be affected; 10,000 of which will have to be resettled, but they still haven’t been informed of where they will live.

The majority of those affected will be displaced as a result of expanding existing roads or building new ones. The Fortaleza Expressway will cross through 22 neighborhoods to connect hotels to the Castelâo stadium. This group of displaced families can choose between an indemnity, a unit in a housing project, or an exchange for another property in a neighborhood in Brasilia. Even though 70 percent have chosen the housing project, societal pressures have stopped the entire process until a better solution, with better conditions, is presented.

Hundreds of homes slated to be demolished this year around the periphery of Fortaleza have been marked with green ink, but the inhabitants of those homes haven’t heard a single word from the officials about when the demolitions are going to happen.

The Popular Committees of the World Cup affirm that the government is applying “strategies of war and persecution” in 21 villas and favelas in seven host cities, “such as the marking of houses for demolition without explanation, warrantless home invasions, and the undue appropriation and destruction of property.” This is on top of threats, the cutting-off of services, and other acts of intimidation.

The work being done for the World Cup facilitates a kind of “social cleansing” motivated by property speculation and the eviction of families that have lived in their homes for four or five decades. It’s happening in San Pablo with the construction of the Parque Lineal Llanos del Tietê, a flood zone where 4,000 families have already been removed and another 6,000 will soon be expelled.

Given the experience of previous mega-sports events in both developed and developing countries, the cost of living will rise and real estate speculation will take off as development displaces some and attracts those who can afford more expensive property. The thousands of displaced are merely pushed to the periphery.

State of Exception

The Brazilian Parliament is being forced to pass the “General Law of the World Cup” that establishes the rules that will govern how the Confederations Cup of June 2013 and the World Cup of the following year are carried out. But even after months of debate, the law still hasn’t even been passed out of the special committee in the House of Representatives that was assigned to analyze it. The Sports Minister, Aldo Rebelo, has since promised the Secretary General of FIFA, Jerome Valcke, that the bill would be voted on after more deliberation in March.

The bill was presented in the Brazilian Congress by the executive branch, using criteria established by FIFA. On Dec. 6, 2011 it was brought to a general vote by the Representatives, but the vote was delayed because a number of representatives deemed the bill contradictory to existing Brazilian law. For example, the sale of alcohol is prohibited in stadiums, but FIFA demands lifting the restriction, which, according to some Brazilian legislators, could lead to violent consequences.

Another sticking point revolves around FIFA’s refusal to allow the special deal that grants students, retirees, recipients of state assistance, and handicapped people half-priced entrance. Additionally, the so-called “Pelé Law” that gives professional athlete unions 5 percent of income generated by the broadcasts of sporting events would be completely suspended for the World Cup games.

FIFA is also demanding that the host country grant visas and work permits to all of the delegation members, invitees, employees of the respective soccer confederations, journalists and spectators of other countries that have purchased tickets to the World Cup. These special permits expire on December 31st of 2014, six months after the end of the World Cup. In sum, a great deal of the country’s national legislation must be suspended to attend to the demands of FIFA.

The report from the Popular Committees of the World Cup also denounces the violation of the rights of workers in the informal sector (almost two-thirds of Brazilians). Article 11 of the Law of the World Cup prohibits the sale of any kind of merchandise in “official competition locations, in their immediate surroundings, and their main access ways,” without the express authorization of FIFA.

The definition and limits of the “exclusive areas” for the sale of FIFA products will have to be demarcated by individual cities “taking into account the requirements of FIFA or of authorized third parties.” Street vendors will be expressly excluded from these areas. The exact perimeters of these restrictive zones still hasn’t been defined, but based on previous experience, it can be estimated that the “exclusion zone” will be two kilometers.

Article 23 penalizes bars that try to transmit World Cup games without the appropriate authorization or that promote certain brands not authorized by FIFA. The National Business Confederation and vendor unions have expressed their strong opposition to the Law of the World Cup.

Perhaps the most troubling part of all is that the bill provides that through Article 37 “Special trials for the processing and judgment of cases related to the events may be formed.” Finally, Article 38 provides that FIFA, its legal representatives, consultants and employees “will remain free from costs, emoluments, fees, and other expenses to the institutions of Federal Justice, Labor Justice, Military Justice,” and other branches of Brazilian government.

The vassalage that FIFA insists on imposing on host countries might lead to the delay of the law’s approval and generate problems in the government’s allied base, perhaps even in the ruling Partido Trabajadores (Workers Party).

The International Olympic Committee has similar demands. In 2009, Law 12.035 was passed which, in addition to the previously mentioned provisions, establishes the transfer of public real estate funds to the Olympic Games, the transfer of exclusive public property spaces, and “the designation of resources to cover the eventual operational deficits of the Organizing Committee of the 2016 Rio Games.”

The law declares that between July 5 and Sept. 26 “advertising contracts in public spaces in airports or in federal areas that are of interest to the 2016 Rio Games” are null and void.

The power accumulated by sports federations in recent decades is capable of imposing its will on millions of citizens across the world—the people who sustain them in the first place—and on powerful countries of every continent, without being subject to public debates that could bring to light the framework of interests behind the many abuses.

Upscaling the stadiums

Around 203,000 people attended the 1950 World Cup final in Macaraná. At the time, that represented about 8.5% of the total population of Rio de Janeiro. The “general” and “popular” seating sections where middle and working class people watched the game, represented 80% of the total seating. Spectators watched the whole game standing up, making room for one another in a stadium that had a maximum capacity of 199,000.

The stadiums where diverse sectors of society used to mix began to change in the 1990s. The justification for this kind of “Europeanization” of the stadiums was security and comfort, and it was part of a global campaign in which FIFA, local soccer federations, and clubs (spurred by private sponsors) participated. Towards the end of the decade, ticket price rose, making it more and more difficult for working-class families and the lower middle-class to attend games.

The legendary Macaraná stadium saw its capacity reduced almost by half, to only 103,022 people, after a remodeling project in 1999 undertaken to host the Club Word Cup in 2000. That project installed individual seating in the top ring of the stadium. Between April 2005 and January of 2006, the stadium was closed for renovations to host the 2007 Panamerican Games. This time the “general admission” section— where the audience used to stand— was replaced with individual seating, further reducing the capacity to just 82,238. But at least the seats are reclinable.

