好色先生TV

The International Olympics Committee votes in Singapore to decide the host city for the 2012 summer games and, to widespread surprise, London stands a fair chance of success.

At the beginning of 2003, liberal amounts of cold water were being poured on the idea of bidding for the global event, let alone winning it. Ministers were accused of dithering over bidding 鈥� Tony Blair made it clear that the hurdles for government support were high, Gordon Brown spoke darkly about the importance of not diverting money from health and education. The bid only went ahead after an eleventh-hour deal between Ken Livingstone and Tessa Jowell splitting the costs between the government and the London council tax payer.

Britain鈥檚 coyness at banging the patriotic drum may yet undo the bid, as IOC members weigh up levels of public support in the countries of the five bidding cities.

Failure will reinforce the sceptics with memories of the Millennium Dome, the Picketts Lock national athletics stadium fiasco, and the troubled renaissance of Wembley stadium. They will conclude that when it comes to big set-piece projects we either do them badly or not at all, a message that, they will say, has been relayed abroad.

But in the time-honoured tradition of British endeavour, failure this time may turn out to be glorious. The London 2012 bid, a late entrant, was hobbled early on by the confusion of having an American-born chairman, and it was dogged thereafter by public scepticism. It has, however, won the admiration of seasoned Olympic bid observers who had been predicting a walkover for Paris.

The bid has been put together mainly by business leaders with little to no interference from politicians. Opposition parties complained that there was no Olympic cabinet minister 鈥� part of the antiquated thinking that assumes only government can organise these things and one that may yet hinder Paris鈥� government-influenced bid.

The result has been a slick campaign, a coherent message and a seemingly daily SWOT analysis of the state of the bid. When an IOC report last year exposed some of the weaknesses of the bid, particularly transport, organisers worked ceaselessly to correct it, and Mr Livingstone skilfully used those shortcomings to extract new government funding for infrastructure.

Other opportunities were grabbed mercilessly. The Athens Olympics proved a turning-point, a chance to impress IOC delegates and dispel some of the perceptions about a damaging Panorama programme on corruption; to highlight Britain鈥檚 passion for sport through the presence of thousands of British spectators; and to relaunch national support for the bid on the back of medal success.

The bid has achieved a hard-won credibility internationally and that is worth volumes for future regeneration projects

The physical plans for the bid have been brought together seamlessly. Four planning authorities sat in special session to agree the masterplan, in contrast to the stadium wrangling that has plagued New York鈥檚 bid and the intractable process for regenerating the wider Thames Gateway.

The nations and regions group of London 2012 believes other cities have been inspired to think more about regeneration opportunities, such as tourism, conventions, conferences and, of course, sporting facilities. London venues such as Excel and the Dome were grabbed by London 2012 and turned into putative stadia for Olympic boxing, judo, gymnastics, and basketball. Expect these and other national centres to be looking beyond Singapore for other sporting events.

London also appears to have pulled off the trick of dissipating national resentment at the concentration of Olympic events in and around the capital. Cities and regions have bought into the idea that a London Olympics will generate significant benefits for other parts of the country.

There are still too many reasons why London may lose. The IOC mood is said to be that after two recent failures it鈥檚 Paris鈥檚 turn. London鈥檚 bid is technically proficient but too 鈥渧irtual鈥� for an IOC disturbed by Athens鈥� last-minute completion of its Olympic building programme. Public support is undoubtedly stronger among rival cities.

But the bid has achieved a hard-won credibility internationally and that is worth volumes for future regeneration projects, sporting-led or otherwise. It will prove much harder to drive the regeneration of the Lower Lea Valley without the timetable of 2012 on the horizon, but at the very least there is parallel planning permission for a park and funding for a permanent aquatics centre, velopark and hockey facility.

Defeat in Singapore is still the most likely scenario, but London has chased this bid to the end, and may yet prevail. Whatever the outcome, the regeneration community will come to see the two-and-a-half year bid as a watershed.