TUESDAY 20 MARCH 2001
  
                               _________
  
                           Members present:
              Mr Gerald Kaufman, in the Chair
              Mr David Faber
              Mr Ronnie Fearn
              Mr Christopher Fraser
              Mrs Llin Golding
              Mr Alan Keen
              Mrs Diana Organ
              Ms Claire Ward
              Derek Wyatt
  
                               _________
  
  MEMORANDA SUBMITTED BY MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL, MANCHESTER 2002 LIMITED 
              and COMMONWEALTH GAMES COUNCIL FOR ENGLAND
                       EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
  
                 THE RT HON IAN McCARTNEY, a Member of the House, (Minister of State,
           Cabinet Office), MR CHARLES ALLEN, Chairman, Manchester 2002
           Limited, COUNCILLOR RICHARD LEESE, Leader, Manchester City Council,
           MS FRANCES DONE, Chief Executive, Manchester 2002 Limited, MR HOWARD
           BERNSTEIN, Chief Executive, Manchester City Council and MR ROBERT
           RAINE, Cabinet Office, examined.
  
                               Chairman
        387.     This is only the third time in the four years of the
  existence of this Select Committee that we have had hearing sessions outside
  Westminster and it is entirely appropriate that two of those three times have
  been here in this city of Manchester.  We would like to thank Manchester City
  Council for all the arrangements they have made and we would like to thank all
  involved for making it possible for us to see some of the Commonwealth Games
  sites yesterday.  We would like to thank the Minister, Mr McCartney, for being
  present here today with his colleagues. There are other people who might
  regard a venture to Manchester as being a bit of a safari but Mr McCartney
  will agree with me that Manchester is the centre of the universe, and that
  being so, it is quite appropriate we should be here.  Before we begin I would
  like to make one point of a good deal of conceit and self-regard, only one at
  the moment, maybe more later, and that is that we, on the Select Committee,
  feel some responsibility for the fact that we have Mr McCartney and his
  colleagues here today because it was as a result of a recommendation that we
  made in a report almost exactly two years ago that the Prime Minister decided
  to make that appointment and the structure that Mr McCartney then constructed
  followed from that.  It is very satisfactory that structure is working closely
  with Manchester City Council who have co-operated very closely with Mr
  McCartney, Mr Allen, Frances Done and their team.  I understand that before
  we start the questioning Mr McCartney would like to make a brief statement.
        (Mr McCartney) Yes, thank you, Mr Kaufman, and thanks to the Committee
  for inviting me.  Before I make the statement could I make one or two points
  of clarification.  I think the epicentre of the universe is actually
  Makerfield, which is slightly 15 miles from the centre of Manchester but for
  the purposes of getting on to the Committee this morning ---
        388.     I do not want to call you to order too soon.
        (Mr McCartney) I would like to thank the Committee for getting me this
  job which was very helpful of you at the time. I hope I can live up to your
  expectations. I am absolutely sure that after today's meeting, because it is
  an ongoing event, you may wish to talk to me later in the year and I offer
  that facility and indeed during the 500 days - or 492 days - left as we move
  from the planning to the implementation stage I make the genuine offer to be
  as closely involved as the Members of the Committee wish to be involved in
  terms of the planning for the successful outcome. The short statement is
  simply this.  The ultimate financial responsibility for the Games is
  Manchester City Council's. There has been no suggestion from them that they
  should be relieved of that responsibility and to be fair to the City Council,
  the question is not expected to be raised with the Government.  The public has
  already contributed substantially to the Games through Lottery money and other
  grants. The Prime Minster and other Ministers have worked hard at encouraging
  sponsorship.  Though the Games' organisers have always made it clear that
  their revenue targets were ambitious, all of us who are on the team - and I
  mean all of us - will be disappointed if we cannot meet them.  As we move from
  the planning to the implementation phase, what we call the last 500 days'
  strategy, the Government remains absolutely keen to see the Games succeed and
  we will continue to work closely with the Games' organisers, Manchester City
  Council and other agencies, to help ensure that the Games do come off in a
  successful way.  We have set up a new Cabinet Sub-Committee being chaired by
  the Home Secretary, Jack Straw, to support me in co-ordinating Government
  support to the Games. Robert Raine, on my left, will lead the Commonwealth
  Games team for central Government, again under my leadership.  Our dialogue
  with Manchester is continuous. We are working with Manchester on an
  examination of the Games' finances and the associated costs of infrastructure
  development. When this has been done the City Council will consider the
  effects locally of any revised figures and we shall again review the position.
  We are conscious of the need to make early progress in these matters and we
  expect the Select Committee again to take a close interest. We welcome your
  views on matters relating to the last 500 days and how we can use Government
  help to ensure the success of the Games.
        Chairman:   Thank you very much, Minister. Mr Fearn.
  
                               Mr Fearn
        389.     Good morning. You mentioned there finance and that is one of
  the concerns that I have. In 1999 we were told that Manchester City Council
  would invest over 20 million in facilities for the Games. You state now that
  the total capital contribution by the Council is 40.75 million so that has
  doubled.  How much further is it going to go?
        (Mr McCartney) I think what we are seeing - and I do not think anyone
  would disagree with this - over the process, first of all from the moment when
  Manchester succeeded in getting the contract to establish the Commonwealth
  Games, there have been a range of phases.  The first phase, of course, was to
  secure all of the infrastructure and that has been done. It has been largely
  within time and within budget.  That is I think a significant feather in the
  cap of Manchester and the organisers.  Government, through various guises,
  have provided the capital resources for that, both the previous Government and
  this Government. As we move from the planning phase into the implementation
  phase, it is of critical importance that one of the major reviews is the
  financial position.  One, we need to ensure that the capital investment has
  been completed, the very problems relating to that, how to resolve them. 
  Issues around renewed Government input, what more the Government needs to do
  to secure the success of the Games.  Logistics, planning for logistics like
  police, fire, transport, health; the volunteers programme; the Baton Relay. 
  At this phase we are looking at all of the aspects of the strategy to ensure
  that firstly the strategy is right and secondly are there any areas we need
  to improve and if there are what are the options for improving and that
  includes options, whether we need to put further resources in.
        Mr Fearn:   I am thinking really of the Council taxpayers in Manchester
  themselves who have seen this figure now, 20 million rise to 40 million. I
  have looked at the sponsorship.  On the sponsorship, you were hoping for 50
  million and so far 30 million is secure.  I think even from the 30 million
  a big lump comes from people like Manchester Airport for instance so it comes
  from Manchester anyway.  How are we going to get more sponsorship?
  
                               Chairman
        390.     Can I just intervene a moment to say that if any of the other
  witnesses feel that they would like to answer questions, of course they are
  very welcome to do so.
        (Mr McCartney) I was going to invite Richard to do the specifics of
  Manchester's budget because that is fortunately his responsibility not mine. 
  On the sponsorship, again Charles Allen may want to say a bit.  I hear a lot
  of knocking of sponsorship in Manchester by people and I get pretty fed up
  with the knocking. I do not mean the hon. gentlemen but outside in the media. 
  The fact is yes the sponsorship targets are ambitious - very ambitious - but
  unless you have got ambition you cannot organise the biggest event ever
  organised in Britain.  If you have not got ambition you cannot go into some
  of the big blue chip companies and sell their involvement in this.  So far,
  despite all the knocking, we have succeeded in getting the biggest sponsorship
  for an event in the United Kingdom.  That is the benefit and the sponsorship
  continues. As it continues the other thing it will move from is not just
  concentrating on the planning, we need to concentrate in the last 500 days on
  making sure the Games are implemented in a successful way.  So the balance
  between continually looking for sponsorship and making sure we are
  concentrating and implementing it, I think we have got it right. This review
  will tell us if we have not got it right and we will make the adjustments.
        (Councillor Leese)         Could I comment first of all on the
  capital costs. We are not comparing like with like, we are comparing 40
  million now with 20 million in 1999.  We can provide, of course, the
  Committee with the revised schedule of what is included in that cost.  Some
  of the headline figures, for example 40 million includes a 10.4 million
  contribution to the Convention Centre which is a facility which will be used
  for the Commonwealth Games but was not being built for the Commonwealth Games.
  The 40 million figure will also include contributions to facilities like the
  hockey, which in 1999 was not planned to be in Manchester but will now be in
  Manchester and will provide us with an on-going facility for the city and the
  region that we previously would not have had.  Again, I think if we see a full
  schedule of where the capital contribution is you will see that by and large
  it is because it is facilities that are not specifically for the Games or for
  new facilities that we will get. The only area where I think there is an
  increased budgetary cost to the City Council is that we increased the budget
  for the stadium by 4 million but over a two year period that is a relatively
  small margin on such a large capital project.  In terms of other costs and
  particularly the cost on the council taxpayer, Manchester has given a
  commitment previously that the council taxpayers will not pay either through
  increases in their council tax or reductions in services.  Our council tax
  increase this year was 2.16 per cent and we are only one of two metropolitan
  authorities to have a council tax increase lower than the rate of inflation,
  and I think that includes the local authority which your constituency is
  within, and that shows we are a prudent manager of our budgets.  As previously
  said to the Committee about how we will effectively mitigate against risk, we
  will over a period of time put reserves aside and we will generate those
  reserves from a number of sources, not least from the capital receipts we will
  get from commercial development around the Sportscity site, and of course that
  value is only there because of the investment that is going from the public
  sector.
        391.     From what we have seen so far and from what we saw from the
  hole in the ground, as it were, things have made great strides and you are to
  be congratulated.  You again there touched on the risk which there may be and
  are putting something aside in the future or during the next couple of years
  probably, but should not the Government underwrite the whole scheme?  It is
  such a big scheme, the biggest we have ever had in this country for sport. 
  Perhaps the Minister could say - or can he not say - that the Treasury are
  behind him?
        (Mr McCartney) If I cannot answer a question, I will tell you I cannot. 
  In 1995 when the original agreement was signed - and I am not saying this in
  a partisan way - the then Government signed with Manchester City Council an
  agreement that Manchester would underwrite the costs and accept any overrun
  costs, and that was reconfirmed in 1998.  What has happened since 1998 is that
  the Government has become far more engaged in government support of this
  project.  Hopefully, after the completion of it successfully next year, one
  of the things the Committee and perhaps Government needs to return to is just
  how we as a country plan both for how we seek out in a global situation large
  scale sporting events, because they are globalised now, and secondly what does
  each of the partners bring to the planning and implementation of them.  There
  will be a role for the public sector, there is a role for partnership in the
  private sector and sponsorship, and there is obviously a role on the ground,
  in the community, on where these events should be placed.  In the past it has
  been a pretty hands-off relationship but it is not now.  We have got a really
  good strong partnership and this partnership will deliver next year the best
  and biggest sporting event ever organised in the United Kingdom.
  