Before the current remodel, Maracaná was a “multipurpose arena” that hosted not only sporting events but also concerts and a wide range of shows. Above the grandstands they have built luxury boxes with great views of the field, and glass walls that separate the VIPs from the rest of the spectators. They’re equipped with bars, televisions, and air conditioning and are usually rented out to businesses that invite their associates and functionaries. They have the privilege of arriving directly in their cars, via a private ramp, without having to put up with even the slightest contact with the “masses.”

Maracaná is currently suffering through a new remodel in preparation for the 2014 World Cup final and the 2016 Olympic Games. Since mid- 2010 the stadium has been closed to make changes that comply with the dictates of the “FIFA master,” which demands that all of the stadiums have enclosed roofs. The whole roof of the stadium must now be modified.

In reality, the stadium was gutted and only the shell remains- a shell considered to be national patrimony. The reconstruction will be handled by private interests, cost billions of reales (at least 600 million dollars), and will have even less seating that will only get more and more expensive.

More than a soccer stadium, it will be a theater. A theater with numbered seats where you cannot follow the game on your feet. As a result, the collective, creative spaces for the fans—fun-loving, lively, impassioned and rowdy as they are— have been abolished. And in their place there only remains the prospect of pre-hashed choreography like “the wave” and the dull display of little individual flags.

From once being the maior do mundo (largest in the world), Macaraná fell to a modest 14th place, far behind the two largest stadiums on the planet: the Rungrado May Day (North Korea) with a capacity of 150,000 and the Salt Lake of Calcutta (India) with 120,000 seats. But most telling of all, Macaraná has ceased to be a place of public recreation and has become a tool for business and spectacle—aspects that have very little to do with soccer’s original popular spirit.

Raul Zibechi is an international political analyst from the weekly Brecha de Montevideo, a professor and researcher on grassroots movements at the Multiversidad Franciscana de América Latina, and adviser to many grassroots groups He writes the monthly “Zibechi Report” for the Americas Program http://www.cipamericas.org

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/sports/soccer/south-korea-confronts-dirty-secret-of-its-sports.html?_r=1

SEOUL — On the day South Koreans rejoiced over the selection of Pyeongchang as the host city of the 2018 Winter Olympics, prosecutors continued to peel back layers of a long-hushed dirty secret of the nation’s sports landscape.

Since June, 55 professional soccer players have been indicted in the biggest match-fixing scandal in South Korean history. Prosecutors called the problem “endemic.” Almost 1 in 10 players in the K-League, Korea’s professional league, have been indicted, prompting it to introduce lie-detector tests and to break into two eight-team divisions, with teams caught manipulating the outcome of games being relegated to the lower division. The league said it would also double the minimum annual salary for a player to almost $23,000, hoping the added pay would reduce the temptation to take bribes.

Observers say that match-fixing is an outgrowth of a number of problems that have plagued South Korea for decades: widespread mistreatment of young athletes; poor salaries; a culture that demands blind respect of authority; and Korean society’s lax ethical standards on corruption.

While cheering Pyeongchang’s success, South Koreans hardly seemed to notice that their Olympic campaign was led by three business tycoons who had each been convicted of corruption: Lee Kun-hee of Samsung, Cho Yang-ho of Korean Air and Park Yong-sung, a former chairman of the Doosan conglomerate and now head of the Korean Olympic Committee.

“Koreans are obsessed with winning Olympic golds and hosting megasports events like the Olympics,” said Chung Hee-joon, a professor of sports science at Dong-A University who contends that there is corruption in all sports in South Korea.

“But other than that, they pay little attention, don’t care,” Chung said. “So widespread human rights violations, abuse of young athletes, beatings and violence in sports go ignored.”

Chung’s contention was reflected in a 2008 report by the government’s National Human Rights Commission that said nearly 80 percent of student athletes in middle and high schools were subjected to physical and verbal abuse from their coaches and older teammates. Of the 1,139 students surveyed, 63.8 percent also reported sexual abuse. In a separate survey on primary school athletes, the commission reported that coaches used “batons, hands, baseball bats and tennis rackets” to beat young players in the name of discipline.

Nothing galvanizes South Koreans more than major international sports events. Star athletes like the Olympic figure skating champion Kim Yu-na have become national heroes.

But most others languish under minuscule wages and social prejudice against athletes. K-League players who make the starting lineups usually earn only $47,000 a year; lesser players make about $950 a month.

“That makes our young players vulnerable to things like match-fixing,” said Cho Jung-soo, a former head of the Korea Football Association’s disciplinary board.

Yeom Dong-kyun, one of the players indicted, told the JoongAng newspaper from prison, “I joined the match-fixing without much compunction because I had heard that it’s widespread in the league.”

In May, another player was found dead in a hotel room. In a suicide note, he apologized for bringing other players into the match-fixing.

“We are at a loss for words,” said Chung Mong-gyu, president of the K-League, “as we try to apologize for causing disappointment for the people at a time when the whole nation is united in rejoicing over Pyeongchang.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2012/feb/23/olympics-higher-education-uk?newsfeed=true

HE leaders have lofty ambitions for the 2012 Olympics. But will these aspirations be realised, asks Andy Miah?

With less than six months to go until the opening of the London 2012 Olympic Games, do we know what will be its legacy for higher education?

A conference taking place at the Department for Culture Media and Sport today aims to reveal what just happened, but also how we might capture what is about to happen during the Games. However, there is more to the impact of the Olympic and Paralympic Games on HE than just how academics have researched and evaluated them.

Back in 2005, I attended a pre-win event about how education would be affected by the London 2012 Games. Some of the speakers – many of who held high power roles within British education – spoke with lofty ambition about how the Olympic period was an opportunity for reform in British education.

Inspired by the founder of the modern Olympic movement, Pierre de Coubertin, who was himself inspired by the British education system and a reformist, there was everything to play for back then. But have these aspirations been realised? Did the Olympics transform education in the UK?

Certainly, a lot within higher education has changed since Britain won the bid. A lot has changed in the world. Earlier this month, the historic site of Ancient Olympia – where the ancient Games began – was in the news due to thefts at its Olympic museum. Seen as a direct consequence of Greece's current economic woes, it is worth remembering that this is a nation that hosted the Athens 2004 Games and which has contributed more to Olympic education than any other.

