Implicating Tourism in the Commonwealth Games 2010


fts for youth & sport s? bene


.....soci al


...democratic participati


...benefts from tou rism ?

...inclusive growth? bu rden on citizens


“Humanity - Equality - Destiny?” Implicating Tourism in the Commonwealth Games, 2010 July 2010
Research Team Divya Badami Rao Aditi Chanchani Ananya Dasgupta Rosemary Viswanath Design & Layout: Smriti Chanchani Illustrations: Tara Goswami Printers: National Printing Press, Bengaluru This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part for educational, advocacy or not-for-profit purposes. We would appreciate acknowledging us as the source and letting us know of the use. Copies available online at For print copies contact: EQUATIONS #415, 2 C Cross, 4th Main OMBR Layout, Banaswadi Bengaluru – 560043, India Telephone: +91-80-25457607 / 25457659 Fax: +91-80-25457665 Email: Url:

ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS >> 03 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS >> 05 INTRODUCTION >> 07 SPORTS TOURISM & MEGA EVENTS >> 09 The Importance of Being a Mega-Host Signalling Progress through Sport Developing a Culture of Sports in India – the Silenced Debate The Absence of Sport INVESTING OUR COMMON WEALTH>> 19 The Story of India’s Bid From Rs. 296 crore to Rs. 12,888 crore to 30,000 crore & still counting The Budget Recovering Costs & Returns on Investment Legacy for Whom? ACCESSORISING TOURISM pinning hopes, uncovering myths >> 29 Guessing Game: Arriving at the Numbers The Obsession with Hotel Rooms Rea(i)lty Scam? The Spill-Over Marketing the Games, Marketing India Training & Awareness Programmes Athithi Devo Bhava THE MAKING OF THE WORLD CLASS CITY >> 45 Fortifying Infrastructure Transportation & Accessibility The Lust for Land Implicating Tourism in the World Class City Project Greenwash Games COLLATERAL DAMAGE: the impacts of CWG 2010 >> 59 Economic Impacts Purging the Poor Exploiting Construction Workers Displacing the Unsightly Operation Cleanse Children at Risk Increase in Sex Work Transforming Culture Democratic Deficit & Public Participation RTI Merry Go Round – Foiling the Citizen’s Right to Information Battling Public Interest Ducking the EIA Process IN CONCLUSION: the Commonwealth Casualties >> 75 REFERENCES >> 78

ANNEXURES>> 81 Annexure 1: Tourism- Hit or Miss? Annexure 2: The Right to Information Annexure 3: Official Tourism Statistics & Analysis Annexure 4: Plans to Augment Amenities & Services Annexure 5: EQUATIONS petition opposing plan to impose Section 144 during CWG 2010 Annexure 6: The FIFA World Cup - Fever in South Africa, a Case Study Annexure 7: Mega Sports, Displacements & Forced Evictions- a dismal record Annexure 8: Evictions in Delhi directly attributable to CWG 2010 Annexure 9: Countries in the global south who have declared zero tolerance against child sexual abuse in tourism/signed the International Code of Conduct for Protection of Children Annexure 10: Working around the EIA- Extracts from the PIL indicating the events leading to the Games Village getting an EIA clearance

Acronyms & Abbreviations
AAI – Airports Authority of India ASI – Archaeological Survey of India ASSOCHAM – Associated Chambers of Commerce & Industry of India ATEC – Australian Tourism Export Council B&B – Bed & Breakfast BJP – Bharatiya Janata Party BPBA – Bombay Prevention of Begging Act BRT – Bus Rapid Transport CAG – Comptroller & Auditor General of India CBCI – Commonwealth Business Club of India CEC – Central Empowered Committee CFA – Central Financial Assistance CGA – Commonwealth Games Association CGC – Commonwealth Games Association of Canada CGF – Commonwealth Games Federation CIC – Central Information Commission CII – Confederation of Indian Industry CoF – Conservator of Forests COHRE – Centre on Housing Rights & Evictions CSIR – Centre for Scientific & Industrial Research CWG – Commonwealth Games DDA – Delhi Development Authority DFS – Delhi Fire Service DIAL – Delhi International Airport Limited DJB – Delhi Jal Board DMRC – Delhi Metro Rail Corporation DPCC – Delhi Pollution Control Committee DTL – Delhi Transco Limited DUAC – Delhi Urban Arts Commission EAC – Expert Appraisal Committee EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment ETOA – European Tour Operators Association EWS – Economically Weaker Section FEE – Foreign Exchange Earnings FICCI – Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry FIFA – Federation de International Football Association FTA – Foreign Tourist Arrivals GDP – Gross Domestic Product GEC – Commonwealth Games Evaluation Commission GoI – Government of India GNCTD – Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi GSSP – Games Statement of Securities Principles GV – Games Village HIG – High Income Group IGI Airport – Indira Gandhi International Airport IITM – Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology IITTM – Indian Institute of Tourism & Travel Management INR – Indian Rupees INTACH – Indian National Trust for Art & Cultural Heritage IOA – Indian Olympic Association ISS – Integrated Security System ITPO – India Trade Promotion Organisation


ITDC – India Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. LandDO – Land & Development Office LEOs – Labour Enforcement Officers LIG – Low Income Group MBC – Media Broadcasting Centre MCD – Municipal Corporation of Delhi MIG – Medium Income Group MLE – Ministry of Labour & Employment MP – Member of Parliament MPC – Media Press Centre MoEF – Ministry of Environment & Forest MoT – Ministry of Tourism MoU – Memorandum of Understanding MUD – Ministry of Urban Development MYAS – Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sport NCR – National Capital Region NCT – National Capital Territory of Delhi NDMC – New Delhi Municipal Council NEERI – National Environmental Engineering Research Institute NOC – No Objection Certificate OC – Organising Committee, Commonwealth Games 2010 PIL – Public Interest Litigation PNG – Pipeline Natural Gas PSC - Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism & Culture

PUDR – People’s Union for Democratic Rights PYKKA – Panchayat Yuva Krida aur Khel Abhiyan Rs. – Rupees RTI – Right to Information SAFAR – System of Air Quality Forecasting & Research SAI – Sports Authority of India SMAM – Sport Marketing & Management Private Limited SC – Supreme Court SMAM – Sport Marketing & Management Private Limited T & T OC – Trinidad & Tobago Olympic Committee UN – United Nations UNDP – United Nations Development Programme UNEP – United Nations Environment Programme UP – Uttar Pradesh US – United States USD – United States Dollar
Notes 1. Indian numbering system Lakh & crore are used instead of million & billion 1 lakh = 100000 10 lakhs = 1 million 1 crore = 100 lakhs (10000000) or 10 million 100 crores = 1000 million = 1 billion 2. Currency conversions As many figures in documents we have referred to are in USD, we have used a uniform conversion of $1 = INR 45 (Indian Rupees), just to give the reader a sense of what it translates to in INR. Obviously this is simplistic & is not intended to be an accurate conversion or reflection of value in that year. Thus a thumb rule conversion used is 1 million USD = 4.5 crore INR 0.22 million USD = 1 crore INR


We would like to thank Mani Shankar Aiyar (MP and Former Minister for Youth Affairs and Sports) Sujit Banerjee (Secretary, Ministry of Tourism) Rahul Bhatnagar (Joint Secretary, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports) Bharat Bhushan (Director (Scientific) Ministry of Environment and Forests) Leena Nandan (Project Director (Host Broadcasting Team, Doordarshan Ministry of Information and Broadcasting) for giving us personal interviews that have contributed towards this research report.




. . .

Valuable inputs and insights have been received from many members of civil society for which thanks is due. In particular we would like to thank Wilson Bezwada (Safai Karamchari Andolan) Prasenjit Bose (Convenor, Research Unit of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) Shivani Choudhary (Housing and Land Rights Network) Ritwick Dutta (Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment) Soumya Dutta (Delhi Platform) Sanjay Gupta (Chetna) Kanchi Kohli (Kalpavriksh Environment Action Group) Miloon Kothari (Housing and Land Rights Network) Kalyani Menon-Sen (Jagori) Shalini Mishra (Housing and Land Rights Network) Dr Usha Ramanathan (law researcher) Nina Rao (tourism academic and activist) Prabhakar Rao (Kalpavriksh Environment Action Group) Professor K.T. Ravindran (Head, Department of Urban Design, School of Planning and Architecture, Delhi) Dunu Roy (Hazards Centre) Lopamudra Sanyal (Sweccha - We for Change) Shashi Saxena (People’s Union for Democratic Rights) Sunny Verma (Sweccha - We for Change) Vinayak Uppal (formerly with Centre for Civil Society, presently with Southern Sudan Centre for Census Statistics and Evaluation, Government of Southern Sudan).





. . . . ..





. .



port has little to do with the playground these days. Sporting events, particularly mega sporting events are being used by nations in interesting and often contestable ways – as a political statement, as an image building and branding exercise for a nation, a nation building exercise, a means to urban renewal, creating top class cities by investing heavily in city infrastructure and state-of-the-art sporting facilities, economic growth and employment, promoting tourism, and are money spinning exercises for individuals involved as well as the organisers.

This report seeks to explore the developments associated with sport mega events, in the run up to the Commonwealth Games (CWG), 2010 in Delhi. The report draws on the links between mega-sport events, tourism, and notions of development in particular. Apart from giving India its moment to bask under the global spotlight, one of the primary stated purposes of bringing the Commonwealth Games to India in 2010 is to tap potential gains from tourism to the Indian economy. Delhi, the host-city is highly influenced by the idea of being a “worldclass city”, and several social, economic and cultural impacts of the image-building exercise in the run up to the games, are directly or indirectly related to the official imagination of what tourism is or should be. Host-nations who use the platform of a mega-event as an opportunity to fast-track development are not particularly concerned with distinctions between kinds of tourists and their motivations or even the experiences of other countries in hosting mega events. The pressure that a host-nation feels to perform and project itself in a particular manner and its need to undertake certain kind of development activities seem to be delinked from these realities. As a result little attention is paid to the impacts of these decisions and developments - some being labelled as unintended consequences and others simply as collateral damage.

The report is divided into five sections. Section I: SPORTS TOURISM AND MEGA EVENTS Linking sports tourism and mega events, this section traces how mega-sports events are used as a strategy for growth and global recognition. It attempts to understand what India hopes to achieve politically and in development terms by staging the Commonwealth Games 2010. Section II: INVESTING OUR COMMON WEALTH This section is focussed on the history of India’s bid, the story of exponentially growing budgets and the pledging of public funds, all in the name of national pride. Section III: ACCESSORIZING TOURISM – pinning hopes,
uncovering myths

Section IV: THE MAKING OF THE WORLD CLASS CITY The idea of the world class city and the Games are intrinsically linked. This section details the developments in Delhi towards making it world class, which are ostensibly about it being prepared to host the Commonwealth Games 2010

Section V: COLLATERAL DAMAGE – the impacts of CWG This section examines social, cultural, economic, environmental, political and human rights impacts ensuing from the preparations under way, particularly the place of accountability, public participation, and public consensus in hosting the CWG 2010 in Delhi. As we mark the countdown to the Commonwealth Games 2010, and the Games Baton travels across the country, the report in its conclusion identifies what are already evident as its key casualties. EQUATIONS team July 2010

This section examines the hopes and myths, as well as assumptions and mental models about the tourism potential of the Games. Linked to this are the preparations being undertaken for tourists, the spill-over potential of the Games and making the city of Delhi a more hospitable environment for foreign tourists.






he link between sports-related mega-events and tourism is now a well-established, oft-cited association used by nations to justify their efforts to host a mega-event. This section seeks to explore why nations vie with each other to host mega-events such as the Commonwealth Games and the Olympics and what the flaws in their reasoning are. This section also explores the reasons India chose to bid for the Commonwealth Games, and the debates in the arena of sports policy that have sprung even as Delhi is gearing up to play host in October 2010. The Importance of Being a Mega-Host
ided and abetted by global competitiveness, a sense of euphoria envelopes a city/country when it is chosen to host a mega-event, especially since the chosen city would have competed with other equally capable cities. Gearing up for the mega-event becomes the pet project of the city administration, and developments towards this get associated in public consciousness as symbols of national pride. In Delhi, with the shadow of the 2010 Commonwealth Games looming over its shoulder, much of that euphoria is now turning into the tension of being the host. As timelines for various city infrastructure projects and sporting venues have long passed, uncomfortable questions about whether various preparations toward the Games will at least be completed before the Games are scheduled to start are being asked. Indeed there are already plans to put up scaffold nettings or shade cloth of high density polythene microfilaments (that is dust and fire-proof) to cover unfinished construction sites near Games venues “aesthetically”, so that the city does not appear “underprepared”1. While national pride has its place, the embarrassment of dealing with the ups and downs of organising a mega event is not entirely unexpected, and the pressure to perform is monumental. It is considered insulting to have a situation where the Games are cancelled, rescheduled, or moved to another location if the host city/country ultimately falls short of the promises it held out when the decision to host the games was taken. With a little over two months to the Games, and a scramble with shifting deadlines for completion of infrastructure projects, the Opposition party BJP has announced its intention to bring out their own report.2 So why would any city/country bid to hold a mega event in the first place? What would it gain from organising a mega-sports event that will not last more than 10 or 15 days? Apart from promoting sports and sport facilities, which is stating the obvious, urban regeneration, economic growth and development of tourism have been consistently proffered as the “benefits” of mega-events and provided as the rationale for bringing the Games to a city. In a series of reports linking mega events and housing rights the Geneva based Centre for Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE)3 notes “Mega-events commonly also termed ‘hallmark events’, are large-scale tourist events of limited duration, designed to generate attention and attract support (often in terms of public funding and private investment) in order to stimulate redevelopment. The staging of a mega-event is typically motivated by three key concerns: (1) Putting the city ‘on the world map’ (increasing tourism); (2) Boosting economic investment in the city and attracting capital (for improving urban infrastructure and redevelopment); and (3) ‘Reimagining’ the city.4 These aspects also figure prominently in what the Indian Government hopes to achieve by bringing the Games to Delhi.5 Revenues will never cover costs, and there are no profits to be made. It would therefore be rare for a mega event to be sponsored privately, which means that it is the public sector that has to step up each time, risking the tax-payer’s money. The public sector motivation therefore, is with the spin offs associated with the Games.6 However, there are an increasing number of studies that show that many of these aspects construed as beneficial to the host city and country are exaggerated and false promises.




Urban regeneration is prioritised and fast-tracked to meet deadlines and in the process social displacement, land acquisition, environmental degradation, violation of worker’s rights, disruption of residents lifestyle go unaddressed and the “pressure to deliver infrastructure and sporting facilities provides a rationale for overriding mandatory participatory planning processes”.7 Of equal concern is that these large projects are susceptible to cost-over runs. In Barcelona the Olympics” costs increased almost five fold, from 237 million pesetas (April 1985) (Rs. 8.3 crores)8 to the final figure of 1,119 million pesetas (July 1993) (Rs. 39.2 crores). For the 2002 Manchester Commonwealth Games the final price tag was four times the original bid estimate.9 A report presented to the Vancouver City Council estimated that it cost the city $554 million (Rs. 2493 crores) to host the Winter Olympics 2009.10 The anticipated final bill for the London Olympics 2012 is projected to be £7.267 billion (Rs. 50869 crores),11 according to the Olympic authority’s quarterly Economic Report.12 The European Tour Operators Association (ETOA) in a hard hitting study addressing the potential lure of the 2012 London Olympic13 shows that “there is no strong link between hosting sporting events and increased tourism. The audiences regularly cited for such events as the Olympics are exaggerated. Attendees at the Games displace normal visitors and scare tourists away for some time. Both Sydney and Barcelona had “excellent” Olympic Games, but their tourism industries have not significantly benefited. Thus there appears to be little evidence of any benefit to tourism of hosting an Olympic Games, and considerable evidence of damage”. This ‘post Olympic blight ‘is supposed to have been common to all the cities that hosted the Games since Seoul in 1988, which were held in Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney, Athens and Beijing. The report distinguishes ‘sports visitors’ from ‘regular visitors’. Sports visitors are interested in sport and not in tourism, according to the ETOA, so the main spending is on hotel accommodation, which predominantly house officials, athletes, media persons and sport enthusiasts whose behaviour is akin to businessmen coming in for a convention. Regular visitors expect congestion and increased prices, which dissuades them from travelling to a country during a mega-event. The report urges that it is vital that the problems experienced by the host cities of past Games be acknowledged and addressed in order to avoid them reoccurring.14

With respect to economic growth, money spent by tourists often does not stay within the local economy as money towards hotel rooms and restaurants that are likely to be national or international chains accrue to stockholders rather than those in the local economy. To the extent that attendees at a sporting event spend their money on that sporting event instead of on other activities (tourism linked) the sporting event simply results in a reallocation of expenditures in the economy rather than a real net increase in economic activity.15 During the Manchester Games, 31.5 percent of the tickets were sold to people living in greater Manchester, so their expenditures were not “new money.” One study found that spending per visitor during the Olympics was lower than spending by the average tourist at other times. In Atlanta in 1996 spending per tourist was significantly lower than normal in areas not adjacent to Olympic venues and affected businesses up to 150 miles (241 km) away.16 Unaccounted for, often, in the argument of mega sports events boosting tourism, is the “crowding out” effect which results in domestic and international tourists avoiding the destination of a mega event to avoid the congestion associated with it. Studies indicate that for the Olympic Games held between 1964 and 1984, most cases saw a drop on the number of visitors. In Los Angeles, attendance figures at popular tourist destinations were down 30 to 50 percent during the Olympics. Victoria had more tourists four years before the Commonwealth Games rather than during the 1994 Games.17 A New York Times report, quoting the Indian Express, put the number of international tourists for the Asiad held in Delhi in 1982 at a shocking 200.18 The relationship between host cities and mega sporting events has always been complex. For example, the slogan, “We want bread not circuses”, raised by Toronto inhabitants had derailed the city’s Olympic bid in 1996.19 The bid to host the CWG 2014 by Halifax, Canada was “withdrawn amid increasing criticism about the growing cost and a perceived lack of transparency in the bid process. Barry Barnet, Nova Scotia’s minister of health promotion, told a news conference in Halifax that an independent analysis of the Games “has led us to the unfortunate decision that the 2014 Commonwealth Games are simply beyond our fiscal capacity”.20 The original


estimated figure of $1.6 billion (Rs. 7,200 crores) presented by the Halifax 2014 Commonwealth Games Bid Society, (the Commonwealth Games Association of Canada (CGC)) was considered too high, and they committed to bring it down to $1 billion (Rs. 4,500 crores). Sport Canada commissioned an independent consultant to evaluate the business plan and budgets, and the resulting “McMahon Report”, was handed over to the province and regional governments in draft form without any prior review by the Bid Society or the CGC. The McMahon Report was very critical of the business plan and budget, and the very next day, provincial and regional governments withdrew their support, before the Bid Society had the time to bring down the budget to $ 1 billion.21 Similarly, New Zealand withdrew its support to Auckland’s bid to host the 2018 Commonwealth Games, on the grounds that a projected 600 million New Zealand dollar loss (US$ 420 million / Rs. 1890 crores) on the event was too large. Prime Minister John Key said economic analysis had shown the loss to taxpayers on the games, even after tourism revenues had been counted, could not be justified. “The issue is what it costs to run the event. It’s very, very expensive and we can’t see the economic payback,” he said.22 Larry Romany, President of the Trinidad and Tobago Olympic Committee (T&T OC) is also quoted to have said “the T&T OC and the Government of T&T conducted a full review, open, constructive, and candid discussions in respect of all the current and projected circumstances and concluded that progressing a 2018 bid at this time is not a prudent or responsible course of action.”23

Delhi also bid for the 2014 Asian games but lost the bid to Incheon, South Korea. The Indian Olympic Association (IOA) was also interested in bidding to bring Formula One to the country. That we signalled the intent to bid for the 2020 Olympics soon after it won the bid for staging the 2010 Commonwealth Games indicates India falling victim to the growing “mega-events addiction” as David Black puts it in his essay titled “The Symbolic Politics of Sport Mega-Events: 2010 in Comparative Perspective”. Black explores and compares the “symbolic politics” of event host South Africa for the FIFA (Federation de International Football Association) World Cup, Delhi/India for the Commonwealth Games, and Vancouver Canada, for the Winter Olympics, all taking place in 2010. According to him, while “marketing” and “place-promotion” are strong incentives for a host country such as India to put out a bid, it extends further to “the dynamics of symbolism and legitimation”. The city has to reconstruct its image given the “cosmopolitan self-image of international sports organisations”25. In his analysis of Delhi’s pitch in projecting itself, there is a strong strain of wanting to shed the “developing country” conception for the “developed country” with its emphasis on the “world class city”. While Black focuses on the image construction aspect, it is important to take note of the broader political agenda in India hosting the Games. The Asian Games of 1951 was hosted with the political intent of building solidarity in the Group of 77, in an anti-imperialist grouping of the United Nations. The 1982 Asian games came at the juncture where India was interested in liberalising, projecting itself as a leader within and outside the country, and signalling the end of Nehruvian socialism. The political agenda of the CWG 2010 must be understood in the context of India positioning as a key player in the grouping of BRIC countries,26 its distancing itself from the G7727 so as to be seen as close to the G2028 (and the United States in particular), and the aspiration for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, among other trends. India represents much more than an emerging economy. It is one of the largest markets with its growing consumerist middle class, has maintained a steady growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and a reckless pursuit of neoliberal policies without heed to the mounting evidence of

Signalling Progress through Sport
elhi hosted the Asian Games in 1951 and 1982. The Afro-Asian Games were held in 2003 in Hyderabad, as were the World Military Games in 2007. The Commonwealth Youth Games were held in 2008 in Pune, and now there is the much awaited Commonwealth Games scheduled in Delhi for 2010. India had bid for the 1990 and 1994 Commonwealth Games but did not make it, and withdrew its bid for the 1998 Games in favour of Kuala Lumpur.24 India is also playing host to the Hockey World Cup, the Shooting World Cup, and a four-nation hockey tournament before the Commonwealth Games are flagged off.



deep rural and agrarian distress, endemic poverty, increased civilian armed struggles, and human rights violations where the state aggresses against its people. Its political agenda in hosting the CWG is clearly of shedding its developing country image and announcing its arrival as a global super power – to be reckoned with – economically and therefore politically. The logo29 of the Commonwealth Games 2010 inspired by the chakra spells out this political agenda in as many words.

Developing a Culture of Sports in India – the Silenced Debate
A separate Department for Sports came into being when India hosted the Asian Games in 1982 thus signalling the strong link between India’s sports policies and mega sporting events.30 Recognising the need for a paradigm shift in how sports percolates to the grassroots in the country, former Minister for Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS), Mani Shankar Aiyar31 had made a 45 minute presentation to the Cabinet during his tenure as Sports Minister. As a result of this, in April 2007 his Ministry was asked to draft a new comprehensive sports policy. The “Draft Comprehensive National Sports Policy, 2007”, was not presented in Cabinet, as the week it was to be presented, Mr. Aiyar was removed from his post, and the policy was never taken up by the Cabinet subsequently.32 In a telephonic conversation33, S.P.S Tomar, Under Secretary, MYAS confirmed that the Draft Policy was “withdrawn” and that the existing policy (of 2001) is “sufficient” (quotation marks ours). An examination of the Draft Policy34 indicates that it is rather progressive. Among its many insightful observations are that “the economic, social and cultural benefits of hosting mega sporting events have to be weighed against the huge opportunity costs involved and needs to be clearly evaluated in the specific context of each country. While the hosting of such mega events undoubtedly gives a boost to the image of the country in the sporting world and makes the promotion of sporting excellence an important agenda, these can be reduced to very short-term benefits unless they are part of a well-formulated and comprehensive long term vision which aims at Sports for All and includes among the highest of our national priorities the development of a National Sports Culture.” The Draft Policy goes on to say that “the direct economic benefit in terms of the creation of


international standard sports infrastructure and facilities too would have limited impact unless this is backed by proper legacy planning. The indirect spin offs, which include the upgradation of urban infrastructure and increase in sports tourism, are also important, but there should be a robust strategy that would ensure that these benefits have a maximum spread effect and are not confined only to a few cities and limited segments of the population.” The fallout of the Asian Games of 1982 which saw infrastructure building in Delhi, and an expansion of Sports Authority of India (SAI) activities is also acknowledged, but is criticised for not having had any impact on sports facilities at the grassroots level. The Draft Policy quotes the National Sports Policy, 1984 lamenting that it’s most important clause “the creation of basic minimum sports infrastructure and the preservation of existing playfields and safe open spaces for sport activities, if necessary by suitable legislation” has not been achieved. The caution with which the Draft Comprehensive Sports Policy treats mega sports events, including its associated benefits, is, in many ways, an official acknowledgement of the doubts there are about the “economic, social and cultural benefits” of staging the Commonwealth Games and the need to re-think the purpose of developing sports infrastructure – for whom, for what, where and why. The draft policy had attracted criticism from major sports bodies as it was seen to potentially jeopardise the upcoming Commonwealth Games and India’s chances at hosting other mega-sporting events in the future.35 Sports Associations were also displeased with the recommendation for a Sports Regulatory Authority to be introduced, and for sports to be put on the Concurrent List. (The IOA has so far been autonomous, drawing funds from the Sports Ministry, without being held responsible and accountable to it).36 The need for a wider public debate was sidestepped when the issue was reduced to a spat between IOA President and Member of Parliament (MP), Suresh Kalmadi and Mr Aiyar, which lead to heated exchanges with regard to India loosing the bid to host the 2014 Asian Games. On hearing that Mr. Kalmadi was going to think twice before bidding for the 2016 Olympics, Mr Aiyar said “I am damn delighted if I have succeeded in diverting attention to the real issues”. “Whether you hold

the Commonwealth Games in Delhi or Melbourne, it makes no difference to the state of those living in the colonies opposite the stadium. The government does not have enough money for social development programmes but has sanctioned Rs 7,000 crore for hosting the Commonwealth Games just to improve India’s image internationally,” he said.37 38 The current Minister for Youth Affairs and Sport, Manohar Singh Gill, has expressed similar sentiments in Parliament, expressing his disapproval at the idea that India should bid for the Olympics. “Look at the poverty in this country, look at its size, look at your urban problem. There is a certain class among us who want these great events because it’s good entertainment and good fun for that time. But, I do not think that the common man wants an Olympic Games. China spent $50 billion (Rs.2,25,000 crores) for the Beijing Olympics. Are you ready to spend that much?” he is quoted saying.39 Representing the other side of the debate, Mr Kalmadi remarked in an interview that “If 2014 Asiad had come, Delhi would have been a global city. Do you know how much it would have helped tourism and how much money could have been generated by this sector? By staging the two Games, India would have become an absolute tourist destination.”40 A similar position was taken by him recently in connection with the Commonwealth Games.41 As the links between mega-sports events, development and tourism are being drawn, and the CWG 2010 draws closer, a limited but essential public debate on the cost at which India should stage such events is underway, and provides much needed perspective to the benefits of sport-related development and tourism.

The Absence of Sport


recious little attention is being paid to our sportspersons and their training and preparations toward the Games. A commonly expressed view is that India would have done better to concentrate on its sportsmen, and return with a good medal tally thus bringing pride to the nation, rather than staging the CWG. This sentiment also springs from the fact that only two years ago when China hosted the Beijing Olympics (2008), China won 100 medals, while India won only 3.


Ironically, the Commonwealth Games are not even considered top priority by sportspersons in India. “Olympics are our first priority, Asian Games are second, and then it is the CWG,” a swimmer participating in the games this year is quoted to have said.42 What is really disturbing is the fact that the 34th National Games, originally scheduled to have been held in Jharkhand in 2007, has been postponed five times in two years.43 The 35th National Games planned to be held between 1-14 May 2010 in Kerala, was postponed from a 2008 date.44 In the course of our research we found a news item on 7th May 2010 declaring that both the Kerala government and the IOA have no clue a week after its supposed start as to when it may happen45. The mainstream media seems to have lost interest in such sporting events with all eyes turned towards Mr Kalmadi and the Commonwealth Games. The National Games are the space and opportunity for young sportspersons to prove their talent at the national level as well as train state administrators to conduct meets on a large scale. It is inexcusable that we have failed to organise the National Games for several years now but are flaunting our commitment to building a sports culture by hosting the Commonwealth Games. While the 34th, 35th and 36th Games have not happened or are under a cloud regarding their dates, the IOA has already awarded the 37th Games to Chhattisgarh.46 While it has nothing to do with the CWG, the recent episode of women hockey players not receiving their due,47 when hockey is officially India’s national sport cries shame. Indigenous Indian sport is also a highly neglected area, and staging of the CWG does nothing to promote kabbadi, gilli-danda and kho-kho, for instance, Budget Estimate 2009-10 (in Rs. crore) Plan CWG 2010 PYKKA* Total - Sports and Physical Education 2000 145 2403 Non Plan 264 0 316

which are among the more well known local sports, but equally the boat races in Kerala, Inbuan, the indigenous sport of Mizoram that resembles combat wrestling, archery indigenous to Meghalaya, the Yubee-Lakpee of Manipur which is a little like rugby, Kirip, indigenous wrestling in Nicobar, or Sagol Kangjei, Manipur’s version of polo.48 However a separate stadium for lawn bowls is being built as a lasting legacy for Delhi. The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports which initiated the Panchayat Yuva Krida aur Khel Abhiyan (PYKKA) scheme in 2008-09 plans to cover 2,50,000 panchayats and blocks all over the country over a period of 10 years with assistance for creation of basic sports infrastructure, nurturing indigenous games and nurturing of sports talent pool. Youth (below 35 years) are 70% of the population of this demographically young country and the cohort of 10-19 years constitute around 250 million youth. One would imagine that the MYAS would see these young people as its key constituency. The Ministry’s Annual report for the year 200910 and its budgetary allocations therein49 are an indication of the extent to which the CWG has taken over all other considerations of building and encouraging a sports culture in the country. Extracts from Annexure 2 of the Report (Financial Outlay, in Indian Rupees) below indicate that the MYAS may as well have been renamed the Ministry for CWG 2010. A disbursement of a mere Rs 70 crores towards the PYKKA for basic sports facilities for millions of young people across the country as against a concentrated 3000 crores in just one year (2009-10) for the CWG is an inexcusable and appalling demonstration of the Ministry’s priorities.

Revised Budget 2009-10 (in Rs. crore) Plan 2268 125 2671 Non Plan 615 0 679.67

Budget Estimate 2010-11 (in Rs. crore) Plan 1454 379 2453 Non Plan 614.5 0 664.69

*Only Rs 70 crore was actually released


There is no proposal for the demonstrations of indigenous sport or proposals for indigenous sport, or sport education in schools, colleges, villages, or for the PYKKA to benefit from the staging of the CWG by being allotted a percentage of revenue for sport-related development. Elite by definition, it is not surprising that the Organising Committee (OC) of the CWG designs mega events that do not improve the chances for millions of young people of India to engage and excel in sport.

In speaking about the impact and legacy of the Games India’s bid document says50 “Sports and Games propagated at the highest levels have a miraculous capacity to percolate even to the grassroots and also achieve the widest coverage”. Going by the manner in which the MYAS and the IOA are determining priorities, it will certainly take a miracle to achieve the building of a sports culture in India.

End Notes
1. Ghosh, A., “Govt plans to hide unfinished Games work behind curtains”, Times of India; 2nd June 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes. com/City/Delhi/Govt-plans-to-hide-unfinished-Games-work-behind-curtains/articleshow/6000895.cms, data retrieved June 2010 2. “BJP leaders say Delhi not prepared to host Games” Hindustan Times; 15th July 2010, newdelhi/BJP-leaders-say-Delhi-not-prepared-to-host-Games/Article1-572470.aspx data retrieved July 2010 3. Centre on Housing Rights & Evictions (COHRE) is an international human rights organisation campaigning for the protection of housing rights and the prevention of forced evictions. 4. Fair Play for Housing Rights: Mega-Events, Olympic Games and Housing Rights, 2007, The Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), Geneva, Switzerland, available at 5. India’s Bid CWG 2010, 6. Wildsmith, J. and Bradfield, M. (2007) “Halifax Commonwealth Games Bid: Were the Costs and Benefits Assessed?” Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Commonwealth_Games_Bid.pdf, data retrieved January 2010 7. Pillay, U.; Tomlinson, R.; and Bass, O. (Eds.) (2009) Development and Dreams: The urban legacy of the 2010 Football World Cup; HSRC Press 8. Conversion used 1 Spanish Pesetas = INR 0.35 9. Wildsmith, J. and Bradfield, M. (2007) 10. Austen, I. “Vancouver Estimates Cost”, The New York Times; 20th April 2010, sports/21sportsbriefs-games.html, data retrieved June 2010 11. Conversion used GBP 1 = Rs.70 12. Brooke, M., “Olympic costs shoot up £5m in 3 months”, East London Advertiser; 27th May 2010, content/towerhamlets/advertiser/news/story.aspx?brand=elaonline&category=news&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newsela&itemid= WeED27%20May%202010%2014%3A05%3A46%3A853, data retrieved July 2010 and 13. ETOA (2006) “Olympic Report”, European Tour Operators Association,, data retrieved January 2010 and ETOA (2008) “Olympics and Tourism: Update on Olympic Report 2006”, European Tour Operators Association,, data retrieved January 2010 14. See Annexure 1: Tourism- Hit or Miss? For extracts from ETOA reports. 15. Matheson, Victor A., “Upon Further Review: An Examination of Sporting Event Economic Impact Studies” 2001, http://www., data retrieved January 2010 16. Wildsmith, J. and Bradfield, M. (2007) 17. Wildsmith, J. and Bradfield, M. (2007) 18. Around the World; Turnout for Games Lags, New Delhi Paper Says. The New York Times; 26th November 1982, http://www.nytimes. com/1982/11/26/world/around-the-world-turnout-for-games-lags-new-delhi-paper-says.html, data retrieved July 2010. 19. Majumdar B., “Zero Sum Game?” TOI Crest; 12th June 2010, Commonwealth-Games/Zero-Sum-Game/articleshow/6040140.cms, data retrieved in July 2010. 20 . Xinhua, “Halifax gives up bid for 2014 Commonwealth Games”, People Daily; 9th March 2007, cn/200703/09/eng20070309_355986.html, data retrieved January 2010 21. See, data retrieved January 2010. 22. The Associated Press (2010) “Government drops Auckland Commonwealth Games bid,” Business Week, 16th March 2010, http://www., data retrieved June 2010. 23. Trinidad Tobago withdraws CWG 2018 bid” 29 March 2010,, data retrieved June 2010. 24. Ali, Q.M., “Elation as India wins Commonwealth Games Bid”, Asian Tribune; 14th November 2003, news/2003/11/14/elation-india-wins-commonwealth-games-bid, data retrieved June 2010 25. Black further quotes Dave Whitson who sees the desire to host such large-scale events as the country giving itself an opportunity to “reshape dominant attitudes and cultures within host communities - to transcend provincialism and historic insecurities and to embrace globality, competitiveness, and excellence”. Of India in particular, he says that “notwithstanding its aggregate low-income status, there is the aspiration for recognition of its rightful place as a world power, reflective of its population, its rapidly growing economic and military capabilities, and its history as an ancient and sophisticated civilisation that has had to overcome the indignity of hundreds of years of external domination and colonisation.” 26. BRIC is a grouping acronym that refers to the related economies of Brazil, Russia, India and China


27. The Group of 77 (G-77) was established on 15 June 1964 by seventy-seven developing countries signatories of the “Joint Declaration of the Seventy-Seven Countries” issued at the end of the first session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in Geneva. The Group of 77 is the largest intergovernmental organization of developing states in the United Nations, which provides the means for the countries of the South to articulate and promote their collective economic interests and enhance their joint negotiating capacity on all major international economic issues within the United Nations system, and promote South-South cooperation for development. (Source: 28. The Group of Twenty (G-20) Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors was established in 1999 to bring together systemically important industrialized and developing economies to discuss key issues in the global economy. (Source: what_is_g20.aspx) 29. The logo of the XIX Commonwealth Games 2010 Delhi is inspired by the Chakra, the national symbol of freedom, unity and power. Spiralling upwards, it depicts the growth of India into a proud, vibrant nation. Her billion people coming together to fulfil their true destinies. India’s journey from tradition to modernity, her economic transformation into a super power… reaching out to the world and leading the way, even as she enthusiastically embraces all the 71 CGA nations and territories of the Commonwealth to become one and host the best ever Commonwealth Games in Delhi. Source: The Games Look, http://www. 30. See, data retrieved June 2010 31. Mani Shankar Aiyar, Former Minister for Youth Affairs and Sport, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 10th March 2010 32. Mani Shankar Aiyar, interview 33. S.P.S Tomar, Under Secretary, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, telephonic conversation with EQUATIONS on 2nd March, 2010 34. Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Draft Comprehensive Sports Policy 2007,, data retrieved January 2010 35. “Kalmadi’s plea to Prime Minister”, The Hindu; 3rd August 2007, data retrieved January 2010 36. Kalra, Y.S, “From playgrounds to medals”, Live Mint; 24th September 2007, data retrieved January 2010 37. “Commonwealth Games irrelevant to common man: Mani Shankar”, Live Mint; 12th April 2007, http://www.livemint. com/2007/04/12131220/Commonwealth-Games-irrelevant.html, data retrieved June 2010. 38. Sahgal, P., “Face Off” India Today; 7th May 2007,, data retrieved January 2010 39. Mackay D, “India should not bid for Olympics says Sports Minister” 25th November 2009, php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8145:india-should-not-bid-for-olympics-says-sports-minister&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=1 data retrieved June 2010 40. Brahma, B., “Aiyar openly backed Incheon’s bid” Times of India; 22nd April 2007,, data retrieved January 2010 41. Kalmadi, S., “Benefits of the Games will be felt for longer than 15 days”, Hindustan Times; 29th May 2010, http://www.hindustantimes. com/rssfeed/sportcolumns/Benefits-of-Games-will-be-felt-for-longer-than-15-days/Article1-550028.aspx, data retrieved June 2010 42. Bisht, A., “Once again Zero Sum Game”, Hardnews; 19th March 2010,, data retrieved April 2010. 43. “IOA postpones 34th National Games again”, India Today; 15th October 2009, postpones+34th+National+Games+again.html, data retrieved March 2010 44. “35th National Games in May next year”, The Hindu; 11th February 2009, stories/2009021155861800.htm, data retrieved March 2010 45. Nath S, “National Games Dates Uncertain: Neither Kerala nor the IOA officials are sure when the 35th National Games will take place”, Yentha 7th May 2010, Data retrieved July 2010. 46. “Chhattisgarh to host 37th National Games in 2013”, Sports News; 30th March 2010, chhattisgarh-to-host-37th-national-games-in-2013-89383/, Data retrieved March 2010 47. “Dues Issue: Women Hockey players wear black bands” Indian Express; 21st January 2010, data retrieved January 2010 48. See, data retrieved March 2010 49. MYAS 50. India’s Bid CWG 2010, pg 22




Section II


his section examines the bid India produced, the infrastructure and other sport related developments that have been committed as part of the deal to play host, a budget that grows exponentially and the implications this has on the investment of public funds. The Story of India’s Bid
ndia bid for the Commonwealth Games in 1990 and 1994 and failed both times. Thus winning the bid for 2010 was a matter of prestige. One would have expected that extensive consultations be undertaken, and the decision to bid for an event the scale of the CWG, be a considered one. The reality is however, far removed from this basic expectation. At the very least, as per the Government of India (Transaction of Business) Rules, 19611, a proposal for the staging of the CWG should have been made and put before the Cabinet for deliberations before any decision was taken. However, Rule 12 on the “Departure from Rules” which states that “The Prime Minister may, in any case or classes of cases permit or condone a departure from these rules, to the extent he deems necessary”, was invoked, as the result of which a process that was initiated by the NDA Government was continued by the UPA Government, fait accompli. In response to an RTI2 seeking information as to whether this was discussed in a cabinet meeting, we were informed that no such meeting was called for or attended to by the PMO to discuss the bid for the CWG 2010. Mani Shankar Aiyar’s view on the process was “The bid was initiated by Mr. Kalmadi, Commonwealth Secretary and head of the IOA, who persuaded Prime Minister Vajpayee to allow him to bid for the Games. There was not enough time to call a Cabinet Meeting and so the proposal was cleared under what is called “Rule 12” which allows the Prime Minister to approve, subject to ex-post-facto cabinet approval. This proves how little debate there was, not only among general public, but within the Government as well”.3 The bid document requires statement of commitment or backing from the government and public. In response to an RTI application4 about evidence for public support the Organising Committee of the Commonwealth Games 2010 (OC) claims 10000 signatures were obtained in support of India’s bid from youth, eminent people and politicians. For the world’s largest democracy this is a rather feeble attempt at public debate and consensus.


The Report of the Commonwealth Games Evaluation Commission for the 2010 Commonwealth Games (GEC)5 considered Delhi, India and Hamilton, Canada as the two possible hosts of the Commonwealth Games 2010, based on the bids submitted. It concluded that both Hamilton and Delhi were capable of staging a successful Commonwealth Games in 2010. Delhi won the bid and was ultimately picked during the General Assembly of the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) held in Montego Bay, Jamaica 2003.6 However, what reportedly clinched the bid was India’s last-minute offer of $100,000 (Rs. 0.45 crores) to each of the 72 associations of the member states to train athletes, which worked out to $7.2 million (Rs. 32.4 crores), as against the Hamilton’s offer of $3.2 million (Rs. 14.4 crores),7 on offer only to needy countries.8 According to Mr Aiyar, “The initial decision in 2003, included a midnight telephonic call to Prime Minister Vajpayee (of the BJP led NDA government) from the (then) Minister of Sports Vikram Verma representing the Indian delegation at Montego Bay, seeking approval that the Indian delegation be permitted to offer one hundred thousand dollars towards the training of sportsmen to every Commonwealth country including the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.”9 Aspects of India’s bid10, as highlighted by the 187 page advertisement brochure like Bid Document were: • Delhi’s past experiences with international sporting events with the 1951 and 1982 Asian games as well as major international trade fairs, summits and exhibitions • Air travel grant for accredited athletes and accompanying officials as well as free accommodation • Free trip to the Taj Mahal for all athletes and accompanying officials • A special lane reserved for participants on all major roads of Delhi • Health Facilities • Commitment from the Government


The Report of the CWG Evaluation Commission11 noted the following: • Delhi’s bid focuses on the potential to motivate the youth of India to become involved in sport • Games Accreditation will substitute as a visa for entry into India • Delhi has provided a travel grant of US $ 10.5 million (Rs. 47.3 crores) based on 5200 athletes and 1800 officials at US $ 1500 (Rs. 67, 500) each which exceeds requirements of Protocol Nine (travel expenses). • Accommodation and board will be provided free of charge for 25 days for athletes and 18 days for technical officials. Capacity of 8500 is possible, enabling all athletes to be housed in a single facility. Extra officials will be accommodated in the village on a costrecovery basis. • The Delhi-Commonwealth Village, a low-tomedium rise development is to be constructed on a 40 acre site in the heart of Delhi. Proposed village site of 40 hectares of land adjoins NH24 and will be connected with MRTS and EMU trains. Air-conditioning will not be required in November (early November were the dates proposed originally), however in select areas like the dining hall it will be provided. Dining facility proposed to be located in the international zone was recommended to be moved to the residential zone. • Post games the village will become University accommodation. The Games Village (GV) will provide excellent hostel facility for Delhi University and will remain available for residential use during hosting of future international events. • Two new sports venues will be constructed by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and Government of India (GoI). • A significant infrastructure improvement is planned (including 74 flyovers and the development of metro lines) and the provision for dedicated lanes and escorts. • A plentiful supply of good hotel rooms exist. Delhi boasts of 9000 first class hotels which will meet the accommodation needs of the Commonwealth Games Family. • The US$ 442 million (Rs.1989 crores) Delhi expenditure budget lacks detail in many of the key areas, however the overriding undertaking is that the Governments of India and Delhi will meet the costs of the Games to be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the

CGF, and will underwrite any operating or capital budget shortfall. Government contributions are USD$ 227 million (Rs. 1021.5 crores) and USD$ 8 million (Rs. 36 crores) from the Government of India and the Delhi Government. These overall budgets are expected to increase, but the amount has not been quantified. Total revenue of US$ 442 million (Rs.1989 crores) comprises US$ 235 million (Rs. 1057.5 crores) in public sector funding and Games revenues of US$ 186 million, which the Evaluation Commission considers is potentially overstated. The Government of Delhi and the relevant Government agencies have advised that the development of venues and the Games Village will include environmental considerations related to micro-environment, ecology and other parameters such as air, water and noise pollution. Delhi has confirmed that its intention is to develop the games in an “environmentally friendly” manner.

What Delhi, through the hosting of CWG stated it wishes to achieve are: • Achieve major additions to sports infrastructure • Stimulate economic growth and development • Improve city infrastructure • Boost tourism in India India‘s last-minute offer of $7.2 million (Rs. 32.4 crores),12 to each member state to train their athletes does not reflect in the bid or evaluation document as it was made during the General Assembly. An important question asked in the Parliament as early as 200313 seeks to know whether India has also undertaken to bear the athlete training expenses for member countries like Australia to the extent of USD7.2 million and if any decision has been taken to mobilise funds for this purpose? The response of the (then) Minister of State is that the “IOA made an announcement in Jamaica for payment of USD100000 to each member country of the CGF after the Commonwealth Games 2006. IOA has informed that the funds for the purpose will be mobilised by the Organising Committee of the CWG through proposed sponsorships earnings of USD100 million”.


This is certainly one of the many promises of the IOA and the OC that have been conveniently abandoned in acts of collective amnesia. There are discrepancies between what is stated in India’s bid submission and the report of the GEC. Some of these are critical to take note of, as they seem to have been emphasised when the Commission visited Delhi for its assessment, and are likely to have been critical factors in India winning the bid for 2010.14 What is also interesting to note is which of these have been lost in transit. • India’s bid claimed that by way of infrastructure 50 flyovers would be completed by 2008. The Evaluation of Bid claimed 74 flyovers would be built (subsequently the number dropped to 25). The Bid spoke of battery operated buses round the clock for athletes from the Games village to competition sites. The current arrangements do not speak of these any more. The Bid document spoke of the Games Village land being 100 acres (or 40 hectares). The actual land acquired is 150 acres or 63.5 hectares. The map in the Bid document also indicated the Games Village to be on the west bank of the Yamuna, while the final site is now on the east bank. Perhaps what is most significant is the promise that the Games Village would be handed over to Delhi University as hostel facilities for its students. This is certainly one promise that has been forgotten as soon as Delhi won the Bid.15

vision is indeed beyond the Games, it is important to scrutinise the investments from economic, cultural, social and environmental lens and interrogate them from the perspective of whose needs they serve.

The Budget eeping track of the shifting scenario of the budgets and estimates of the CWG 2010 requires tenacity and a sharp eye!