                               Mr Fraser
        392.     You talk about the commitment of the City Council and the
  point has been made about council tax and the financial implications.  What
  consultation have you undertaken with the ratepayers of Manchester and Greater
  Manchester as a whole about your commitment for these Games?
        (Councillor Leese)         We go through a process of consultation
  about our budgets every year with the public of Manchester, with the business
  community and other people who are interested in our financial affairs.  Our
  commitment to the Commonwealth Games is as I have described and that clearly
  has been part of that budget consultation.  The response of the citizens of
  Manchester to the Commonwealth Games has been overwhelmingly supportive
  because they can, particularly now, visibly see the benefits which will come
  to the City in terms of raising the international profile, the education and
  sports legacy and, more specifically, the regeneration legacy, and that is a
  legacy which is not simply one for the City but is one for the whole of the
  North West of England and indeed a legacy for the country as a whole.
        393.     Can you expand slightly on the issue of regeneration and the
  forecasts about what you will be doing afterwards?
        (Councillor Leese)         Within the East Manchester area, which
  is where the Sportscity is located, the permanent jobs which will be created
  around that development - and we are talking about over 3,000 permanent jobs
  on that site alone - will be the centrepiece of the very much needed
  regeneration of East Manchester, which ranks as one of the most deprived areas
  anywhere in the country.  The Commonwealth Games and the Sportscity
  development gave the impetus for proposals to be made under the New Deal for
  Communities which have provided a regeneration scheme in the adjacent area of
  some 50 million over ten years and for a single regeneration budget proposal
  for the wider East Manchester area, which is providing some 25 million over
  seven years.  There are other programmes operating within that area including
  an Education Action Zone, a Health Action Zone, a Sure Start programme, the
  Millennium Communities programme as it has been renamed and the Endcoates
  Urban Village, all of which bring substantial public and private resources
  into the city, and of course, the Metro link will be going through the middle
  of the site from around 2005.  All of that is being co-ordinated jointly
  between the City Council, the community, English Partnerships and the North
  West Development Agency through the new East Manchester Urban Regeneration
  Company.  But I think the Commonwealth Games and Sportscity for East
  Manchester has provided the catalyst for one of the most needed but also the
  most comprehensive regeneration programmes this country will ever have seen.
        (Mr McCartney) Last week I came to Manchester to launch just south of the
  stadium a project to wire up into 4,000 homes access to services run by the
  Council, the Government, including 24 hour access to police, providing
  training and free access to the Net for the residents of one of the most hard-
  pressed parts of Manchester.  So we are making all these links and we are
  getting not just value for money in terms of the investment needed to secure
  the Games as a success but what happens afterwards is important.  Not all big
  sporting events across the world actually think through what happens
  afterwards and that is the important bonus here.  All of us, the private
  sector, the Government, the City, have a long-term strategy so the Games are
  at the centre of delivering the sporting event but out of that there are major
  new investments in the City of Manchester and in the wider region.
        394.     We have been given what I consider to be an extremely
  impressive document which I read last night, the Sydney Experience, about the
  Olympic Games which clearly were a great success.  Would it not be more
  appropriate perhaps to have some more home-grown British experience like the
  Dome and learn from that experience?
        (Mr McCartney) It is a clever point politically but the Dome has got
  nothing to do with the organisation of an event which spans 72 countries, 17
  sports, a whole range of new infrastructure projects and, in addition, causes
  a lot of structures to be put in place for transport, policing, for VIPs
  coming from across the globe in the same year as the Queen's Jubilee.  It is
  a different type of event, a different scale of organisation and a far more
  complex set of issues to be resolved.  From my point of view, these have been
  resolved so far in a very effective way and will continue to be so.  So you
  are not comparing like with like.  The Dome is the Dome, you can have your
  view of it, but, please, let us concentrate on delivering the Commonwealth
  Games here, which is my job.
        395.     One is not denying you are trying to do that but I put the
  point to you because there were great aspirations for that which,
  unfortunately, were not realised and the press have made a great deal of it. 
  Finally, what are the lessons which have been learned by you from the Olympics
  as outlined in this particular document?
        (Mr McCartney) The logistics I will leave to the team, because a lot of
  the document is on logistics.  To be absolutely frank, what we have learned
  as a Government is the more you get involved in a partnership, the more
  transparent the relationship, the more the Government are prepared to engage,
  the better the outcome.  That is the lesson we have learned.  The other
  lessons are, one, unless there is in the final phase a complete concentration
  on delivery, then the Games in the last 500 days could falter, and what they
  have learnt from Sydney is a complete focus on the final 500 days is vital. 
  Secondly, despite everyone saying these were going to be the worst Games in
  history, there was a constant daily barrage of bad press and negative press
  about Sydney, but the team concentrated its efforts.  That is another lesson
  we will learn, despite negativity in the press we are focused on delivering
  the best Games.  Those were the two lessons from the Government perspective
  we have learnt.
        (Mr Allen)  I think from a managerial perspective that it was the
  partnership that really delivered and had the Government working hand in hand
  with the organising committee and that has really helped the whole thing. At
  a very practical level one of the key things which made Sydney very successful
  were the volunteers and one of the things is it which will have the largest
  volunteer programme ever in Britain. I think a lot of lessons were learned in
  how to recruit people, how to bring them on board and how to engage them and
  we have learned a lot of lessons.  The other thing that we learned was not
  only lessons which we learned when we were there. What we have done is bring
  some 25 people from Sydney to work with us so we are using the expertise in
  creating a multi-sport event in Sydney and using that experience here. I think
  it was practical in terms of looking at what happened on the ground and then
  bringing in the people who actually delivered it.  I think across all the
  ranges, from accommodation through to transportation we have learned a lot of
  lessons on how to do it so it was a very useful experience.
  
                               Mr Maxton
        396.     The BBC are your broadcasters on this.  Can you perhaps
  describe to us exactly what the deal is, I do not mean in direct financial
  terms but how important it is in terms of your financing the Games?  Did you
  select the BBC because you wanted a terrestrial broadcaster or were they the
  broadcaster who would give you the money?  How dependent is the money you get
  on the BBC selling on the rights to other broadcasters, presumably in the
  Commonwealth?
        (Mr Allen)  I am slightly conflicted I suppose as the Chairman of Granada
  but I am sure the BBC will do a fantastic job.  Basically the deal itself with
  the BBC is they are the host broadcasters and provide the infrastructure and
  the feed around the world. In terms of the financial deal effectively the
  organising committee then sells the rights so the BBC does not go out and then
  sell on the rights.  They have rights for the UK but they provide all the
  broadcasters around the world with the content, with the feed.  We have a good
  relationship with the BBC, they have put a lot of resources behind it.  I
  think they see the opportunity to make this a very exciting Games. I think the
  other thing which is reflected in the whole Spirit of Friendship Festival is
  making it more than just 11 days of sport. It is about the build up, it is
  about how we are structuring it and we have a very close relationship with the
  BBC in terms of doing that.  Let me turn to Frances in terms of picking up any
  detailed points.
        (Ms Done)   Yes. Just to make the point that the actual commitment of the
  BBC is 129 hours of free to air transmission on BBC1 or 2 between seven
  o'clock in the morning and 11.30 pm.  So that is very extensive coverage and
  means that the impact will be felt right across the country.  They are
  required to show the finals of all the events live for the majority of sports
  and for certain other sports then some of the finals will be shown.  There
  will be a huge range of sport, given that we have 17 sports, 14 individual and
  three team sports.  There will be a feast of sport really during that ten day
  period. One thing I think we should not forget is that by having the BBC as
  the host broadcaster what we have achieved, of course, is that in our
  discussions with rights' holders and potential rights' holders there has never
  been any question about the quality of the picture and the feed that will be
  given. I think from our point of view the relationship with the BBC is
  fundamental to the success of the Games.
        397.     Two points following on from that. Firstly, what other rights
  have been sold then and how important are they and also the other ones that
  have not yet been sold into other countries to the final financing?  Secondly,
  while we all accept the BBC is a superb broadcaster and will do a great job
  on this, the fact is that they do not have a sports channel, Sky do. Can the
  BBC sell on to Sky, if you like, some of the minority sport events, not the
  finals but the other parts of them, to be shown on the sport channels? If they
  can, are you actively encouraging them to do so?
        (Ms Done)   Shall I answer in terms of the other rights' holders?  We
  have sold the rights to Channel 7 in Australia who were hugely successful in
  being responsible for the Olympic Games. We have sold TV and radio rights to
  TV NZ New Zealand and radio rights to Australian Broadcast Corporation. There
  is a deal under negotiation with Asian Broadcasting Corporation.  We are in
  negotiation for the sale of Canadian and South African rights.  In relation
  to the ability of the BBC to sell further rights that is within the contract
  with them and that is entirely a matter for them. It may well be something
  that they choose to do but that would not be for us to make that move.
        398.     Lastly on the same area, the BBC have one of the best
  regarded websites in the world on the internet. What rights do they have to
  put these events on the internet and how does this affect the deals you would
  then be doing with other broadcasters around the world?
        (Ms Done)   As I think we explained in the discussion yesterday, there is
  a real issue about the use of the internet for video streaming and therefore
  they have no rights to do that unless we subsequently agree it.  I think we
  discussed the difficulty in ensuring that you maximise the value from the main
  rights' holders, broadcast rights' holders if you allow live feed for the
  Games at any stage via the internet.  That is a question that is still under
  discussion. Those of you who are very interested in all this will know that
  this was a major cause of issue and controversy around the Olympics so it is
  a developing area.
        399.     What about radio broadcasting, is that the same?
        (Ms Done)   The BBC have the rights to radio, they are host broadcasters.
        400.     They stream all their radio broadcasts live on the internet
  automatically, that just goes out, will they be stopped from doing that?
        (Ms Done)   I think what I have said applies both to radio and TV, yes. 
  That does not mean to say that things will not develop because the ability to
  agree something subsequent to our original contract is still a possibility. 
  