Its International Olympic Academy, which is located nearby the museum where the thefts took place, has been providing higher education students from around the world with Olympic education for more than 50 years. If Greece can hold together a summer programme of Olympic education in such times as these, then the bar has been set very high indeed for the UK and its future contribution to olympism.

Even without a similar length of history, the UK has a strong commitment to supporting higher education endeavours around the Games. The British Olympic Association has hosted an annual National Olympic Academy for many years, where students, teachers and HE professionals gather to consider the state of the art for the Olympics. As well, the UK has a well-populated register of Olympic scholars, as seen on the recently launched Games Experts website. This portal will have particular value during the Games period, when some 30,000 journalists will be seeking expert commentary on all aspects of the Games.

It was set up by Podium, the London 2012 HE and FE Unit, which itself is a unique and pioneering agency in Olympic history, providing a crucial catalyst for collaborations across the sector and necessary liaison across various stakeholders. A quick glance at Podium's websites offers a snapshot of how the Olympic and Paralympic programme has informed the strategy of numerous universities around the UK, not just in London.

From setting up undergraduate modules on media training in order to staff Olympic venues to building links with hospitality courses or security, there is hardly one dimension of the higher education sector that has not been reached by the Olympic programme in some way. Research from last year showed that over 90% of all HE and FE institutions expected to be involved with the Games in some capacity.

This does not mean that all HE professionals or institutions have placed themselves firmly behind the bid, or the Olympic programme. Many academics have devoted their careers to criticising the overblown commercial projects of mega-events, the exemplar of which is the Olympic Games.

The day following the DCMS conference is a Political Studies Association meeting at Southampton Solent University, which will cover such topics as Occupying the Olympics and the rise of new media activism as community of critical debate.

Examining the bid commitments made by London 2012 back in 2005, educational is located within the very final paragraph of the final chapter,Olympism and Culture. For those unfamiliar with the term, olympism is a study of the philosophy of sport literature and Coubertin's own writings reveals how he devised the modern Games as a philosophical framework. To this end, one may see the Olympics as, first and foremost, an intellectual project – a desire to promote a higher education.

As with many aspects of London 2012 – indeed, with all Games from bid to delivery – there are educational promises that have not been kept since 2005 – the creation of a London Olympic Institute and a literal "Friend-ship", which would house a range of projects during the Games. Their absence does not negate the fact that the higher education work that has taken place during this pre-Olympic period has been substantial.

Research councils have worked together on funding programmes, funding councils have developed extensive programmes of activity, and the Games have given rise to cross-sector collaborations, particularly between education and the arts sector.

What happens next is the crucial question for me. What will be the HE legacy beyond the Games? Will HE institutions continue to pursue an Olympic mission in their work or will they move on to the next political agenda?

The next Olympics take place in Russia at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games. Russia has created the world's first Olympic University as the framework for its HE contribution, concerned with teaching and researching mega-events, along with their management and administration. This institution has global ambitions to become a centre for training after the 2014 Games.

While it is unlikely that a London Olympic University is anywhere on the horizon, if educators are truly sold by the idea that the Olympic and Paralympic Games can bring about some kind of positive rethink of how education should take place, then this conviction should not end in 2012.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/46de800e-5bf9-11e1-bbc4-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1nDygUcQn

No home secretary would have wanted to announce the break-up of the UK Border Agency just five months before visitors begin flooding into the country

for the London Olympics. But Theresa May’s decision to do so is a measure of the desperate need for reform at the country’s embattled border organisation.

Formed in 2008 after John Reid, then Labour home secretary, famously declared the previous immigration system “not fit for purpose”, the UK Border Agency has been frequently criticised as successive ministers have struggled to get a grip on its inefficiencies, operational inconsistencies and huge backlog of unresolved asylum cases.

Last summer, when an approved pilot programme to reduce some checks was widened to include the dropping of other controls without ministerial permission, the cries of discontent became impossible to ignore.

Ms May ordered three separate investigations into how the security breach had come about, the most important of which, unveiled on Monday, accused the organisation of “poor communication, poor managerial oversight and a lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities”.

Following this damning verdict by John Vine, the agency’s independent chief inspector, Ms May has decided to split the UK Border Force – the sub-command which deals with law enforcement – from the body running border control operations.

The changes will take place with unusual speed, since the agency will split on March 1, and a new interim head of the border force, Brian Moore, currently chief constable of Wiltshire Police, has already been appointed.
Borders pose question for independent Scotland

Scotland may have to establish passport controls at the English border if it votes for independence, the UK’s Europe minister has said on a visit to Holyrood.

David Lidington said an independent Scotland would not necessarily inherit the UK’s opt-out of the Schengen Agreement which permits freedom of movement around most of Europe.

Accusing Mr Lidington of peddling “tired old scare stories”, a spokesman for Alex Salmond, Scotland’s first minister, said: “An independent Scotland will also inherit the Common Travel Area which exists between the UK and Ireland, rendering claims of passport controls ridiculous.”

Mr Lidington said opt-outs like Schengen, and also of the euro currency, “require not just a bilateral agreement between the UK and an independent Scotland, it would require the agreement of all of the other member states as well.”

But Mr Salmond’s spokesman said that both Scotland and the rest of the UK would become successor states upon independence – inheriting the arrangements of the parent nation – and there was no provision for this to change.

But while Ms May emphasised that UKBA was now in “better hands for the future” as a result of the new structure, there were still concerns across government about the wider repercussions of the report.

One of the greatest fears is that the good intentions behind last summer’s pilot programme, under which the home office agreed to experiment with a handful of risk-based controls, may now be lost. It will now be far more difficult for ministers to sanction measures to reduce queues by focusing on only the most dangerous passengers – even though the government claims that the exercise led to more arrests, more firearms seized, and more forged documents found.

Matt Cavanagh, an associate director at the Institute for Public Policy Research, a think-tank, and a former Labour special adviser in the Home Office, said the report would “increase the pressure to tighten checks – especially since it casts doubt on some of the claims ministers made at the height of the scandal about the ‘risk-based’ pilot having been a success.”

“Border security is an emotive issue for many people, but we need a mature and honest debate, accepting the inherent trade-offs between security, passenger convenience and cost,” Mr Cavanagh said.

Ms May herself said the unauthorised suspension of checks meant “it is impossible to know what effect the pilot had”.

