There was a buzz around Glasgow in 2014 that is glaringly absent in the current run-up to the Commonwealth Games which nobody, it seems, particularly cares to play host to.
As of 10 years ago today, Scotland was in the throes of the final days of a bitter referendum campaign that some no doubt hoped would be helped to a vote for independence by the warm afterglow of what was acclaimed as one of the most successful Commonwealth Games ever in Glasgow. The two-week event brought in an estimated 690,000 visitors and put the country in front of a global audience of approximately 1.5 billion people.
Everyone knows the outcome of that election which was dominated in large part by the economy, public finances, and the currency question. On one hand voters were being told that an independent Scotland could thrive on its own, while on the other grave questions were being asked about its stand-alone viability.
Read more:
Notwithstanding the impact of the Conservative austerity programme of that time - in fact, perhaps because of it - today's public finances have markedly deteriorated from those of a decade ago. Brexit and Covid have also played a large part in pushing public budgets close to breaking point.
Labour under Prime Minister Keir Starmer has since taking control in July remorselessly hammered home the message about the painful decisions to come as Chancellor Rachel Reeves prepares to lay out her first Budget next month. And the Scottish Government has already announced budget cuts of some £500 million that will profoundly damage key services such as housing and care.
Against such a backdrop it's no surprise there is limited appetite to commit to hosting a major sporting event that historically has been a financial gamble at the best of times.
Scotland isn't alone in its financial woes. A two-year surge in inflation, high interest rates, sluggish global growth, and the hangover from that pandemic mentioned earlier have left others questioning the value for money of playing host to the Commonwealth Games.
Thus it was for Daniel Andrews, the premier of Victoria, when he announced in July of last year that the Australian state would not as expected be hosting the upcoming quadrennial event.
“What’s become clear is that the cost of hosting these Games in 2026 is not the $2.6 billion (£1.3bn) which was budgeted and allocated,” he said. “It is in fact at least $6bn, and could be as high as $7bn.”
The Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) begged to differ, calling the figures a "gross exaggeration", but history appears to back up Mr Andrews' claims.
Read more:
Victoria had only stepped in at the last minute because Birmingham had to be moved from 2026 to 2022 to replace Durban, which failed to make its finances stack up. Durban was only a back-up choice, replacing Edmonton, which ran out of funding and had to withdraw.
And then there's Delhi, host of the 2010 Commonwealths. The government of India had set aside $250m for the Games but the eventual cost came in at $11bn, the most expensive in history. This led to accusations of a "negative financial legacy" in a country with one of the world's highest concentrations of poor people.
According to an independent report commissioned by the UK government, the 2022 Games in Birmingham contributed more than £870m to the UK economy which is roughly what it cost. This was a rare balancing of the books.
Since hosting the Games in 2014, Glasgow has also successfully staged the European Championships, the World Indoor Athletic Championships, and last year's UCI Cycling Championship, among others. Preparations for the event led to the construction or refurbishment of the Emirates Arena, the Sir Chris Hoy Velodrome, the Glasgow National Hockey Centre and Tollcross International Swimming Centre, along with a further £1bn of Games-related road and rail transport infrastructure projects.
So it's understandable why an increasingly vexed CGF has turned to Glasgow as a last-minute stand-in for the 2024 Commonwealth Games, even though Glasgow City Council and the Scottish Government are at best lukewarm about the prospect.
As reported by my colleague, Herald political editor Andrew Learmonth, the local council which was instrumental in delivering the 2014 Games has made clear that it is completely hands-off in these latest developments. If the Games do come to the city, their role will merely be to rent out the venues.
Read more:
For its part, the Scottish Government said yesterday that it is on the verge of a deal for Glasgow to stage a scaled-down version of the event in 2026. This hinges on a £100m contribution from CGF to cover part of the cost of hosting the event, whose total budget is pencilled in at a mere £150m.
The 2014 Games in Glasgow cost in the region of £543m, with the Scottish Government and Glasgow City Council contributing £425m towards that. CGF president Chris Jenkins has insisted that the 2024 Games will not require any financial outlay by the Scottish or UK governments, but on a budget of £150m neither should anyone expect an economic boost on par with that of £73m in 2014.
That said, if the CGF is true to its word about there being no public money involved this time around, whatever economic benefits there are should largely fall directly to the bottom line. That's at least a sliver of a silver lining in an otherwise bleak landscape for the public finances.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel