Singapore YOG & London Olympics: A Tale of 2 Budgets

The UK Sports Minister Hugh Robertson has revealed that the expenses for the London Olympics would be within the budget allocated for the games. A budget of 9.3 billion pounds was set in 2007. Hugh Robertson has indicated that about 500 million pounds would be returned to the Treasury as they are within the budget.

This is how you come out smelling like a rose. Set a high budget with a huge contingency in the budget (2 billion pounds) and then keep your spending within the budget. You get lauded for your fiscal responsibility.

Compare that to the heat receieved by Singapore's former Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Vivian Balakrishnan. The budget set for the Youth Olympic Games was $104 million and the spending went up to $387 million.

Although the Olympic Games cannot be compared with the Youth Olympic Games in terms of logistics and expenses, I am trying to draw a comparison with the way expectation management is done. The organising committee for the YOG grossly underestimated the expenses and set a budget that was too low. In the end, given the nature of the event, $387 million was probably a reasonable sum.

But, in Singapore, the public conversation saw a mishmash of issues colliding together to form an overall anti-PAP rhetoric. (Incidentally, despite my long-standing stance against the PAP's authoritarian style of government, I did not see the YOG budget as an issue. If anything, the problem was in the initial estimate of the organising committee. It was not a case of fiscal irresponsibility.) 2010 was the year of the "once-in-50-years" flood. Singaporeans were becoming increasingly conscious of the presence of large number of foreigners. The plight of senior citizens fending for themselves by scavanging for tin cans was becoming more evident. For many, the YOG expenses became indicative of a government that had the wrong priorities.

I can imagine that the organising committee of the YOG could have estimated the budget at $500 million and kept the spending to $387 million leaving a balance of $113 million. I suspect that not much of a complaint would have been raised (and Vivian Balakrishnan might have kept his previous portfolio instead of being sent to fight floods).

From a public relations standpoint, the UK Sports Minister has scored a respectable point by keeping the Olympic Games expenses within the budget by 500 million pounds.

Olympics & Politics

There are many of us sports fans and purists who just love to see a sporting event unfold dramatically with lots of on the field and off the field stories to digest. But, there is one sporting event that always seems to attract off-the-field drama of a different kind. The Olympic games seem to be pursued by politics all the time.

Now, it is China's turn to face the music. Hosting the Olympics is a matter of pride for any nation. Certainly in the case of this emerging power, it is an opportunity to showcase the arrival of China as a nation of significance economically and politically. But, it was inevitable that in this Olympic year some political issue would have grabbed the limelight.

I was having a conversation the other day with a friend about mixing politics with sport. This friend was insistent that the Tibetan issue should be kept out of the Olympics and the torch relay should not have been marred by the disrespectful pro-Tibet groups.

I believe that we are not in a position to dictate which way politics would flow. Whenever there is an issue that deserves to be highlighted it is inevitable that groups involved in politics would pick whichever medium enables them to exhibit their message as widely and as effectively as they can. There is simply no point in insisting that politics should not be mixed with sports. Whether the organizers of the sporting event like it or not and whether fans like it or not, the political groups will simply attempt to hijack the event in the desparate attempt to get media attention.

The torch relay presented the perfect opportunity for pro-Tibet activists to make a point about their cause all around the world. If the Olympic committee intended to avoid politics, they should have simply cancelled the relay. This wouldn't have been a case of losing out. It would simply have been a security issue. And the political issue that they are so worried about would not have received the kind of airing that it got.

The point i'm making is that we cannot keep politics out of the Olympics or plead that it be kept out. It is going to always seek the platform that would give it the most limelight. The Olympics is the most ideal sporting event for that.