“While we can remain open-minded about the principle of risk-based checks, they must only be implemented in a controlled and authorised way,” Ms May cautioned.

Labour, meanwhile, suggested that the pilot had accelerated the tendencies of border officials to relax checks without permission – a practice which dated back to 2007.

Yvette Cooper, shadow home secretary, said that while Ms May had claimed the problems at UKBA had nothing to do with her, the immigration minister Damian Green or the pilots, “the report shows the opposite”.

“It makes clear that controls were downgraded far more often in 2011 than in any previous year, and that the immigration minister licensed repeated weakening of border controls,” Ms Cooper said.

http://www.metro.co.uk/olympics/891177-london-2012-olympics-torch-relay-dress-rehearsal-to-take-place-on-april-20

London 2012 Games organisers will stage a dress rehearsal of the Olympic torch relay on April 20 to assess organisation, security and logistics.

The Olympic Flame will be carried approximately 8,000 miles around the British Isles in the build-up to the Games, with 8,000 torchbearers getting their hands on the traditional Olympic symbol in the relay which starts on May 19.
Lord Coe carries the Olympic torch, which will be taken - unlit - on a dress rehearsal run before the torch relay starts

But before then, the unlit torch will be carried by a series of runners on an 80-mile route from Leicester to Peterborough, calling in at Quorn, Loughborough, Hoton, Wymeswold, Asfordby, Melton Mowbray, Langham, Oakham, Uppingham and Stamford.

This will allow organisers to see how convoy, crew and communications procedures work, and to assess issues such as timing, traffic management and security before the 70-day relay starts.

The dress rehearsal will involve participants from the Royal College of the Blind; Loughborough College; and Leicester, De Montfort, Loughborough and Northampton universities, and as with the real relay, they have all been chosen because of their inspirational story.

'The dress rehearsal will give us the chance to test many of our operations around the Olympic Torch Relay,' said London 2012 chief Lord Coe.

'We are also looking forward to working with the 100 inspirational people who will play an essential role in helping us to test how we will operate during the relay.'

http://www.eturbonews.com/28017/london-olympics-par-destroy-travel-and-tourism

Tour operators in the United Kingdom are waiting with bated breath, as the date gets closer and closer to July 27, 2012, the day when to the 2012 London Olympic Games will hold its opening ceremony. The reason? The forecast for London’s travel and tourism industry for 2012 is gloomy. Simply put, it has been claimed that London will lose up to £3.5 billion as a result of the Games being held in the British capital.

In 2009, sports tourism was touted at the World Travel Market’s Sports Tourism Conference as a new niche market that commands the attention of the global travel and tourism industry if not for one very simple argument: its potential economic benefits cannot be ignored. At that said conference, I raised the European Tour Operators Association’s opposition to London hosting the 2012 Summer Olympics on the grounds that it will damage London’s travel and tourism industry. ETOA upon researching visitors arrival for the past Olympics in Beijing in 2008, Athens in 2004, Sydney in 2000, Atlanta in 1996, Barcelona in 1992 and Seoul in 1988 found that the Olympic Games “disrupted normal tourism” and that the Olympic Games “did not reveal any conspicuous tourism growth.”

Mark Howell from VisitLondon was asked to comment on ETOA’s opposition at the abovementioned conference in 2009. His remark, however, drew more criticism than praise for failing to address the real tourism problem, which, according to David Tarsh, ETOA’s publicist whose firm represents several organizations in the tourism industry, was about market distortion of hotel room accommodation or simply put, the practice of room blocking. Mr. Howell managed to deliver a strong message, however. That “London is going to be different.”

VisitBritain’s chairman, Christopher Rodrigues, in an eTN interview last year, explained what this message means in terms of a specific plan. According to him, a budget of 100 million pounds was allocated for a marketing plan designed strategically to market Britain effectively within the critical four years of hosting the 2012 London Olympic Games—from 2011 to 2014. “Start before the Olympics” is an important aspect of the plan. He acknowledged that the Prince William and Kate wedding in 2011 did “a lot of good work in showcasing Britain and getting people to want to come.”

In that same interview, Mr. Rodrigues also said: “We are working very hard with the trade to make sure that there is a coordinated effort to get people to recognize firstly that Britain is a small country, but there’s a lot of Britain outside of London, so why not come and see the Games in the same time zone, in the same country – the coverage will be nonstop – but while you’re at it, go see other things, go to the Cotswolds, go to Edinburgh, go to Cardiff, see the Welsh coast, go to the south of England – all of the things that you can do in Britain – and still enjoy the Olympics for part of the trip.”

The VisitBritain chairman, however, agreed with ETOA on the room blocking issue, but offered what he referred to as positive observation. Mr. Rodrigues said: “The Olympics secures a lot of London rooms – a lot of rooms in whatever event city. The trick, and often they then release them late, from an independent traveler’s perspective that’s great, because they get discounted rooms; from a tour operator’s perspective, that’s not great, and we need to see if we can find a middle ground to get some kind of progressive release so that tour operators can handle that during the event. The observation I would make, and one always focuses on the positive, is that I hope this is the year that tour operators go beyond their traditional buyers, which is to focus on London and focus on the rest of the country where the hotels rooms are not pre-booked by the Olympic organizers, and there is plenty of capacity.”

Between 2009 to now, there have been numerous dialogues between UK’s travel and tourism industry and key governmental agencies such as Visit Britain and the London Olympics Organizing Committee (LOCOG). For ETOA, its position the Olympics has remained, if not even more aggressive in voicing out its opposition to the Games. ETOA, however, has remained firm in its projection that London will lose an estimated US$2.4 billion next year because of the Olympics; hence, ETOA’s argument that the Olympics will damage London’s travel and tourism.

In 2009, Tom Jenkins, ETOA’s Chief Executive said: “Every city is unique, and each city handles the Olympics in its own way. But we have yet to have a Games where tourism has not been disrupted.”

ETOA has backed its opposition of the Olympics by research and surveys. At the end of October 2011, ETOA canvassed 38 tour operators who move more than two million people annually to London. They revealed that they were expecting a significant downturn throughout 2012. This looks like being extremely severe in July and August, where operators are currently seeing a 60 percent shortfall in bookings, becoming acute during the period of the Olympic Games where bookings are running at 95 percent below where they would normally be.

