|
Move to re-site Youth Olympic Village a blow to Singapore’s stature |
|
By Michael Wan
|
|
Aug. 16 2008 |
The fanfare earlier this year that greeted the selection of NUS University Town as the venue of the Youth Olympic Village for the inaugural Youth Olympics Games 2010 has come to naught.
The Singapore Youth Olympic Games Committee announced on Aug. 02 that Nanyang Technological University has been chosen as the replacement venue.
 The simple reason: The recent rise in construction costs worldwide compounded by the urgency to complete building the University Town venue within the next two years will incur a substantially higher expenditure.
The committee’s flexibility in scrapping well-defined plans to suit pragmatic needs is admired, but there is a feeling that when it came down to the wire, Singapore failed to deliver on its promises.
Recall the remarks made by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong during the peak of the hype surrounding the February announcement that Singapore was picked over Russia to host the YOG.
Lee said, “We are a young nation and a small city state, but we have built a trusted brand name internationally as a reliable partner, able to get things done, and deliver on what we promise.”
The situation now is that we have overpromised and under delivered and this decision of not speeding up construction of the University Town might deal a blow to Singapore’s stature.
Come August 2010, the eyes of the world will be cast on this small garden city scrutinising its capabilities of meeting the rigorous demands of hosting the YOG.
The young athletes, being put up in a not-so-new university premise that has to be retrofitted with upgraded amenities, might become a major talking point for critics and naysayers.
Being the host for the inaugural games also means that we will set the bar for other countries to follow.
But have we set the bar high enough?
The choice to re-site the YOG to NTU is sending a signal that Singapore is making a necessary compromise, albeit one where she ultimately failed to deliver after making grandiose promises in the proposal to the IOC for the right to play host.
I have no doubts that the NTU administration will do a fantastic job in refurbishing all its facilities to make the venue as ready as possible.
However, the question here is more about image rather than just a choice of venue.
If China did not finish construction of the Beijing Olympic Stadium, affectionately known as the “Bird’s Nest,” the international community certainly would not have hesitated to ridicule and criticise.
Although the architecture and design had to be tweaked to reduce costs, the Beijing Olympic Stadium was completed in timely fashion. The opening night’s performance held in that stadium was even grudgingly lauded as one of the best in recent history by China’s worst critics.
Like the construction of Olympic infrastructure in China in time for the Olympic Games, Dubai also delivered on its project to complete “The World,” an enormous archipelago of man-made islands made to resemble the world map, in spite of the many engineering problems that it encountered throughout the construction process.
The latent ambition that is present in those islands measuring nine kilometres in length and six kilometres in width is emblematic of a country not wanting to come up short.
How will the world perceive Singapore’s ambition then?
Will Singapore be seen as a country that emphasises only on practical aspects involving costs, and not on intangibles, such as aesthetics, image, and art? Is taking calculated risks hurting our image in other intangible ways?
The YOG is more than just an event for Singapore. It is a chance for Singapore to showcase itself to the world.
Even if the University Town is completed ahead of schedule, there is no worry that its amenities will be underutilised because it is constructed primarily for NUS students.
Ultimately, there is a lot for Singapore to gain if it sticks by its original plan.
The YOG committee should reconsider its decision. |
