My hon. Friend makes an important point. I was about to say that the spirit of cross-party support has been sorely tested at regular intervals, mainly over budgetary issues.
The budget was raised last March. It was not raised by 20 or 50 per cent., or even doubled: instead, it was nearly tripled, to £9.3 billion. Did the Opposition withdraw our support for the Olympics, or say that it was a mistake to spend the extra money or to have bid for the games in the first place? No, we did none of that. Our support for the Olympics has been rock solid—rather more so than the Secretary of State's. When the bid was being assembled, he was leading the charge against it, so we will take no lessons from him about the need for an Olympics consensus.
However, the Secretary of State will appreciate that our commitment to the success of 2012 means that we have a duty to speak up when we think that the Government are managing the project badly. We have a responsibility to scrutinise the use of taxpayer's money, to protect the good causes for which the lottery was set up and to ensure that the games are on a sound financial footing.
In the spirit of bipartisanship, I spoke to the Secretary of State in the Lobby last week, and I also wrote to him last Thursday. I said that the Opposition would be prepared not to vote against the statutory instrument—even though it is in large measure due to the Government's financial incompetence—if the Government could reassure us on two matters.
The first reassurance that we seek is that the Government will publish proper cash flow figures for the project. Those figures should set out the money that has been spent and contain cash flow forecasts. The Secretary of State will know that, if accounts are to be scrutinised properly, they must contain a profit and loss balance sheet and a cash flow analysis. With a project of this size, however, we can determine whether it is under proper financial control only if we are able to measure the rate at which cash is going out of the door and to compare that with the rate that was predicted. That is why the cash flow forecasts and outcomes are so important.
In response to my request, the Secretary of State said that he was prepared to make available any figures that the Department had, but that he did not want to construct figures especially for us because that would involve a cost. He said nothing in his speech about cash flow forecasts for the way in which the Olympic budget will be spent, so are we to take it that no such forecasts have been prepared? If they do exist, will he publish them so that we can scrutinise the progress being made and the rate at which money is being spent?
National Lottery
Proceeding contribution from
Jeremy Hunt
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 15 January 2008.
It occurred during Legislative debate on National Lottery.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
470 c815-6 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:42:37 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_434520
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_434520
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_434520