Market distortion of hotel room accommodation is a major reason why ETOA has opposed the London 2012 Summer Olympics. “One of the main reasons for the drop is that the hotels believe that they are going to be full. London has priced itself out of the market in July and August,” said John Boulding, president of Insight Vacations, a leading luxury tour operator. ”Insight has won a Queens Award for Export, but we have had no choice but to remove London from our best-selling European ‘Panorama’ tours in July and August. Each one will start and finish on the Continent. They are selling well, but they are selling without the UK.”

To better understand why UK tour operators are against the Olympics is to understand it from their perspective. According to ETOA, the problem for the tourism industry is that even if London does fill with Olympic enthusiasts, they do not behave as normal tourists. “Their presence is determined by their interest in an atypical event. They do not come to shop, to sightsee or to attend the theatre.”

“We anticipate a significant decline in business in July and August 2012 for London Theatres and attractions” said John Wales, managing director of Encore Tickets, one of London’s leading theatre ticket agencies, who sell over 2 million tickets annually “At present I anticipate sales from tourists to be at least 40 percent down on last year, so we are looking urgently at alternative customers to the traditional inbound visitor that has been displaced.”

Mario Bodini, JacTravel CEO, said: “We’ve always known that hosting the Olympics is negative for the regular tourism industry. That’s why we set a strategy years in advance to try to win Olympics-oriented incentive business. Thankfully, this has paid off for us but I know the inbound industry in general is not forecasting a good year for tourism to London.”

Mr. Bodini added: “Displacement is apparent already – we are seeing 2012 hotel bookings in major Continental European cities doing much better than London.” According to him, the biggest problem is the over-ambitious rates hotel are asking and their aggressive terms and conditions, which makes London not viable as a destination for tour operators.”

There are some signs that at last ETOA’s warnings are starting to be heeded, according to ETOA’s publicist, Mr. Tarsh. He cautioned that “a concerted effort by airlines, Eurostar and accommodation providers is urgently needed to rescue London from an Olympic tourism slump.”

As of January 30, 2012, the London Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) has released 20 percent of the hotel reservations it made for the Games. In terms of hotel room nights, this means approximately 120,000 rooms will be vacant during the Games.

ETOA has yet to officially comment on LOCOG’s latest move, but Mr. Tarsh is not impressed. According to him, LOCOG’s move was expected and that “120,000 rooms over 18 nights is 6,700 rooms per night which is not such a big deal in a city with 125,000 rooms to fill.”

He added: “Perhaps news of LOCOG returning rooms will finally wake hoteliers up to realizing that selling out London this summer will not be easy and the bonanza they anticipated will not materialize.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/9100821/London-2012-hotels-persist-with-Olympian-price-hikes.html

Visitors to London during this summer’s Olympic Games can expect to be charged up to three times the normal rate for accommodation, despite a sharp increase in the number of hotel rooms available.

Last month LOCOG, the organising committee of the Games, returned more than 120,000 unneeded reservations to hoteliers, a move that many predicted would see average rates fall.

But while the rooms were offered to LOCOG at a subsidised rate, for the use of sponsors, media personnel and International Olympic Committee members, hoteliers are continuing to charge the general public well over the odds.

Accommodation at the Premier Inn Victoria, for example, during the Games, which runs from July 27 until August 12, costs from £199, a rate that is non-refundable and must be paid in advance. For the rest of August, rooms start at £87. At the Premier Inn Old Street, August rates range from £75 to £132, but during the Games the cheapest rooms are also £199.

A room at the W Leicester Square, for stays at the beginning of August, costs from £559 per night, and at the Park Lane Hotel, rates start at £479. During the second half of the month, accommodation at the same hotels costs from £299 and £188 per night, respectively.
Related Articles
Olympic hotels outside the city 23 Feb 2012

At the Novotel London Paddington, room rates during the Olympics are more than double (from £299 per night) what they are during the rest of the summer (from £149). And at the Z Hotel in Soho, a two-night stay during the Olympics costs from £186 a night, compared to just £102 a night in the week after the closing ceremony.

Telegraph Travel’s findings are supported by a new Which? Travel study, which highlights increases in room rates of up to 300 per cent at Holiday Inn and Travelodge hotels.

With the start of the Games just five months away, criticism of the high cost of hotel rooms for the period covering the event has increased in recent weeks.

Speaking in the Commons earlier this month, Tessa Jowell, the Labour MP and shadow minister for London and the Olympics, described the cost of hotel stays during the Games as a “scandal”. She cited the case of a woman from Exeter who she said was forced to pay £1,000 a night for a room fitted with a hoist, to allow her to take her disabled daughter to the Paralympics. She said the room was normally priced at £375.

John Penrose, the minister for tourism, responded by claiming the release of rooms by LOCOG would ease the restriction in supply.

“It has always been the case that prices alter during the course of the season – that is entirely natural,” he added.

Last summer Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, launched the London Visitor Charter, which aims to “provide the means by which visitors to London can readily identify businesses and attractions that have made a firm commitment to reasonable and fair trading terms” during the Olympics.

But after more than seven months, just six hotels have signed up to the scheme – and four of those properties (Tylney Hall in Hampshire, Ashdown Park Hotel in East Sussex, the Grand Hotel in Eastbourne and Luton Hoo Golf and Spa) lie well outside the M25.

There has also been criticism from tour operators, who claim that ordinary holidaymakers have been put off visiting Britain this summer because of the high cost of accommodation. The European Tour Operators Association says the majority of long-haul visitors to the continent this year will be avoiding London, in favour of other major European cities. It has predicted that London’s hotels will not be full this summer, pointing to the example of previous major sporting events.

Hotel rates in Beijing during the 2008 Olympics were up to 10 times more expensive than normal, a figure that is thought to have contributed to a 30 per cent decline in visitors to the city in 2008 compared with the previous year.

Martin Couchman, deputy chief executive of the British Hospitality Association, dismissed the evidence from previous Olympics as “irrevelent”.

“From our research, we believe that central London will be close to full during the Olympics, therefore pricing reflects that. The further from central London you travel, the more likely you will find cheaper rates.

“Although LOCOG has returned some rooms, it is still retaining a large proportion of those available,” he added.

http://blogs.bettor.com/LOCOG-not-to-issue-more-tickets-for-Greenwich-Park-London-Olympics-2012-a131894

It has been recently announced that the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games will not be issuing a further 25,000 tickets as previously planned for the cross country London 2012 Olympic Games event.