In May 2003 when the IOA submitted India’s bid to the CGF its projected expenditure was 266.65 million USD (1200 crore rupees). This included capital expenditure of 210.2 million USD, major repairs and maintenance of 23.23 million USD and other incidental expenditure of 33.30 million USD. The corresponding means of finance were grants to the tune of 115.07 million USD (518 crore rupees), sale of residential flats 106.00 million USD (477 crore rupees), and surplus from operating the Games at 45.58 million USD (205 crore rupees). The surplus was the difference between the revenues from Games of 186.59 million USD (840 crore rupees) and Games operating expenses of 141.01 million USD (634.5 crore rupees). Thus operating expenses plus capital expenditure would amount to 407.7 million USD (1835crore rupees). On 7th October 2003 the Commonwealth Games Evaluation Commission for the 2010 Games brought out its report. The finance section relating to India’s bid indicated negotiations with the IOA that the sale of residential flats is removed from the CWG budget (as an item of revenue generation) and the responsibility/risk is transferred to the DDA. As a result of this “adjustment” the government grants portion of the budget financing became 235.07 million USD (1058 crore rupees) and the Games revenue part remained at 186.59 million USD (840 crore rupees). India won the bid in November 2003. The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) released a report in July 2009 titled “A Report on Preparedness for the XIX Commonwealth Games 2010”17 which is a sobering account of the lack of preparedness just 14 months before the Games were scheduled to start. However, it is a horrifying account of the expenditure until that point and the nature of “legacy of the games”. A careful reading of the CAG report will indicate that in a span of 9

What is not available for public scrutiny is the Host City Contract that Delhi signed, which is the legally binding contractual agreement. RTI applications and an appeal to the OC have not yet provided conclusive position as to whether the OC will claim this is a confidential document. The MYAS and IOA have not responded either to the request through RTI of a copy of the Host City Contract.16

From Rs. 296 crore to Rs. 12,888 crore to Rs. 30,000 crore and still counting.
With the logic of the “legacy of the games” being a “world-class city”, the cost of the Games are downplayed, arguing that better roads, better infrastructure, world-class facilities will go beyond the Games. Literature on the subject indicates that the concept of the “legacy of the games” is used to justify the mammoth investments and expenditure required to host a mega event. If the


months the IOA made three estimates and upward revisions by a factor of 4 in its estimates (May 2003 - Rs 296 crores, September 2003 – Rs 400 crores, December 2003 - Rs 1200 crores, final bid document - 1853 crores!). This certainly does not inspire confidence in the IOA’s ability to plan or

project expenditures18 - a story that unravels more messily in the years that follow. The table below puts together the projected and actual figures of budgetary expenses for the Commonwealth Games from various official sources.

Updated bid document projection December 2003 1835 crore rupees Estimated operating expenditure Rs. 635 crore. Total expenditure (other than Games operating expenses) estimated at Rs. 1200 crore, Government grants were estimated at Rs. 518 crore. Rs. 1835 crore (US$ 400 million) (Bid evaluation report USD 421.66 million) MYAS estimated expenditure as of May 2009 9599 crores (US$ 2133 million) CAG calculated expenditure up to May 2009 Rs. 12,888 crore (excludes expenditure incurred by DMRC, AAI, ITDC) (US$ 2864 million) MYAS estimated expenditure as of February 2010 Rs. 10445 crores (US$ 2298 million) Ministry of Tourism, Government of India study 2009 estimated expenditure for the CWG Rs. 87500 crores (US$ 19,444 million) First Budget approved by Cabinet April 200719 Rs.3566 crore ± Rs. 300 crore. (US$ 792 million ± US$ 67 million)

A Ministry of Tourism (MoT) commissioned study (2009) makes the most spectacular assessment or revelation of them all.20 We quote from page 17 of the published study “The total budget estimated for hosting the 19th Commonwealth is US$17.5 billion (approximately Rs. 87.5 thousand crore). This makes the 2010 CWG, the most expensive Commonwealth Games ever (compared to Manchester 2002 - approx. US$ 14.63 million, and Melbourne 2006 - approx. US$ 1 billion)”. The source of this data is not indicated – but we should assume or hope that the Ministry of Tourism is confident about the source and reliability of

its data. Interestingly it seems to be the only government Ministry that indicates a budget estimation of this order. Civil society organisations in a watchdog role have also been making their own assessments of the expenditure attributable to the CWG 2010. A report by Housing and Land Rights Network (HLRN),21 provides an excellent analysis of the increase in budgetary costs, the allocations and financing of the Games and its likely financial legacy. It is evident that the budgets were made without serious analysis, and in feeding this seemingly


insatiable beast, funds from critical social sector spending – health, schooling, housing and even funds from the Special Component Plan meant exclusively for welfare of scheduled castes have been diverted. Dunu Roy, Director of Hazards Centre, estimates that the total expenditure taking all infrastructure projects into account is likely closer to Rs. 80,000 crore.22 In its 2003 bid document, the IOA estimated a surplus of 45.58 million USD (205 crore rupees). (This holds, of course, only for the operating expenditure; it doesn’t factor in the hefty expenses on infrastructure or security, which go into the government’s books. By August 2009 (but even earlier in the CAG report of July 2009 which was less publicised), came the news that the Games would be “revenueneutral”—that its operating expenditure would exactly equal its revenue. Now both operating expense and revenue estimates have ballooned, to Rs. 1,620 crore and Rs. 1,708 crore, respectively. By focussing only on the operating costs of running the games a case of a subtle “manufacturing consent” is created as it leads to the misconception among citizens that this is indeed the size of the CWG budgets and expenditure. In fact in response to a Parliament Question as recent as March 2010 “People paying for CWG” 23 asking if a) is it a fact that people are made to pay for the CWG b) should the Government not have thought of the poor people before agreeing to host the CWG, and c) what was the expenditure incurred so far on the infrastructure for the Games; the MYAS responded as follows: “For conduct of the Games funds are being provided as loan, which are to be recouped from revenues generated by the Games. The sports and other infrastructure which are being funded by

Budget - 500 crores? my daily wage = Rs. 100 & they still can’t pay me?

the Government will have lasting legacy value. The Government took a considered decision for holding the Commonwealth Games. An amount of Rs. 2260.35 crore has been incurred on sports infrastructure by the concerned agencies.” The answer is not just misleading but can also be termed as incorrect. There have been a large number of questions raised in both houses of Parliament on an ongoing basis about the budgets, their escalation and where the funds allocation is intended from. In response to a Parliament Question24 on the Government’s initial estimate, the increased amount at present, and whether the CAG is conducting an audit, the MYAS’s response in February 2010 is “On the basis of the projection by the IOA a figure of 665 crore had been estimated


in September 2003 for staging the Games in India. The current estimated budget for holding the Games including construction of venues, preparation of teams, conduct of Games and other expenditure is 10445 crores”. The Minister of State confirmed a CAG audit. Unfortunately the responses of the MYAS have been merely to provide “information” of current status and there does not seem to have been a significant debate on the appropriateness of these escalations or the wisdom of the Government to have underwritten all escalations.

Recovering Costs & Returns on Investment
n May 2003 the position of the OC was that it would require no more than a “loan” of USD 115 million (517 crore) of public money — all of which would be reimbursed to the exchequer from ticket sale proceeds, sponsorships and advertisements. This loan is now 1620 crores which is returnable by 31 May 2011. The OC has made repeated requests for concessions and waivers of various sorts, which has prompted an official in the Finance Ministry to exclaim “The OC is behaving like a spoilt child, coming up with some new demand every other day. The fact is it can’t foresee its requirements. It shows a lack of planning”.25 Among the concessions being demanded are, the 10% luxury taxes on hotel rooms for participants, officials and media rights holders being waived (Rs 30 crore)26, waiving off 12.5 per cent value added tax (VAT) on all purchases made for the CWG, and the waiving off nearly Rs 50 crore to be charged as entertainment tax on match tickets during the actual competition and test events. 574 Delhi Transport Corporation buses are being supplied for free of cost during the Games in October, and the OC has requested the same free buses for participants and organisers during test events that have already begun.27 The citizens of Delhi however have been subjected to a “growth-oriented budget for the games”, as Delhi’s finance minister Ashok Kumar Walia, presenting the Delhi State budget in March 2010, put it.28 In Chief Minister Sheila Dixit’s words, “There has been a lot of developmental work in the city and there is a lot more to happen. A lot more money is needed for that and the government has no option but to slightly burden the people to incur the losses.”29


The Ministry of Tourism commissioned study rather soberly reflects on the need for caution in investing in sports infrastructure.30 “Although there are a lot of benefits of hosting such an international sports event, challenges associated with it are many. Mainly these challenges are infrastructure requirement particularly transport and accommodation. The investment requirement for such events is huge and gestation period is time-bound. Further, demand for most utilities created for huge special events is only for a short period (a month). These conditions make the entrepreneurs conscious (sic perhaps they meant cautious?) of investments in this area.” Estimates are that the Delhi Government will contribute its estimated savings of Rs. 170 crore from the withdrawal of LPG subsidy and the Rs. 805 crore from the increase in tax on CNG and diesel. According to Dunu Roy of the Hazards Centre, ‘the OC proclaims that it has already earned about Rs 270 crore from television rights. This impressive figure is less than 1 per cent of the current cost. Other incomes brandished are Rs. 960 crore from sponsorship receipts, Rs. 100 crore each from ticketing and donations, and Rs. 50 crore from licensed merchandise - so munificent that they barely cross 4 per cent of investment - and this too has been exempted from tax”.31 According to media reports, sponsorship deals have only earned the OC Rs. 143 crore in cash from five sponsors Air India, NTPC, Hero Honda, Central Bank of India, and Coca Cola, and another 60 crore in kind. The sponsors have been brought in by Australian firm Sport Marketing and Management Private Limited (SMAM), engaged for this purpose. SMAM is to get between 20 and 25 % of the deal as commission; leaving roughly Rs. 107.25 crore of the Rs. 143 crores with the OC. The Indian Railway has independently promised Rs.100 crore.32 SMAM was a consultant at the 2002 Manchester Games and 2006 Melbourne Games too. Mr. Kalmadi has admitted that both Melbourne and Manchester Games did not get many multinational sponsors, which suggests that the OC may also lose out on that front.33 In response dated 21st June 2010, to an RTI34, the OC informs that 1.7 million tickets are being printed for the CWG, from which it expects to gain a revenue Rs. 70 crore and that 20,000 tickets were already sold. Newspapers however, reported


that organisers expect to sell around 17 lakh tickets in all, with earnings hovering around the Rs 60 crore figure.

Legacy for Whom?
ith respect to the legacy of the Games, the CAG Report35 is particularly indicting on the lack of legacy planning for the sports infrastructure. “OC has not developed a comprehensive legacy plan for the overall legacy and long-term impact of the Games. By contrast, the legacy plan for CWG-2014 at Glasgow is already ready, and the plan for CWG-2006 at Melbourne was finalised three years before the games, in 2003. Further, the Sports Authority of India (SAI) had not taken effective steps for legacy planning for utilisation, operation and maintenance of its five stadiums (to be renovated at a cost of Rs. 2475 crore). While a PPP model was envisaged in 2006, this is yet to materialise. There is a risk that the sporting infrastructure created through substantial investments may not be fully exploited after the Games”. It seems that the idea of “legacy” as far as the Delhi Commonwealth Games go, is an afterthought at best. CAG investigations prompted the SAI to state that it would shortly engage a Transaction Advisor to develop a Business Plan as MoUs have not been made with semi-governmental and non-governmental venue owners for legacy aspects of the venues and possible revenue sharing arrangements. A significant part of the expenses are on sporting facilities. However, who would these sporting facilities benefit? World class facilities are beyond the need of the majority, besides it can be expected that high membership/entry fees required for the upkeep of facilities would make it an unviable option for low income groups. Thus while a privileged few might use these facilities beyond the Games, the cost for its upkeep would be the responsibility of the State. Degeneration of world-class sport facilities after a mega-sporting event is not uncommon. Stadium Australia, the centrepiece of the sports park constructed for the Sydney 2000 Olympics has not found a sustainable use, as four years later, the stadium incurred operating losses of AUD $11.1


million (Rs. 44.4 crores).36 The total subsidies were AUD $ 46 million (Rs.184 crores) annually for unprofitable Olympic venues. Similarly, Munich’s Olympic Park shows annual losses of more than US $30 million37 (Rs. 135 crores). The infrastructure developed for the Asian Games held in Delhi in 1982, saw shoddy maintenance as well. The Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium houses other offices which have little to do with sports, for instance, the National Environment Appellate Authority and the National Commission for De-notified, Nomadic and Semi-nomadic Tribes, who have moved out of the stadium recently, to allow for its renovation for the CWG 2010.There is no reason to expect sporting facilities created for CWG 2010 to be maintained any better or meet a different fate. Going by an interview with Rahul Bhatnagar, Joint Secretary, MYAS,38 there is awareness that the upkeep of sporting facilities is a challenge, and that they are rarely used to full capacity after the games. For instance, the Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, built in time for the Asian games 1982, was reportedly used to full capacity only on one occasion, thereafter, during an India-Pakistan cricket match. For the CWG, right from the design stage, stadia are being designed for optimal use, with attempts not to lose sight of the main purpose of the stadia. The venue for weight-lifting is being designed such that it can double up as an auditorium for concerts in future, and ‘corporate boxes’ are also being introduced in stadiums. There is also recognition that for a school to use the stadia, the rental will have to be heavily subsidised. However, in order not to lose sight of the main purpose of constructing a stadia, revenue and maintenance details being worked upon for the upkeep of stadia is to include details of time-share for sports and other non-sport activities. On inquiry about the economic legacy of the Games, and whether there have been economic impact studies, the MYAS believes that the OC has undertaken them, but Mr. Bhatnagar hadn’t seen it. Neither had the former Sports Mr. Aiyar, seen the economic impact studies and wasn’t entirely sure if it existed.39 On an appeal filed by EQUATIONS representative to its RTI application (due to the grossly inadequate responses to our RTI applications) to the OC asking if any economic impact studies were done prior to and planned post Games, we were asked to present our case in person. In discussions with the Appellate Authority


(speaking order)40 the Organising Committee claims it has no idea if any economic impact study was done before or will be done subsequent to the Games. That cost recovery will be an uphill task was always suspected and this is now increasingly clear. It is also quite clear that it is the ordinary citizens, who will carry the burden through increased taxes over many years. It seems the show must go on, whatever the cost.

End Notes See Annexure 2: The Right to Information Mani Shankar Aiyar, interview See Annexure 2: The Right to Information Commonwealth Games Federation (2003) See, data retrieved January 2010 “India to host 2010 Commonwealth Games”, The Hindu, 15th November 2003 stories/2003111507551800.htm, data retrieved January 2010 8. HLRN (2010), “The 2010 Commonwealth Games: Whose Wealth? Whose Commons?” asp?catid=2&id=47. 9. Mani Shankar Aiyar, interview 10. India’s Bid CWG2010, 11. Commonwealth Games Federation (2003) 12. “India to host 2010 Commonwealth Games” The Hindu; 15th November 2003, stories/2003111507551800.htm, data retrieved January 2010 13. Rajya Sabha, Q No 2007 to the MYAS and responded to on 19th December 2003 14. Nevatia S and Ravindran S, “Has the city lost its priorities in the rush for cosmetic nirvana?” Outlook; 12th April 2010, http://www. article.aspx?264893, data retrieved July 2010 15. HLRN 2010: Fact Sheet 4. The Social Legacy of the Games: Who Gains? Who Loses. Pg 5 refers to the Lt. Governor of Delhi admitting that the 1982 Asian Games Village was a mistake and that the 2010 Village should be used as a hostel. 16. See Annexure 2: The Right to Information 17. Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2009) “A Report on the Preparedness for the XIX Commonwealth Games, 2010”, http://www., data retrieved January 2010. 18. The section on Finance in the eloquent and voluble 187 page Bid Document submitted by India is a compact 8 pages inclusive of annexures (pgs 172-178). 19. In response to Parliament Question Rajya Sabha Q no 890 responded on 04th March 2010, MYAS confirms that the budget submitted by the OC in November 2005 was approved by the government only in April 2007. The time taken it is claimed was on account of revision in the budget and its appraisal. 20. Ministry of Tourism (2009) “Report of the Ministry of Tourism: Assessment of Number of Tourists Expected to Visit Delhi during Commonwealth Games 2010 and Requirement of Rooms for Them”, See Surveys and Studies. 21. HLRN (2010) Fact Sheet 3. The Economics of the Games: Necessary Expenditure? Wasteful Extravagance? 22. Sharma, G., “Commonwealth Games Hurt the Commons”, 17th May 2010,, data retrieved June 2010 23. Rajya Sabha, Q No 3064, MYAS, answered on 22nd April 2010 24. Rajya Sabha, Q No 426 to the MYAS answered on 25th February 2010 25. Bajpai, R., “Games panel whims make Delhi whine” Yahoo! News; 6th March 2010,, data retrieved March 2010. 26. CWG: Delhi govt grants tax exemption,; 4th January 2010, data retrieved July 2010. 27. Bajpai, R., “Games panel whims make Delhi whine”, Yahoo News; 6th March 2010 28. “To Pay for the Games” Hindustan Times; 23rd March, 2010,, data retrieved March 2010 29. “People Burdened due to CWG expenses: Dikshit”, Thaindian News; 22nd March 2010, people-burdened-due-to-cwg-expenses-dikshit_100338009.html, data retrieved March 2010 30. Ministry of Tourism (2009) 31. Roy, D., “Nothing Common about this Wealth”, Hardnews; 24th March 2010,, data retrieved April 2010 32. “Where are the sponsors?: CWG OC Struggling To Raise Rs 1,600 Crore To Repay Loan” Times of India; 2nd June 2010, http://lite.epaper. format=&publabel=TOI, data retrieved June 2010 33. “Where are the sponsors?: CWG OC Struggling To Raise Rs 1,600 Crore To Repay Loan” Times of India; 2nd June 2010 34. See Annexure 2: The Right to Information 35. Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2009), page 59 36. Conversion used: AUD $1 = Rs. 40 37. Wildsmith, J. and Bradfield, M. (2007) 38. Rahul Bhatnagar, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 2nd March, 2010 39. Mani Shankar Aiyar, interview 40. See Annexure 2: The Right to Information 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.



pinning hopes, uncovering myths


Section III


olstering the tourism industry forms a large part of the Government’s agenda in the hosting of the Commonwealth Games. Post the Mumbai attacks and the global economic slump, the recovery phase in tourism has only just begun.1 Kumari Selja, Union Minister for Tourism, Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation is “quite positive that the country’s individual economic upturn and Commonwealth Games will pull India out of the dip in foreign tourist arrivals faster than others”.2 Much hope is pinned on the CWG 2010 to do its magic and this section examines the basis and implications of coupling mega sports events and tourism.



s the CWG serves as a platform; and the world class city, the medium, to showcase India to the world, tourists are no longer passive recipients of the underlying message, but are active vehicles that spread it: they arrive in India, highlighting that India has ‘arrived’.

infrastructure and connectivity, conservation and preservation of monument, hotel accommodation and human resource development etc. for making the event successful.” There are several assumptions throughout the report, many of which are unsubstantiated by evidence or analysis of any depth. Predominant are the assumptions about the number of foreign tourists expected for the Games (100000 tourists) and the shortfall of rooms which then follows at 30000 rooms. The report connects the CWG with the future flourishing of tourism in India and 10 million foreign tourists predicted for 2012. The report then goes on to castigate the lack of progress on infrastructure development, urges that Delhi be cleaned up and beautified, that all menace such as touts and encroachments be dealt with, and a no holds barred incentivisation be offered to private hotel developers in the form of single window clearances, tax incentives, land banks etc. What is stark in its absence is the lack of evidence for all these projections and conjectures which are treated like truths. The lack of attention to economic implications of spending of public money, the disregard for the common man and any negative consequences in our bending over backwards to make the foreign (read white) tourists feel safe and happy, is glaring. In fact the thought that the tourist could be domestic does not even seem to cross the mind of the Parliamentary Standing Committee!

The Ministry of Tourism commissioned study3 on assessment of tourists and room requirements has the following analysis of tourism impact from mega sports events • • • • • “The tourism impact from the mega games come from four main sources: Increased media profile attracts visitors before, during and after the Games. Training and holding camps for elite teams. Increased number of international competitions in India. Existing competitions will attract higher numbers of athletes.”

This is a rather vague and disappointing analysis and like many conclusions in the MoT Report has little basis as substantiation. It does not lend itself to any strategies about how tourism should or will be enhanced because of hosting the CWG. The key element in the Ministry’s vision for tourism is developing infrastructure and this is eagerly supported by no less a body than the Department related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport Tourism and Culture (PSC).4 In its 149th Report appropriately titled ‘Development of Tourism Infrastructure and Amenities for the Commonwealth Games 2010’, released in February 2009 and adopted in March 2009, the PSC notes “As the Commonwealth Games is expected to have large scale impact on India’s tourism sector, the Committee decided to take stock of the preparedness and efforts of the Government and various stakeholders for providing the tourists all the facilities including infrastructure development, transport

Guessing Game: Arriving at the Numbers
he Ministry of Tourism’s commissioned study on tourist arrivals and room requirement for the CWG was prepared by the Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM) Gwalior and released in the year 2009, titled “Assessment of Number of Tourists Expected to Visit Delhi during Commonwealth Games 2010 and Requirement of Rooms for Them.”



We go into a detailed critique of this study as it seems to be sole basis of the MoT and PSCs data on number of tourists and number of rooms required for the Games. The study notes that beyond being a leisure pursuit, sports is a big industry. Sports tourism is a key component of the huge economic impact of hosting a major event like a World Cup or an Olympics. The business of sports and tourism is a complex industry, which is difficult to quantify completely. But it is so lucrative that countries, travel companies, tourist boards and the whole world of sports are keen to take benefit of it.5 Focusing on the glamour that an event like the CWG brings with it for the “brand image” of the country, and for industry in particular, the report does not look at any of the effects of a mega event on different sections of society. The study is marginally critical about the claims of a boost in tourism and the Games attracting several visitors from across the globe. It notes three trends of movement in and out of the city as a result of the Games: 1. Would-be-tourists put off by the Games, termed “avoiders” under the influence of the crowding out effect. (for instance 66% of the Danish tourists avoided the Lillehammer region during the Olympics in 1994, and similarly the Costa Brava region was affected by the 1992 Barcelona Games, and theme park hotel owners in Los Angeles also shared similar experiences in 1984) 2. Crowding out of citizens as in Sydney 2000 with 30% of its population having no interest in the Games, and 60% of those intending to leave had chosen locations abroad and 3. Visitors on limited budgets spend their money on the Games and not local tourist attractions, for instance Los Angeles saw a 30-50% dip in visitors at local tourist attractions during the Games, and in Sydney, attractions unrelated to the Games also saw a dip in attendance figures. Having noted these broadly, the study does not engage with these issues in any substantive way further in its analysis and conclusions. The MoTs report is clearly problematic on several counts. But what is most worrying about the study is its selective choice of data, incorrect data and in some cases inadequate reliance on very limited data, in arriving at conclusions thus raising

serious questions on the robustness of its research methods and conclusions. There is very little referencing of data, little reliance on credible studies on links between mega events and tourism (like ETOA), and surprisingly little reliance on the Ministry of Tourism published official statistics. Page 3 refers to International Passenger Survey 2009 of MoT. MoT6 has confirmed to us that the International Passenger Survey 2009 is not finalised and the last International Passenger Survey published by the MoT was in 2003. An important document, the Twenty Years Tourism Perspective Plan for Delhi7, commissioned by the MoT and published in 2003 has also not been considered. In terms of methodology – what is baffling is while the study goes into a convoluted arriving at CGAR (compounded annual growth rate) of tourist patterns of earlier games locations to arrive at estimates for tourist arrivals; it chooses data of some games and rejects others. It uses only Manchester 2002 and Melbourne 2006 tourist arrival data. It does not consider the only other Asian country to host CWG viz. Malaysia (Kuala Lampur) (1998) or the recent Olympics in Beijing 2008 attributing their negative results to economic recession, virus outbreak and typical foreign policies, disregarding them as aberrations from the norm instead of acknowledging them as possible inconvenient truths. The assumption seems to be that Delhi 2010 will be miraculously indemnified or immune from all extraneous negative factors. The study’s silence on a worst-case scenario for CWG 2010 in Delhi, and possibilities of a negative growth rate are significant lacunae. India displaying low growth post-games is a possibility that should have been given a fair chance, given that the effects of the economic slowdown continue to be prevalent globally. With reduction in disposable incomes, trends in Foreign Tourist Arrivals (FTA) in India have shown a dip till recently. India has received a lot of bad press within the country and abroad with respect to the preparations for the Games itself, which is not very encouraging for the domestic or the foreign tourist. Last but not the least, fear of terrorist activities is also a significant factor that is expected to keep interested visitors at bay. The Indian Premier League cricket series in 2009 was shifted to South Africa after the 26/11 attack on Mumbai.


