Mike Weed is Professor of Sport and Society and Director of the Centre for Sport, Physical Education and Activity Research (SPEAR) at Canterbury Christ Church University. He also engages with #media2012, and was a speaker at the recent annual olympic and paralympic conference of PODIUM, the London 2012 Further and Higher Education Unit. Republished with permission here is a piece calling for a debate around 2012 sporting legacies which he asserts has been largely absent.

There has been no end of promises for a sporting legacy for London in the wake of the 2012 Games. But fine sentiments alone are not going to deliver it to future generations of Londoners, argues Kurt Barling, BBC London.

One of the supposed objectives of the 2012 Olympics is to stimulate greater participation by the general public in sport. However, another even more pressing concern is the final medal table and Britain’s place in it. The National Audit Office recently got in on the act and produced a report (see attachment) on Britain’s strategy for increasing its medal tally at the Olympic Games.

NewteredPhoto from Londoncyclesport.com

“The Olympics will promote sport and healthy living in the capital,” it says the website of Waltham Forest borough council. “We can now look forward to seeing the area regenerate with the best sporting, leisure and cultural facilities the world has ever seen."

Athletes waiting for funding to finance their training complained of delays by Chancellor Gordon Brown in allocating monies to the British Olympic Association (BOA) (E. Harris & P. Waugh, Evening Standard, February 15, 2006). The BOA has stated that it needs £500 million to develop young athletes. The Chancellor refused to announce a decision until after the March 2006 Budget. Three athletes announced that they were quitting because finance had not been made available.