                              Derek Wyatt
        401.     Good morning. I wonder if I could start with the Minister
  first. We recommended you, as it were, two years ago. If we were here again
  or say in another city and we said there should be another Minister, do you
  feel you should have a substantial budget? Is it a weakness that you have to
  go cap in hand across Government?
        (Mr McCartney) Well, Mr Wyatt, everybody who knows me in the House of
  Commons says I am never somebody to go cap in hand over anything. I am, of
  course, the advocate for the Games within Government and as the advocate for
  the Games I am closely involved with all my colleagues whether it is DCMS, the
  Treasury or all the other departments who have got a direct input into the
  Games to ensure that happens in an effective way and where it is not my job
  to make sure it does.  Within Government I am really the eyes and ears of the
  Prime Minister in ensuring we deliver what has been promised.  As to the
  budget, already the Government is providing huge resources and my job is not
  a Chancellor of the Exchequer in that sense, my job is with the partnership
  to report to the Prime Minister issues around which I think the Government may
  wish to put further input. For example, when we did an initial review
  following your review we identified the need to put further resources into the
  opening and closing ceremonies.  I did not need a budget to do that.  I have
  arranged for that to be done through the appropriate department and I will
  continue that role. Therefore at the end of this review, which is the review
  leading up to the implementation stage, if there are other issues which arise
  from that where Government needs to make further input then my job is to
  advocate and do that, and so far so good.  Ultimately it will be the day after
  the Games when you can then decide whether you were sensible to recommend me
  for the job or not, history will tell that.  As it stands I do not have my
  hands tied behind my back, I do not have a zip in my mouth, I advocate very
  strongly within Government.  My job is to deliver these Games and work for the
  partnership here and if that means occasionally standing on toes then toes
  will be stood on.
        402.     Not an unsurprising answer.  Let me try and tease it a bit
  further.  It seems to me the inward investment is between 150 and 200 million
  in total build, infrastructure and so on, which again if I have done my
  calculations right means between 25 and 35 million VAT will go to the
  Treasury which is very comforting.  It would be very nice if you could
  hypothecate the actual regeneration fund back into the system. This would be
  a very nice way, a neat way, of making sure you do have your own money as a
  Minister.  Would you like to comment on that?
        (Mr McCartney) Not really.  If you give me the option I will say no. If
  you want to make recommendations with funding that is your duty. From my point
  of view my job is one of making sure the Government's input to the Games in
  whatever guise it is - logistical, financial or whatever - is maximised to
  ensure the Games are successful.  That job will continue right up to the day
  of the Games and during the Games because there will be a role still to play
  during the ten days of the Games, there will be issues every day which will
  come up which the Government will need to respond to, and that will continue
  right through to the closing ceremony.  As to the funding arrangements, we
  have a review at the moment which will take us to the 500 day strategy, and
  at the end of that review if issues of funding arise my role will be to
  advocate for those resources.
        403.     You cannot believe everything you read in the press, I should
  know that best of all, but there was a story about a 20 million not deficit
  but difference between how much you might need and what you had.  Mihir Bose
  had a story suggesting that perhaps the Government might actually pay this. 
  I am not so interested in that but rather the tension.  If the organisation
  always knows the Government is always there and is always going to have a
  cheque book, that makes it more difficult for a sponsorship department to try
  and get the money.  On the other hand, these facilities are not just for
  Manchester, you have international facilities which will be used for world-
  class events - the swimming, the cycling - so there is a bigger picture than
  just beyond Manchester.  So in an intelligent way how do you solve that and
  say, "If we are going to bid, the Government is at least going to put in X
  because it is going to get Y"?
        (Mr McCartney) That is a very fair point and there is a tension in the
  sense that each of the partners have a role to play, but it is defining what
  that role is which is important.  Having a transparent relationship and being
  able to have an effective system to deliver it quickly and to cut out as much
  bureaucracy as possible is important.  But when you deal with resources,
  whether it is the planning of resources or the allocation of resources, it is
  critically important from two perspectives, that there is value for money,
  that we are able to put a business case for each investment we want to make,
  and nobody around this table in the partnership wants to do it in any other
  way.  Secondly, in making investments, the critical factor is to try and
  maximise the partnership in terms of sponsorship.  There is not a global event
  organised now where there is not a tri-partite approach.  The Government
  usually pays for the infrastructure, the private sector the fund-raising
  resources, and income stream comes from the Games organisers, which helps to
  sustain the income levels.  Another element, of course, is the partnership and
  the management structure to deliver the Games, and that is what has happened
  here.  I have absolutely no doubt that when we do our review, issues will
  arise which will need to be dealt with and dealt with quickly and effectively. 
  That is where we are up to.  As to any level of further funding, I would not
  speculate on that.  I see what the media says but my job is not to speculate,
  my job is to get this review completed and at the end of the review see what
  additional logistics have to be put in, is additional finance required, and
  then to sit down with the partnership and colleagues in Government and ensure
  we deliver.
        404.     When we had the Rugby World Cup in 1999, one of the problems
  was it was felt in London this was a Welsh event rather than a world event. 
  It was very difficult in London to focus.  The Welsh decided not to have a
  London office.  In the same sense, this is felt to be a British event and an
  English event and a Manchester event, on the other hand though London has
  absolutely no presence, there is no understanding this is going on.  I wonder,
  given you have British Council offices and there are British Council offices
  in London, whether there is a role in having a physical presence, because we
  cannot drop in on Manchester, you have 11 million people in London --- well,
  you understand what I am getting at.  Is a greater focus going to occur so
  that the London media are better informed and we are better informed?
        (Mr Allen)  I think that is a very good question.  One of the other
  things we learned from Sydney is that it was not until six weeks out from the
  Sydney experience that the whole of Australia owned the event.  One of the
  things which was incredibly successful was the torch going round the country
  to basically ignite people's passions as such, and that is something we want
  to do here with the Queen's Baton Relay, to have 5,000 people involved, with
  the baton going round the country, in fact going round the Commonwealth, so
  it will touch 95 per cent of the population because they will be within an
  hour's drive of an event, and really build that process.  We have in place a
  number of things which we think will be very useful in building that.  I think
  a presence in London is an important point and it is part of our planning in
  terms of whether we should have a greater presence there.  The issue of the
  media is that we do not want to peak too early and therefore there is quite
  a detailed communications process, and the Baton Relay is an important part
  of that overall communication, and the programme of events and the openings,
  be it the volunteer programme, the launch of our education programme, the
  elements of the whole festival.  Frankly, if you were to over-communicate too
  quickly, the population would forget about some of the things.  So it is a
  programme which will build.  You will see it build in the summer and, more
  importantly, build into 2002 as part of the whole communication programme.
        405.     We were in Australia in January 1999 and there were Olympic
  stores in Melbourne and Brisbane as well as Sydney and not just around the
  site in Sydney - they were down by the waterfront and so on.  One of the
  things we said about the Dome as a Committee was we could not feel it and
  touch it until it was built, and we recommended there ought to have been
  merchandising shops all over the place so that people felt what it was, but
  that never happened.  I guess I am going over similar territory I have just
  asked, but there is a feeling that here you are, you know what it is about,
  but we cannot touch it, kids do not have the jigsaws, there is not a pop-up
  book.  Can you give us an indication of when those will come on stream and
  whether you have a retail outlet arranged, perhaps an M&S or Debenhams or
  something?
        (Ms Done)   There is a fair amount of work going on now and it will start
  to be seen very soon on the whole merchandising programme.  We will have a
  whole range of merchandising available by the time we get to one year out, 25
  July 2001.  We will be opening a store in Manchester.  I take the point, it
  is a good idea to think about having a presence in London in that way, and we
  will certainly be looking at that.  You will see the effect of the whole build
  of our PR, communications and marketing from within a couple of months' time,
  and it does require building around the country to make sure that everybody,
  not just in Manchester and the North West, is really excited about this. 
  There is the launch of the ticketing programme in the autumn, which is part
  of the merchandising, and there is the website which is very much the means
  of communication these days.  I have teenage sons and they do not find out
  about anything except through websites and this is something we need to be
  very conscious of.  We have started to heavily promote our website which was
  relaunched last Monday, on Commonwealth Day.  It has been received very well
  and that will go and build and build over the period to the Games.  One of the
  important things we have to crack is publicising the existence of that website
  because the more you do that, the more people get to know about the Games
  wherever they are, whether in the Isles of Scilly or in Northern Ireland.
        406.     I was interviewed this week and asked what my five favourite
  websites were - it is on Sky tomorrow - and yours was one of them.  It is a
  very good site.
        (Mr Allen)  Thank you very much!
        407.     Coming back to the boards, you have 2002 Ltd and Commonwealth
  Games Ltd.  What are the differences?
        (Mr Allen)  Basically there are two boards.  One is to manage the
  detailed business reviews, so effectively the board can go through in a lot
  of detail the sponsorship, the venue overlink planning, the manpower planning,
  and that board will be much more involved in the detail.  The broader board
  is to use the experience from the world of sport and from the commercial world
  to advise.  So one is more of an advisory board.  2002 is more an operating
  board.
        408.     In looking at the board structure, I notice in 2002 Ltd there
  is no one formally from CMS although I see there is an observer.  We talked
  about this before with the Dome which, although it had some criticism, was
  built on time and opened on time whatever the actual problems were on the
  night, which of itself was a hell of an achievement, and we do not want to
  lose all that expertise.  We have seen big projects going wrong - you only
  have to look at Wembley.  Do you feel either board has enough of a Government
  presence?  How do we pick it up in Whitehall or are you quietly confident that
  is how it should be?
        (Mr Allen)  I think as well as the board structure there is the daily
  contact across the partners.  We have the formal board review process, which
  I think has the appropriate representation, but probably more important than
  that is the daily issues where the management team, the City Council and the
  Government are literally in daily contact.  What has happened recently is that
  has been strengthened with Robert's appointment, with the City being involved
  in a lot of the detail, there is daily contact on issues, and that is the
  practical way we will resolve issues.  Rather than wait for a formal board
  meeting the issues are being dealt with on a daily basis.  Certainly from my
  perspective that is the best way to deal with it rather than have a very
  formal process that waits for a month to make an issue.  We are making
  decisions with the partners on a daily basis.
        409.     This is a huge undertaking.  We all know it is the biggest
  sporting event we have ever held.  It is a fantastic regeneration project too,
  I congratulate you on that. What have you learned that you would not do again
  already?
        (Councillor Leese)         I am not sure that is something we would
  want to confess to.  I suppose one answer would be we would not bid next time;
  actually we would because I think already the benefits have far exceeded any
  sort of investment.  It is a big complicated process and there are a number
  of areas where we have made mistakes as we have gone along. I think there was
  an assumption made early on, for example, that we would be able to find a lot
  of the expertise from in-house, and I think we have discovered that really we
  need to have more people with hands on experience of all kinds in a multi-
  sport event of this sort.  As Charles Allen referred to that is why we have
  brought more people in from Sydney and elsewhere who have hands on experience.
  We have also had people who have had Victoria and Atlanta experience as well
  within the overall team. That is a mistake and we have put it right.  I think
  the process at the moment is that we are putting mistakes right in plenty of
  time to make sure that we do open on time because we do not even have an
  option on that, the Games do have to start on a certain day. That is the sort
  of area of things that we would want to deal with differently.  
        (Mr Allen)  To reiterate, I think in terms of looking at the broader
  issue of hosting international sports events, then frankly if you thought of
  it strategically you would want to have a caravan of people who literally go
  around the globe. I think there is a big missed opportunity there in terms of
  not having that caravan of people in place which gives you the core thing. I
  think my experience is that Sydney found that, we have found that.  We seem
  to reinvent the wheel every time. I think there should be a core of people who
  could be part of that in a strategic sense who would literally go around and
  help because I think that would fast track a lot of the learning.  Certainly
  from an operating perspective that would be something we picked up in terms
  of having a core caucus of people who literally travel the globe. You would
  then have to localise it but they could give you that fast track and point you
  in the right direction early on.
  
