Culture secretary Jeremy Hunt has welcomed the Olympic organisers’ announcement that ‘under budget’ now means ‘spending four times more than originally quoted and 75% of all contingency funding’.
From an original budget of £2.4bn, organisers say that keeping just 25% of the £2bn contingency fund on top of the already spent £7.3bn actual cost is a ‘proper result’.
Financial Analyst at LOCOG, Simon Williams, told us, “I realise that technically people will look at this whole exercise as being four times more expensive than we originally said – and that’s one opinion.”
“Others will point to the fact that we blew past our £7.3bn budget long ago and have been dipping into the contingency fund for several months now.”
“But again I would stress that right as of this minute there is still some contingency fund left, and that, technically, means Jeremy Hunt can call this a ‘success’.”
“And let’s be honest, he needs one at the moment – no matter how ridiculous it sounds.”
Olympic funding
Observers have pointed out that the new definition for ‘under budget’ is already being rejected by financial institutions across the country.
Dave White told us, “I’m applying for a mortgage at the moment and I called the bank to report that this month I was under budget by £500 after only spending five grand more than I told them I would at the start of the application process.”
“They used a lot of words I didn’t understand and then gave my application a ‘No, absolutely not’.”
“They weren’t even impressed when I explained that I still had 25% of my credit card limit available. That’s loads!”
Non-moron Sheila Davies concluded, “I saw the government’s statement, and with such a solid grip on the fundamentals of financial prudence, is it any surprise their expenses were in such a mess?”