The study was published in 2009. One wonders why it did not procure actual figures for tourists arrival in the previous Commonwealth Games 1998, 2002, 2006 – actual tickets sold, actual spectators, rooms needed and additional rooms needed and occupancy. Between the MoT and the IOA surely there was the scope for access to such information from countries that hosted earlier Games? Instead it has chosen to remain with a set of theoretical estimations, based on selective optimistic data.8 Furthermore, the study does not consider the data for any Games organised in India – the Asian Games 1982 (which reportedly had an international tourist arrival of 200 and hotel rooms going vacant in spite of being a “grand success”), the Afro-Asian Games 2003 and the Commonwealth Youth Games 2008. This is a significant lacuna.

A subsequent chapter of the study includes a table on Foreign Tourist Arrivals (FTA) in India. It does not pay heed to the fact that India saw only a 0.69% growth in 1982, the year that the Asiad was held, which subsequently grew to 1.30 and the -8.52 in 1983 and 1984, which doesn’t indicate much that the Asian Games could have done for improving the tourist potential in the country. In fact the highpoint of that decade came only in 1989 with a growth rate of 13.33, which was first surpassed only as recently as 2005, with a 13.33% growth. The heart of the report seems to be a table on page 4/ page 51 which we reproduce below and add to it a column with our comments and observations, in order to point out what we believe are serious inconsistencies in logic.

Assessment of Number of Hotel Rooms required for CWG 2010
Normal visitors 1 2 Expected number of tourists in Delhi during 12 days period of 3-14 October 2008 Growth rate of tourists in 2009 Expected number of tourists in Delhi during 12 days period of 3-14 October 2009 based on normal growth Normal growth rate of tourists in 2010 3 4 5 6 Additional growth rate of tourists due to CWG in 2010 Aversion effect Net growth rate of tourists in CWG 2010 Expected number of tourists in Delhi during 12 days period of 3-14 October 2010 No of tourists staying in official accommodation (not requiring hotel accommodation) No of tourists requiring accommodation 8 9 10 11 12 % of tourists staying with friends and relatives No of tourists requiring hotel accommodation Estimated number of nights of stay Total no of bed nights required during CWG 2010 Average no of bed nights required per day during CWG 2010 Average no of rooms required per day during CWG 2010 (assuming 2 beds per room) 13.61% 69643 118617 61300 0.00% 61300 8.3% 5.31% 10.7% 0 33.33% 11.88% 21137 139754 See note 4 11.88% See note 2 See note 3 10.7%

For Games Sub total (domestic) 145185 10.7% 160720 Total

EQUATIONS comments
See note 1


10000 59643 11.22% 52951 9 476559 39713 118617 2.51 297729 24811 21137 9 190233 15853 487962 40664 964521 80377 139754 See note 5 See note 6 See note 7








Note 1: A serious flaw is that foreign visitors have not been bifurcated into the two categories – for games and normal visitors. This has an implication on two aspects that come up later in this table – viz. length of stay and aversion factor. The study has not dwelled on the crucial issue of the profile of international visitors and why they visit India. For instance after the US and the UK, the largest number of international visitors to India are from Bangladesh. It is likely that business and medical treatment are high on their list of reasons to visit Delhi and sports linked tourism is low. Being a noncommonwealth country, tourists from the US are likely to drop in the period of the Games. While acknowledging that only 41% of tourists to India are from Commonwealth countries (of which the UK and Bangladesh together comprise 61%), the analysis completely fails to consider motivations of these tourists. Note 2: CGAR and y-t-y growth rate taken only for Melbourne and Manchester (5.31 above normal growth) for foreign tourists. For domestic tourists only Melbourne is considered (11.88 above normal growth) and even Manchester data is dropped! Note 3: The aversion effect has been taken only for domestic tourists. There is no reason to believe that the aversion effect does not apply to foreign tourists. In fact if one goes by the data on foreign tourists profile,9 it is clear that foreign tourists visit India primarily for sightseeing, cultural activities and shopping. In fact those visiting for sports linked reasons such as participatory sports are very few. Thus it is logical to assume that a large percentage of those visiting for heritage etc – are likely to avoid Delhi during this period. Note 4: The logic by which the figure 21137 is arrived at is unclear to us. Note 5: Again it is illogical to assume that domestic tourists will not stay with relatives and friends. Note 6: Tourist profile and nature of accommodation: Further more it is assumed that all tourists domestic and international will stay in starred accommodation. A major flaw again in this analysis is not to take into account the differentiated nature of type of accommodation. The 20 year Perspective Plan and the International Passenger Survey 2003 give a different picture.10

Note 7: Having not distinguished between visitors coming as spectators for the games and other “normal visitors” it assumes that all international visitors will stay 9 nights. This does not take into account therefore that the average stay for international visitors is 3 days. Furthermore the study suddenly relies solely on a 1998 study forecasting the duration of stay of spectators for the Sydney Olympics 2000 as 75% of the duration of the Games. With an amazing leap of faith it concludes based solely on that one piece of forecasted research (not even actual data!), that spectators to CWG 2010 will also stay for 75% of the duration of the Games viz. for 9 days. That Delhi is not Manchester or Melbourne or Sydney is a factor that seems to not merit any consideration whatsoever. The study (on page 60 says) “The hotel occupancy rate during Manchester Commonwealth Games was 82% while during Melbourne Commonwealth Games it was 82.8%. It is expected that the hotel occupancy during the Commonwealth Games will be nearly about 85%, which is 11% more than the average hotel occupancy for Delhi hotels”. The basis of this assumption again is quite unclear. Also one can logically assume that occupancy is a resultant factor and not a predictive factor. Occupancy is based on number of rooms vs. number of tourists (supply and demand) and it seems illogical again to predict number of rooms required based on assumed occupancy – a case of putting the cart before the horse. The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM) also undertook a study on the tourist arrivals for the CWG 2010, and this has been widely reported in the media. According to media releases, their Forecast Paper titled “Aftermath of CWG2010”, India will see 10 million international foreign tourists in 2010, of which one million of these tourists will be in India during the Games period. An additional four million tourists during the Games period are expected to be domestic tourists.11 Also, “(the) Commonwealth Games 2010 are likely to push India’s FEE through tourism alone in 2010 to an estimated level of over USD 16915 million (Rs. 76000 crores), as these are expected to grow at cumulative rate of 20 per cent in next two years.12 Repeated efforts at requesting ASSOCHAM to make available a copy of their report has been


of no avail. We are therefore unable to judge the methodology used in their study or the accuracy of these projections, and have had to rely only on their press releases and media reports. Luckily the Ministry of Tourism has chosen to work with the lower figure of one lakh foreign tourist arrivals for the Games and not ASSOCHAMs one million, otherwise one can imagine the level of frenzy about construction of hotel rooms, as is evident in the next section. However, the serious question about the wisdom of the Ministry of relying on one study whose methodology, data and analysis are all weak to project a crucial number of tourists and rooms required remains unanswered. In several Parliament Questions seeking information on the number of tourists expected, the Ministry has given a consistent response that its estimate is 1,00,000 tourists (requiring 40,000 rooms) and adds that 90,000 spectators were present at Melbourne.

and State Governments for implementation of single window clearance system for tourism projects in order to encourage the private players to build hotels in the country. To remove the fear of not getting the business after the games, the Government may continue to grant the tax incentives/benefits to the hotel sector.” In addition, provisions for a waiving of certain statutory clearances for hotels, prior to construction (beginning from the ground level, and extended to the first level) was made, allowing clearances to be sought post the construction, with a rider that if any agency asked for a radical change, the developer would have to comply, and therefore constructions without prior clearances were at the developers” risk.15 Allowing commercial activity in the lower floors of hotels was also introduced with the Games in mind, adding to the strategies to facilitate the growth of hotels to meet the demand for rooms.16 The Industry’s views on supply and demand vary. Confirming that supply of rooms has outstripped demand in India Naresh Chandnani, Vice-President - Sales, IHHR Hospitality says that “Supply has already gone up by 30-40 per cent in some cities and we must be prepared to deal with the fact that prices will not be what they were two years ago. Supply has outstripped demand and price rationalisation has happened, which is keeping a check on room rates.”17 Sundeep Jain, executive vice-president, Jones Langlasalle Hotels, a hotel advisory group opines that “The Commonwealth Games would have an impact on the hospitality industry, but it would be temporary. We are not seeing the market coming back to the 2007 level anytime soon.”18 On the danger of rooms going unoccupied, some sources within the hospitality industry believe that it might be a blessing – as it will result in hotels (especially in the luxury segment) being forced to lower their tariffs, making Delhi/India a more affordable destination in the long run. For periodic reviews the Ministry of Tourism set up a task force to take stock of rooms in the “definite” and “likely” categories. However, with a shortage of rooms expected, the Ministry has been exploring alternative accommodation arrangements which include the Incredible India Bed and Breakfast Scheme with a target of 3000, upgrading and using 3250 beds hostel room facilities from

The Obsession with Hotel Rooms
he Ministry of Tourism has been preoccupied with making room for the 100,000 (foreign) visitors, expected to show up at Delhi’s doorstep during the Commonwealth Games. Keeping tabs on the status of the number of hotels and rooms and what the shortfall might be is an obsession with the Ministry with regular updates on the status of rooms, and creative strategies being evolved to tide over the impending crisis! With a view to encourage development of hotel accommodation for the forthcoming Commonwealth Games 2010, a five year tax holiday under Section 80-ID (1) of the Income Tax Act was announced in the budget of 2007-08 for new hotels of two, three and four star category and convention centres coming up between 1st April 2007 to 31st March 2010 in the National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCT) and the districts of Faridabad, Gurgaon, Gautam Budh Nagar and Ghaziabad (National Capital Region NCR). This was extended to 31st July 2010.13 A recent media article indicated that the tax relaxation will continue for five years.14 In fact the Parliamentary Standing Committee went even further with recommendations of further liberalisation and incentives “The Committee also urges the Ministry to impress upon the Central



Delhi University and other educational institutions, upgrading 11,000 guest houses in Delhi, using 5500 residential flats of the DDA to be furnished and operated by ITDC,19 and setting up of luxury tents in Surajkund in Faridabad and Dondahera near the National Highway-8 where the target is to house 700 guests.20 The Incredible India Bed and Breakfast (B&B) scheme has been aggressively advertised in an attempt to reach the 3000 target. In May 2009, there were only 800 registrations, (although India’s bid document claims 1472 were registered by 2003) but by June 2010, there were 2,007 rooms in the NCR of Delhi (1,230 rooms in Delhi and 777 rooms in the NCR ie. Gurgaon, Faridabad, Noida, Greater Noida and Ghaziabad). The idea is that foreign tourists staying with Indian families can experience their culture, cuisine, and way of life. In efforts to meet the target, resident welfare associations have also been recruited to promote the concept through door-to-door campaigning with promotional pamphlets and material, in addition to being advertised in newspapers and bus kiosks.21 While B&Bs can continue post-Games, farmhouses that have expressed an interest in the scheme have had the scheme extended to them, but only for the period of the Commonwealth Games.22 Apart from the fact that all B&Bs do not exude the “family feel” and needn’t particularly turn into an avenue for the woman of the house to take charge and earn an income, B&Bs are themselves not doing very well, and are not seeing many guests. The Bed and Breakfast Establishment Guidelines for Approval and Registration, B&Bs are classified into two categories – gold and silver. The guidelines indicate what the size of the room, toilets should be, it also insists on air conditioners and heating, refrigerators in the room, a lounge with adequate seating in the lobby area and sufficient parking with adequate road width, to name a few. Thus, any B&B setting up would have to take on minimum investments irrespective of approval being granted or denied. While listed and registered B&Bs have their share of problems, there have also been some would-be-B&Bs, especially in the lesser developed parts of the city, where people spruced up their homes but did not receive approval from Delhi Tourism on various grounds related to facilities provided, and the possibly shabby approach roads. According to activist Kalyani MenonSen,23 there were middle class and lower middle class applicants who took loans to meet several

guidelines, but did not receive the approval of the classification committee to get listed as a B&B. A group of unsuccessful applicants even petitioned the Chief Minister. The sops being offered to the high end section of the accommodation sector angered the large number of low budget and “unclassified” hotels in areas like Karol Bagh and Paharganj that are extremely popular with backpacking and low budget tourists and account for over 30000 low budget rooms. In an interesting twist to the accommodation tale, in May 2010 they threatened to boycott the CWG, if the government did not offer them any help. “All we are telling the government is that when they can spend Rs 140 crore to upgrade and renovate the Ashoka Hotel, why can’t they help the hotels here, which will be hosting a majority of the visitors to the city,” said Arun Gupta, secretary general of the Delhi Hotel Mahasangh.24 Seemingly in response to this pressure the MoT scrambled to announce (on 26th May 2010) an “Interest Subsidy Scheme for the Upgradation of Guest Houses” in the NCT of Delhi.25 The scheme would be applicable only to licensed guest houses as per the guidelines of the Ministry, which would provide Interest Subsidy on loan of maximum Rs. 2 lakh per room basis subject to an upper limit of Rs. 60 lakh per Guest House. Also linking with the Commonwealth Games 2010, the subsidy is applicable for loans that are sanctioned and first instalment released by 31st July 2010 and only if the upgradation work is completed by 20th September 2010. When the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) dragged its feet on the process of issuing of licences to guest houses in Delhi, the MoT had to push the MCD to do the needful. An office bearer of the Guest House Owners’ Association of Delhi said that in the absence of licence renewals, majority of the guest houses will not be able to avail the loans and interest subsidy scheme for upgradation of guest houses. Around 90 per cent of the licensed guest houses could not renew their licences.26 In the latest development of this fast changing scenario the Delhi Hotel & Restaurant Owners decided not to apply for the Delhi state approval and demanded approval from the MoT. Guest house owners fear that they will be deprived of all the benefits of India Tourism’s overseas promotional programmes, if they accept the Delhi state approval.27


Rea(i)lty Scam?
n the obsession with shortage of rooms the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture came up with some rather bizarre suggestions: “To meet the requirement of hotel accommodations we have to look for hotel accommodations beyond Delhi and NCR. In such a situation cities like Agra, Jaipur, Udaipur, Jodhpur, Khajuraho can serve as alternative. It appears to be a difficult task, but not impossible. There is need to increase the speed of trains running between Delhi and Agra and Delhi and Jaipur. There should be direct air connectivity to and from Delhi to these cities where tourists can stay and come to Delhi to enjoy game events without much loss of time. Even other cities like Mumbai and Kolkata may be sensitized to accommodate the tourist pressure during Commonwealth Games.”28 One can only hope that the Committee is not serious in suggesting that spectators for the Games events stayed in Khajuraho and Udaipur and fly in every day! As the Committee itself points out – it is difficult but not impossible! Notwithstanding all this hyperactivity and hyperbole, it may be useful to dig deeper and understand some of the dynamics from the perspective of real estate. As per the CAG report, India’s bid document in 2003 estimated 30000 spectators for the Games,29 but thanks to the MoT study a “more refined assessment” upwards to 100000 has been made, which translates to 40000 rooms. Thus, after considering the already available 11,000 rooms of hotel accommodation in Delhi and NCR, an additional requirement of about 30,000 rooms for tourists and visitors was projected”. India’s bid document had this to say in 2003, “Delhi very easily will be offer much more accommodation than is considered appropriate to cope with the anticipated inflow for the 2010 CWG. It assessed a total of 7927 rooms in the starred category.30 A few months later the GEC report mentioned “A plentiful supply of good hotel rooms exist. Delhi boasts of 9000 first class hotels which will meet the accommodation needs of the Commonwealth Games Family.31 However this sense of confidence changed dramatically a few years later when the figure of 40000 rooms began to do the rounds. The first


mention that we could trace of the 40000 figure seems to be in February 2007, when Ambika Soni (then) Minister of Tourism and Culture responded to a Parliament Question32 on “Action Plan for CWG.” Asked if: 1. An assessment of number of tourists expected in the NCT for the CWG was made and if 2. An assessment of hotel rooms required was made. The Minister’s response is surprising: 1. No estimate has been made regarding the number of tourists expected to arrive in the National Capital Territory of Delhi during the Commonwealth Games 2010. However, 90000 visitors visited Melbourne during the Melbourne Games. 2. Yes, Sir. The Ministry of Tourism has assessed that the city of Delhi will require 30,000 hotel rooms and a total of approx. 40000 rooms in the NCR to meet the requirement of the CWG 2010. It is quite incomprehensible how the hotel rooms required could be so confidently assessed at 40000, when the number of tourists expected to arrive was not estimated. What is also striking that two years later in 2009 the study commissioned by the Ministry of Tourism on the number of tourists estimated and therefore number of rooms required arrived providentially at exactly the same figure of 40000 rooms. The MoT certainly set into motion the process of augmenting hotel accommodation with the key players being various landowning agencies such as DDA, DIAL, DMRC, Governments of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, (Noida, Gaziabad, Gurgaon) and the Railways. Of these the largest expectation was 9000 rooms from Haryana and 7000 rooms through the DDA route. According to the CAG report “DDA had auctioned 6 sites for 650 rooms (even before this responsibility was assigned to DDA in January 2006) and another 33 sites for 5369 rooms by March 2008. On 28th April 2010 in response to a Parliament Question33 on “Allotment of Land for Hotels” the Minister of State for Urban Development confirmed that out of 39 hotels where land was allotted by DDA only 4 had completed construction. In 12 there


was substantial progress, in 10 some progress and on 13 no progress at all. Some months prior to this, on 30th November 2009 the Ministry of Tourism admitted34 that 20 hoteliers were considered to have “opted out” of the CWG linked construction project. The reasons attributed are the global economic crisis of end 2008 and clearances that were required from too many different agencies.35 The category of accommodation being built has not been specified in the various updates of the Ministry of Tourism – all rooms are treated as similar and not differentiated into starred and non-starred categories, and further within the starred category as budget, luxury and super luxury. However given the fact that the tax holiday was for hotels in the one to four star category, it is likely that all these DDA sites were intended for starred hotels. However it is the budget, mid-range range and lower end hotels that the shortage exists, and this is the area where the least attention is being paid. In Urban Designer K.T Ravindran’s36 opinion, many young people from different States, and schools and college groups will come to Delhi for the Games, but low-cost accommodation has not been given much attention in the run up to the Games.37 In fact, in the response to a Parliament Question38 specifically on “Yatri Niwas Type Hotels” answered on 17th December 2009 as to (a) whether Government propose to build Yatri Niwas type hotels before the Commonwealth Games, 2010; (b) if so, details thereof with approximate rooms likely to be constructed. The response from Kumari Selja, Minister of Tourism was a clear and simple “No”. The question of approximate rooms likely to be constructed in this category, therefore, as per the response, did not arise. The auctioning of sites for hotel development by DDA has been instrumental in playing havoc with real estate prices. A report “The Real Demand for Rooms”,39 by ECS Private Limited in March 2008, quotes Praveen Chugh, Chairman, Travel Agents Federation of India (TAFI) from the perspective of the industry, “rigid land use laws, skyrocketing real estate prices and lots of formalities have kept

the industry from building more hotels required to accommodate the swell in tourist arrivals. In the same tone, lands, which are sold through auctions and tenders, have mind-boggling rates that would justify only “seven-star” properties. The auctioning created an artificial demand, to increase the plot price that never existed.” K.T Ravindran opines that almost all hotels that are coming up in the luxury sector are a function of the way in which land is auctioned. He adds that Delhi’s Master Plan allowing for three or floor floors within a hotel for commercial activity becomes an added incentive to buy land at higher prices and enhances the auction value of the land.40 In an article analysing the scorching land deals in Delhi, MD of HVS India, a consulting firm focussing on the hotel industry, Manav Thadani points out, “Globally, the land cost in any hotel project is between 15-20 per cent and in India, it has been around 30-35 per cent. However, with the recent example of exorbitant prices being quoted in the bids, the land cost goes up to 70-75 per cent of the total project cost, which makes it unviable. This is pushing hoteliers towards the luxury segment rather than the budget category at these sites in order to get a swift return on investments.” Another cause for alarm he says is non-hoteliers buying land. “This is specially so in case of builders acquiring hotel plots. It is uncertain whether they want to convert the plot into a hotel or just multiply their investments. Some of these developers wish to sell the plots in order to multiply their investments. This is what will upset the industry as hotels need to be constructed and be operational before the Commonwealth Games 2010.” Thadani cautions that the government needs to get more serious about this. “There is a clause in the new auctions that does not allow second sale and penalty on not starting the construction by the agencies, which is comforting. The earlier auctions should also be brought under this,” he says. In around 18 plots auctioned by the DDA in the recent past, only four to five plots are under construction, which highlights the bleak picture. The DDA managed to earn as much as Rs 1.25 lakh per square metre and plots were sold for over three times the reserve price.41


It is increasingly clear that the “opportunity” that the CWG provided has been primarily used by real estate developers and builders to enter the hotel industry, catering to higher end clientele. It is evident that the auction for so many sites would not have happened were it not for the pressure put to accomplish 40000 rooms for the Games. However, barring the 4 out of 39 hotels that completed construction, the remaining 36 are sitting pretty on real estate, likely to be in prime locations in Delhi. In the normal course, as per the projections of the Twenty year Perspective plan for Tourism for Delhi, the gap in demand and supply of rooms in the starred category, keeping in view growth projections for tourist arrivals was a mere 2988 rooms.42 It would be interesting to figure out why the hotels built in neighbouring Haryana and Uttar Pradesh who were able to “deliver” rooms were not as hit by the global recession, which seems to have hit the ability of NCT of Delhi starred hotels sites in a particularly harsh way! It seems that this merits further investigation, as there is more here than meets the eye.