                               Mrs Organ
        410.     Mr Maxton asked about television rights and I wonder if I
  could ask Frances Done a few more questions about that. Why did you terminate
  your contract and relationship with IMG?  Was it because there was a problem
  with selling the Games?
        (Ms Done)   Well, when one starts something like this, you have to make
  a decision about taking on advisers and that was what was done at the time,
  a certain decision was taken to take IMG on.  A fair amount of work was done
  with them but at each stage when you have consultants who advise you, you have
  to keep under review whether you think the results you are getting are the
  ones you feel are appropriate.  During the course of last year we reviewed all
  our consultancy arrangements both in relation to television rights and
  sponsorship rights and we made a decision to change the way in which we were
  dealing with them.  That was what we did and we have changed our approach to
  dealing with both television and sponsorship.  We are very satisfied with the
  new arrangements.  In fact I think the fact that we are now, 17 months out,
  able to tell you that we have a committed commercial income of 30 million,
  which is substantially more than the whole proceeds of the Rugby World Cup or
  the Football World Cup in 1999 demonstrates that we took the right decision.
        411.     You said in December last year that "we are on target about
  television rights and television negotiations will be sorted out by next
  spring as scheduled".  It is now into that spring, are they all sorted out?
        (Ms Done)   We have made very great progress.  As I mentioned Channel 7
  television, TV NZ, NBC, we are now negotiating the Asian contract.  Yes, I
  would say we are on target actually. We have had a very successful World
  Broadcasters Conference which was hosted by the BBC in Manchester, obviously
  supported very much by our team.  Those broadcasters from all over the
  Commonwealth went back incredibly impressed, as I hope you were yesterday,
  when they saw the stadium, Aquatic Centre, and all the other venues because
  they went to see every single one. These are people who are very experienced,
  very hard bitten, they have been everywhere and done everything and yet they
  are extremely impressed with the preparations we are making. We expect to see
  them back in October for the next rights' holders conference and by that time
  we will definitely have signed up the remaining rights' holders. The bulk of
  the deals we have done we are very satisfied with the outcome.  
        412.     At the onset what was your expected income from the sale of
  television rights?
        (Ms Done)   We have always taken a view that the target that we were
  working to of commercial input of 62 million was a composite figure because
  although views could be taken at various stages of what the likely outcome
  would be on sponsorship or ticketing or merchandising or TV rights, the
  individual components could only be the best guess at any particular time. 
  We have never taken a view that we would succeed or fail by comparing what we
  actually get against those individual targets.  My team, and I have a very
  effective commercial team, take the view that the aim in life is to raise the
  whole sum of money. They are working very hard on that on a daily basis.  We
  are very optimistic about the outcome. I do not think comparisons of
  individual elements are very helpful at all and we do not discuss this.
        413.     You are saying that in the ball park figure of the 62
  million you never worked out a percentage or a target for what could be
  delivered from TV rights within that?  It was anything between one and 61
  million, you must have had an element within that you expected to get from TV
  rights?
        (Ms Done)   Of course a view was taken but a different view has been
  taken at different stages bearing in mind the state of the market place. In
  many ways those different elements, as we have moved towards the
  implementation phase, as the Minister said, we are able to take a much more
  upbeat view on some elements.  To us it is very important and it is extremely
  important in terms of maintaining confidentiality of our deals with all our
  commercial partners that we talk in global figures. I am sure the Committee
  would respect that because we would have no credibility whatsoever in the
  market place if any of the information comes out about the sums of money,
  whether they are TV rights' holders or sponsors or partners, if we lose our
  credibility in that market place we will not succeed in selling further
  commercial relationships and that would be very, very unfortunate for the
  Games.
        (Mr Allen)  Could I just add to that.  The issues are inter-related in
  terms of who your television partnership is and the level of sponsorship.  For
  example, going with Channel 7 in Australia is good news because it also helps
  us in the sponsorship negotiations.  There is a play off there in terms of
  what level of coverage, what rights' coverage. One of the things which
  influenced us in our decision in terms of Channel 7 was its tremendous success
  in terms of what it did in Sydney and the fact that it had firstly the air
  time and secondly the capability of broadening the profile, giving us more
  hours of coverage which then helps in terms of sponsorships.  Although you may
  put it in a box the two - and this is from my experience in the industry - are
  absolutely inter-related in terms of the rights versus the sponsorship that
  you may get for those rights. It is a play off between the two.
        414.     Given that you have secured some negotiated deals already,
  what percentage do you think so far you have achieved of your total income
  that you could get from television rights at this point?
        (Ms Done)   I think the major deals have been done.  We are now seeking
  to make sure that we sell the remaining deals to the appropriate rights'
  holders across the rest of the Commonwealth. I think that is all I would want
  to say. It is not for us to give any impression to the outside world about how
  we see subsequent deals.  The point I made is completely valid which is we
  look at our 62 million target as a target as a whole.  For example we would
  not be complacent even if we had reached any pre-arranged or pre-thought
  individual subsidiary targets because that is not the point.  What we want to
  do for this city is make sure we raise the whole of that 62 million if we
  possibly can.
        Mrs Organ:  Can I just move on to another point.  Yesterday we were shown
  the site where the village will be.  We did have to use our imagination
  somewhat because at the present it looks like a very English cricket pavilion,
  a lot of sports fields and bits of tarmac where we were told "Here will be the
  marquee for the reception".
        Chairman:   You are talking about the Gorton division.
  
                               Mrs Organ
        415.     Beautiful though it was at present we do have to use our
  imagination for how it will be when it is a village.  Now to a certain extent
  we are rather concerned about this because in the CGS Evaluation Team
  Conclusions when they visited earlier on in November 2000 they made the point
  that athletes, particularly world class athletes, have an expectation of the
  kind of accommodation and facilities they can expect because the standards of
  villages both at Olympic and Commonwealth Games previously have been very
  high.  Do you believe you can meet those standards?
        (Mr Allen)  We have had some very good visits from the individual chef de
  missions who feel, because of the way it is structured, there is an
  opportunity.  There is a lot of dressing to be done and the key thing will be
  how people feel when they come here.  What has actually happened in the last
  three to four years is expectations have been raised because of Sydney,
  because of Kuala Lumpur, but the key thing for the athletes is the atmosphere
  which is created, and one of the things we are fairly confident about is we
  will be able to create a very warm, very friendly set of Games which the
  athletes feel comfortable with.  There is attention to detail in terms of
  accommodation and food.  The accommodation manager who managed Sydney is
  managing our accommodation, so there is a real understanding of what is really
  important.  What has happened over the last couple of years - and this is part
  of the 500 day review - is we have looked at what more we could do and what
  more could we afford within that process.  The detail of that is something we
  are asking those people who were responsible for providing accommodation in
  KL and in Sydney to look at with their expert eye and tell us in detail what
  needs to be done.  That is part of this 500 day implementation.  We have been
  through the planning phase, we know the structures, we know what needs to be
  done, but what is very important is this detailed implementation.  Our own
  people are feeling confident they can create the right environment.  People
  will look at the Games, people will look at the village, but what is going to
  be really important is the people and the atmosphere we create, and that is
  not just about bricks and mortar.
        416.     Given that is very important, that people want to feel this
  friendly and safe environment, there are some very basic things which people
  will expect.  For instance, will you be able to provide en-suite facilities
  for all athletes?  Will all the teams be able to be put together?   Will all
  of them, whatever the numbers, be able to be kept on one site?  Are those
  practical things which people would expect deliverable?
        (Ms Done)   The sites you saw yesterday will be able to accommodate about
  4,800 athletes and team officials, and the intention is that they will be
  accommodated in their teams, and that is exactly how they want it, of course. 
  They have to have bedrooms, obviously, bathrooms, showers, they have to have
  team rooms and rooms for medical teams, and there is a very complex planning
  process going on now to make sure we fit all the different teams into
  different spaces so they can all be together.  The point made in the CGF
  Evaluation Report is a very valid one, which is that the challenge of that
  site is that the standard of accommodation is very variable, and that is bound
  to be the case because it is a student village which was built up from a long
  time ago, 1968, when there were very few blocks on that site, and now we have
  some absolutely brand new, beautiful en-suite accommodation.  So the challenge
  is the variation in standard.  We are adding to those facilities to make sure
  every athlete has the required number of showers and so on.  What we cannot
  do is make all the accommodation exactly the same, that is not possible,
  however the very encouraging thing is that some of the main teams who will be
  coming, the big teams, have opted for and asked for accommodation which is not
  en-suite because they prefer the nature of the accommodation where some of the
  buildings are old, because they are more attractive than modern buildings, I
  think, and we feel we are going to be able to satisfy the requirements of all
  the teams in that way.  But it is an enormous task to make that village what
  we want it to be.  I do agree with Charles, given we will make the
  accommodation of a very good standard, albeit not all exactly the same, we
  will make the atmosphere in the village, the services and the way in which the
  athletes are treated, so good, so welcoming, so exciting a place to be, that
  for them it will be a once-in-a-lifetime experience, and we are quite
  confident we can do that.
        417.     Obviously security is a real issue at all Games.  However
  friendly you want to make them, it is important that personal security is
  available for all the teams and all the athletes.  How will you cope with that
  when, if these Games are really successful and more people come than you would
  initially envisage, more people have to be accommodated off-site?  How are you
  going to manage the security arrangements then?
        (Ms Done)   We will be looking very hard at how to deal with that when we
  are clear exactly how many are coming in each team, how many will be in
  overflow accommodation.  Obviously we have already thought about overflow
  accommodation and then we will know how much we are going to use.  We will be
  talking very hard with our security adviser and security manager and the team
  to make sure we provide the appropriate arrangements.  We have selected
  accommodation with a view to making sure that can actually happen.  The
  athletes will travel on dedicated bus services, and that is a very important
  part of securing their well-being during the period of the Games.  I think you
  can be sure that whatever the overflow numbers are, and at this stage they are
  very much estimates, there are quite likely to be more athletes because the
  Games are turning out to be extremely popular, especially bearing in mind that
  an English Games means the Welsh, the Scottish and Northern Ireland teams very
  much want to come and are in much bigger numbers than would normally be the
  case, so that has contributed to it.  We will also have very large teams from
  Canada, Australia and other teams from across the world.  It is very
  encouraging for us actually that one of our problems is the fact so many
  athletes and team officials are likely to come.
        (Mr McCartney) There are two issues on security.  We have set up a very
  close liaison relationship with the police who are now part of the team for
  the planning of general security.  It is also the year of the Queen's Jubilee
  and therefore we are expecting to have to plan for a substantial number of
  VIPs from across the Commonwealth, and that brings with it some acute issues
  around protection and security, which has been handled in a very specific way
  with the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and the Home Office, with the team. 
  So even at this stage issues around that type of security are being planned
  in a specific way.  I thought I had better say that because there are
  different levels of security and so you know we are thinking of each level. 
  Given it is the Queen's Jubilee, there will be an expectation that a majority
  of key people, VIPs, politicians and others from the Commonwealth will at
  least come to the start of the Games and therefore logistics are being planned
  now to deal with that.
  
