Inspired by her success, he furiously pedalled around the block one hundred times before pausing for breath. He was no trouble to anyone.

He had, according to his parents, simply been captivated by Cooke's endurance as she battled her own demons – and the elements – to win the gruelling time-trial in the shadow of the Great Wall of China.

So had the whole country.

There's nothing more invigorating than waking up in the morning to learn of an unexpected British sporting success leading the main news bulletins. A friend who works at my local leisure centre said youngsters were actually waiting for the public session to begin a week ago when swimming heroine Rebecca Adlington won the first of her unprecedented two gold medals.

Swimming – arguably the healthiest of all sports – is suddenly back in vogue, thanks to the history-making performance of American Michael Phelps, the new king of the water, and British competitors, like Adlington, who can actually swim rather than sink to the bottom of the pool under the weight of public expectation.

But, given the phenomenal level of interest in the Games, and Britain's weekend gold rush, why is this inept Government not doing more to capitalise upon the feel-good factor that is generated by the Olympics?

It says it wants young people to become involved in sport. It believes healthy exercise is the most effective way of halting the obesity epidemic. It also knows that a fitter nation will save the NHS hundreds of millions of pounds each year. Yet, what have Ministers done?

Virtually nothing.

They may be content on spending £7m on sending 600 publicly-funded workers to Beijing – two for every competitor wearing a GB vest – to monitor how the Games are being staged, ahead of the Olympic baton being passed to London for 2012, and to put together the BBC's presentation of television images provided by Chinese television.

But, given this largesse, and how the public bill for the 2012 Olympics is London is likely to top £10bn at a conservative guess, couldn't a few million pounds have been spared so
that children could have enjoyed free admission to Britain's
leisure facilities for the duration of the Olympics?

When you look at the amount of taxpayers' money that is squandered each day on petty bureaucracy, and policies that simply don't work, such a forward-thinking initiative could actually pay dividends in the longer term – especially if it encourages young people
to become active participants
in sport.

It wouldn't necessarily mean the Government having to spend millions on expensive new equipment at a time when
the nation's finances are
sinking faster than a diver entering the water from the
10 metre platform.

Look at the enjoyment that can be derived from sports like badminton and table tennis – and the energy exerted simply getting the shuttlecock or ball back over the net. A few hundred bats and rackets would cost a tiny sum compared with the £500m that Gordon Brown wants to spend on laptops for children in under-privileged areas; a worthy project that is doomed to fail simply because the computers will be used as expensive toys, rather than learning tools, if they are not sold on eBay in the meantime.

It's the same with swimming. The Government recognises the health benefits, hence why Ministers announced in June that "the centrepiece of the Government's plan to ensure a lasting sporting legacy from the London 2012 Olympic Games" would be free entry to the country's 1,600 municipal pools for the over-60s.

To underline this commitment, Ministers confirmed £140m of funding would be made available, though they refused to reveal how this policy will be financed once the initial money had been spent.

But, while free swimming for more mature people is very worthy and laudable, it would be far better if the Government was prepared to make similar resources available for young people – and perhaps revive the concept of school swimming lessons (where pools still exist).

This is key. If children can be encouraged about the benefits of healthy living and regular exercise in their formative years, they are more likely to embrace this message for the remainder of their lives.

By leaving it to 60, it is too late – by about 50 years.

The Government may talk about introducing a £7m campaign to encourage people to walk more each day, and a £1m commitment to encourage school-leavers to use gym and fitness clubs, but these are tiny amounts that will do absolutely nothing to improve the health of the nation.

These sums are so small that they will barely make a difference in one city. Yet this money is intended for the whole country.

However, as the Olympics have shown, many of Britain's stars actually hail from modest backgrounds. Nicole Cooke is the pride of South Wales; Rebecca Adlington grew up in Mansfield, the epitome of a working-class town while teenage diving prodigy Tom Daley comes from the proud Naval city of Plymouth.

What Ministers fail to recognise, as they pour even more money into the 2012 Games for the near-exclusive benefit of London, is that there are now aspiring cyclists, swimmers, rowers, runners and so on living in every street in Britain. All they need is an opportunity to participate at a modest cost – or for free.

That is what should be happening during the Olympics. The rewards are potentially immense. For, if the Government was as progressive with its policy-making as the British cycling team, the country would no longer have to agonise over its future place in the upper echelons of the medals table – or how the NHS is to be funded in the longer-term.

It would be assured – because of the investment made in the youth of today. It is a sporting opportunity that is too great to miss.