WITH the expected cancellation of the 2?022 Durban Commonwealth Games as South Africa is not prepared to commit to more events (Durban was a 2010 World Cup venue) while it cannot pay social security payments; with the International Olympic Committee running out of venue choices and considering a two-country Olympic Games; with Rio's Olympic venues lying unused amidst the favelas; and our own national government paying dearly, even with a tenant, for the Olympic stadium in East London, surely it is time to lay the legacy myth to rest forever and ask just what is the return of public investment from multi-sports events. And who benefits?

The evidence is now utterly persuasive that there is no sporting or health legacy from these events. And with sportscotland even telling the Holyrood health and sports committee recently that it, the national agency, does not target disadvantaged areas, the writing is surely on the wall for its "world-class sporting system". Instead of investing in elite athletes and sporting structures, who can probably fund themselves, surely we must prioritise those in greatest need and create opportunities for participation that will yield improved health for all. Future public investment in sport should be inclusive, inexpensive and in every community. ?

John Dunlop,

9 Birnam Crescent, Glasgow.