APPENDIX 11
Memorandum submitted by the Genesis Consortium
GENESIS CONSORTIUM—NEW WEMBLEY STADIUM
Further to our recent telephone conversation
I write to confirm that the Genesis consortium has a fully funded
solution to finance and build a new Wembley Stadium. We have held
detailed discussions with Sir Rodney Walker, and have recently
made presentations to various most professional parties that for
confidential reasons I must not name here. Furthermore, we are
currently reviewing our funding approach with KPMG at the request
of Patrick Carter's office.
In response to some of the statements that have
been made to the Select Committee, we would like to make the following
observations:
1. STADIUM FUNDING
It is true that while stadia in the past may
have been funded by nations, specialist-banking arrangements,
which include the securitising of future revenues and bond schemes,
have commercially funded the majority of the stadiums built in
more recent years.
The international funding institution, which
has confirmed the ability to fund 100 per cent of the Wembley
solution that Genesis is proposing, has funded other national
stadia in this manner.
2. STADIUM BUILD
PROGRAMME
A build programme of 39 months is not necessary
for all stadium designs. It may be correct for the complex design
of the current Foster/HOC scheme, but the DLA/Ellerbe Becket stadium
design will not require such a lengthy build programme.
3. ATHLETICS
(a) The IAAF issue needs to be better understood
in that perhaps the IAAF did make a mistake in increasing the
number of events by staging the Championships every two years
instead of four. One of the Genesis members was in fact involved
with the IAAF in creating the World Athletic Championships, writing
the rules and regulations, and funding the inaugural event in
Helsinki in 1983 and is, therefore, fully conversant with the
commercial funding arrangements through the IAAF's marketing agency
and its sponsors, and the Eurovision television rights agreement.
The IAAF has made a categorical decision that
all future World Championships will be staged in capital cities.
They cannot, therefore, recognise a bid from Sheffield, as it
is not our capital city. London is a prime target for the IAAF
in terms of prestige, presentation and world recognition, and
they are still waiting to hear news that the Championships can
be hosted in London.
(b) The IAAF are fully supportive of the
Genesis Wembley plan, and they have confirmed their endorsement
in writing.
(c) The Football Association has recently
stated to us that they would not object to athletics being staged
in Wembley as long as the stadium is not compromised when it is
in football mode. Our design achieves this. Not only can we accommodate
91,000 spectators with perfect sight lines for football but also
have the ability to seat an acceptable 46,000 spectators for the
World Athletics Championships.
(d) It is highly likely that the debacle
over Wembley has caused the problem for UK Athletics and its desire
to host a World Championships. There is clearly an opportunity
for a new Wembley for both football and athletics being funded
through the private sector, and evidence has been provided accordingly.
4. OLYMPIC GAMES
Again, there is a misunderstanding about Olympic
bids, which needs to be clarified. A stadium that is suitable
for the World Athletic Championships is not a stadium that is
suitable for the Olympics. A new Wembley would be a perfect facility
for some Olympic sports, especially the football events, but Olympic
bids require an entirely different approach.
However, any Olympic bid by London would not
be acceptable if a resolution cannot be found for the IAAF World
Championships.
Contrary to arguments put forward at the Select
Committee hearing, there is still a very real opportunity for
the 2005 IAAF World Championships to be hosted in London. Our
stadium design offers a timely and economical solution both for
the Football Association and the Government, and will keep any
future Olympic bid alive.
Our design, which is as previously stated, fully
fundable by the commercial sector and resolves the problems for
both football and athletics, can be built in time. Our architects,
DLA/Ellerbe-Becket, are leading designers of sport stadia around
the world, and the Genesis design in no way compromises the standards
and imagery of a national stadium. It also provides a solution
for the Twin Towers, which although moved, are an integral part
of our nation's tradition and heritage on the world's sport stage,
a tradition endorsed by the President of FIFA in his letter of
support for our proposal.
We would really appreciate any assistance you
might offer in us being able to brief your committee further on
this matter that we have only touched on in this letter.
Please feel free to call me today or at any
time over the weekend. For too long we have kept very quiet on
this matter. We feel it very appropriate to inform the Select
Committee of some very important facts on the matter that we know
they will find of the utmost interest.
25 October 2001
|