                                Ms Ward
        418.     Minister, given that in most other parts of the world where
  events take place it would be considered unusual to say the least for a local
  authority to underwrite the costs of such a major event - normally it would
  be perhaps the region or the state or the Government - do you think the risks
  that fall upon the City or the local authority are so great that there will
  be a problem for others in the future in deciding whether or not to take the
  initiative to bid for other events?
        (Mr McCartney) You are leading me into an area which I have no
  responsibility for but I do have a view on this and I am prepared to share it
  with you.  Across the globe, looking at the other events which have happened
  in the recent past, there is an absolute mixture as to who takes
  responsibility for what.  A mixture in terms of local government, state
  government and in some countries the local government is merely a shell and
  the state government is really the local government.  What seems to be a
  general pattern though is that state governments or national governments have
  two hands-on and that is for ensuring the infrastructure projects are
  completed and secondly have a good, close working relationship with the
  organisers.  This is not always the case, as we have seen in the recent past
  with some high profile disagreements over Olympic sites.  Each country in its
  own way either muddles through or has a Rolls Royce version.  I think it is
  true to say that in each country you have to deal with the situation as you
  find it, and that is what we have here.  The second part of your question
  relates to here.  In 1995 the agreement was reached that Manchester City would
  take responsibility and it has not changed.  What has changed since your
  report - so I do not take credit for this - is that there has been a change
  in direction, and that direction is a far closer working relationship and
  partnership between central government and those who are delivering the Games. 
  This has in turn led to - and I have no brief to say this but I think it is
  important to say it - a changed culture within Whitehall.  Irrespective of
  what party has been in power, there has never been a culture of actually
  working together to secure big events; it just has not been part of our
  culture.  Therefore it was not just a matter of taking your review and ticking
  the box and taking up the idea, we had to look at changing the culture and
  getting people to accept risk, accept responsibility and accept they need to
  work in a different way.  That has been difficult for some people.  In
  establishing from ground zero in under a year a really good working culture
  we have come a long way in a short time. What we need to do after this event,
  and this is for others to determine, is to build on that culture because this
  hopefully will not be the last event we will want to compete for as a nation.
  I hope we are going to have an ambition and compete for other large global
  events and other events which are not seen as global but are actually very
  important to attract into the United Kingdom to use them as a window of
  opportunity for a range of other issues.  That will mean a different tack from 
  how we have done it in the past and that will mean a far more focused approach
  at Central Government, a far more focused set of partnerships and to invest
  in skills from the Commonwealth Games.  Those skills, having invested in them,
  to retain those skills to use them for further events.  If that is helpful,
  that is my view of what should happen. 
  
                               Chairman
        419.     Could I just intervene at that point.  Of course I think the
  answer you have given us, Mr McCartney, is extremely valuable.  The fact is,
  is it not, that until our report and your appointment, what happened within
  this country was when we had international events we somehow muddled along.
  The last Commonwealth Games at Edinburgh were, as it were, the personal play
  thing of Mr Robert Maxwell.  The World Student Games in Sheffield have left
  a legacy which is a lesson to all of us as to what can go wrong when you do
  not have a structure. We now have a structure.  You were appointed as part of
  a recommendation from this Select Committee that there be a Minister for
  Events and as you point out there are going to be more events.  We have the
  World Athletics Championships and already looming up is the question of
  Picketts Lock and the availability of a stadium.  That being so, while of
  course you very properly make the point that this is not a matter for you to
  decide yourself, would you confirm what seems to have come out of the answer
  you have just given to Claire Ward that what we do need for future events,
  because we want more of them, is a central structure, not a centralised
  structure but a central structure, whereby Government takes its proper
  responsibility for making sure that these events, which are so important to
  this country, are properly arranged and managed, and leave the kind of happy
  after glow, say, that came from the Sydney Olympic Games?
        (Mr McCartney) I am not an Events Minister, I am this Event's Minister
  in terms of co-ordinating Government response.  It is an absolute death wish
  within politics to recommend you for a job, Mr Kaufman, and whether there is
  going to be a reshuffle sooner or later, I would rather leave it to the
  reshuffle. As to whether or not there should be a specific department
  responsible, we do have a department, DCMS, and we do have a Sports Minister,
  and we have a Secretary of State.  We have got a department identified in
  Government to deal with sport and sport related issues and perhaps you could
  ask the Secretary of State his view about that and how he should promote that. 
  Certainly in terms of learning lessons about the role that I was asked to
  play, the fact that I have been asked to play this role gives an indication
  that your report was taken seriously and there was a requirement to get better
  co-ordination and a better approach. If that was not the case I would not have
  been appointed, would I?  What I need to do, I suppose, and your Committee
  from the experience of the Commonwealth Games, is to put recommendations about
  what we do in the future and that is really why I expressed my view that
  whatever Government is in power of whatever political persuasion, whatever the
  structure of Whitehall is, there will need to be in my view an absolute
  clarity about the role of the specific ministers or department who will take
  responsibility for working with local authorities or others in determining,
  one, should we make a bid, two, what the nature of the bid should be, three
  what the components of those who are involved in the bid are and, four, if it
  succeeds what is going to be the input from Central Government and the rest
  of the partnership. If we can achieve that and be far more effective in how
  we have done it than in the past then we have done this nation a great favour.
        420.     Just one more question before we go back to Claire.  As a
  consequence of that you have mentioned the role of the Department of Culture,
  Media and Sport. In the House of Commons tomorrow we shall be having both the
  Secretary of State and the Minister for Sport and obviously we shall be
  questioning them closely.  The fact is that the structure that is represented
  by the six witnesses at this table today did not result from anything which
  came out of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and the Minister for
  Sport simply does not have the powers that you have or the access to the Prime
  Minister that you have. Of course we recognise that you are the Minister for
  the Commonwealth Games and not the Minister for Events, though for my part I
  wish you were the Minister for Events as well - I see you shaking your head
  but the Prime Minister makes these decisions, Mr McCartney - but is it not
  worrying that until we made that recommendation the kind of structure and
  partnership represented by these six people at the table did not exist and
  might not have existed?
        (Mr McCartney) I would rather look forward than back. You made your
  recommendations and the Government has responded. I think you should just go
  away and slap your backs and let us get on with it.  You invite me to make a
  comment.  All I can say is I have got a very good working relationship with
  the Minister for Sport and Chris Smith. From the outset when I was appointed
  to this specific task I have had total co-operation with them and working with
  the team.  Much of the resource that I need to deploy lies in their Department
  and, therefore, they are part of the team too, a very critical factor. The
  Secretary of State does have access to the Prime Minister, he is a Member of
  the Cabinet.  
        421.     He cannot just walk through the door the way you do.
        (Mr McCartney) That is maybe because of my weight rather than my close
  proximity to the Prime Minister.  It does not work that way actually. There
  is a lot of myth about. Like any other Minister I get access to the Prime
  Minister on request.  The Sports Minister gets as much access to the Prime
  Minister as I do on occasions. The issue for me is not to go and see the Prime
  Minister with problems, my job is to go with solutions to problems.  I hope
  I can continue to manage to do that. You do not like to go to the Prime
  Minister and say "I have failed", do you?  It is important those relationships
  are maintained. There is a very good working relationship with DCMS and
  myself.  I said earlier about the changing culture, none of the departments
  now in the task force has been anything other than very supportive.  From
  having no engagement to absolute total engagement in just over a year is a
  tremendous achievement. Without being complacent about it because there is
  still a lot to be done here and a lot of decisions yet to be made, sometimes
  difficult decisions, I am absolutely certain that whether it is Ministers in
  DCMS or Ministers in DfEE or the Foreign and Commonwealth Office or the Home
  Office, I will get total support in trying to achieve the objectives which the
  Prime Minister set out for me when he appointed me to this job.
  