Haryana and Rajasthan should be provided central grants in order to meet the shortfall in hotel accommodation. In the wake of these suggestions, the hotels in these states have indeed received many sops and incentives to construct, expand and upgrade hotels. With respect to transport and connectivity, to ensure “seamless travel”, a one-time road tax system initiated by Ministry of Tourism and Ministry of Road Transport and Highways by Government of India, was suggested by the Parliamentary Standing Committee. Scheduled to be effective from December 2009, this allows commercial and tourist vehicles of registered tour operators on the Golden Triangle Tour of India to pay the road tax only once at the beginning of the trip, without having to pull over every time they enter a new state.43 The Committee also recommends that the Ministry of Railways increase the speed of the trains and double lining of rail line between Delhi and Jaipur. The Udaipur and Jaipur Airports are slated to function as International airports by the end of 2009, another recommendation of the Committee.44 To improve monument maintenance and other tourist attractions, the Ministry of Tourism has sanctioned tourism projects and released funds under the Central Financial Assistance Scheme for the “holistic development of the golden triangle. The Government of Uttar Pradesh is focused on arrangements for Agra as it expects one million tourists. (The Taj receives about 3.2 million tourists a year45 both foreign and domestic, so the basis for 1 million just during the CWG period is not clear at all). The PSC, noting the “long and arduous” journey between Delhi and Agra, and poor access roads to the Taj Mahal, urges that the six lane Taj Express way right from Noida and Greater Noida under construction is to be completed by the time the CWG commence46 and this is expected to reduce the travel time between Delhi and Agra by an hour. Easy ticketing procedures to gain entry to the Taj Mahal, and a relaxation of rules to allow for the viewing of the Taj Mahal by night, including viewing of the Taj Mahal from the other side of Yamuna, Mehtab Bagh where amenities for drinking water and toilet facilities are being sought. However, the Committee also recommends that a survey should

The Spill-Over
he “spill-over effect” is one of spin offs of getting the Commonwealth Games to Delhi as it is hoped that tourists who come all the way to India to watch the Games, will also want to see what the rest of India looks like. This is what the tourism industry looks forward to, to give it a leg up. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report, deals substantially with this aspect and the status of arrangements. The states that are gearing up for the anticipated “spill-over” tourists are primarily Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh, being most accessible from Delhi. A blanket suggestion of the Parliamentary Standing Committee with respect to accommodation has been to extend the tax incentives/benefits as provided to the hotels in the National Capital Region (NCR) of Delhi to the hotels in Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, including single window clearances for the hotel projects to private players in Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh who are interested in setting up of new hotels to facilitate the growth of the accommodation sector to tourists during the period of the Games. In addition, it suggests that the State Governments of Uttar Pradesh,



be conducted by the Government to ascertain the carrying capacity of the monument to protect it from being damaged by over crowding. In addition to these primary States, a spill over is also hoped for in Shimla, Mussoorie, Nainital, and Manali in Uttaranchal, Himachal Pradesh, and Jammu & Kashmir. Being promoted are also tourist destinations in Goa, Andaman and Nicobar, and Leh and Ladakh, and the Northeast as Indian travel agencies are also preparing specialized tour packages for the Commonwealth Games of 2010 for these destinations.47 Karnataka, Andhra, and Maharashtra are also laying the ground for potential “medical tourists” among the visitors for the CWG.48

However the official website of the Commonwealth Games has a very curious map for tourism destinations with largely two clusters in northern India (Delhi and surrounds – up to Bandhavgarh and Kanha), and then the next cluster in South India (starting with Bangalore and mostly Karnataka, Kerala and parts of Tamil Nadu). What is significant to note is what is absent – most of the strife torn parts of India have been “blanked out” in what seems to be an unconscious internal travel advisory or security warning for foreign tourists by the CWG OC. Thus Jammu and Kashmir, Central India – particularly Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, parts of Andhra Pradesh, and the entire North Eastern region are off the “destinations” map. One wonders if the Ministry of Tourism having delegated the organising of tours to the OC’s Games Travel Office, and the Ministry of Home Affairs have approved of this idea of “approved” destinations.

Map 1: Travel Destinations in India on official website of CWG 2010

Source: CWG Delhi 2010 Website (

Marketing the Games, Marketing India
he Ministry of Tourism has been allocated Rs. 250 crore for overseas marketing of the Commonwealth Games. The Delhi Government is similarly in charge of promoting tourism and the Commonwealth Games within India for which it was allocated Rs. 30 crore.49 The Commonwealth Games was the theme for the Indian Travel Pavilion at the World Travel Market held in London in November 2009, where the Tourism Ministry’s


“Incredible India” campaign won the World Travel Award 2009 for being the year’s best campaign as well.50 The Ministry of Tourism held an Incredible India Road Show in Johannesburg on 12th January 2010, to coincide with the passing of the Queen’s Baton to promote Commonwealth Games 2010.51 The Ministry of Tourism has also slated promotional shows between April and June 2010 in various capital cities abroad that include Toronto, Sydney,


Auckland, Singapore and Kuala Lumpur. During the period of the Games, “beauty cameras” are also being set up to showcase the city from a tourism perspective. Snapshots of the city taken by these cameras are expected to be aired during the transmission of the Games on domestic and international channels providing television coverage.52 BBC, CNN, Experience India Society have partnered with the Ministry of Tourism to promote Incredible India Campaign both in international and domestic markets through short films with the unifying thematic line “Only in India”.53 Marketing Incredible India abroad has gone hand in hand with giving tourists special incentives to visit India. A 50% waiver of visa fees for visitors from Commonwealth Nations has also been proposed, and the MoT is to bear the expense of the waiver.54 In another promotional exercise with cultural overtones, the OC CWG has joined hands with Society for Promotion of Indian Classical Music and Culture amongst Youth, better known as SPIC MACAY. The partnership with SPIC MACAY aims at spreading awareness of the Games across youth in educational events around India and mobilising their support and participation. 500 schools and colleges have been targeted in New Delhi and the NCR, where specially created material will be distributed, photo-exhibitions and short-films will be screened and Shera, the mascot will also be visiting campuses. Promotional messages are also to be read out during “Music in the Park” concerts. Dr. Kiran Seth, Founder SPIC MACAY has been quoted to have said “It is a matter of national pride that we ensure the success of the Games”. The Ministry of Tourism clearly sees promotion abroad and infrastructure development as its key roles. In fact it adroitly sidestepped a Parliamentary Question55 on why it did not focus on domestic promotion, by reiterating its allocated budget of Rs 250 crores for promotion abroad.

of the language barrier. Porters at railway stations are all set to adopt more aesthetic uniforms and become porter-cum-guides at the end of the training programme initiated for them by the Railway Ministry. In the first phase, 2800 porters have been “groomed” on historical places in and around Delhi; taxi and bus fares; venues of the Commonwealth Games; facilities in railway stations like wheelchairs, ATMs, STD/ISD booths, waiting halls and internet café.56 Similarly, around 8000 auto rickshaw drivers of Delhi have been compensated with Rs. 200 to attend a training program that will involve classes in yoga, life skills, first aid, spoken English and psychometric tests as an interesting perception from the Ministry of Tourism is that the image of the auto-driver communicates the image of India.57 DTC bus drivers and conductors are also to receive training on soft skills, basic English language and skill sensitization in collaboration with the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII).58 Gwalior based Institute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM) has been training guides on major monuments and tourist attractions around the city, and how to answer tourist queries, and a certificate of completion is being awarded to the trainees. The Delhi Government is also planning to tie up with INTACH59 to train guides. Additionally, a tourist guide policy based on “earn while you learn” is also being developed.60 The most recent candidates for attitudinal training are immigration officials – being the “moment of truth” face of India when foreign tourists arrive. Equal emphasis is being provided for the actual conduct of the Games. 30,000 volunteers is the target for training under a programme launched by the OC called “Delhi United”61, though the original bid document had estimated the need for only 18,000 volunteers. Volunteers will receive instruction that will comprise general training, event leadership, role specific training, and venue training, toward the smooth conduct of the Games.62

Training and Awareness Programmes
raining and awareness programmes being undertaken are basically with auto-drivers, porters at railways stations, and travel guides, equipping them to talk basic English, and teaching them courtesy and “etiquette” for the benefit of foreign tourists who have a tendency to be lost when it comes to availing basic facilities because


Athithi Devo Bhava


he Commonwealth Games has sent into overdrive the idea of “athithi devo bhava”63 which has been a pet phrase of the Ministry of Tourism. In the rush to make every event worthy of the approbation of the tourist, we seem to


have lost our sense of perspective. Referring to the glorification of the Queen’s Baton relay, former Deputy Speaker of the Punjab Assembly Bir Devinder Singh has questioned its relevance to sovereign nations like India,64 who long have moved out of the shadow of their colonial past. In pushing forward the slogan of athithi devo bhava, tourism becomes both the raison d’être and the means for sorting out a range of fundamental problems, all of them long standing and seemingly intractable – ranging from polluted rivers, to ugly slums, to transportation tangles. The Parliamentary Standing Committee however takes the concept to new heights and its report reflects a consistent concern about what the foreign (read white65) tourist will feel, think, experience and need. The Committee recommends that the city monuments, places of tourist interest and the Games Village should be well connected for easy accessibility to these places and for smooth flow of traffic. The Committee also recommends that the Ministry of Railway should be pursued for providing basic amenities like, drinking water, tea, coffee, parking facilities, clean toilets and well maintained clean waiting rooms, porters with trolleys at the main stations. The Ministry of Civil Aviation should provide infrastructure facilities at the airport to meet the ever increasing traffic requirements and quality of service. The Delhi Government should make a comprehensive map for the entire city with all information regarding different bus routes and metro-lines to make commuting easy. This way, the tourist will get wonderful feeling and experience of reaching a place and coming back safe and sound. (Para 57) The Committee is surprised to know that there is no specific law to deal with the touts stringently. At present the action is taken under Section 151 of CrPC and Section 97 of the Delhi Police Act for creating nuisance that provide very minor punishment. The Committee welcomes the move of the Government of Delhi for enactment of a law for the safety of the tourists and to protect the tourist from the touts. The Committee is of the opinion that the safety and security of tourists

is paramount and should be looked into seriously and recommends the Ministry to pursue the other State Governments for enactment of the law and creation of tourist police force for ensuring of the safety and security of the tourists at the earliest. (Para 80) The Committee notes the sorry state of affairs in cleaning and maintenance of river Yamuna. The concerned agencies are not aware of who is doing what and passing the blame and responsibility to one and other. The Committee feels that there appears a lack of coordination between different agencies of Union, State and the local bodies. The Committee, therefore, recommends that the work of cleaning and beautification of river-bed should be integrated and designated to a single agency for better result or else, there should be close coordination between DJB and the DDA who are mandated to do the two works. The Committee was surprised to find that DDA was blissfully unaware of its responsibility of developing Yamuna river front. These works – cleansing and beautification of river front – should be given utmost importance and urgency because the entire Games Village is being erected just on the banks of Yamuna. (Para 94) The Committee observes that the entire Delhi should be clean and neat for attracting tourists. However, the nallahs criss-crossing the city, give an unpleasant experience to anyone who visits Delhi. The Committee therefore, recommends that the Ministry of Tourism should take up the issue of cleaning of nallahs at the highest level to ensure that all the drains are cleaned and landscaping and beautifications work is done before the Commonwealth Games 2010. (Para 95) These extracts from the report are to indicate the extent to which the Commonwealth Games and the hope of impressing foreign tourists is able to mobilise a Parliamentary Committee. Surely our Parliamentarians will agree that a clean Yamuna, nallahs not polluted by sewers, safety and security, clean toilets, and safe drinking water are primarily the right of the citizens of Delhi.


End Notes
1. “Tourism in India has grown steadily despite economic meltdown: Selja”, Thaindian News; 18th August 2009, newsportal/business/tourism-in-india-has-grown-steadily-despite-meltdown-selja_100234441.html, data retrieved June 2010 2. Sharma, V., “We will try to increase job opportunities: Selja”, The Tribune; 7th June 2009, edit.htm#3, data retrieved June 2010 3. Ministry of Tourism (2009) Report of the Ministry of Tourism: “Assessment of Number of Tourists Expected to Visit Delhi during Commonwealth Games 2010 and Requirement of Rooms for Them”, data retrieved June 2010. 4. Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism & Culture (2009) “Development of Tourism Infrastructure and Amenities for the Commonwealth Games 2010”, see Standing Committees Department related. 5. Ministry of Tourism (2009), Page 10 6. Checked with S V Singh (Ministry of Tourism) telephonically on 9th July 2010. The MoT website also does not have the survey 2009 uploaded. 7. Ministry of Tourism, 20 Year Tourism Perspective Plan for the State of Delhi (2003) 8. On asked if the MoT intends a post Game study to assess the tourism impact and how many tourists actually came, Secretary Tourism admitted it was not planned but a good idea. Interview with Sujit Banerjee, Secretary Tourism, on 9th March 2010 9. See Annexure 3: Official Tourism Statistics & Analysis. B – Factors Influencing Choice of Destination of Foreign Tourists visiting India (in %) 10. See Annexure 3: Official Tourism Statistics & Analysis. C - Percentage Distribution of Tourists using various Categories of Accommodation 11. “Commonwealth Games 2010 to lift tourism earnings: ASSOCHAM”, Travel Biz Monitor; 2nd February 2009, http://www.travelbizmonitor. com/commonwealth-games-2010-to-lift-tourism-earnings-assocham-4910, data retrieved January 2010 12. “Commonwealth Games 2010 to lift tourism earnings: ASSOCHAM”, Travel Biz Monitor 13. “New Delhi to witness 2,224 hotel rooms for Commonwealth Games 2010” HospitalityBiz India; 29th March 2010, http://www., data retrieved March 2010 14. Dhawan S, Games: Haryana crosses hotel target, Tribune News Service; 15th June 2010, delhi.htm#5, data retrieved July 2010 15. K.T Ravindran, Urban Designer, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 04th March 2010 16. K.T Ravindran, interview 17. Tiwari, A. K., Supply deluge = hotel room rates look capped, DNA; 1st April 2010, 18. 21 hotel set to increase room tariffs from October 1, Moushmi Das Gupta, Hindustan Times; 3rd September 2009 http://www., data retrieved July 2010 19. “Union Tourism Minister reviews progress of creation of additional accommodation for CWG-2010”, DARE; 21st October 2009,http:// data retrieved January 2010 20. “Luxury tents for Commonwealth Games visitors at Surajkund”, DNA; 10th January 2010,, data retrieved January 2010 21. “Homestay in Delhi for the Games” 12th May 2009, homestay-in-delhi-for-the-games, data retrieved January 2010 22. Renjhen, P., “2010 Commonwealth Games Accommodation – Delhi Pulling Out All The Stops”, Accommodation Times; undated, http://, data retrieved March 2010 23. Kalyani Menon-Sen, activist with Jagori, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 13th March 2010 24. Devasia, S., “Paharganj hoteliers threaten to boycott CWG” Mid Day; 8th March 2010,, data retrieved June 2010 25. Ministry of Tourism, Notification No.14.TH.II (1)/2009 Dated 26th May 2010 26. Kumar, K. P., “MOT asks MCD to expedite issuing of licences to guest houses in Delhi”, Hospitality Biz India; http://www., data retrieved June 2010 27. “Delhi guest house owners not to accept Delhi state approval”, Hospitality Biz India; 13th July 2010, detailNews.aspx?aid=8548&sid=41 data retrieved July2010 28. PSC (2009), Pg 34 29. However, it is not very clear to us where this assertion appears either in the Bid document or in the Report of the Evaluation Commission 30. India’s Bid CWG 2010, Pg 140-141 31. Commonwealth Games Federation (2003), Pg 79 32. Rajya Sabha Q No 244 MoT responded on 27th February 2007 33. Lok Sabha Q No 4588 MUD responded on 23rd April 2010 34. “MoT’s Commonwealth Games 2010 hotel project sees 20 hoteliers opting out”, Hospitality Biz India; 30th November 2009, http://www., data retrieved January 2010 35. Sujit Bannerjee, Secretary Ministry of Tourism in an interview with EQUATIONS on 9th March 2010 36. K.T Ravindran, Urban Designer, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 04th March 2010 37. However, one interesting legacy of the Games, Mr Ravindran’s opinion is the proposal for a “hospitality city” near the airport built on the PPP model called the “Janata Hotel” with the low-end air traveller in mind, but it would depend on how the hospitality city is managed, and on how well the original intent of the hotel is maintained. Similarly, various hostels that are being constructed in close proximity to sports venues could be an interesting legacy of the Games, depending on whether these sports hostels have a continuous inflow of sports people who use revamped sports facilities for training purposes, and contributing to the development of sports at a national level 38. Rajya Sabha Q No 3195, MoT answered on 17th December 2009 39. ECS (2008) “The Real Demand for Rooms”,, data retrieved, January 2010 40. K.T. Ravindran, interview


41. Singh, P. K. “Scorching land deals”, Express Hospitality; 01-15 April 2008, shtml, data retrieved January 2010 42. See Annexure 3: Official Tourism Statistics & Analysis. D - Supply Demand Gap for Accommodation Units 43. Lucy, G., “Golden Triangle Tour in India gets Booster Shots for 2010 Commonwealth Games”, Articlebase; 10th December 2009, http://, data retrieved January 2010 44. “Rajasthan Readies for Commonwealth Games Tourists”, Thaindian News; 28th April 2008,, data retrieved January 2010 45. See Annexure 3: Official Tourism Statistics & Analysis. F – Tourist visitations to the Taj Mahal, Agra 46. Kumar L, Taj Expressway to open before Games, Times of India; 5th March 2010, data retrieved July 2010 47. Franklin, J., “India Tourism Industry Is Gearing Up For Commonwealth Games 2010 Article Snatch”, undated, http://www.articlesnatch. com/Article/India-Tourism-Industry-Is-Gearing-Up-For-Commonwealth-Games-2010/799864, data retrieved January 2010 48. “Commonwealth Games 2010 to lift tourism earnings: ASSOCHAM”, Medinet India; 2nd February 2009, news.php?n_id=76 49. “Plan to promote CW Games abroad” Business Line; 26th January 2010, stories/2010012751810900.htm, data retrieved January 2010 50. Branding Incredible India: Tourism Ministry’s “Incredible India” campaign won the World Travel Award 2009 for being the year’s best campaign, 3rd December 2009, Banerjee 51. “Incredible India road show held in Johannesburg”, NetIndian; 13th January 2010, incredible-india-road-show-held-johannesburg, data retrieved January 2010 52. Leena Nandan, Project Director, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 05th March 2010 53. “Ambika Soni launches e-commerce platform on Incredible India”, MoT Press Release; 25th July 2007, release.asp?relid=29373 54. MoT likely to waive off 50 per cent Visa fee for Commonwealth natives, Travelbiz Monitor; 16th January,2010, http://www., data retrieved January 2010 55. Rajya Sabha Q No 856 MoT responded on 8th March 2010 56. Mukherjee, S., “Railways dishes out English lessons to Delhi porters”, Deccan Herald; 6th January, 2010, http://www.deccanherald. com/content/45177/railways-dishes-english-lessons-delhi.html 57. Singh, H. S., “English lessons for India’s rickshaw drivers”, CNN; 16th September 2009, asiapcf/09/15/india.rickshaw/, data retrieved January 2010 58. “Communication programme for DTC drivers for Commonwealth Games”, India eNews; 30th September 2009, http://www.indiaenews. com/business/20090909/219929.htm, data retrieved January 2010 59. Indian National Trust For Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) 60. Roy, E., “Games on mind, Delhi plans tourist guide policy”, Express India; 26th October, 2007, games-on-mind-delhi-plans-tourist-guide-policy/232495/, data retrieved January 2010 61. “30,000 volunteers to be roped in for Commonwealth Games”, Thaindian News; 4th December, 2009, newsportal/uncategorized/30000-volunteers-to-be-roped-in-for-commonwealth-games_100284417.html 62. See, data retrieved January 2010 63. Sanskrit term meaning ‘the guest is God”, signifies host guest relations in ancient Indian culture. Currently the title of a Ministry of Tourism campaign to sensitise the general; public and tourism stakeholders towards tourists. 64. PTI, “Put Immediate halt to Queens Baton”, Hindustan Times; 4th July 2010 data retrieved July 2010 65. After the UK, the largest number of foreign tourists from Commonwealth countries arriving in India are Bangladeshis followed by Sri Lankans.




Section IV


he city of Delhi is under siege. Having been persuasive enough to win the bid to host the Games, the country in general, and Delhi in particular, is preparing for the Games, almost on a war footing, as concerns of time-lags, quality facilities, and security apprehensions are being articulated from different quarters. This section traces developments in Delhi that are taking place in its commitment to being a “world class city” in honour of the impending Games.
In an essay titled “Deconstructing the ‘world class’ city”1 Lalit Batra gives a succinct understanding of the world class city, also referring to Saskia Sassen’s “The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo” published in 1991. Batra says, “[...] attempts of the ruling elite at neo-liberal reconfiguration of major Indian cities into the socalled ‘world class’ cities characterized by leisure living, high-end infrastructure, a spectacular consumptive landscape and nodal positioning in terms of attracting and controlling the flow of transnational capital. This reconfiguration is undergirded by far-reaching transformations in investment patterns, spatial formations, employment structure, governance paradigm and class relations unleashed by powerful forces of economic reforms in the early ’90s. Indian cities, especially the metros, are today increasingly sought to be modelled on the image of global cities such as New York, London or Tokyo to function as nodes in the circulation of high finance, information flows, hi-tech productive activities and global tourism.” Tied closely in with the idea of a world-class city is national pride, and this has become the leit-motif of a wide cross section of actors in the desire that Delhi live up to the idea of a world-class city, each accentuating different aspects that they believe are crucial to the concept.2 The idea of national pride is also inextricably linked with Delhi hosting the Commonwealth Games. Ashok Kumar Walia, Minister of Finance, Government of Delhi a vocal champion for transforming Delhi into a world class city3 says “Our vision for Delhi is essentially based on the premise of making it a world-class city. The Commonwealth Games in 2010 is another area which is going to serve as a growth propeller and catalyst for the development of the city.” Talking about the limitations of the Government, the Chief Minister Sheila Dixit has also said “People should, therefore, also contribute to making it a worldclass city ahead of the Commonwealth Games,” she said.


Fortifying Infrastructure
he pursuit of “global standards” for infrastructure fortification for the Games has meant primarily lots of clearances from various Governmental agencies, vast sums of money, and an expediting of projects to meet the 2010 deadline. HLRN’s Report4 is a meticulously research account of the promises and costs of infrastructure development in making Delhi a world class city for the Games. To cater to the needs of the Games amenities and utilities such as water, power, security systems and solid waste management are being augmented specifically5 to addresses the needs of the Games. That this would have been planned and distributed quite differently and would have catered to a completely different set of stakeholders if the Games were not the focus of the investment, makes mockery of the so called legacy of the Games.


Transportation and Accessibility
ransport and accessibility have been among the topmost priorities in the preparation for the Games, leaving no stone unturned with road-building, road widening, introduction of the bus rapid transport system, strengthening rail links, new stations, metro coverage and airport modernisation. Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL), a consortium of the GMR group, was given the task of modernising the Indira Gandhi International (IGI) Airport in 2006, and gives passengers a worldclass “international experience” with the addition of new terminals, runways and other passenger convenience infrastructure.6 7 In addition, a heliport is also planned to be operational before the Games, and is being constructed in Delhi’s Rohini area.8 If airports are an indication of a country’s economic progress, then India has certainly arrived on the world stage. Projecting the new, swanky Terminal 3 (T3) at IGI inaugurated on July 3rd 2010 as an example of the country’s growing prosperity and confidence, the eight largest passenger terminus in the world with a passenger capacity of 34 million passengers per annum comes at an estimated price tag of Rs10000



crore. T3 boasts of joining the league of the few airports which can host commercial operations of Airbus A380, the world’s largest aircraft. Ecologically unsound, representing a capacity far beyond Delhi’s needs, political analyst and activist Praful Bidwai asserts that T3 does not represent progress, rather it marks the Indian elites dependence on false symbols of grandeur. Air India has signed a MoU with the OC, designating it as the official carrier of the Commonwealth Games 2010. It is considering re-routing and upgrading of aircraft as per the requirement depending on the size of foreign delegations and deploying the Air India charter services rather than commercial flights to accommodate large contingents from certain countries or regions.9 British Airways has Delhi and Cape Town, South Africa (hosting the FIFA World Cup) in position 1 and 2 of its Top 10 destinations for 2010,10 adding to the sense of anticipation about inbound tourists. In addition to road-widening projects, 25 new flyovers (though the bid evaluation report claims 74, of which it said 41 were to be completed by end 2003) and underpasses are being planned at an estimated cost of Rs. 1650 crore. Many of these projects are the links between venues, and the airport. 12 of the 25 flyovers are already operational, and about 3,500 low-floor buses will replace the privately-owned Blue line buses. (However, many of the new buses having unexpectedly caught fire has placed a question mark on their safety). Around 950 low-floor buses are running on city roads now, and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors were designed especially for these buses, giving public transport a boost.11 Rs. 8000 crore worth of metro expansions is set to take place, including a metro line from the airport.12 The New Delhi Railway Station has also been revamped and air conditioned along the lines of New York Central and is a world class facility. A similar station is being built in Anand Vihar to ease the congestion of the New Delhi Station.13 A state-of-the-art, solar powered version of the cycle-rickshaw or the “soleckshaw” a motorised cycle rickshaw that can be pedalled normally or run on a 36-volt solar battery, developed by the state-run Centre for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), is being road-tested in Old Delhi’s Chandni Chowk area, planned to be used sporting venues.

According to media reports, Delhi Traffic Police planned to impose Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code on the demarcated areas on dedicated lanes throughout the duration of the Games, should they be violated by general commuters.14 To provide dedicated lanes and escorts was one of the promises in the bid. To even consider applying a law meant for emergency situations such as riots and arson to ensure the smooth passage of officials and athletes is at best absurd and at worst a contempt of both the spirit of the law and citizens rights, and has been opposed by civil society groups. 15

The Lust for Land
and is a key ingredient to all that’s cooking for the Commonwealth– the metro, the bus rapid transit system, the airport, the hotels, the stadia, the Games Village, the shopping malls, the parking lots, power plants and more. It is obvious that land would have to be made available to build the world class city. The rhetoric is that these developments benefit the city as a whole, and as the distinction between public land and private land begin to blur, the transition is complete when the ‘public’ blurs out altogether, and only the ‘private’ remains. Land acquisition has been one of the issues that has “come in the way” of timely preparations for the Commonwealth Games. According to the CAG Report, “hindrance-free sites have also been a major bottleneck, and the issue of land acquisition needs to be addressed quickly.” For instance, land acquisition was seen as holding up work for some of the 16 railway- under- bridges being constructed to ease traffic flow16 and three projects in UP were at risk of non-completion and therefore to “mitigate the risk of non-transfer of lands, land acquisition provisions were now being resorted to.”17 Other contentious issues were to do with 250 residents of Dwarka protesting the takeover of 26 acres of open land with two water bodies belonging to the Gram Sabha, for the construction of a DTC Bus Depot in time for the Games,18 and a hotel developer who bought land that the DDA auctioned only to find it encroached upon by a Delhi Jal Board Office, a gas agency, a taxi stand and a number of slum clusters.19



An underground parking complex at Siri Fort is also part of the construction for the 2010 Games, but it was later discovered that underground or basement parking is not permitted on the grounds of security, as per CGF rules. Thus, while the parking area is ostensibly being constructed for the Games, the long term plan is to convert it into an underground mall or shopping complex- another instance of land-grab that would not have been achieved, but for the Games.20 The Games Village is mired in controversy of all kinds.21 The Village spread over an area of 63.5 hectare is at a cost of Rs. 995 crore and will include commercial and recreational facilities, hospitals, training shopping and living.22 The DDA has incurred a loss of Rs 150 crore in its dealings with EMAAR MGF Construction; the company contracted to construct the Games Village and bailed them out by purchasing 333 apartments at Rs 766.89 crore, as per the CAG report.23 Also EMAAR-MGF is under the scanner for various irregularities related to purchase of land by the Enforcement Department. The Games Village and other developments on the floodplains feed into the vision of the Thames riverfront model of development for the Yamuna, a rather misguided model given the hydro- geology and ecological fragility of the area. The location of the games village has been controversial, and was challenged through a PIL24 by concerned environmental activists. The PIL was dismissed and the Games Village was given a go-ahead. It was not as if there were no alternatives. The abandoned airfield and its surrounding land at the Safdarjung Airport had been earmarked in the Master Plan of Delhi for sports, was ideal for the Games Village. DDA’s reluctance to acquire land from another government agency is reportedly behind its decision to not use the Safdarjung Airport as the site for the Games Village. Chief Minister Sheila Dixit also said that the venue was a security risk as it was too close to the Prime Minister’s house.25 Other possible locations that were rejected were Dwarka and Bawana, the latter in an ironic twist is the “resettlement” site for Games and development induced displacement particularly those from the Yamuna Pushta region. What will become of this “Village” post the Games? The Games Village appears to be heading in the

direction of the Asiad Village constructed for the 1982 Asian Games. The ultimate beneficiaries of this ‘games infrastructure’ where a forest once stood, turned out to be senior officers of the government and public sector companies who occupied 70 per cent of the flats built. In Amita Baviskar’s opinion “that’s land grab, a neat government scam to convert public green spaces into private property”.26 The Report of Evaluation Commission clearly mentions27 that the Games Village (supposed to be low to midrise apartments) will be handed over to Delhi University to serve as student hostels. In a case of history repeating itself - the high end luxury apartments are an enviable address and will sell at prices ranging anything from 2.5 to 4 crores per apartment.28 East Delhi has seen a significant amount of infrastructural development with the Games Village being located there. It now has connectivity to the airport, metro, railway stations, and flyovers to more central parts of Delhi as well, which has pushed up property prices in the area. Real estate watchers report that the apartments within the Games Village are being sold at Rs 12,700 per sq ft but are expected to increase to Rs 15,500 per sq ft in future.29 In response to a Parliament Question to the Ministry of Urban Development30 asking the Ministry if it a) intends to incentivise affordable housing, b) the reason why DDA and EMMAR-MGF is selling most flats in the Games village at very high prices of one crore: and c) if the Government is likely to intervene to ensure the common man is not left out when these flats are offered to public. The Minister in his reply on 16th July 2009 committed that DDA housing projects of 65000 numbers between 2009-2010 and 2014-2015 are planned in the HIG, MIG LIG and EWS categories. To incentivise housing the Reserve Bank of India has announced a package keeping home loans cheaper than other bank loans. On the Commonwealth Games, however the ministry (forgetting of course the promise to Delhi University altogether) informs that the project is being executed in the PPP mode and these flats are not part of the general housing scheme. As per the agreement the developer can sell portion of the flats to private buyers after the Games are over. DDA will be offering a portion of


the flats to the public for which DDA will fix prices. What the Minister also failed to mention is the bailout by DDA of EMAAR-MGF to the tune of over 700 crore, which does nuance the idea of PPP in new ways.

Implicating Tourism in the World Class City Project
here is a significant link between the idea of tourism development and beautification of cites as a cursory examination of most tourism schemes will show. That the beautification of Delhi to make it world class and “tourism ready” has resulted in the heartless eviction of lakhs of people from the Yamuna banks is a story that merits narration in some detail. In March 2003, the 20 Year Tourism Perspective Plan for the State of Delhi commissioned by the Ministry of Tourism was released. The idea of the Yamuna Riverfront recreation project makes its brief appearance here. In the assessment of consultants who produced the report, J K & Associates, “the development of Yamuna River front for recreation use is a long term plan, as the pollution in the river has to come down (pg 253). In a detailed section on Environmental aspects (pgs 171-187) with specific reference to the Yamuna River Corridor, the report points to the lack of a effective inter-state river basin hydropolicy regime resulting in upstream pollution from agricultural pesticides and sub-optimal water extraction practices. It also refers to high density informal housing resulting in untreated sewage and solid waste, as well as the untreated industrial effluents discharged into the river. The report then goes on record about the ambitious and controversial plans of the DDA in the context of the Yamuna Action Plan. Change in land use for a 260 hectare central trance (sic) to be classified for public use. The report points that public use is a vague definition that seems to offer wide interpretation since 45 hectare are proposed for a major temple complex and Manhattan style CBD project has been slated and pending. It concludes that in essence such proposals without rigorous public examination constitute public encroachment by stealth.” (pgs 182-183). In a later section on “Future Actions for other infrastructure sectors” (pgs 257-273), with


reference to the Yamuna Riverfront the report makes the following recommendations for action: “Review current land development polices relevant to flood control. Ensure zero development / construction in Yamuna flood plain. Implement changes required and enforce – including any resettlement required. Tourism Projects in Yamuna corridor to take serious view of this before implementing micro and macro plans”31. Except for resettlement (which was done in the form of evictions and not resettlements) none of these important suggestions in relation to the Yamuna riverfront in this Perspective Plan Report were considered. Jagmohan, the (then) Union Minister for Tourism and Culture (2001-2004) was at the forefront32 of evicting people from the Yamuna Pushta settlement. His motives for such large scale evictions were the development of the Yamuna River Front.33 Jagmohan’s eagerness and sense of urgency in January 2004 to lead the evictions of Yamuna Pustha was the Ministry of Tourism’s project – “Development of Great Green Tourist Complex” in the area lying between Yamuna River Front, national Samadhis and Red Fort, and to implement this project through the India Tourism Development Corporation Limited (ITDC). Within a span of two months (Mar-Apr 2004), backed by court orders,34 an estimated 40,000 homes housing 150,000 people in the Yamuna Pushta settlements were demolished in an unprecedented and inhuman drive to clear the floodplains; most people were left to fend for themselves with no arrangements made for their resettlement.35 The Pushta population were mostly from Bihar, Bengal and Uttar Pradesh, and about 70 per cent were Muslim.36 In the context of this report on the Commonwealth Games, the tragic irony is that most of them came into the city as construction labour for the 1982 Asian Games and stayed on to make a living in the big city when the Asiad construction task was accomplished successfully. Nidhi Jamwal, reporter with Down To Earth, also investigated this series of events and their legality. “In December 2003 the Union Tourism Minister shot off a letter to the Union Minister of Urban Development about “a big project, which


synthesises elements of tourism, culture, history, heritage, clean civic life and environment’. The project was being held up by delays in clearing jhuggies37, the letter stated. Subsequently, at a high level meeting on 3 January 2004, the Tourism Minister “Drew attention of the participants to the fact that about 19,000 plots were available for resettlement of eligible squatters and yet the orders of Delhi High Court regarding clearance of Yamuna River Front were not being implemented’. At this meeting, “It was unanimously decided that, for the first phase, 5,000 plots should be earmarked and clearance and resettlement should begin’. Accordingly, Gautampuri 2 was demolished on 13th February 2004”.38 With the onset of the Lok Sabha elections 2004, the model code of conduct for elections came into force and the Election Commission in a directive to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) banned any slum relocation drive in the Capital asking the civic body to seek case by case permission for removal of any slum. The MCD sought permission for relocation of slums from Yamuna Pushta, Dhapa Colony and two other colonies. The reasons given for the urgency was Union Tourism Minister Jagmohan’s plans to develop the area into a tourist spot and a green belt. It is reported that Jagmohan wrote letters and met senior officials of the Election Commission seeking their approval to relocate the slum clusters from the banks of Yamuna, as this would delay the ambitious project.39 Permission was granted by the Election Commission on 11th March 2004 and the demolition drive resumed with its ruthless efficiency. After a month’s gap, the MCD cleared the rest of ITO-Rajghat Pushta in a fortnight: Gautampuri 1 and Koyla plot on 17 March, the slum near Power House on 19 March, Kanchanpuri on 24 March and Indra Colony on 1 April. On 7 April, bulldozers were pressed into service in Vijayghat Pushta and half the area was cleared within a week.40 At the Ministry end the story took an interesting twist. Having got the demolitions and evictions in motion, in February 2004, pending preparation of plans/ drawings/ blue prints, detailed estimates of the work and transfer of land to the project executing agency, the Ministry released an amount of Rs. 500 lakhs to the ITDC as an advance to start the work. As per the sanction, ITDC was asked to furnish the land availability certificate within six

weeks from the date of the sanction as the land belonged to the Central Government. In March 2004, ITDC submitted a project proposal to the MoT at an estimated cost of Rs. 787.33 lakh and at the same time requested the Land & Development Office (L&DO) for permission to carry out the sanctioned work. The L&DO, however, intimated MoT in December 2004 that the land was not available for the project as the same had already been transferred to the DDA for the purpose of integrated development of Yamuna River Front.41 In the meanwhile after the NDA lost the 2004 general elections, Jagmohan (who was part of the BJP led NDA government) was no longer Minister of Tourism and Culture, and Renuka Choudhary of the Congress (UPA government) took over the reins in May 2004. The episode of the Ministry of Tourism “losing” the land to the DDA seems to have poured cold water on their direct plans to develop the river front. The google map indicates the approximate locations of these sites. The DDA now in possession of the land on both sides of the Yamuna, has decided to push through its own version of the river front project. Kannan Kasturi42 documents the story of the shifting land use to make this possible. The 1962 Master Plan of Delhi sensibly designated the Yamuna floodplains as a green area reserved for water bodies and agriculture. But government planners and political leaders always found this land use too restrictive. With visions of Paris on the Seine and London by the Thames, they came up with proposals to turn the stretch of the Yamuna flowing through Delhi into a canal, restricting its width and opening up the floodplains for ‘riverfront development’. The DDA was forced by the weight of expert opinion (Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune between 1988 and 1993, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi) to keep the canalisation plans in limbo. It simply carried forward its idea in a different way - by changing river bed use in an ad hoc manner from time to time, and by handing over the floodplains for other uses piece by piece. Constructions were permitted on the floodplains through ‘notified amendments’ to the land use permitted in the Master Plan - with amendments being made sometimes to legalise a land use change post facto. An amendment permitted the construction of the massive Akshardham temple


Map 2: Google map indicating site of Games Village & Yamuna Pushta evictions

on the eastern floodplain of the river in 1999. Another amendment allowed development of a Delhi Metro depot further north of the temple, in 2003. In 2006, the land use of the site adjacent to the Akshardham temple that was earlier marked as ‘recreational’ was changed to ‘residential and commercial’ and allocated for the Commonwealth Games Village. Even though DDA had plans all along to develop tourism along the riverfront, it announced in 2007 the freezing of all tourism and riverfront projects (with the exception of the Games Village Project) in lieu of environmental concerns. We suspect that this move was simply a stop gap arrangement to appease the flood of protests and legal action by several activists and environmental groups. However with the Games Village nearly completed, super luxury apartments built that would be sold at premium prices, the road and rail connection established by the Delhi metro line to Connaught Place & an elevated road over the Barapullah Nullah connecting to the Nehru Stadium and South Delhi, all that remains now to be done for the world class city is to “develop” the river, the river bed and its flood plains into a picturesque postcard. The Delhi Government’s plans for tourism in 200910 include the development of tourism destinations by taking up the master planning of the entire

area in Yamuna bed up to the Yamuna Pushta in the East. This would entail development of additional 1000 acres land. The matter is being taken up with DDA. As of May 2010, DDA has prepared the concept plan which was approved by the Lieutenant Governor who is giving the project a push. The plan proposes development of both banks of the river, comprising 48km of land from Palla to Jaitpur within a span of 5 years.43 In another ironic twist to this complex tale, the first stretch that will be taken up for development is from ISBT to ITO. This was the site from where the ‘encroachers’ were evicted and supposedly given a new lease of life to live in “dignity”. The site will now have a flower garden, nursery, parking and a playground. The Signature Bridge is a special showpiece project, mooted some years ago by the Delhi Government, that also needs mention in the context of the CWG. An 8 lane cable-stayed bridge across the Yamuna, on the lines of the London Bridge, it was originally slated to be ready in time for the Commonwealth Games, but its completion is now deferred to 2013. The cost of the project, which did not receive a go ahead for over 7 years, has escalated from Rs 460 crore when proposed in 2003, to Rs. 640 crore and along with the approach roads will end up at Rs. 1185 crores.



The Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation (DTTDC), which is in charge of the construction plans to clean up the stretch of river from the Wazirabad barrage to a kilometre downstream to turn the Signature Bridge into a tourist destination. “Since tourists will not come to see the bridge if the river is dirty, we have decided to clean up this stretch. We plan to place a rubber barrage 1km downstream of the existing barrage. Just after the flood season, the barrage will be inflated and water will collect between the Wazirabad barrage and the rubber barrage. In time, this water will clean up naturally. Before the next floods, the rubber barrage will be deflated, the water let out and the process repeated after monsoon”, a tourism official was quoted to say.44 This harebrained scheme to clean up a part of the much contested Yamuna for tourists can only be understood within the context of the overall irrationality of the “world- class city” project.

expert advice and support for the development of its environmental and sustainability reports prior to and after the XIX Commonwealth Games 2010 Delhi.” In addition, “Delhi and the relevant Government agencies have advised that the development of venues and the Games Village will include environmental considerations related to micro-environment, ecology and other parameters such as air, water and noise pollution. As mentioned the Evaluation Commission report also signalled Delhi’s intention to develop the Games in an “environment friendly” manner. The contentious location of the Commonwealth Games Village on the floodplains of the Yamuna river, and its serious ecological ramifications, has been glossed over by the GoI, Delhi Development Authority, Ministry of Environment and Forests and the Supreme Court. How UNEP plans to justify this particular development having “agreed to work together (with the Organising Committee) to incorporate environmental considerations into the planning and staging of the XIX Commonwealth Games 2010 Delhi,” would be of interest. Just this one issue throws the entire green agenda of the Games into question. There are many aspects related to the Games, which cannot be considered “green”. The cutting down of trees to make way for various projects, and the concreting of pavements and other open spaces impacting rainwater harvesting and the groundwater recharge potential of the city are two of them. Many trees have been sacrificed to the developmental projects that have come to be associated with the Commonwealth Games including road widening, new flyovers, and the revamping of stadiums like Jawaharlal Nehru stadium, Talkatora stadium, Delhi University48 and Siri Fort. In an estimate by the NGO Kalpavriksh, at least three lakh trees have been cut to make way for construction-related activities, while around 35,000 trees were felled to make way for the metro.49 While there are provisions for compensatory plantations, and six sites have been allotted by the Forest Department, compensatory plantations are hardly a solution. In Ghuman Hera in southwest Delhi — where 15,000 saplings were planted by the forest department as part of compensatory afforestation was later was handed over to the Power Grid Corporation Ltd (PGCL) for the construction of a power sub-station.50

Greenwash Games
Green” is part of the rhetoric of the worldclass city and showcasing a green image to the rest of the world is a priority for Delhi. Touted as the first ever “Commonwealth Green Games”, UNEP signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Commonwealth Games for the first time in October 2007, though UNEP has had a “Sports and Environment” Programme since 1994. UNEP was involved in similar initiatives for the Beijing Olympics, 2008, and also commissioned an independent environmental assessment45 of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games. UNEP has also signed a similar MoU with the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Winter Games organizing committee. UNEP seems to believe that mega sport events promote increased public awareness of the importance of environmental protection and sustainable development. Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP Executive Director, said: “Through the Olympic Movement, we can further sustainable development by holding green Games and boosting global interest in the environment.”46 According to its Annual Report, 200747 “UNEP and the Organizing Committee Commonwealth Games Delhi 2010 will work together to green both the 2008 Commonwealth Youth Games in Pune, India, and the 2010 Commonwealth Games in Delhi”. A significant point in the MoU signed with the OC is that UNEP will “visit the venues and participate in an environmental assessment, and will provide


These are monoculture plantations and significantly affect the biodiversity that the felled trees represented. Moreover the trees provided shade to human beings and sheltered birds – all over the city – which a new plot elsewhere does not compensate for. With the thumb rule that for every tree cut, 10 trees have to be planted, 30 lakh trees have to be planted. Where is the land available for this, one wonders? On some sites, the survival rate is only 5-10%. The loss of trees, hedges and undergrowth have also lead to the disappearance of many species of birds – especially birds that nest in old trees such as the hornbill, and the smaller bush and ground-nesting birds.51 However the Green Games website proclaims tree plantations as a key achievement.52 There is also a category of trees that are not actually cut, but are dying a slow death. Under the zeal for beautification, pavements are been built violating the July 2000 guidelines issued by the Ministry for Urban Development and Poverty Alleviation.53 Prabhakar Rao, a naturalist with Kalpavriksh explains that with the advent of concrete pavements, top soil, formed by slow, natural processes, is removed to make room for the asphalt mixture to cover the pavements with concrete or while, a mixture of stones/ brick pieces and cement is laid, and covered with cement slabs, kota stone slabs, chequered or interlocking tiles. This seals off the soil, prevents root aeration and water percolation, thus lateral roots of trees are damaged.”54Along with its trees, hedges, and top soil, Delhi has also lost out on its potential to tap rainwater adding to the massive groundwater scarcity. Most of the initiatives as part of the “green games” are cleanliness drives and urging good practises among citizens of Delhi. The anti-litter campaign, bio-diverse afforestation drive, sustainable transport, water conservation rally, and an ecocompliant lifestyle, use of solar energy and other forms of renewable energy in venues and recycling of plastics and paper. A large part of the green agenda for the Games is, to send out messages of environmental consciousness through pamphlets and posters at sports venues, accommodation venues, through audio-visuals during the event, and using the Queens Baton Relay as a large outreach platform to communicate green themes and achievements of Delhi 2010 to a large audience.

Not to be outdone on the climate change bandwagon, plantation drives, solar energy and ozone friendly air conditioning systems proposed for the Games Village are being considered as carbon mitigation and offset measures. The official websites of the CWG make no commitment on the carbon neutrality of the games and does not indicate the likely carbon footprint of hosting the event. The Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games had announced their intention to make the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics and Paralympics carbon neutral.55 In a response dated 29 April, 2010, to an RTI filed by EQUATIONS representative,56 the OC says that the current estimation of the total footprint of the Games will be between 130,000 tonnes of C02e -155,402 tonnes C02e, subject to change based on emerging data. In activist Soumya Dutta’s analysis,57 the break-up of figures quoted in the response have not accounted for the huge embedded emissions (which includes the quantum of steel, power and water used) of Games Village construction, luxury hotel rooms, flyovers, widened roads, concretised pavements and other structures. In addition, it is not a holistic calculation of emission as effective emissions from the loss of fertile open greens and emission resulting from the loss of water recharge capacity from this area, resulting in “importing” that much water from far off rivers, like the proposed Renuka dam on the Giri river, the Tehri dam and the resultant emission due to loss of forest / agricultural lands caused by the dam have not been accounted for. In response to EQUATIONS RTI application the OC also indicated that it is planning an extensive plantation programme pan India and NCR with 50,000 saplings, funded by the Global Environment Fund of the UNDP and another 50,000 saplings are being planted by the Department of Environment (DoE). It believes that this will neutralise the Games emissions of at least 15,000t Co2e per year upon maturity. The condemnation of carbon offset programmes and of monoculture plantations as not only not contributing to reduction in climate change, but actually exacerbating the problem is well known,58 but UNEP, UNDP, the OC and DoE seem to have decided to ignore this.


Map 3: Stadium Venues for the CWG

Source: Maps of India61

According to newspaper reports, the OC hired Nature First, Green Ecological Managed Services Pvt. Ltd, to “plan a series of steps to offset and make Games carbon-neutral” as they are “toying with the idea of introducing voluntary carbon offset programmes”. Nature First has recently been acquired by Tata Consultancy Services59 and have been unavailable for comment. Is the world class city necessarily inhuman? The Commonwealth Games and the expected influx of tourists are a front being used to expedite clearances and build infrastructure. Vinayak Uppal notes that in the rapidly growing city, with an estimated population of 192 lakhs by 2010 as against 140 lakhs in 2001, a growth of nearly 40% needs to be factored in. “This means that it would be inappropriate to place the causation of all infrastructure and urban development onto the Commonwealth Games. A large amount of it would probably have taken place anyway, the games just gives it a geographical bias and a deadline.”60

City planning should be geared to the needs of the city and its people, rather than the needs of the city and its people being addressed as by-products of the needs of its short term visitors - athletes, tourists and officials of the Games. Eight of the eleven planned venues for various sports events to be held during the CWG 2010 are located largely on one road itself, mostly along the BRT corridor and accessible by bus and metro. The Games Village however, is not aligned with these venues. K.T. Ravindran points out “By virtue of the fact that it has been located in such isolation and across the river, it has necessitated the building of so many link roads and flyovers.” Clearly, the benefits accrue more to upper class residential areas, and posh developments and transiting tourists, rather than the augmenting facilities for the slum pockets and other lesser developed areas of Delhi, that have been screaming for attention, long before we bid for the Games. The idea of a world-class city has


no relevance to the poor, when the world-class infrastructure is inaccessible, and in fact irrelevant to the lives of those who have to learn to live on Rs. 50 to Rs.100 per day. Social activists and urban developers have long argued that the squatter and slum problem is less a natural outcome of the urban phenomenon of overcrowding, but a result of the persistent denial of housing rights to the needy, and the ignoring of integrated housing policies. Beautification drives move ‘illegal’ slum dwellers out of sight of the view of an urban middle class who continue to wish them to keep serving as the cheap, ancillary informal economy of the state. However in the imagination of a world class city – they have no space – so the poor are segregated and distanced – to fend for themselves in a kind of apartheid city. The COHRE reports on Mega Events and Housing Rights observes, “The desire to show off a city

and make it an attractive tourist destination is often accompanied by a process of sanitisation – clean-ups of public areas facilitated by criminalisation of homelessness and increases in police powers. Rebuilding a city’s image appears, from the examples of many mega-events, to mean rebuilding a city to make it more attractive for the local, national and international elites (middle and high income earners), and as a result, less liveable for those who fall outside these categories”.62 In the desire to present a “world-class” city to the external world, the make-over of Delhi is tainted with much more than infrastructure and land deals – it has to answer for purging its poor, exploiting its migrant labour, displacing those who are inconvenient and incompatible with the idea of world class city like beggars, street vendors, slum dwellers and the street and homeless people. The next section examines the collateral damage that is already visible in the run up to the Games and its implications for democratic and citizenship rights as well as basic human rights.

End Notes
1. Batra, L. (2008) “Deconstructing the ‘world class’ city”, Seminar; Issue 581 data retrieved May 2010 2. Romana M, “Slums, Shops Make Way for ‘World-Class’ Delhi”, SAWF; 1st May 2006, data retrieved July2010. 3. Singh, S. S., “We want to make Delhi a world-class city”, Project Monitor; 14th March 2005, asp?newsid=8876, data retrieved May 2010 4. HLRN (2010): Fact Sheet2 The Promise of the 2010 Games: True Claims? False Hopes? 5. See Annexure 4: Plans to Augment Amenities and Services 6. Sharma, P., “Delhi airport in for a mega makeover soon”, The Hindu; 20th April 2009, stories/2009042053040400.htm, data retrieved January 2010 7. Bidwai P,“Terminal Folly” Frontline 20th July 2010 8. India’s first seaplane operations to take off in October”, Msn News; 15th July 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 9. “Air India to be official carrier of Commonwealth Games”, Live Mint; 6th October 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 10. See, data retrieved June 2010 11. “2010 dawns, but Delhi unprepared for Commonwealth Games”, Prokerala; 31st December 2009, articles/a104157.html, data retrieved January 2010 12. See Citizens for Workers, Women and Children Factsheet,, data retrieved January 2010 13. Rains, S., “Preparations for Commonwealth Games 2010 in New Delhi”, Rolling Rains Report; 30th September 2009, http://www., data retrieved January 2010 14. Ranjan R., “Police plan to impose Sec 144 on Games restricted lanes”, The Pioneer; 10th June 2010, THEPIONEER/PIONEER/2010/06/10/ArticleHtmls/10_06_2010_003_047.shtml?Mode=1, data retrieved June 2010 15. See Annexure 5: EQUATIONS petition opposing plan to impose Section 144 during CWG 2010 16. “16 railway under-bridges to come up in Delhi before CWG”, DNA; 1st December 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 17. Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2009) A Report on the Preparedness for the XIX Commonwealth Games, 2010, http://www.cag. data retrieved January 2010 18. “No DTC depot here”: Dwarka residents protest land acquisition”, Indian Express; 13th May 2009, no-dtc-depot-here-dwarka-residents-protes/458331/, data retrieved January 2010 19. “DDA sells encroached land to builder”, Indian Express; 14th January 2008,, data retrieved January 2010 20. Ritwick Dutta, Environmental Lawyer, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 8th March 2010 21. Baviskar, A., “Delhi’s Date with the Common Wealth Games 2010: Common Wealth or Kiss of Death?” Games Monitor, 11th August 2007,, data retrieved January 2010 22. Uppal, V. (2009)


23. “DDA lost Rs 150 cr on C’wealth Games Village project: CAG”, Hindustan Times; 7th May 2010 newdelhi/DDA-lost-Rs-150-cr-on-CWG-Village-project/Article1-540712.aspx, data retrieved May 2010 24. Rajendra Singh & Others vs. Govt. Of Delhi and Others, PIL under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, (Filing No. 134027/2007) 25. Baviskar A, (2007) Delhi’s Date with the Common Wealth Games 2010: Common Wealth or Kiss of Death? uk/node/488 26. Baviskar A, (2007) 27. Commonwealth Games Federation (2003) 28. Nevatia S and Ravindran S, “Has the city lost its priorities in the rush for cosmetic nirvana?” Outlook; 12th April 2010 http://www., data retrieved July 2010 29. Panda, S., “Builders & developers new projects - Akshardham, New Delhi - Commonwealth Games Village”, Real Estate Times; 29th March 2010 30. Rajya Sabha Q No 1458 on affordable housing MUD responded on 16th July 2009 31. Ministry of Tourism (March 2003), 20 year perspective plan for the State of Delhi, New Delhi;, data retrieved July 2010 32. This however was not the first time that Jagmohan targeted eviction of the juggi jhopadis from the Yamuna (first as Lt Governor of Delhi and later as Union Minister for Urban Development) 33. Gopalakkrishnan, A (2004) A tussle on the Yamuna’s banks, Frontline; Volume 21 - Issue 05, 28 February – 12 March 2004, New Delhi, data retrieved July 2010 34. Delhi High Court Orders for Clearance was in March 2003 35. India Shining: A Report on Demolition and Resettlement of Yamuna Pushta Bastis, Peoples Union for Democratic Rights, May 2004 36. Menon-Sen K and Bhan G (2008) “Swept off the Map: Surviving Eviction and Resettlement in Delhi”, Yoda Press 37. Jhuggies, and jhuggi – jhopadi refers to shanties and temporary huts in slum and squatter settlements 38. Jamwal N, Beautification drive, Down To Earth; Vol 12, No 24, 15th May 2004 me=news&sec_id=4&sid=29, data retrieved July 2010. 39. “Shifting of Yamuna Pushta slums approved”, The Hindu; 11th March 2004, stories/2004031211390300.htm data retrieved July 2010 40. Jamwal N, Beautification drive , Down To Earth; Vol 12, No 24, 15th May 2004 41. Comptroller & Auditor General (2007), Report No. 2 of 2007, Chapter XV: Ministry of Tourism reg/overview.pdf (data retrieved July 2010). Thereafter, MoT directed the ITDC (December 2004) to refund the advance amount. The ITDC refunded (June 2005) Rs. 469 lakhs after deducting Rs. 31.31 lakh which included expenditure of Rs. 28.94 lakh incurred mainly on hiring a project consultant and security guards and contingencies and centage charges of the ITDC. The CAG thus noted that the injudicious sanction and release of funds without ascertaining the availability of land for the proposed project resulted in wasteful expenditure of Rs. 31.31 lakh 42. Kasturi, K, “Commonwealth Games: A run on the Yamuna banks”, India Together; 24th September 2008, http://www.indiatogether. org/2008/sep/gov-games.htm, data retrieved July 2010 43. Banerjee, R, “Revitalizing the Yamuna Riverfront”, TNN; 3rd May 2010 p?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=CAP/2010/05/03&PageLabel=2&EntityId=Ar00200&ViewMode=HTML&GZ=T, data retrieved July 2010 44. Dash, D. K., “For showpiece Signature Bridge, 1km stretch of Yamuna to be gift-wrapped”, Times of India; 20th March 2010, http:// ustom&Path=CAP/2010/03/20&ID=Ar00401, data retrieved March 2010 45. Available at 46. UNEP partners with Vancouver 2010 on environmental initiatives for the 2010 Winter Games. UNEP News Centre. 29 October, 2007 47. See, data retrieved January 2010 48. Dastidar, A G., “Greens to confront Delhi govt at sapling planting”, Hindustan Times; 30 October 2009, News-Feed/newdelhi/Greens-to-confront-Delhi-govt-at-sapling-planting/Article1-470707.aspx 49. Prabhakar Rao, Naturalist, Kalpavriksh Environmental Action Group, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 5th March 2010 50. Bhasin, R. and Lalchandani, N. “Cost of power station: 1,800 trees”, Times of India; 16th November 2009, http://timesofindia.indiatimes. com/city/delhi/Cost-of-power-station-1800-trees/articleshow/5233620.cms, data retrieved April 2010 51. Prabhakar Rao, interview 52. See, data retrieved June 2010 53. On “environmental damage due to unnecessary and wasteful building exercises undertaken by municipal agencies: Unnecessary and excessive tiling on roadside pavements’ need to be avoided, the area around trees lined along the road should not be covered with tiling as it hampers the basic necessary functions and needs of the trees, an area of 6 ft x 6ft should be left un-cemented and compactness of soil should be avoided at least one metre around the tree”. 54. Rao, P., “Is Delhi Dying?”, The Hindu Magazine; 24th August 2003, stories/2003082400130200.htm, data retrieved January 2010 55. Vancouver 2010 organisers pressing for carbon-neutral status”, 4th November 2009, data retrieved January 2010 56. See Annexure 2: The Right to Information 57. Soumya Dutta, Activist, Delhi Platform 58. The Corner House, Carbon Trade Watch are excellent resources for civil society critique on Carbon trading and Offsets. The World Rainforest Movement and Sinkswatch provide additional references on the fallacy of using monoculture plantations as carbon sinks. 59. See, data retrieved June 2010 60. Uppal, V., (2009) 61. Maps of India, data retrieved July 2010 62. COHRE (2007), “Fair Play for Housing Rights: Mega-Events, Olympic Games and Housing Rights”



Impacts Of CWG 2010

Section V


n an article titled “What does a beautiful Delhi look like?” Shalini Sharma and Akhil Katyal comment that “the Delhi Government’s ideal viewer of the city is the figure of the tourist who should have an uninterrupted passage through the city’s streets and sidewalks, malls and monuments. A city amenable to perfect holidays but not to democratic dissent.”1 Mission Commonwealth Games and showcasing India are already proving to have adverse economic, social, cultural, environmental and political impacts, ensuing from the preparations under way. This section examines these impacts, the extent to which they have been acknowledged (let alone mitigated) and explores the place of public participation and public consensus in hosting the CWG 2010 in Delhi.2 Economic Impacts
hat the Commonwealth Games will create 2.5 million jobs, create an impact of approximately USD 4500 million (that is Rs. 20941.28 crore) for India over a period from 2008 to 2012, with over 100,000 tourists expected to arrive has been given great publicity by the organisers of the Commonwealth Games.3 Historically, with the exception of the Games in Los-Angeles in 1984, no similar event has made money, and the success of LA has not been replicated till date. The debt of $1.5 billion (Rs.6750 crores) towards the Summer Olympics held in 1976, in Montreal, was cleared three decades later, in November 2006 and much of it was serviced through a special tax levied on tobacco. The debt was to have been paid off earlier, except that the smoking ban introduced in May 2006 slowed down the process.4 The Asian Games saw little success on the revenue front, as expenditure on the Games was approximately Rs.7000 to 10,000 million rupees, and revenue through ticket sales, donations and franchising revenue cost got hardly Rs. 60 million, not enough to cover even the operational costs of Rs.150 million.5 With respect to media and broadcasting rights, while India’s public broadcaster Prasar Bharati is the Host Broadcaster of CWG 2010 with a Rs. 463 crore expenditure, earmarked revenue of only Rs. 214 crore has been confirmed through the signing of six international contracts for broadcasting rights, at the time of the CAG report. The updated information we have is as per media reports is that deals with BBC in United Kingdom, Network Ten and Foxtel in Australia, South African Broadcasting Corporation, TV New Zealand, Cyprus Broadcasting Corporation, Seychelles Broadcasting Corporation, ABU in Malaysia, Broadcasting Organisation of



Nigeria, Namibia Broadcasting Corporation and others are believed to have generated close to Rs 300 crore.6 Employment generation is hailed as an important boon of the Games, in addition to the economic and infrastructural benefits claimed. One estimate puts it at 5 lakhs for the Commonwealth Games 2010 in Delhi7 while another estimate put it at 2.5 million8, however the basis of these estimates is unclear. The effects of employment and economic activity are likely to be transitory, taking into account previously held games.9 The CAG report of 2009 expresses serious doubts about the CWG 2010 being revenue-neutral even in operational terms. It states “As per the latest estimates, the estimated revenue generation of Rs. 1,780 crore would fully defray the total operational expenditure of like amount. The estimated revenue generation which was pegged at Rs 900 crore in August 2007, has nearly doubled in the space of about a year.” Thus, the overriding undertaking given by the Governments of India and Delhi to meet the costs of the Games to be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CGF, and underwrite any operating or capital budget shortfall. In short, the tax-payers money is being unconditionally pledged in order for the games to go on. HLRN’s report10 refers to the clear caution the Ministry of Finance had advised in 2003 against such a “blanket commitment “from the GoI, but such concerns seems to have been brushed aside. The citizens of Delhi are already facing the brunt of the Games though reduced concessions and higher taxes imposed by the latest budget. The “economic benefits” that hosting a megaevent proclaims are being found to be an increasingly grey area, in the limited post-games research that takes places. Even as the cost of


hosting the Olympics touched a dizzying $40 billion in Beijing last year—more than the entire gross domestic product of Sri Lanka—the literature on the economic effects of such games has grown. Most scholars see only negative economic benefits to hosting these events.11 Economic impact studies of mega-sport events are hard to gauge as the procedure of establishing the profits and losses has been widely acknowledged to be complicated, and as a result, the methodological issues of computing the benefits is being hotly debated. According to media reports, a study by Pricewaterhouse Coopers suggests the Commonwealth Games 2010 will create business opportunities worth around $6 billion in India, the highest ever in the history of the Commonwealth Games.12 Earlier a 2007 media report referring to ASSOCHAMs predictions said “Commonwealth Games of 2010 are likely to generate more than Rs 4500 crore revenue through various promotional and sponsorship activities for Delhi Government. Resultantly, GDP will be pushed up to Rs 1,75,000 crore, up by 49%, from present level of Rs.1,17,000 crore according to a report on “Forthcoming Commonwealth Games: Possible revenue generation resources for Delhi” brought out by ASSOCHAM13.” Big claims indeed! That is the backdrop against which the sportsmedia-business alliance is taking place in India, at the expense of the common citizen. The Organising Committee led Commonwealth Business Club of India (CBCI), has tied up with the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) and Confederation of Indian Industry14 (CII) to promote sports, and market India as a business destination. The strategy is that CBCI draws “high-power business delegations from offshore to India during the Games and enables them to leverage the unfolding opportunity for transacting business and enjoying the Commonwealth Games.”15 The involvement of FICCI will be to line up companies to sponsor not only the Games but specific events, to ensure that “various sports get financial backing from the Indian Industry.” As of now, FICCI is involved in sponsoring the volunteer training programme and the Queens Relay Baton, where it will be hosting an official dinner in London.16 In another business initiative, CBCI and FICCI, has partnered with Business Club Scotland to

bring together apex Indian and Scottish business organisations during the run-up to the Games in Delhi so they could explore business and economic opportunities between the two countries.17 The skewed composition of India’s social sector spending, in comparison to expenditure on the Games is enough to indicate that the Games have come at the cost of inclusive growth. The HLRN Report in examining some of these figures, not only finds a huge discrepancy between social budgetheads and Games-budget-heads, it also finds instances of funds having been diverted for Gamesrelated expenditure.18 Funds from the Scheduled Caste Sub Plan 2009-10 (Special Component Plan) were diverted, while Health Minister Kiran Walia’s plan to facilitate best-deal health insurance schemes through private agencies and upgradation of existing Centralised Accident and Trauma Services (CATS) ambulance fleet have been abandoned in Delhi’s 2010-11 Budget according to the report. The Government is spending more on the CWG, than on Integrated Child Development Scheme or the Indira Awaas Yojana for the entire year. In an RTI application filed by EQUATIONS representative seeking information on pre and post economic impact analysis studies related to the games, the OC passed the question onto other bodies who passed the ball back to the OCs court. In our verbal discussion with the Appellate Authority in an appeal process, we were informed that the Organising Committee has no information if an economic impact study was done and is being planned post Games. Our enquiries with the MYAS also drew a blank as mentioned earlier in this report. Whether the Games will deliver on its economic promises seems to be nobody’s particular concern.

Purging the Poor
he social consequences of staging a mega-event are many, a large proportion stemming from the decision to transform the city into a world class one. While transport, hospitality, power supply, airport modernisation, the metro project, street lighting are being addressed with zeal to create the myth of the “world class city”, equally concerted efforts are being made to conceal and in fact get rid of Delhi’s poor. The Delhi Government has worked out a beautiful charade whereby slums clusters will be hidden behind a bamboo screen.



The North-Eastern States, particularly Mizoram and Assam have been approached to help grow and provide bamboo trees which are above five feet in height and capable of withstanding the dry climate of Delhi.19 The “preparations” for staging the mega event in Delhi has already set off a range of human rights violations - displacement and evictions, impacting livelihoods of informal sector workers and street vendors, expanding prostitution rackets, and targeting particularly the most vulnerable and voiceless such as street children, the homeless, and beggars. In the fervour to beautify the city, anybody and anything not in line with it, is being dispensed with. While attributable to the “development path” that the city has chosen, the urgency and pace at which the CWG necessitates this transformation only heightens these impacts.

Exploiting Construction Workers mployment generation, particularly in construction and unskilled labour is certainly an outcome of hosting a mega event.20 Much of the employment generated however is short term, exploitative, and violates basic rights. Construction workers in Games facilities and city infrastructure find themselves having to deal with non-payment of legally stipulated minimum wages and overtime, not being issued identity cards and payslips as proof of employment, and the most deplorable working conditions leaving them vulnerable to be cheated of their dues.


In a re-enactment of this situation decades later, as we host the next mega Games, daily wage and contract labour working to meet the Commonwealth Games deadlines of October 2010 have not experienced much improvement in their desperate plight for money which leaves them little capacity to confront their exploitative employers. Once again the PUDR report 23 highlights their plight. Irregular payment, lack of proof of employment and amount pending with the contractor, resulting in a “final settlement” that depends upon the contractor; no weekly offs, no, wage slips, women being routinely paid less, are the realities the workers have to face. Security equipment, if at all, has to be borne by the workers through a deduction in wages. Workers from Games sites are being rotated once in two months, making it all the more difficult to monitor the application of labour laws. Complicating issues is that there are no fixed set of workers, which makes unionisation difficult. PUDR was able to contact a few workers in December 2005 when a death led workers to hold a demonstration, and also had access to workers in 2 camps not located within the boundaries of the Games Village site. Accessing other sites proved very difficult, and PUDR released an indicative report based on the interaction with workers of the Games Village site that they could access. A PIL was submitted in the High Court of Delhi by PUDR, Common Cause and Nirman Panchayat Mazdoor Union in early 2010 which resulted in a Committee being appointed by the High Court to investigate the issue.24 The Committee comprising of Arundhati Ghose, former representative to the UN, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) member LN Mishra, the labour commissioner and labour secretary of Delhi government, decided that the petitioners could accompany the Committee on investigations. After a month-long investigation the Committee, which filed its report on 17th March 2010, observed that the charges made in the PIL were “well founded”. According to newspaper reports, the Committee recommended an “exemplary fine” be levied on errant authorities, and commented that steps needed to be taken to start timebound registration of workers and extending to them benefits like weekly offs and hygienic living conditions. The committee said that many accidents at these sites were never reported and

In 1982, the People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) had done a fact finding into the working conditions of the Asiad workers and its report was treated as a PIL by the then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. A historic judgment by Justice Bhagwati in September 198221 declared “payment of wages less than the minimum wages is equivalent to forced labour traffic in human beings and beggar”22 as described in Article 23 of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court held the central government, the Delhi administration and the DDA as principal employers responsible for these violations. The judgement however came too late for construction workers attached to the Asian Games construction sites to benefit from it, but has served as a guiding principle.


workers continued to work without safety gear. It also said muster rolls were not verified and that abuse of migrant workers was common.25 The court-appointed Committee also found that 43 workers had been killed at work sites because of dangerous conditions and lack of safety gear.26 A quick scrutiny of a sample of Parliament Questions on this issue in both houses of Parliament in 2009 and 2010 is both revealing and shocking. Until forced to accept the report of the Commission appointed by the High Court, the Ministry of Labour and Employment (MLE) as well as the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports both resolutely maintained the position that conditions of work at Games related sites were acceptable, minimum wages were being paid and that regular inspections ensured that there were no violations of any workers rights • Rajya Sabha Q No 1483 responded on 26 February 2009, MYAS claims workers are getting all legal dues, only 2 accidents have been reported. • Rajya Sabha, Q No 704, responded on 25 November 2009, MLE says it is not a fact that workers engaged in various projects are paid less than minimum wages and labour laws are violated by contractors. Inspecting Officers keep a close watch on the payment of minimum wages. If any violation is noticed necessary legal action is taken under Acts/labour laws. • Rajya Sabha, Q No2252 responded on 9 December 2009 by MLE. Was asked if nonpayment of minimum wages to labourer under the Minimum Wages Act is as good as bonded labour. Also asked if the government is aware that the labourers engaged in construction work for CWG 2010 are not getting minimum wages. The Minister confidently replied. No Sir, Bondage implies loss of freedom. It has no connection with payment of minimum wages which is ensured under the Minimum Wages Act 1948. He goes on then to repeat the standard lines about it not being a fact that the workers engaged are paid less than minimum wages etc. Obviously the minister has not kept himself informed of the historical judgement of the Supreme Court in 1982.

• Rajya Sabha, Q No 236 responded on 24 February 2010 MLE about deplorable working conditions, drew a blank again. • Lok Sabha, Q No 1776 responded on 08 March 2010 MLE about workers death, violation of labour laws and any action taken against contractors. Minister of State responds – 9 deaths in 2008, 11 deaths in 2009, 1 death in 2010. No complaints about violation of labour laws by private contractors were received. Therefore action taken against them does not arise. However by May 2010, after the directives of the High Court, the government changed its tack in Parliament and its hubris eroded slightly. • In response to Rajya Sabha, Q No 4400 answered on 5th May 2010, MLE, when asked about exploitation of workers and the details of the Committee constituted by the Delhi High Court to look into irregularities. The same Minister for State now acknowledges that “The Honourable High Court of Delhi while considering a Writ Petition Civil no 524/2010 in PUDR and Two others vs Union of India and two others set up a Monitoring Committee on 3rd February 2010. The Committee has submitted its report”. It then passes the buck completely by saying “since the Committee was set up by the Hon’ble High Court further action in the matter will depend on the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court”. • Again in response to Rajya Sabha Q no 4404 MLE responded to on the same day viz 5th May 2010 on violation of labour rights at CWG sites, the Minister of State for Labour and Employment acknowledges that the Committee’s report was submitted on 17th March 2010 pointing out shortcomings relating to non-payment of minimum wages, lack of health and safety, medical care and housing etc. The Minister then goes on to admit that in pursuance of the High Court of Delhi’s order a status report on behalf of Government of India was submitted to the High Court on 15th April 2010 for further directions. The Government, he said, is committed to forestall any abuse of labour, including child labour to protect the image of the country.