The London 2012 organisers have already made available a total number of 50,000 tickets for the cross country event that is in popular demand. The venue of the Olympic event is scheduled to be the Greenwich Park. The suggestion had been made previously by the London 2012 organisers that more tickets will be made available for the Greenwich Park as the Olympic Games scheduled to be held on July 27 draw nearer.

Jeremy Edwards, who is the LOCOG venue manager for Greenwich Park, expressed the reasons behind the decision not to sell any more tickets for the cross country event in the following words, “We have had to take into account the need to put on an event in which people can move around to enjoy the cross-country course and safety of crowd numbers outside. We believe that 50,000 is the best number to ensure a fantastic experience.”

There were concerns that if the number of spectators for the cross country event at the Greenwich is made to increase by another 25,000, it would cause a great strain on the transport system of the capital of England. It is predicted that the Greenwich town centre would not be able to accommodate such a huge amount of visitors who will come to watch the cross country event if more tickets are sold.

Furthermore, the LOCOG states that the crowd at the venue would be too great to handle efficiently.

Despite that fact, it has been reported that the maximum number of people that the Greenwich Park can accommodate equals to be 75,000.

The people who are interested in viewing the cross country event can still get a chance on becoming a spectator at the Greenwich Park. There will be some tickets made available on the official website of the London 2012 Olympic Games as it is providing a platform to those ticket holders that want to re sell their tickets.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/feb/26/olympic-outrage-saudi-women-athletes?newsfeed=true

Ex-Olympics minister Tessa Jowell voices anger after report reveals discrimination against women in sport

Saudi Arabia has been accused of breaching the spirit of the Olympic movement by discriminating against women in sport and failing to bring a female team to the 2012 London Games.

Tessa Jowell, the former culture secretary and Olympics minister – who is now a member of the Olympic Board – said the Saudis were "clearly breaking the spirit of the Olympic Charter's pledge to equality" with their attitude to women in sport and the Games.

The Saudi government, which closed private gyms for women in 2009 and 2010 and severely limits their ability to undertake physical activity, is under mounting international pressure to adopt a more liberal approach.

Jowell spoke out after a report by Human Rights Watch highlighted the way in which Saudi Arabian women and girls are denied the right to sport.

The report found that, despite pledges to open up more sporting opportunity to women, "the Saudi government continues to flagrantly deny women and girls their right to practise physical education in schools and to practise recreational and competitive sport more generally".

Based on telephone interviews with Saudi women, the report says that, having introduced schooling for girls in the early 1960s, the country "never added physical education classes to the girls' curriculum".

Those fighting for change have faced opposition at every turn. "Opponents of sports for women and girls put forward the 'slippery slope' argument that, once women start to exercise, they will shed modest clothing, spend 'unnecessary' time out of the house and have increased possibilities for mingling with men," the report says.

"Others propose endless conditions for women and girls practising sport (for example that they must wear modest clothing and engage in sports away from the prying eyes of men)."

Because women are banned from driving in Saudia Arabia, their ability to get to gyms or sports events is further limited. "Saudi Arabia's strict clothing requirements for women are a further impediment," it adds. "Outdoors, a woman must wear a black cloak called an abaya, covering her from head to toe." One woman told Human Rights Watch that a marathon was held a few years ago in which women could participate only if they wore the abaya.

The International Olympic Committee reserves a limited number of places for male and female athletes who are not required to meet the qualifying standards in swimming and athletics events. However, despite this concession, Saudi Arabia has never sponsored a female team and its national Olympic committee does not have a women's section.

Jowell stopped short of saying the Saudis should be excluded from this year's or future Games if they did not improve their record. But she called on them to demonstrate a commitment to change, noting that Afghanistan was banned from the 2000 Sydney Olympics over its attitude to women under Taliban rule.

"The London Games would be the perfect opportunity for the Saudis to spell out a way forward," she said. "I would like to see them set out a clear plan for equal inclusion of women in time for the 2016 games in Rio de Janiero. This has to be a substantive commitment."

Barbara Keeley, a Labour MP who works extensively to promote women's sport, said female athletes had fought for more than a hundred years to take part in the Olympics on an equal basis with men. "It is time to call a halt to discrimination against women in Olympic events. It seems totally unacceptable for any country competing in the Olympics to be allowed to have a team that is entirely male."

A spokesman for the IOC said some progress was being made. "The IOC strives to ensure the Olympic Games and the Olympic movement are universal and non-discriminatory, in line with the Olympic Charter and our values of respect, friendship and excellence. National Olympic committees are encouraged to uphold that spirit in their delegations. The IOC does not give ultimatums or deadlines, but believes a lot can be achieved through dialogue.

"We have been in regular contact with the three national Olympic committees that have yet to send women to the Olympics, ie Qatar, Brunei and Saudi Arabia. As a result of fruitful discussions, the three NOCs included women in their delegations competing at the Youth Olympic Games in Singapore last summer. Dalma Rushdi Malas was one of them. She was the first female Saudi athlete to compete in an Olympic competition and claimed a bronze medal in the equestrian jumping event."

http://www.businessweekly.co.uk/legal/13637-london-olympics-marketing-opportunity-or-minefield

This summer London will host one of the greatest shows on earth - the 2012 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games. Although for many this may seem to be the marketing opportunity of the year, a great deal of caution should be exercised, writes Richard Plaistowe, a brands specialist at Mills & Reeve.
Once paragons of the amateur ideal, the Games have become increasingly financially dependent on commercial sponsorship, and the sponsors in turn require exclusivity.

The UK, like all other host countries, has had to enact legislation to clamp down on anyone other than the official sponsors seeking to use the Games for promotional purposes.

This legislation provides for the so-called “Olympics/Paralympics association right” and the sweeping “London Olympics association right”, which will both be policed and vigorously enforced by The London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (Locog). Anyone who infringes these rights will risk legal action by Locog and a claim for an injunction and damages, as well as an order of delivery up of infringing material.

Apart from the legal risks, this could mean the significant financial and reputational costs of having to withdraw a high profile and expensive advertising campaign.

The Olympics/Paralympics association right is infringed by the unauthorised use of:
• The Olympic rings and motto (Citius, altius, fortius)
• The Paralympic symbol and motto (Spirit in Motion)
• Words such as Olympiad, Olympian, Olympics, Paralympiad, Paralympian and Paralympics

Likewise, the use of anything so similar as to be likely to create an association with the Olympics is also not permitted. However, use in a context not likely to suggest an association with the Olympics will not infringe the legislation. Examples would be a newspaper using the word Olympics to report on Olympics events or a hotel stating that it is next to the Olympics Stadium.

To be safe, it is best simply not to use any of the prohibited symbols, mottos or words in your marketing or advertising.

The London Olympics association right is infringed by the unauthorised use in trade of a representation likely to suggest to the public that there is an association between the London Olympics and any goods, services or the business providing them.

Unfortunately, the legislation does not define what “association” means, and this will remain ambiguous until there is a court case which a judge rules on. The legislation does, however, provide some guidance.

First, it states that the “concept of an association” includes “in particular” any kind of contractual or commercial relationship or corporate or structural connection, and the provision of financial or other support for, or in connection with, the London Olympics.

This suggests that there must be a representation of an actual connection with the Games, such as a sponsorship or supply contract. Whilst this might seem to be a commonsensical interpretation, these examples are illustrative only and do not limit the meaning of “association”.

Locog’s own interpretation, published on its website, states: “Concerted marketing campaigns or promotional events framed around the Games are likely to create an association between the business in question and the Games, and may well therefore infringe our legal rights.”

It is clear from this guidance that they regard any unauthorised promotional, advertising or marketing activity referring, or alluding to, the London Games as an infringement, even if no actual connection between the advertiser and the Games is suggested.

Secondly, the legislation also states that the combination of any of the words “games”, “Two Thousand and Twelve”, “2012” and “twenty twelve” with each other or with any of the words “gold”, “silver”, “bronze”, “London”, “medals”, “sponsor” and “summer” will be taken into account when determining whether someone has infringed this right.

Examples would be the use of “2012 games” or “London games” in a manner alluding to the London Olympics. However, combinations of such words will not always infringe, such as the use of "summer 2012" to refer to a fashion show. It must be remembered that the use of these words is not a precondition for infringement. The use of a photograph showing an athlete carrying an Olympics torch against a London skyline is certainly likely to result in a letter from Locog’s lawyers.

As with the Olympics association right, the legislation provides for limited exceptions. In particular, one can make a statement which “accords with honest practices in industrial or commercial matters, and does not make promotional or other commercial use of a representation relating to the London Olympics by incorporating it in a context to which the London Olympics are substantively irrelevant”. This is language likely to keep many legal teams busy.

It will therefore be very difficult for any business wishing to use, or even allude to, the London Olympics in its promotional and marketing activity to be certain of knowing how to do so without legal risk. In almost all cases it would therefore be prudent to take legal advice before doing so.

• If you would like to find out more about what you can and can’t do when it comes to the Olympics and advertising, Mills & Reeve is organising a free seminar next month at four of its offices. The event takes place in Norwich on March 1, Birmingham on March 7, Cambridge on March 9 and London on March 13. For more details on how to sign-up go to www.mills-reeve.com/legalevents.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/sports-news/OtherSports/London-Olympics-Govt-writes-to-IOC-on-Dow-row/Article1-817811.aspx

After repeated letters of protest by the IOA failed to move the International Olympic Committee, the Indian government has now stepped in by asking the body to drop Dow Chemicals as sponsor of this year's

London Games for the company's link to the Bhopal Gas tragedy. The sports ministry
has sent a
"strongly-worded letter" to the IOC on Friday seeking Dow's removal as an Olympic sponsor.


The move comes after the IOC refused to entertain pleas by the IOA.

The IOC said while it appreciated IOA's concern for the victims of 1984 Bhopal Tragedy but Dow Chemicals had no ownership stakes in Union Carbide till 2000.

The IOC had also said that its relationship with Dow Chemicals was well over 30 years and "we were aware of the Bhopal tragedy when discussing the partnership with Dow".

IOA had repeatedly expressed its opposition to the Dow Chemicals as one of the sponsors for the London Olympics because of its ownership of the infamous Union Carbide which was responsible for the worst industrial disaster in India.

IOA had urged the IOC and London Organising Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) to withdraw Dow as Games Sponsors.

In a letter to IOA acting president Vijay Kumar Malhotra, IOC chief Jacques Rogge had said that "IOC recognises that the Bhopal tragedy in 1984 was horrific event for India and the world. The Olympic Movement sympathises with the grief of the victims' families and regrets the ongoing suffering people face in the region."

"The IOC and LOCOG were aware of the Bhopal tragedy when discussing the partnership with Dow. Dow had no connection with the Bhopal tragedy. Dow did not have any ownership stake in Union Carbide until 16 years after the accident and 12 years after the USD 470 million compensation agreement was approved by the Indian Supreme Court," he said.

http://www.procurementleaders.com/news/news/london-2012-organisers-to-get-tough-on-supply-chain-

Producers of merchandise for the London 2012 Olympic games are set to introduce new measures to protect workers after an investigation found evidence of exploitation in Chinese factories.


The investigation carried out by the Trade Union Congress (TUC) and Labour Behind the Label found evidence of child labour, excessive hours, poverty pay, dangerous working conditions and no trade unions at factories producing badges and the Games’ mascots Wenlock and Mandeville.



The two groups presented their findings to the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) in a dossier entitles Toying with Workers Rights.



Commenting on the finding LOCOG chair Seb Coe said “We place a high priority on environmental, social and ethical issues when securing goods and services. As soon as we were made aware of the Playfair 2012 report, we instructed our independent monitor to carry out a comprehensive investigation and review. The outcome of this will be made public as soon as it is concluded.



“We have taken a lead in ethical sourcing and supply chain management but there is always more to do and we are committed to making a real difference to workers’ lives and creating a valuable legacy that we can share,” he added.



TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said: “LOCOG had gone further than any previous Games’ organisers in adopting an ethical code and complaints mechanism, but as our research shows this hasn’t been nearly enough to prevent abuses from taking place.



“However it’s not too late to make a difference for workers producing goods for London. We welcome LOCOG’s acknowledgement that further action is necessary and its commitment to act immediately to ensure that factory owners can no longer exploit workers in the name of the Olympics.



