Tom Richmond: Rest of nation will be also-rans in Olympics

Labour were the past masters at being duplicitous over funding sources, but the coalition took this art – or is it sport? – to Olympic proportions this week.

The coalition tried to pretend that it was on the side of grassroots sport by unveiling a 135m legacy package, and saying that the owners and organisers of local sports clubs could apply for grants of up to 150,000 to improve their facilities. Two million people will benefit, claimed Olympics Minister Hugh Robertson.

And then the announcement unravelled – Jennie Price, chief executive of Sport England, piped up and said only 98m of money will be new. The balance, 38m, will come from funding that has already been allocated.

To compound Robertson's gaffe, Tessa Jowell – Labour's Olympics Minister – pointed out that the announcement did not compensate for the coalition's decision to suspend funding for school sports partnerships that equated to 162m a year.

I'm a sports fan. I initially thought the London Olympics would be good for Britain, both in terms of sporting excellence and encouraging leisure.

I was wrong. Apart from a few business contracts and photo-opportunities, it will pass Yorkshire by. The Games is being solely staged for London's benefit.

And, if the powers-that-be are seriously committed to the notion of a British Olympics, as Lord Coe promised six years ago, they would have been doing far more – before the credit crunch changed the economy forever – to ensure that every parish in the country benefited from some form of new leisure or recreation facility, whether it be an all-weather sports pitch or improved footpaths for ramblers.

The only conclusion I can draw is that the coalition intends to use sport as a political football for PR purposes – just like its predecessor. Red cards to the lot of them.

THE need for Labour to refine its policy, in light of economic and political changes, is made even more urgent by Charlie Falconer's attempts to delay the referendum on electoral reform.

It must have escaped the former Lord Chancellor's attention that Labour backed the alternative vote – the system being proposed – before the election.

Six months later, and Falconer was leading the charge against AV, albeit on technical grounds over the phrasing of the Parliamentary Bill.

However, just like differences between Ed Miliband and Alan Johnson, the Shadow Chancellor, over their party's future stance on the 50p tax rate and tuition fees, these interventions create the impression that Labour still does not recognise that the country's political dynamics changed when the Tories and Liberal Democrats forged their coalition deal six months ago.

TALKING of plans to reduce the number of MPs, Denis MacShane, the former Minister and Rotherham MP, makes this salient point,

"There are 95 members of the present government, 14 more than when Margaret Thatcher was in power. There are 33 Select Committees whose chairmen are paid. Three Labour MPs are paid ministerial salaries to carry out leadership and whipping duties. The Prime Minister also appoints around 50 MPs to serve on international delegations with expenses paid for a good number of foreign trips," says MacShane.

"So if the House of Commons is reduced to 600 MPs, a quarter of them will be paid a salary in addition to their pay as MPs. As it is 40 per cent of the Liberal Democrat MPs are now on the executive's payroll. Many MPs wait dutifully in the queue to earn these extra emollients as ministers or select committee chairs come and go. Reducing the number of MPs will further tilt power towards Whitehall and the executive."

That maybe so. But, when I watched David Cameron's statement on the G20 summit and Eurozone crisis, the Commons was virtually empty. And, furthermore, not one MP raised the issue of the Irish bailout at Prime Minister's Questions. Why not?

DAYS after Pudsey MP Stuart Andrew joins the Wales select committee, I see that another Tory newcomer, Kris Hopkins, the Keighley and Ilkley MP, is picked to sit on British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly.

Is there chance, lads, of the two of you putting your Yorkshire constituents first? Hopkins talks excitedly about the BIPA's two-day gathering in the Isle of Man next week, but I'm not convinced that this jolly – sorry, meeting – will benefit hardworking residents in his home patch.

Given that Hopkins was leader of Bradford Council when it spent 3,568 on Christmas refreshments for councillors and senior officials last year, I would have thought that junketing would have been off his agenda.

THE power of the Yorkshire Post! On the day I highlighted David Cameron's vanity, I see that the Prime Minister announced that his photographer and website producer were to be taken off the Civil Service payroll – an embarrassing retreat overshadowed by the Royal Wedding announcement.

Andrew Parsons, who was Cameron's photographer when the Tories were in opposition, and Nicky Woodhouse, the woman behind his WebCameron website, will now be paid by the Conservative Party.

This is quite right – but it shouldn't have taken this sorry saga to reach scandalous proportions for the PM to have acted.

LESS than an hour after Prince William and Kate Middleton announced their engagement, a PR company acting for a firm of Leeds divorce lawyers was offering a piece on the importance of pre-nup agreements. Couldn't they be pleased for the happy couple for 24 hours?