                                Ms Ward
        422.     What other departments are involved in the task force?
        (Mr McCartney) I have brought a list with me just in case you asked me. 
  We have got DCMS.  The Home Office, of course, is involved not just in
  relation to logistics with the police but they are also a link into the
  Jubilee. The Home Secretary has taken personal involvement and that is why he
  is chairing a new Cabinet Committee. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office are
  involved because of their over-arching role in the Commonwealth but also their
  expertise in dispute resolution over contacts and issues around security. 
  DfEE have been very much involved both in terms of the curriculum, very much
  involved in the Friendship Festival.  In the curriculum next year in primary
  schools there will be a pack to give help, advice and knowledge of the
  Commonwealth Games and the relationship with the Commonwealth.  The Department
  of Social Security is involved with us in relation to issues around the
  volunteer programme and the role of volunteers and those who are on benefits
  and how they can play an active part.  DFID is involved because of its
  commitment around the Commonwealth.  The Ministry of Defence is involved in
  logistical issues and issues around what they can bring to the party in terms
  of the opening and closing ceremonies.  The Department of Trade & Industry is
  involved because of their role with inward investors and helping with
  sponsorship arrangements and also the links with the regions to develop
  regional links.  The Treasury, of course, are involved in all parties in
  government but play a very pro-active cost role with us.  The Department of
  Health are involved.  We have just appointed to the Games a senior official
  to co-ordinate the logistics around health for a large influx of people who
  will come in because, unfortunately with a large influx, there will be people
  who will become ill and we have to ensure the structure is in place.  They are
  also playing a good role in seeing the Games as an ability for them to promote
  healthy living, healthy lifestyles, involving young people and others in
  sport, recreational purposes.  The Government Office for the North West, which
  is the link between the Government in the centre and the regions, are closely
  involved, working on a daily basis to co-ordinate things with Manchester.  If
  you had asked this question, as you probably did do in your previous
  investigation, this list would have been simply DCMS and the Treasury.  So you
  can see from your recommendations how we have moved things dramatically in
  terms of a total engagement across all government departments.  Of course we
  keep Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland intimately involved too, because of
  the need for them in the implementation phase of encouraging interest in each
  of those parts of the United Kingdom to participate in the Games and also to
  participate in tourist attempts to bring people into the North West to see the
  Games and stay for a few days to boost the tourist industry.
        423.     So there is not a single department not involved?
        (Mr McCartney) Maybe that was the easy way to answer it but, you know me,
  if ten words will do I will give you a hundred.  I wanted to put it in that
  way to show we have taken very seriously the views expressed in May 1999.
        424.     I think what it underlines is that DCMS could not have done
  it without a Minister in a position to draw all of those departments together.
        (Mr McCartney) I think that is grossly unfair, to be honest.  Whoever got
  the job to co-ordinate it would have done it in the same way.  I think the
  point to be made here is that you cannot have a single department, however
  good it is, do a huge event like this.  If you want to make an impolite
  criticism, that is fine, but I would not want to be associated with that.  The
  fact is, we took seriously what you said, it was not a decision by us as a
  Government that we did not think DCMS could deliver it, it simply means the
  Government could have done better in delivery and we have done that.  The
  final department involved is of course the Department of Environment,
  Transport and the Regions, which is linked to local government and the
  regions.  So it has been a Government effort to respond to your request to
  brush up our act and do better and that is what we have done.
        425.     How will the Government assess the success of this working
  together to decide whether or not a post of Minister of Events should be made
  permanent?
        (Mr McCartney) The Government assesses all the programmes and this will
  be assessed and is continually assessed.  As to the structure of Government,
  that is thankfully for others to decide.  From your point of view, you can
  sleep easy in your bed at night knowing there is co-ordination in this event
  and there will continue to be co-ordination and it will be successful.
        426.     One final question to all of you.  What work have you been
  doing with the British Tourist Authority to ensure we get as many people as
  possible to come over for the Games and that they not only look to enjoy
  Manchester but a much wider part of the UK?
        (Mr McCartney) This is one of the areas which I decided to look at.  I
  received yesterday from the Tourist Association their new strategy.  I asked
  them to develop a quite specific strategy.  That has been delivered to us. 
  I have no doubt at the end of the page there will be a request for additional
  money to go with it, so I have only read half way through it just in case. 
  It is vitally important that we attract people to come to the United Kingdom,
  not just to come to the Commonwealth Games but to get out of the golden
  triangle in the south east and visit our heritage in the north of England. 
  We are very lucky here in Manchester, we are within less than an hour's travel
  distance of the Peak District, the Lake District, we have a massive industrial
  heritage, we have two of the most growing and vibrant cities in Europe, so we
  have a very, very good product to sell.  We need people to come to the United
  Kingdom and to stay for more than two or three nights.  We need them to stay
  for the Commonwealth Games and stay on and to come back again and retain a
  patronage.  This would be very true anyway but since the events of the last
  few weeks it is even more true, and I see the Commonwealth Games as a real
  opportunity to have a step change in our strategy in attracting tourists to
  areas outside London and into other parts of the United Kingdom.  So I am very
  much on board to ensure this strategy is not just on paper, it is one which
  can be effectively deployed to attract people into the United Kingdom but also
  a strategy to attract people who are our citizens to have holidays in the
  United Kingdom too.  We all want to go overseas for holidays and nobody wants
  to stop people doing that, far from it, but there is also a capacity to build
  a market place here too in terms of what our own citizens can do to come to
  the Commonwealth Games and have long weekend breaks or winter breaks and come
  to the north of England and the North West in particular.  So there is a range
  of markets which will better attract people and encourage them to come.  It
  is not just about coming to the North West, if you come to the United Kingdom
  and come this far to the Games, you can also visit Northern Ireland, Scotland
  and Wales, because again the North West is geographically well-placed to serve
  the rest of Britain.  Within four hours you can reach 90 per cent of Britain
  from the North West.  That is a fact and we should use that as an advantage
  in developing a tourist strategy.  That is another job I am not responsible
  for!
        Chairman:   We ought to set that to music, Ian!
        Mr Keen: First of all, can I congratulate you all because you have
  recovered so well from what must have been a deep psychological blow when you
  realised the whole of the Games would not fit into our Chairman's Gorton
  constituency.
        Chairman:   That is a tragedy, I agree.  We could do it given the
  opportunity actually.
  
                                Mr Keen
        427.     I am sure.  One thing I learned from the Dome experience was
  that the close involvement of a minister right from the very beginning gave
  a target for the press.  They treated it as if an alien species and a space
  craft had landed and was going to exterminate the world.  It gave them a lead
  straight back to Government and the media attacked the Government and so did
  the main Opposition parties.  With your involvement, Minister, this is a more
  complex situation, and maybe your involvement will protect Manchester City
  Council from media attacks, or is the media treating it as their Games rather
  than as they did the Dome?  How does it work?
        (Mr McCartney) It is difficult at the top, is it not?  It goes with the
  territory.  If you are a politician involved either in a high profile policy
  area or a high profile event in the United Kingdom, just do not expect to get
  any favours.  The issue here for me is that the UK press have a real
  opportunity to be well on board, and I do not mean the press should not query,
  challenge, question, long may that be the case, and if they can dig up errors
  and mistakes in this or any other event, fair enough, we will respond to them,
  but what has not yet happened in the United Kingdom is that there has not been
  a buy-in by the sports press or a buy-in by the general press yet.  What we
  organising here in the United Kingdom is not just the biggest sporting event
  but it is a window to the wider world about what we are as a nation and what
  we can be as a nation. I think you should be terribly ambitious about your
  country and really ambitious about what we can achieve. Recently I visited
  Japan as part of my role in the DTI.  There is a funny story but it has a tale
  to it and it is this. I was asked to go and visit a Japanese electronics
  company. They wanted me to see their latest robots. I was put in front of the
  300 staff by the head of the company who proceeded to tell me that these
  robots were designed to play Japanese drums.  I knew it was going to happen,
  I knew he was going to ask me to respond at the end of it.  So these robots
  played the drums, wonderful drums, you would shut your eyes and think they
  were being played by drummers themselves. My response to him was this "When
  they can play the bagpipes come back and see me".  The underlying trend there
  was that he and the Japanese press were so proud of their achievements and
  were proud to promote their country. That is one of the other roles, as well
  as being an advocate in Government, I think you should also try to be an
  ambassador for these Games, wherever you go, to promote your country, to
  promote the Games. I would like the press in Britain to take on an ambassador
  role here, it is wider than just the Games in Manchester, it is about our
  nation, how we feel about our nation.  It is a multi-cultural nation, it is
  a nation full of talent.  We have a generation of young people who have got
  lots of talents and we should celebrate those talents. We should celebrate as
  a nation, we have got great engineers and architects, you can see from the
  structures we have built.  We have got event venues here which will compare
  with anything in the world, architecturally and in engineering skills. We need
  to sell it. The other thing we need to sell is our country through tourism as
  an attraction to get inward investment into the country.  People do not just
  come to the country simply on wages alone, they come because of the nature of
  the country, the people, the structures and what else the country can bring
  to the party. It is a big opportunity, I think, the Commonwealth Games, to
  sell our country and feel a sense of pride in it.  We need to get the press
  behind us and do that on a regular basis.  There was an article in a national
  newspaper recently saying that people were not coming forward to be sponsors. 
  That newspaper had only two weeks previously agreed to be a major sponsor. 
  There are issues around. We have to put up with the nitpicking but there comes
  a point with 500 days to go to stop the nitpicking and get behind the Games
  and be an ambassador for the nation.  For once everybody get behind these
  Games, get behind the country and be proud about it. 
        (Councillor Leese)         Could I just add one thing. It would be
  a mistake to put all of the media into the same basket. It is the case that
  from the regional media within Manchester and the North West the level of
  support that we have had has been both very, very good and has been increasing
  all the time. I do not think any of them have ever suggested that the City
  Council was wrong with its partners to go into this enterprise.  I need to be
  clear that we do have that level of support here.
        (Mr McCartney) Yes, I was talking about the national media.
        428.     Can I say I think all of your attitudes will help make it our
  Games rather than some alien situation. Can I ask about the stadium legacy.
  What arrangements are there for the stadium after the Games? I understand the
  physical changes that will take place but financially, how is that to work?
        (Mr Bernstein) Immediately beyond the Commonwealth Games we convert the
  stadium into a football stadium which will be occupied by the football club,
  Manchester City. In terms of the financial arrangements, Manchester City
  assume the operational responsibility for the stadium and then there are rent
  share arrangements based on performance which are captured by the public
  sector for the benefits of sport generally. There are also other arrangements
  in relation to the stadium in order to guarantee certain performance levels
  around community use, so certain times of the year the community have the
  right to use the facilities.  
        429.     The stadium is built with public money.  So Manchester City
  will pay a rent for operating the stadium.
        (Mr Bernstein) Yes.
        430.     Will they operate the stadium for the other events that will
  be held?
        (Mr Bernstein) Yes.
        431.     They will be the official operators?
        (Mr Bernstein) Yes.
        432.     The stadium will always remain in the public ownership?
        (Mr Bernstein) Yes.
        433.     Can I ask a question which affects my own constituency, on a
  subject that you have already mentioned, about involving other people. I have
  got a very high percentage of people from the Punjab in India and some from
  the Punjab across the border in Pakistan and hopefully we will have some
  strong teams coming over. Although the community that I am part of shout for
  England a great deal of time in different sports events they have a great
  interest in the Commonwealth Games.  What can I say to them when I go back to
  West London?
        (Mr Allen)  If I can pick up on that.  I think they have the opportunity
  to be part of one of the most exciting world events as such.  I hope they are
  supporting India and the Punjab and I hope they are supporting England. I hope
  they actually come to Manchester.  We hope through the whole communication
  programme to really ensure they see this as a big sporting event, a big
  cultural event.  We actually aim to celebrate the diversity in this country. 
  That is the thinking behind the whole Spirit of Friendship Festival that we
  are a diverse country, we want to use the Arts Festival which is the year of
  diversity for the Arts Council to celebrate our heritage and culture. We want
  to ensure that children in schools through the schools programme understand
  the heritage and understand what the Commonwealth Games is. We want them to
  participate in the Schools Programmes in terms of playing the sports
  themselves. We want them to come, we want them to own this event, we want them
  to be part of the best and biggest event that is happening in 2002.  I think
  the key thing here is making the whole thing inclusive. One of the key things
  we have actually worked very hard on is making this what we believe will be
  the most inclusive event, whether that is on gender, there will be more women
  in this event than ever before, over 40 per cent of the participants will be
  women, there will be more countries involved, there will be more sports
  involved. The whole idea is to make it as inclusive as possible. I think that
  is the important message that people should take away from what we are doing.
        (Ms Done)   Could I just add one thing which I think might be
  particularly relevant to that question, Mr Keen, which is that we have been
  offering the opportunity to North West Local Authorities to adopt a nation and
  to set up arrangements so that they can communicate with the team.  They will
  put events on for the team, maybe link the team and the information about that
  particular country to schools in their own local authority and so on. At the
  moment we have only really offered that opportunity to the North West local
  authorities because of the distance issues but many of them are very
  interested and there is absolutely no reason why that opportunity could not
  be taken up by a local authority somewhere else in the country.  I would quite
  like to have a word with you about that afterwards because I think that would
  be something that would really have an impact.  
        (Councillor Leese)         In terms of the volunteer programme we
  are working with Manchester Council for community relations to make sure that
  in terms of recruitment of volunteers that all parts of the community,
  including particularly those from Commonwealth country backgrounds, are
  involved in that programme.
  
                               Mr Faber
        434.     Could I return to the issue of sponsorship and television
  income. I quite accept that you do not wish to give precise details of actual
  deals struck but actually reading through the oral evidence we received from
  you two years ago there was a considerable amount of detail given then and I
  think it is a reasonable yardstick. If we could return, first of all, to IMG.
  You told us in 1999 they were looking at between 10 and 12 sponsorship deals
  of 2 million each.  Now I understand you have got four sponsorship deals
  agreed, as I say I do not want to know the precise value of them. If you were
  looking at ten to 12 sponsorship deals of 2 million, perhaps it is
  immediately clear where some of the shortfall is.
        (Mr Allen)  If I can just clarify.  What is already in place now are five
  sponsorship deals and seven partnership deals. The key thing as well as the
  cash element of the sponsorship is ensuring you actually have the right
  partnership.  If I can elaborate on that. If I take something like Adeko,
  Adeko are helping us with the whole recruitment process and therefore as well
  as the cash they are helping us with the overall recruitment, the overall
  structure, training and package.  What I am very comfortable with is that we
  have actually brought on board the right partners, it is not about just
  somebody writing a cheque, it is about somebody who can deliver. Adeko have
  a lot of experience because they have done a number of deals.  We have been
  quite selective in the process to make sure we are getting the right partner. 
  If I then look at something like telecommunications, we are bringing Atlantic
  on board who are very integral to the whole process and they will actually
  leave an infrastructure here in the North West that will benefit the North
  West and benefit Manchester. I think we are pleased with the progress that we
  are making in each of the key categories.  Some of those categories are time
  critical. You can imagine telecommunications has a long lead time.  As you can
  imagine, recruitment and bringing enough people on board is an important part
  of the process. In terms of who we are, then we are ahead of the internal
  plans at this particular time.  One of the things again we looked at in terms
  of Sydney was when the sponsors came on board and in certain categories they
  came on board right up to days before the event.  So in terms of progress, I
  am encouraged not only by the quantum but more importantly by the quality of
  the partnership we have been able to get.
        435.     I quite understand you cannot be held responsible for what
  your predecessor said but he directly contradicted that.  Two years ago he
  said he hoped within the next two years sponsorship deals would be in place,
  but, as I say, I do not hold that against you.
        (Mr Allen)  I think one of the things we learned, and one of the reasons
  the review touched on IMG, was exactly what was done in this process.  There
  were expectations there on timing which were not realistic and when we
  reviewed it we said, "Let's look back and look at what is do-able" and we were
  quite encouraged by where we were.
        436.     The reason IMG walked away from their relationship with the
  Dome,  and they were originally appointed to run the sponsorship for the Dome,
  was they were unable to agree with ministers on who should be held responsible
  for some of the sponsorship leads and they were subsequently paid off.  Have
  you severed your relationship with them?  Has that been accounted for within
  your budget?  Are they responsible for a large part of the sponsorship income
  you have already received?
        (Mr Allen)  There were very few they were directly responsible for.  They
  were paid the appropriate commission for the ones they actually delivered,
  including ones like the BBC.
        437.     They delivered the BBC?
        (Mr Allen)  Yes, they delivered the BBC as part of the original
  agreement.  The key issue was having the right partnership and the right
  people on board.  Frances Done and I did a very thorough review, following our
  discussions with the Minister, and we felt we could achieve the sponsorship
  by having a different partnership in place.
        438.     You mentioned value in kind a moment ago.  Again I apologise
  to the Minister but there are very many potential parallels to draw with the
  Dome, whatever he may say.  One of the great problems with the Dome was
  actually it proved almost impossible to quantify the value in kind sponsorship 
  by the end of the project, and in fact a lot of what had been promised was
  never delivered.  Of your 30 million you have already raised, I accept some
  of that is television, and again I do not want to know the precise figure,
  what sort of percentage are you talking about of your overall sponsorship
  figure is in kind rather than hard cash?  I think I would be very worried if
  you were relying too heavily, however admirable the sponsors may be in terms
  of what they are providing for you, on sponsorship in kind because you often
  end up getting things you do not need or want.
        (Mr Allen)  I agree.  Because of my background in the television business
  I have a very good understanding of that.  We took a very hard-nosed view that
  we would only count it if it was in the original budget.  In the sponsorship
  game people want to give you lots of things you do not need or want.  The view
  we took was VIK sponsorship could only be related to direct items in the
  budget.  So if there was a cost for recruitment and Adeko were going to do
  that, that would count in VIK.  In terms of the proportion, it works out
  roughly 50 per cent in cash and 50 per cent VIK but with a very specific
  definition of VIK because, as you say, people want to give you things you do
  not need and it does not count towards the budget.  There are some elements
  which are nice to have but it is not counted in the 30 million we quoted.
        (Ms Done)   The 50 per cent is 50 per cent of the sponsorship.
        439.     That is what I meant.  To come on to television revenue, Mr
  Allen told us earlier you did not have a specific target for television income
  but I am afraid your predecessor back in 1999 gave us a specific target.  He
  said he was looking at receipts of 23 million.  Do you think with hindsight,
  given that was originally built into the budget, that was a little ambitious? 
  I actually said, "More than has ever been raised for a Commonwealth Games?"
  and the answer, and Councillor Leese was involved in the exchanges as well,
  was basically along the lines that in spite of the fact the Kuala Lumpur Games
  were more attractive for Australian television you still felt you would do
  better than Kuala Lumpur.  Is that clearly going to the case any more?  Do you
  think that perhaps 23 million target was ambitious at the time?
        (Mr Allen)  I think the budget has even moved on from there since I came
  on board because I do not recognise the 23 million.  I think what you have
  seen is us out-perform in certain categories, for example telecommunications
  where we got substantially more than they thought.  As I said earlier, the key
  to this is understanding that balance between television and the sponsorship
  packages we can achieve.  The way we are managing it is very much to run it
  as a total package rather than say X or Y fall into each category.
        440.     You said, Minister, in your opening statement you were
  closely involved with attempts to raise sponsorship.  Councillor Leese in 1999
  said to us, "In terms of what we will need to do in terms of raising
  sponsorship, particularly on a national level, we are only likely to do that
  successfully if we have the full support of Government, the sort of support
  we have seen perhaps with the Millennium Dome, if I can draw that as an
  analogy."  I do not want to embarrass Councillor Leese but perhaps with
  hindsight, given one or two of your colleagues have had their fingers badly
  burnt in terms of raising sponsorship for the Dome, how do you go about it and
  maintain the levels of propriety in doing that?  It is a difficult balance for
  a politician to become involved in basically touting for money, raising money
  for a project such as this.  How do you go about doing it?
        (Mr McCartney) First of all, I do not tout for money.
        441.     I am sorry, that was the wrong word.
        (Mr McCartney) The responsibility for sponsorship lies with Manchester
  2002.  I have no involvement in the planning of that, I have no involvement
  in the negotiations, indeed, to be honest with you, I myself do not ask them
  about the details of the negotiations which take place because they are
  confidential in terms of relationships.  If someone wants to maintain that
  confidence then I have full confidence in them to deal with that.  My role is
  an ambassadorial role as a minister.  I do not go in and negotiate or
  facilitate meetings on sponsorship.  My job is to ensure, where people are
  interested in sponsorship, we give them an absolute commitment and
  understanding of what the Government's role is.  They are not coming in here
  to be involved in an organisation which has no relationship with Government
  which the Government is going to walk away from.  My job is to ensure that
  people interested in sponsorship know the Government is behind the project,
  the Government has got ministers who are delivering the things the Government
  needs to deliver and are delivering them on time.  Thirdly, the ambassador
  role is to persuade people to get involved in what is the biggest event ever
  organised in the United Kingdom.  That is a legitimate role.  There is no
  Government in the world which organises big international events where there
  is not a role for sponsorship.  You cannot run big international events in the
  world without a role for sponsorship and that means being an ambassador for
  the Games, and that is what my role is and that is what I have been doing,
  that is what the Prime Minister has been doing.  The Prime Minister has done
  a promotional video which goes out to potential sponsors which tells them what
  the Games are about, and my role is to do that in a different way, to
  encourage people by going to receptions and talking to people.  Manchester
  2002 and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office have receptions for potential
  sponsors and at those receptions, in addition to the potential sponsors, those
  who have already become sponsors come along and act as an advocate with the
  Minister too.  So if I go and talk to somebody and say, "We want you to be a
  sponsor", we have people already on board who can explain why they got
  involved.  I am not a negotiator or a facilitator, I am an ambassador.  I
  think every minister should have that role in terms of this event, persuade
  people this is worth being involved in.
        442.     Minister, it was not a criticism at all ---
        (Mr McCartney) No, I did not take it as a criticism.
        443.     You have also answered my next point.  You mentioned in your
  opening statement the Prime Minister's involvement and you have just said his
  was an ambassadorial role.
        (Councillor Leese)         I ought to say that what I said in 1999
  was absolutely quite correct.  I was asked earlier about mistakes we have
  made, clearly one of the mistakes we have made was to give you precise figures
  in 1999, and we have not made that mistake today!  
        444.     As no one else has asked, can I go to a completely different
  topic and ask about the issue of transport during the Games?  No one has
  touched on it, so I hope I might just mention it.  We were bussed around
  yesterday and clearly Manchester can be a very busy city at times.  In Sydney
  the local transport authority took on statutory powers to move people around. 
  We have seen at other Games sometimes the disastrous effects if athletes and
  spectators cannot get round.  Can you tell us what you are doing to facilitate
  both the movement of athletes and also the movement of the general public?
        (Ms Done)   Yes.  Manchester 2002, working with all the partners in
  Manchester and Greater Manchester, are planning hard to make sure that we do
  not gridlock the city and not only athletes but everybody can get around the
  city at the time of the Games. The main elements are really to recognise that
  in any event of this type what we have to do is encourage the use of public
  transport, both into Manchester and around Manchester between venues.
  Obviously that is easier said than done since the British public are well
  attached to cars when they have them. What we will be doing is trying to put
  in place, and we are well ahead with these plans, means by which the use of
  public transport will be encouraged.  So, for example, you saw on your trip
  yesterday that the distance between the city centre and sport city is really
  quite short a distance.  We will be setting up arrangements either for a fast
  bus along the route of Metrolink or, if that is not possible, shuttle buses
  between the city centre and Sportscity, that is for the general public.   We
  will be encouraging people to park and to walk or to come in by public
  transport and walk and also park and ride schemes, of course, will be
  encouraged using existing transport networks and sometimes special ones. We
  will be making sure in conjunction with the local bus operators and tram
  operators that we encourage the putting on of services later in the evening
  to a greater quantity than we would otherwise normally have so that people can
  be sure that when they go to an event they can also get home. We are
  negotiating with the local operators to try to secure that spectators with a
  ticket will be able to travel free on public transport within Greater
  Manchester. We are very optimistic that the local bus operators and train
  operators will see that is a very, very good PR thing for them to do and will
  encourage the use of public transport.  We are working very closely with all
  the agencies, Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive, the police,
  the Highways Agency, Government Office for North West. As you all know it is
  a very complex transport situation compared with, say, Sydney.  We have to
  deal with a large number of operators but our experience to date is that they
  are very keen to make sure this all works.  Of course we have to, under the
  constitution, provide dedicated bus services for athletes, team officials and
  the media, and we will shortly be in a position to announce a sponsorship deal
  which will provide that arrangement with a company which knows how to run
  buses.
        445.     Good value for kind.
        (Ms Done)   Yes.  Very valuable value for kind because certainly I do not
  want my own company to set up the infrastructure to start running buses, we
  would rather leave that to the experts.  I think we are well on target with
  the planning but we are not complacent at all. It is one of the major areas
  which will decide whether people after the Games feel that the whole event was
  a success.
        (Mr Allen)  Just maybe to add to that, if you look at some of the
  practical problems, and again it comes back to people with experience, one of
  the problems they had in America was they did not have experienced drivers.
  So you had this fantastic infrastructure in place and if the guys who are
  driving the bus do not know how to get there it is a real problem.  That level
  of detail is in place, there will be experienced drivers.  Again, the lesson
  from Sydney is managing expectations, people did use public transport to get
  around.  We are using that expertise in terms of the teams to actually help
  drive that forward.  It can be very small things like experienced drivers but
  that can cause havoc if you have not thought about it.  I think there is good
  planning in place and good contingency planning.
  