“We’re hopeful that a marker has now been set for all future Games and that the International Olympic Committee will play a leading role in taking this work forward so that the exploitation of workers in Olympic supply chains can become a thing of the past. This groundbreaking agreement should also help lead to better working conditions throughout the sporting industry.”



Following the report the LOCOG has agreed to get tougher with the factories in its supply chain.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/news/9109007/London-2012-Olympics-BOA-reveal-plan-to-open-Olympic-Museum-in-2014.html

The British Olympic Association are planning to build a museum to celebrate London 2012 on the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park as a permanent legacy of the Games.

The British Olympic Museum is due to be opened two years after the Games, in 2014, and will be positioned adjacent to Anish Kapoor's ArcelorMittal Orbit tower.

The BOA are hopeful that it will prove a top tourism destination following a successful London Olympics and that the museum will create an interactive experience using technology and entertainment to communicate the Olympic values to inspire future generations.

Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said: "This is yet another fantastic example of how the 2012 Games are inspiring the building of new permanent attractions in this great city.

"The Museum will help ensure the Olympic Park attracts visitors to the park for generations to come. More importantly it would become another major asset supporting and driving new job creation in east London."

In hosting the Games this summer, London will become the first city in the world to host the Olympics three times and the museum will celebrate the 1908 and 1948 Olympics, as well.
 
BOA Chairman Colin Moynihan said: “As the only city to have earned the honour of hosting the Olympic Games three times, London occupies a truly unique place in Olympic history.

"It is a feat we should be immensely proud of and I believe the British Olympic Museum is the perfect way to ensure the spirit, excitement and unforgettable memories of the London 2012 Games live on to inspire future generations to follow their own dreams.

“The museum will also provide an important opportunity to honour and celebrate the most outstanding British Olympic athletes and create a platform for their stories to inspire generation upon generation of future sport participants with their achievements.”

International Olympic Committee President Jacques Rogge approved of the plans and added: "I am a firm believer that the Olympic Games are not only about gold medals, world records and unforgettable sporting competition. They can bring out the best of humanity and all that we can achieve when we strive to be the best at something.

"The new British Olympic Museum is the place where these stories of human triumph and sacrifice will come to life and it will become part of the lasting legacy that London 2012 will leave the UK for generations to come.”

The BOA is working to raise funds from Olympic Partners and individual donors and the BOA and Olympic Park Legacy Company will work together to reach a final licensing agreement in the forthcoming weeks.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2107403/London-2012-Olympics-Official-scarf-latest-long-line-souvenirs-outside-UK.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Meant to show patriotic support, but garments will be made in India
Just 9 per cent of London 2012 memorabilia is being made in the UK

It would appear to be the perfect way to show patriotic support for our sportsmen and women – and also keep the sun off.

But the official Olympics scarf, unveiled yesterday, has become the latest in a long list of souvenirs for the London Games to be revealed as made outside of the UK.

The initial run of 500,000 of the bandana-style cotton sheets will be produced at a Next factory in India, with subsequent orders made in either Portugal or Turkey.


Unpatriotic: The official Olympic scarf for London 2012 (above) will be made in a Next factory in India

It comes just days after the Daily Mail revealed just 9 per cent of the 2012 memento collection is made here.

The scarf will be available in Next stores in May, costing £5 for a 20in one or £10 for a 35in version.

More...
We're the fuel tax capital of Europe: British motorists pay up to 60% duty and VAT on petrol - the highest figure in the EU
Two British cruise ships turned away from Argentina after visiting the Falklands


All proceeds will go to the British Olympic Association and British Paralympic Association and it is hoped it will raise up to £10million for the athletes.

The cotton voile scarves feature the Team GB logo or the British Paralympic Association logo on a background of more than 2,000 black ‘hieroglyphs’ – symbols representing the Olympic sports and London.


Flying the flag: Five-time Olympic gold medal rower Sir Steve Redgrave, Olympic silver medalist Sharron Davies and para-equestrian Lee Pearson unveil the two designs of scarves at the Saatchi Gallery in London yesterday

The symbols include 900 figures to represent the 900 Team GB and Paralympics GB athletes, 900 hearts ‘to express the nation’s special love’, 900 stars ‘to recognise that every one of our athletes is a true star’ and 60 hands to symbolise 60million GB supporters.

English roses, Welsh daffodils, Northern Irish flax and Scottish thistles also feature on the heavily-patterned scarf as well as national landmarks and the date of the opening ceremony.

The scarf has been described as ‘an iconic memento of the London 2012 Games’ and the BOA has agreed for Olympic sponsor Next to manufacture an initial run of 500,000 scarves.

Adidas, another sponsor, will have its logo on the scarves and help sell them through its outlets.

The scarves are one of two pieces of Olympic merchandise which the BOA are allowed to keep net profits from, following an agreement with the London 2012 organising committee.



Rich tapestry: The cotton voile scarves feature the Team GB logo or the British Paralympic Association logo on a background of more than 2,000 black ‘hieroglyphs’ – symbols representing the Olympic sports and London

The second item, a ‘collectable’ produced in partnership with BP, will be launched at the end of May.

The association has spent more than two years working on the design for the scarves, which come with a letter from five-time gold medallist Sir Steve Redgrave, encouraging people to ‘wear it, wave it and help Team GB WIN with it!’

The BOA hopes to sell at least one million of the scarves, which some have described as looking like tea towels, in an attempt to mirror the success of the 2010 Vancouver winter Olympics – where 4.3m pairs of red mittens were sold, raising millions for the organising committee.

BOA chief executive Andy Hunt said the scarves were vital for building support for the games.

He said: ‘We would love it to be a massive success. Here is an item you can take to show you have gone out and supported the team.’

The scarves will be available online WHEN and in Next stores from May – but may not be on sale in any of the official London 2012 merchandise stores in Olympic venues, due to a row between the BOA and Locog, which controls the shops.

The BOA will have to share profits from any sales in initial shops with Locog, which needs merchandise income to meet the £2.2bn running costs of the Games.

The BOA also announced that it will be opening a museum close to the main stadium and aquatic centre in the Olympic Park after the Games. The £10m project will celebrate London’s status as the only city to have hosted the Olympics three times, and could include memorabilia from every member of Team GB at this summer’s event.