Translated material
Games with the state
The Olympics in Sochi will be prepared according to the least risky scheme
Contrary to popular belief, the future Winter Olympics in Sochi in 2014 is not yet the most expensive in the history of these sporting competitions. In terms of costs at the moment - the budget for seven years can still be adjusted upward - it ranks only fifth in the recent history of Olympism. Although, of course, the Sochi Olympics are very expensive. The most expensive among winter ones. It is second only to the Summer Games, where there are more types of sports (and therefore Olympic venues, participants, guests and costs).On average, the Olympic budget is 2-4 billion dollars. President Vladimir Putin promised to spend 12 billion on building an Olympic fairy tale in Sochi. But, for example, 17.5 billion dollars were spent on the Summer Olympics in Barcelona in 1992, and Sydney Olympics 2000 - 14 billion. London plans to spend 18.2 billion dollars for the 2012 Summer Olympics. This is the maximum Olympic budget to date.
After the victory of the Sochi bid at the session of the International Olympic Committee in Guatemala, the most pressing question became how to spend the money most rationally. So that later there will be no painful shame in front of the world community for the poor quality of the objects of the very expensive Olympics.
An analysis of twelve Olympics prepared by the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation showed that without the participation of the state, the successful construction of sports facilities and infrastructure is almost impossible. A scheme in which the government is removed from control over the construction of facilities is doomed to failure. “The Olympic Center for the Construction of Facilities must build a theater, the organizing committee is required to stage a show,” was the slogan under which preparations for the Sydney Olympics took place. It is this Olympics that is recognized by the IOC as the most successful. The London Olympics will be organized in its image and likeness. It was decided to apply the same control scheme in preparation for the Games in Sochi.
There are two main schemes for managing Olympic projects. According to the first scheme, all tasks, including financing, construction and holding of competitions, are assigned to the organizing committee. According to the second, the organizing committee is responsible for holding the competition, and the state is responsible for the construction of facilities.
The first scheme is fraught with significant danger. Due to the fact that the organizing committee does not bear political responsibility, and with the danger of the Games being disrupted, the international prestige of the state suffers, which cannot be allowed, the government in a difficult situation is forced to urgently take upon itself the solution of problems, says the document prepared by the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade.
For example, in Sydney, four years before the Olympics, the state had to change its preparation tactics for the Games when it became clear that the process was in jeopardy. The construction of Olympic facilities moved from the organizing committee to the government-controlled Olympics Coordination Office. A similar situation arose during the preparations for the Games in Athens in 2004. The organizing committee could not cope with the number of applications during tenders and did not meet the allotted deadlines. As a result, also four years before the start of the Olympics, all work on the construction of Olympic facilities came under the control of the Ministry of Tourism. However, this was done too late, and the organization of the Olympics, held in the historical homeland of the sports festival, was considered a failure. Just like last year's Winter Olympics in Turin.
The first model works only with small costs by Olympic standards, less than two billion. The organizing committee cannot cope with larger projects alone.
Therefore, in recent years, the second model has been increasingly used, where areas of responsibility are divided. The government and the structure under its control resolve issues related to the financing and construction of Olympic buildings and infrastructure, and the organizing committee is involved in holding competitions and ceremonies. This scheme was in effect during the organization of the Summer Olympics in Seoul in 1988, which was considered very successful. A similar scheme, when the state corporation will handle the construction, and the organizing committee will work with the IOC, will work in Sochi.
Another general conclusion that can be drawn by studying the experience of other Olympics is that almost no one managed to meet the originally planned budget. For example, for the preparation of the Winter Olympics, which will be held in 2010 in Vancouver, Canada, the authorities will have to allocate an additional one and a half billion dollars.
It is also clearly clear that one should not save on such an important matter as the Olympics. For example, the budget for the 1984 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles was only $1.1 billion, and the organizing committee entrusted the construction of key facilities to sponsor companies to save money. As a result, the low level of preparation of the facilities drew sharp criticism from the IOC. The same thing happened with the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, where, to save money, they didn’t even build an Olympic village, and the athletes lived in student dormitories.