Tom Richmond: Why David Cameron needs to have a share of Olympic glory

God willing, Sheffield’s Jessica Ennis will be in the form of her life as she steps into the Olympic Stadium for the heptathlon.

The talismanic Skipton oarsman Andy Triggs Hodge – a gold medal winner from Beijing – will hope to uphold Britain’s great record of rowing success.

And cyclist Ed Clancy, another golden boy from 2008 and who comes from near Huddersfield, will be at the forefront of GB’s cycling charge in the velodrome.

For them, and each and every competitor from these parts, the “middle weekend” of the Olympics will be a potentially life defining experience – it will determine their legacy and, in many cases, their sporting future.

Yet, while they will have their own army of wellwishers, one person who will have even more at stake when Ennis steps onto the starting blocks, Hodge calls for one last effort or Clancy leads the pursuit cyclists.

Step forward David Cameron, the Prime Minister, who was not even a household name within his own party when London won the right to stage the Games six summers ago.

Any unforeseen political calamities aside, he’ll be the leader tasked with greeting the world as London attempts to match the ruthless efficiency – and record British success – that was witnessed in Beijing in 2008.

And his entire political reputation could depend on whether the Games are an overwhelming success, or an organisational disaster. The stakes will be that high.

In short, the successful staging of the Olympics – complete with fan parks and various cultural events – will produce a “feelgood factor” that might kickstart the economy and help to transform the nation’s outlook ahead of the 2015 election.

In contrast, a Games bedevilled by disappointing results for GB, travel chaos and rows of empty seats following the fiasco over ticketing arrangements will reflect badly on Cameron’s Government, and prompt sceptics to question Britain’s status as a world leader.

It is why the PM cannot afford to leave anything to chance, even though the preparations are being spearheaded by two former Tory MPs – 2012 supremo Sebastian Coe and Boris Johnson, the somewhat eccentric Mayor of London.

Assuming the latter is re-elected next May, they will be fully pre-occupied with issues relating to venues, ticketing and transport while the success of failure of GB’s competitors will come down to their personal desire – and an element of luck on the day. There’s nothing that Cameron can do about this. He can, however, ensure that the Games deliver a sporting legacy that is far more substantive than the protracted legal row about whether West Ham United or Tottenham Hotspur should relocate to the main Olympic stadium.

This was not supposed to be an Olympics for London – or the future of one of the capital’s lesser football teams. It was supposed to be a Games for Britain. That is certainly what Coe argued, with great plausibility it must be said, when he wowed the International Olympic Committee in July 2005, and before it emerged that the overall cost would be three-times greater than taxpayers had been led to believe.

Yet, while the budget has spiralled, the benefits to the English regions have diminished – even though some Yorkshire companies have gained some lucrative construction deals.

Funding for grassroots sport continues to be compromised by the need to divert funds to London, and the ramifications of the coalition’s spending cuts.

Just look in your local community. How many new sports pitches, or tennis courts, have opened in the past year? I’ll bet that you’re able to count them on one finger.

Yet, when the Conservatives belatedly started to embrace the concept of the London Olympics, once it emerged that the capital had a credible bid, they promised that it would not be at the expense of neighbourhood sport.

Assuming that Britain achieves a top-four finish in the medal table, and there’s no reason to doubt this, there will be an opportunity for the Government to highlight the virtues of sport as a force for good – whether it be breaking down ethnic barriers, developing team work skills or countering obesity.

You do not need to be a potential Olympian to derive lifelong benefits from regular exercise, but you do need facilities – and you do need coaching support where necessary.

However this will not happen overnight. It needs structures being put in place now – rather than vague promises in the after-glow of the Olympics where communities have to compete for limited sums of money.

As such, the Prime Minister’s challenge is to solve this question of legacy rather than fret about which events he will attend – and how many seats will be made available to politicians.

In the meantime, he can only hope that Coe and Johnson deliver a games to remember – no security lapses, packed out venues, a robust transport infrastructure and early British success that inspires others to uphold the Olympic values of Citius, Altius, Fortius – Latin for “Faster, Higher, Stronger”.

That is why so much will be at stake on the middle weekend of the Olympics in 12 months time. Not just for Yorkshire’s medal contenders – but for David Cameron.

Events on the track, at the velodrome or on the rowing lake could make or break his government.

For, if it cannot organise 16-days of sport, how can it be trusted on far more profound matters – like the economy or whether to send troops into war?