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 œ20 million in facilities for the Games. You state now that the total capital contribution by the Council is œ40.75 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, œ20 million rise to œ40 million. I have looked at the sponsorship. On the sponsorship, you were hoping for œ50 million and so far œ30 million is secure. I think even from the œ30 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 œ40 million now with œ20 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 œ40 million includes a œ10.4 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 œ40 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 œ4 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 œ50 million over ten years and for a single regeneration budget proposal for the wider East Manchester area, which is providing some œ25 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 œ150 and 200 million in total build, infrastructure and so on, which again if I have done my calculations right means between œ25 and œ35 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 œ20 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 œ30 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 œ62 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 œ62 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 œ62 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 œ62 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 œ2 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 œ2 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 œ30 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 œ23« 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 œ23« 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 œ23« 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.