London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill

My Lords, it is a very special moment for me to be taking part in this debate about the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. My father was a member of the International Olympic Committee for a considerable number of years and he always hoped against hope that the Games would one day return to Britain. He would have been delighted at the present outcome. He was also the predecessor of the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, as president of the Advertising Standards Authority, and I am sure noble Lords will agree with me that he would have thoroughly approved of the noble Lord’s excellent speech. We have listened to many fascinating speeches on the Bill this evening. Many important points have been made, but the most important point is that all of us, on all sides of House, are in favour of the Bill. We have heard about a number of things since it was published, but we have not heard much about security. No doubt that is because security would be prejudiced if the arrangements were common knowledge. We must trust that this matter is under control, and I hope that the Minister will reassure us on that later. As my noble friend said, we on this side of the House have the same objective as Her Majesty’s Government. During the course of the Bill, our debates will have the sole purpose of improving it. It has been a particular pleasure to listen to the maiden speech of the noble Baroness, Lady Valentine. When I made my maiden speech, I was simply terrified, and I do not know how I remained standing while doing so. The noble Baroness showed complete sangfroid, and I look forward to hearing her speak during the course of the Bill and on other occasions. These are the London Olympics, but we must not forget the events that will be taking place outside London. It is therefore disappointing that the Bill establishes the regional development agencies as the bodies concerned with preparing for the Games outside London. The RDAs are neither local planning authorities, nor highway authorities. These events will have local implications, not regional ones. We shall pursue this matter during the course of the Bill. It is axiomatic that the control of costs throughout the build-up period and during the Games should be robust but, at the same time, it must be sufficiently lightly applied to ensure easy co-operation between the various interests involved. As your Lordships know, the Bill will be going to Grand Committee. That is a good decision, although there is no provision for votes. However, in a Bill like this, is unlikely that there will be fundamental differences, and the informal atmosphere of a Grand Committee should lead to better discussions, particularly about details of the Bill. I ask the Minister to agree that we should have the fullest possible debates and to adopt a position permitting some flexibility on detail in the light of our discussions in Committee and subsequently. Many issues have been raised, not least the rather vexed question of the duplication of powers. It would be disastrous if works were delayed because of interminable arguments about responsibilities. For instance, which is pre-eminent, the Olympic Delivery Authority or the Greater London Authority? What is the precise role of the Mayor of London? As my noble friend Lord Higgins said, it must be defined so that he becomes a facilitator, and not in any way an obstacle to the smooth progress that is essential if all works are to be finished on time. Is the remuneration of the businesses that are being moved out, which were mentioned by my noble friend Lord Glentoran, being funded by the Government, as it should be, or is it being left to the Greater London Authority, which, I fear, may lead to considerable delay? The one thing we cannot have is delay. The tax on lottery proceeds has been a great bone of contention. It is completely illogical that it should be retained by the Treasury, which is refusing to fund coaching for our precious elite athletes adequately. They might just win medals, but only if they have the best available coaches. That is most urgent. It is not something that can happen in some years’ time. It must happen now. Can the Minister guarantee that designs for buildings, structures and the general site will be British? Will the provision of horticulture and other facilities decorating the whole site be from Britain, and not sourced from Holland or anywhere else abroad? We have heard a lot about the legacy at the end of the day. Are the Government aware that the accommodation provided for the athletes in Sydney was all sold off before the Games opened as low-cost affordable housing? Are we planning, as I hope, to do something of the same sort, or will it be left to rot, as I am told happened in Barcelona? To conclude, I wish the Bill a fair passage through this House, coupled with the hope that the Minister will listen to what has been said today, and that he will help us to help him pass this Bill with as little extra delay as possible. I look forward to his reply.