                              Mrs Golding
        446.     Many years ago I had the pleasure of living in Manchester for
  quite some time.  At that time the city was dead, it was dying, there was no
  regeneration.  Going around in the bus yesterday I kept coming across sites
  and saying "What has happened there? What has happened there? That has
  disappeared. You have got new buildings there.  That old building that was
  crumbling has been regenerated." It was a real, real experience and nobody can
  place a price on having the Games in this city on further regeneration and
  pride in what is a great city. I was so pleased that we had the opportunity
  to go round and see what is happening.  But, having said that, it is an
  enormous area of responsibility that you have in proving that these great
  international events do not have to be held in London. My question is how are
  you going to get the media on the site to do that?  They are the greatest
  spreaders of doom and gloom ever.  What we really need is a press and people
  who say "We are doing something for the Commonwealth.  We are hosting the
  Commonwealth.  We are going to be the Commonwealth for the time of these
  Games." You have said also that areas in the North West were adopting
  countries and the problem you had was distance.  My constituency is not far
  distant, Newcastle-under-Lyme is just down the motorway, and yet we have had
  no great input in what is happening in Manchester.  I would be so pleased if
  in fact you could start spreading that very quickly so we can play our part
  in what is going to be a very good international event?
        (Mr McCartney) I am hopeful that today is a watershed and I am hoping in
  a very transparent way we have been able to show there is a quite clear and
  big ambition and that the partnership work will work together to deliver this. 
  The missing pieces of the jigsaw, outside of the regional press, have been the
  focus of the national press but maybe that focus is simply because it is 500
  days away.  I am confident in the end it will happen.  We have a job to do and
  we have to provide them with materials so they get a good on-going
  relationship, and that is one of the areas we will impact on and improve
  significantly over the coming short period, and that is how we provide to the
  national press and that is a lesson to learn.
        (Mr Allen)  We want to throw down the gauntlet to the press and say do
  not write about it unless you have been to Manchester, do not comment on it
  until you have come here and seen it.  There are a lot of people sitting in
  London making comments about the Games and about the facilities and they have
  never been here.  I think the key message is they should come here and see
  what is being done and feel the atmosphere, not only in the facilities but
  feel the city, as you have done.  I do hope, as the Minister has said, this
  is a watershed in terms of communication and people should not comment on it
  until they have seen what is happening and felt the passion that hopefully you
  have got from the organisers here today.
        447.     In Australia what happened as they were coming up to the
  Olympics was that every other city felt part of it and felt the glow of pride
  in it.  We need all the cities in the United Kingdom to feel that as well. 
  I must say that still we have no indication in Stoke-on-Trent of all these
  things which are going on in Manchester.  We really have to get them on board.
        (Mr Allen)  One of the things which worked incredibly well in Australia
  was the Baton Relay (sic).  What that meant was that rather than just the
  flame going through the city, all the regional authorities, all the cities,
  came up with their own event, and what it did was build a level of excitement
  because Adelaide wanted to do it better than Sydney, and if we can get that
  excitement around the Baton Relay that will be the thing which would ignite
  it.  That has to be coupled with using the media to follow that up and show
  people how exciting Britain is, to actually go to Ireland, Scotland, to go to
  the North East, the North West, as part of that process.  I think there is a
  fantastic opportunity here where we can demonstrate this is an exciting
  country.  The flame did that for Australia and I think we can do something
  even more exciting and get behind the whole Baton Relay and use it as an
  opportunity to communicate the message this is a really exciting country to
  visit, Scotland is different from the North East, different from the North
  West.  In Australia they did that through fantastic images - you saw the flame
  going round, you saw the Outback, you saw the city, wonderful images of
  Australia - and I think that is something we could do and be part of the whole
  planning process, and that is something which is uppermost on our agenda.
        448.     How many cities have you spoken to?
        (Mr Allen)  Basically the thinking is that there will be 50 locations,
  linking it into the Queen's Jubilee celebrations.  What we want to do is go
  forward with an agreed package and plan as part of the detailed planning
  process now.  If that is agreed, we will make it an open invitation to talk
  to those cities and regions which want to be involved.
        (Councillor Leese)         There is also the Spirit of Friendship
  Festival which should be launched around about March next year.  It is a
  national festival, obviously culminating in the Games in Manchester, and that
  will be an opportunity for education, sport and culture and for very, very
  widescale involvement.  There are already plans, for example, for a Youth
  Games in all the regions of the United Kingdom which will start to generate
  a level of involvement.  In addition to that really, I will take away one of
  the suggestions that you have made but in terms of local authority contacts,
  we have tended so far to concentrate on those local authorities which are
  within the boundaries of the North West of England.  A lot of those have
  appointed liaison officers to work with us and so on.  It will make sense to
  do that in radiating rings and we will go to other areas which are
  geographically adjacent and spread out. I will certainly take that away.
  
                               Chairman
        449.     On my way into the town hall this morning I passed a poster
  which clarified the relationship of Sydney and Manchester and made it clear
  which was the superior one.  Of course I pass Oxford Road Railway Station for
  which Sydney Opera House is a rip off.  Could I thank Manchester City Council
  once again for providing the facilities for this evidence session.  Could I
  thank all the witnesses for the very frank and forthcoming answers they have
  provided.  Could I make clear, in case there was any doubt, that while it is
  the responsibility and duty of the Members of the Select Committee to ask
  probing questions on behalf of the taxpayers whom we represent there can be
  no doubt whatever that every Member of this Select Committee wants the
  Commonwealth Games to be a great success for Manchester and for the whole of
  our country. Thank you very much.
        (Mr McCartney) Thank you.