This trail of parliament questions and their responses is a sorry testimony of impunity by the Ministries concerned. When questions were being raised for months by Members of Parliament, it seems that the Ministries did not feel accountable to give verified and accurate data to Members of Parliament. When through efforts of civil society organisations and the initiative of the High Court, they were caught out, there seems to be no consequence they have to bear for their misleading statements and inaction. Sadly, the Government seems to be finally only concerned about the “image of the country” and not about the basic human rights of its citizens. Displacing the Unsightly ega events have had a notorious record on displacement. According to COHRE “The Olympic Games have displaced more than 2 million people in the last 20 years, disproportionately affecting minorities such as the homeless, the poor, Roma and African-Americans.27 According to COHRE, 300,000 people were evicted till 2007 in New Delhi in developments linked to the 2010 Commonwealth Games.

and the adjoining Commonwealth Games Village. Besides taking up more riverbed area than the slums, they draw more groundwater from the Yamuna floodplains. Documenting the brutality with which they were evicted, Kalyani Menon-Sen and Gautam Bhan extensively chronicle the politics of relocation to Bawana and the harrowing experiences of those selectively and supposedly “rehabilitated” in their book “Swept off the Map: Surviving Eviction and Resettlement in Delhi.”28 Nidhi Jamwal also continued her investigations and documents the evictions story.29 The mainstream media by and large maintained a deafening silence on this large scale violation of human rights in the Capital city.30 HLRNs report has documented the slum demolitions and evictions directly attributable to the Games31 between 2004 and 2010.They also chronicle the “reasons” for these evictions and link them to specific development projects linked to the CWG 2010.32 What runs through all these cases is the fact that the Government washed its hands of any responsibility for resettlement or compensation of any kind. Operation Cleanse: Rounding-Up Beggars, Dispensing with the Homeless, Hiding Street Children eggars are eyesores that don’t belong to the “world-class city” another inconvenience that the city administration has found the need to deal with in the run up to the Games. The Bombay Prevention of Begging Act (BPBA), 1959 which was extended to Delhi in 1960 is being invoked with great vigour to tackle Delhi’s 60,000 beggars. Strategically placing themselves at traffic signals, temples and so on, they are tracked down and dealt with by mobile courts consisting of a retired judge, a policeman, and an official from the department of social welfare along with 12 round-up vans that have been organised. Treated like criminals, offenders can be arrested and taken before the beggars’ court before being confined in one of 12 beggars’ homes, which are more like jails than homeless hostels.33 In March 2010 the Delhi Government informed the High Court that it had written letters to 10 states, including U.P, Bihar and West Bengal, asking the


A significant portion of the evictions were from the banks of the Yamuna, the north east of Delhi - an area that is central to the “developments” linked to the Games – whether it is the location of stadia, the construction or upgradation of many link roads and flyovers or the Games Village – and therefore critical also to the idea of beautification and a world class city. What became critical therefore is that this same area had to be cleared of its greatest liability - the millions of migrants and poor who settled in informal illegal settlements to eke a living in the big city. The government derives sanction for the demolition and evictions from a High Court order dated 3rd March 2003 to “Forthwith remove all unauthorised structures, jhuggies, places of worship and or any other structure un-authorisedly put up in the Yamuna bed and its embankment, within two months”. Though ‘all’ encroachments had to be removed, the government only targeted the jhuggies. Buildings owned by religious, private, government and non-government organisations which are equally if not more illegal remain untouched – the Metro Railways Depot with a police station and mall, the Akshardham Temple,



states to take back their beggars from Delhi,34 a move that legal researcher Usha Ramanathan35 says is “completely unconstitutional”. In addition, locations for six “holding areas” for beggars in the outskirts of Delhi have been identified for beggars to be detained and provided for during the period of the Games.36 A PIL has been filed by social activist and former civil servant, Harsh Mander seeking that begging be decriminalised. Harsh Mander’s PIL also focuses on the police arresting elderly and sick people on charges of begging, thanks to which the poor and homeless live in a state of fear.37 The renewed zest with which mobile courts have been set up and the BPBA 1959, a draconian law on several counts, is being implemented cannot be fully comprehended without contextualising it within the history of beggary and the law in India. Usha Ramanathan in her essay38 “Ostensible Poverty, Beggary and the Law”, explains “The BPBA, 1959 has been heavily criticised for encouraging the equation of poverty with criminality, where “the class of persons who may be the intended subjects of a law that deals with this phenomenon of ostensible poverty have been

identified as “status offenders”, that is, they offend by being who they are, and not by doing what they do.” In response to a PIL filed by Anjula Sen in 1990 challenging the constitutionality of the BPBA 1959, the court concluded that arrests are made of people in dirty clothes, wandering, but not actually begging; large number of wrong arrests are made, which is inhuman and unjust; and that there is no criteria to distinguish a beggar from one who is sick, physically handicapped or in need of economic help. A committee set up to review issues related to emerging law and practise of the Act, and suggesting a method of implementation or amendments that would help the Act achieve its objective. Disregarding all this, as we go to press, the Delhi Police have begun removing beggars and making Delhi Beggar Free – because Chief Minister Dixit wants it so before the CWG. The target is to “process” 2500 to 3000 beggars. That is a strange term used in the media report because one could be mislead into thinking beggars are not human beings.39 40


Homelessness is another inconvenient truth in India and Delhi, not lending itself to the idea of a world-class city. On December 22, 2009 in the height of the Delhi winter, the MCD demolished a temporary night shelter on Pusa Road, which had been set up by the Department of Revenue, Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD).41 In a suo moto action, (then) Chief Justice A.P Shah of the Delhi High Court pulled up the MCD for a move which was squarely identified with the Commonwealth Games, and ordered for an immediate restoration of the shelter at the same site. Commenting on the MCDs impetus for bringing the structure down, Justice Shah was quoted to have said that ‘Commonwealth Games is after 10 months, and for the city’s beautification you will throw out people in chilling winter like this?”42 The bench has also been quoted to say “Have you thought of the suffering of people who suffered due to the demolition? Winter is severe in the city and you give an explanation for demolition on the ground of beautification and Commonwealth Games. Show us the order under which it was demolished”.43 Another target is street vendors in Delhi, estimated to be about 3 lakh in number, contributing Rs.3500 crore to the city economy. In fact they are the basis of the economy for the poor and lower middle class section of the society. Clearance drives have picked up in preparation for the Commonwealth Games for Delhi to fit into the image of the world class city.44 In a more recent development however, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi has decided to give out licenses to 14,000 street vendors from the 1,31,000 applications it received.45 The National Association of Street Vendors of India (NASVI) (and later the National Hawkers Federation) staged protests at the MCD headquarters in New Delhi on June 1, 2010 accusing it of dilly-dallying in formulating and implementing a proper policy for urban street hawkers. They had also alleged “arbitrary” eviction of vendors before the Games. A representative from NASVI has been quoted to say that rather than making the Games an excuse to “chase away” the vendors, MCD should make them participants in the process to make the Games a success.46 Children at risk hile there has been no official word, it is expected that street children will be dissuaded from locating themselves in South and

East Delhi, where much of the Commonwealth Games action will take place. Mr. Sanjay Gupta of Chetna, an NGO working with street children in Delhi feels that there is a possibility that many children will work in B&B establishments, and small hotels, trafficking will increase and that the incidence of run-away children attracted to the city by the Games may increase. In a recent series of meetings of child rights groups under the banner of Bal Adhikaar Abhiyaan India, in connection with the CWG, members were concerned at reports already emerging of street and homeless children being taken in trucks and dumped on the borders to get rid of them. The other alternative of pushing children into already overcrowded and abusive juvenile homes is no alternative they pointed out. That there were almost no government or departmental mechanisms for child protection in place was noted with concern. The Ministry of Tourism, under pressure from civil society organisations for many years has woken up to the fact that child sex abuse in tourism is indeed a reality in India. What has been more difficult for them to internalise is that this reality has as much to do with domestic tourists as it has to do with foreign paedophiles. It has chosen however to link efforts to work on the issue to the Commonwealth Games. An effort is spearheaded by tourism industry association PATA (India), UNODC and Save the Children (India) to bring out a Code of Conduct on Safe and Honourable Tourism, which is applicable to the industry players who sign on.4748 While this is an important step coming after 19 years of advocacy on the issue in the country, the Union Ministry has still not taken the decisive move to declare the country a zero-tolerance zone for child abuse in tourism, a step that tourism dependent developing countries like Sri Lanka, Kenya, Costa Rica and more recently South Africa have taken.49 Thus the Ministry at the Centre and Departments in States continue to shy away from the decisive steps, mechanisms and legislation that only they can put in place to directly protect our children from sexual abuse and trafficking linked to tourism, and have for the moment, settled on a CSR like measure linked to the CWG 2010. When zero tolerance is so easily declared against beggars, the Government drags its feet to protect its children through declaring zero-tolerance and taking active measures against perpetrators of child sexual abuse in tourism.


Increase in Sex Work ewspaper reports indicate the growing possibility of increased demand for prostitutes with the onset of the games and arrival of a large number of tourists. The link between mega events and increased prostitution has been established in earlier games.50 51


even though it has little to do with sport per se. However the trend to equate (or rather reduce) Indian culture to Bollywood is regrettable! “See you in Delhi” was the message splashed during the closing ceremony of the Melbourne Games 2006 in a 11-minute show that reportedly cost Rs. 40 crore, featuring Bollywood artists including superstars Aishwarya Rai and Saif Ali Khan.58 The Opening and Closing Ceremonies of the Commonwealth Game 2010 has a budget of Rs.84 crore, and Wizcraft International Entertainment will be event managers for both ceremonies, to be held in Delhi”s Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium. A media source put this figure at Rs 400 crores.59 The IOA has also invited up to 17 celebrities who have a connection with sport on the field or through films to promote the event free of cost. Sportspersons Leander Paes, Mahesh Bhupati, Milkha Singh, Vishwanath Anand, Prakash Padukone and Bollywood favourites Shahrukh Khan, Preity Zinta and Aamir Khan, Deepika Padukone Nana Patekar, and A.R Rehman are among those who have been invited to make the Games a “star-studded” event.60 Efforts to sensitise citizens of Delhi into behaving like they belong to a “world-class city” are also underway. Citizen Dentsu, a Mumbai based social communications group has launched a campaign on behalf of the Delhi Government on an experimental basis and will be intensifying the campaign in 2010 in the run-up to the Games. A mascot in the form of “Dilli ki Ladli” attempts to inspire civic awareness in the citizens of Delhi.61 Similarly, the Incredible India “Athithi Devo Bhava” campaign was launched by the Ministry of Tourism featuring actor director and producer Aamir Khan, who exhorts citizens not to misbehave or cheat foreign tourists and not to deface places of tourist interest.62 The Delhi Tourism Department is also bringing out a book of good manners called “Delhi Celebrates” Rina Ray, Managing Director of Delhi Tourism explains “We want to tell them don’t urinate in public, don’t spit, keep your houses and shops clean, keep public transport safe and such things… This will tell every Delhiite that instead of being on the sidelines as a spectator, he or she can contribute to a better Games.”63 Another area receiving attention by the Delhi Government in the run up to the Games is women’s’ safety, especially in the run up to the

Sex workers are learning English, while GB Road, Delhi’s red light district is also “sprucing up its act in anticipation of big business from tourists”.52 NGOs are involved in conducting medical tests, including tests to identify those who are HIV positive and providing counselling.53 One lakh condoms will be ready to be given out to athletes and officials who ask for it during the Games at the Village clinic and probably at the reception as well. That apart, the National AIDS Control Organisation (NACO) will install condom-vending machines at the stadia and other public areas.54 Media reports refer to increased activity by escort services55 to meet the demand “While precise numbers cannot be ascertained, the shortfall in the number of women available in New Delhi is approximately 50 per cent, of which 25 per cent will be met by the cities named above. The other 25 per cent will be sourced from Punjab and Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and the North East. The one-lakh figure includes sportspersons, officials and visitors to the games.” In the absence of a move either to decriminalise or legalise prostitution, sex workers continue to be regarded as a problem of law and order. They are have not been given access to either health services, or security, and continue to be subject to harassment and brutality from the police as well as from pimps and clients. The Supreme Court suggested legalising prostitution in India56 a move welcomed by sections of sex workers who see it as a form of empowerment, or at least a protection of their rights. One cannot connect this directly with the CWG but the timing is of interest. South Africa also debated legalising prostitution ahead of the FIFA World Cup to contain the spread of HIV-Aids.57

Transforming Culture
t seems that the “success” of Games partially rests on putting up spectacular opening and closing ceremonies, showcasing the country’s abilities to tie together culture and heritage and tradition along with technology that contributes to creating a slick and visually impressive production



Games, with the focus being the safety of foreign women tourists. Delhi’s Department for Women and Child Welfare launched a series of awareness programmes and workshops in Delhi to sensitise people on women’s safety, which included working with the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC), Delhi Police, Department of Education, and Market Associations. A working committee on women’s safety has also been formed.64 That the impetus to run such basic campaigns and awareness drives becomes the Commonwealth Games is rather disappointing. The paranoia about citizens of Delhi not living up to the image of the “world class city” is definitely immense, judging by the exhortations and campaigns launched to change behaviour and public practices. Home Minister P. Chidambaram has been quoted saying “We should seize the opportunity of the Commonwealth Games to change our behavioural pattern. We must behave as (residents of) an international city”.65 Earlier, Chidambaram had criticised Delhiites for being rude, loud and discourteous. Chief Minister Sheila Dixit, at the Delhi Tourism Conclave announced “We want tourists to go back with the impression that Delhi is a sophisticated city.” At the same platform, Ray much like an anxious mother before the house guests arrive, said: “We don’t want to start (the campaign) too early lest it fizzles out.”66 As long as the delinquent citizens of Delhi adopt behavioural changes for the duration of the Games, it will probably go back to being no particular concern to the admonishing bodies post the Games!

According to Horne and Manzenreiter, “Sports mega-events have been largely developed by undemocratic organizations, often with anarchic decision-making and a lack of transparency, and more often in the interests of global flows rather than local communities. In this respect they represent a shift of public funds to private interests. Such organizations represent part of the ideological assault on citizenship that has occurred since the 1980s, which prefer global consumers to local publics.68 Given that the official stakeholders of the Commonwealth Games 2010 identified in the Host City Contract are the Commonwealth Games Federation, Indian Olympics Association, Organising Committee, Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, and the Government of India the ordinary residents, citizens, and project-affected people are simply not considered stakeholders at all! The Commonwealth Games Organising Committee has resisted attempts at disclosing information and thereby being publically accountable for its actions. A recent attempt by the MYAS to reign in the tenure of office bearers of sports bodies was met with stiff resistance from the IOA, demonstrating the sorry state of affairs in our country.69 With no official channels for public consultation and wider public consent on the implications of bringing the Games to Delhi, citizens have had to voice their concerns through making RTI applications and petitions, staging demonstrations, forming groups and coalitions, organising public campaigns and writing to various officials on their concerns about certain developments. When all fails, litigation is the long and weary road upon which they are forced to embark. RTI Merry Go Round – Foiling the Citizen’s Right to Information oncerned citizens monitoring developments in relation to the Commonwealth Games are continuing to battle with tenacity and courage to claim their right to information and to demand accountability from key bodies. In spite of a directive, the IOA and the OC managed to duck this obligation for over four years and only recently have finally been obligated by a High Court Order.

Democratic Deficit and Public Participation


ublic participation, accountability and democratic processes are perhaps most significant casualties in the organising of mega sports events. The International Olympics Association has the dubious distinction of being listed in the Global Accountability Report 2008 (One World Trust) listing the world’s most powerful corporate, intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations that are not answerable to the people they affect. The International Olympics Committee (IOC) received the lowest overall score in the report with 32% accountability against its accountability indicators.67



The Central Information Commission (CIC) in November 2006 held that the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) was a public authority under the RTI Act 2005 and directed it to provide the particulars of expenses incurred by it on tours in connection with the Commonwealth Games to an RTI applicant. The Organising Committee, not taking kindly to this turn of events challenged the CIC in the Delhi High Court, where it also argued that if it was brought under the RTI Act, work will get unnecessarily stuck in responding to queries, proving a setback to the preparation of the games. Dismissing the appeals of the OC and the IOA against the CIC order to provide information, Justice Ravinder Bhatt of the Delhi High Court ruled that both are public authorities under the RTI Act 2005, have to provide information and cannot keep their accounts private.70 Following the ruling on 7th January 2010 and a push once again from the MYAS,71 the OC finally set up an RTI cell on 15th March 2010. Though the Sports Ministry was instrumental in opening up the IOA and OC to the RTI Act, the Ministry itself has been found to evade public disclosure of information. An RTI application sought information on expenditure incurred on Gamesrelated foreign visits of its officials abroad for which the central government had almost doubled the budget. The rejection of the application brought to light that the information requested was not available, and neither were records of Games related meetings available.72 EQUATIONS has also faced a similar issue, where an RTI request made to the OC, on 13th April 2010 was transferred to 12 different authorities without indicating which part of the RTI was applicable to whom. Many offices73 replied identifying the OC as the appropriate authority to answer the questions, during which process more than 37 days elapsed, leading us to suspect that the OC is either evading or delaying the release of the information.74 On filing an appeal we were summoned by the Appellate Authority of the OC to Delhi to personally present our case and the Appellate Authority’s speaking orders are awaited. “We are only a coordinating agency” the OC claimed. Discussions with the IOA75 official to whom the RTI was also forwarded indicated that the IOA’s view was that it concerned itself only with the contingent of athletes and it was the Organising Committee that needed to answer all questions related to the Games.

Similar experiences are chronicled by PUDR in their report of April 2009 on violation of workers’ rights, by HLRN, and other organisations as well. Battling Public Interest part from several other forms of peoples protests, there have been at least three PILs filed by citizens and groups on various aspects of the games – with regard violations of construction workers rights, wiping beggars off Delhi’s streets and compromising the Yamuna riverbed by allowing a Games Village in the area that people were evicted in order to “protect” the river.


The Siri Fort upgradation that has been on for 18 months to make the facilities Olympic standard has been severely criticised by members who use the facilities Residents of the area strongly protest trees being cut to make way for the badminton and squash courts, deeming the entire exercise “a waste of public money”. According to architect Gautam Bhatia, “Initially it was about saving the trees and the area’s heritage sites. Now it is imperative to also highlight that good sense needs to be employed while planning these projects. As per media reports, the Supreme Court cleared the constructions on the greenbelt contending that much time had been lost, that the damage already caused to the environment could not be undone now, and ordered the authorities to seek approval of a court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) before chopping down any more trees. This diluted verdict was despite the fact that the three member Supreme Court Bench had appointed eminent architect and town planner Charles Correa to review the project. Correa criticised the DDA for ignoring all norms while giving the project a goahead, and wondered why the DDA had chosen the green belt area of the Siri Fort auditorium for the courts and the parking area. The report had said 10 hectares of forest land had been encroached upon and that there had been indiscriminate uprooting of trees “The site selection was not proper and the design far from satisfactory.” His recommendation was that the structures be relocated, and the original forest restored.76 77 In the case of the Games Village being set up on the floodplains of the Yamuna, two Writ Petitions in the High Court78 were submitted in the year 2007, one by Vinod Jain from Tapas, and the other


had four petitioners - Rajendra Singh, Magsaysay Award Winner, and ‘Water Man’ of India; Manoj Misra, former IFS Officer and currently Convenor of the Yamuna Jiye Abhiyaan; INTACH, a nonprofit organisation set up to protect and conserve India’s vast natural and cultural heritage; and Sanjay Kaul, a leading civil rights activist. The PILs highlight the area as having prime ecological importance to the city as it is instrumental in recharging the groundwater aquifers of the city and managing/controlling flood. Indian rivers are fed by the monsoons and have a tendency to flood, making it integral that both the river and floodplain be protected. As the Yamuna floods once every 4-5 years, in addition to which climatechange may induce unforeseen flooding, with the reigning in of the river with “development” there is now no room for floodplains to absorb or contain the excess water, thereby inundating the city.79 Yamuna Satyagrahas have taken place, and appeals have been sent by groups such as the Yamuna Jiye Abiyan highlighting many of the issues with locating the Games Village on the floodplain, including its propensity for seismic activity.80 The PIL81 submitted by Rajendra Singh and others was based on three main contentions: • The first contention was that the area is an ecologically fragile and the clearance for construction violates the Public Trust Doctrine which places a duty on the State to hold environmental resources in trust for the benefit of the public. The PIL also elaborates upon the ecological importance of the river through recharging of groundwater benefitting the city of Delhi in particular, and that the “Yamuna flood plain area” is a “notified area”, declared by the Central Ground Water Authority under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, and that a committee has been set up to by the MoEF to formulate a Draft River Regulation Zone along the lines of the Coastal Regulation Zone, as laid out in the 10th Five Year Plan document. • The second contention was that the construction on the floodplains of the river Yamuna is a violation of a previous High Court Judgement that cleared encroachments and displaced many in order to protect the river from pollution caused by encroachers. The petition therefore ponders upon how various constructions on the Yamuna riverbed is justified after the area was cleared, supposedly to get “encroachers” out

of the way in order to “make Yamuna free from encroachments and pollution of all kinds”, only to ultimately hand it over to the more privileged and elite sections of society. • The third contention was that the environment clearance letter from the Ministry of Environment and Forests for the Games Village was modified to allow permanent constructions on the riverbed without the approval of the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC), thus disregarding the procedure laid down in the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006. The two writ petitions finally ended up in the Supreme Court through Special Leave Petitions, and a common judgment was issued. Among the final conclusions based on which the judgment cleared the construction was that, “In view of notification in the Gazette of the Government of India dated 21st September 1999 relating to change of land use and to the fact that the site in question for the construction of Games Village had been chosen and widely published way back in the year 2003 itself, the writ petitions which were filed before the High Court of Delhi only in the year 2007, in the absence of proper explanation, the High Court ought not to have probed the matter at this juncture.” and also that “On a conjoint reading of NEERI reports 1999, 2005 and January, 2008 coupled with its assertion in the form of an affidavit dated 29th January 2008 clearly show that the Games Village site is not either on a “riverbed” or on the “floodplain” of the Yamuna river.” Ritwick Dutta explains that the land was considered an “agricultural water body” and the land use of the area changed in 1999 to “public” and “semi-public” use. The Court’s contention was that the petitioners should have opposed the change in land-use at that point in time or in 2003. However, the contention of the petitioners is that the grounds to challenge the construction in court came only with the issuance of modified version of the environmental clearance letter in April 2007, while the PIL was filed in September 2007. In addition, the PIL was filed before any construction work had started, and there was enough time to find an alternative site to start construction, but the final order from the Supreme Court came only in November 2008, by which time a significant amount of construction had taken place.


There is no doubt that the construction of the Akshardham temple in 2000-2001 alongside the river gave precedence for the construction of the Games Village and other developments including the Delhi Metro Depot and the Metro Mall. However, the then reigning Environment Impact Assessment Notification 1994 did not include construction projects and the EIA process did not apply to the Akshardham temple. The construction of the Akshardham temple was directly challenged in the Supreme Court by the U.P Employees Federation, but the case was lost.82 The judgement permitting the construction of the Games Village seems to be a way the Supreme Court has evaded being held responsible if the Commonwealth Games did not make it to Delhi in 2010. A review petition against the Judgement of the SC has been filed by the original petitioners in the case, which among other things, stresses the fact that expert-opinion was in fact against the siting of the project at its present location, and that the expert opinion of the EAC constituted to evaluate the merits of the project for environmental clearance was bypassed in subsequent modifications to the clearance letter. While there is no compulsion on the part of the Supreme Court to respond to the review petition, it does put on record that the battle goes on. Ducking the EIA Process nother attempt to bypass democratic process and public consultation was the request by the Delhi Government to exempt all constructions related to the Commonwealth Games from having to procure the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) certificate, and by extension the entire EIA process, on the grounds that it would cause delays in meeting infrastructure deadlines. If exemptions are not possible, the MoEF was requested to “rationalise guidelines” as a special case.83 Dr. Bharat Bhushan,84 Director (Scientific), MoEF confirms that CWG projects were prioritised, but claimed that no concessions were made with respect to exemptions from procedure. However the sequence of events as known to us indicates otherwise. The PIL filed by Rajendra Singh & Others vs. Govt. Of Delhi and Others, Constitution Filing No. 134027/2007 gives a detailed documentation85 of the process by which the Environmental Clearance letter for the Commonwealth Games Village issued by the MoEF was modified to allow permanent constructions on the riverbed without

the approval of the Expert Appraisal Committee, thus disregarding the procedure laid down in the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 1994/2006. The manner in which the DDA has applied pressure via what the PIL calls an “ultimatum” and the manner in which the MoEF has succumbed indeed makes a complete mockery of the EIA process of the MoEF, as the PIL remarks. Also highlighted in the EAC meetings is that the Safdarjung Airport was proposed by the EAC as an alternative site for consideration, but was dismissed by the DDA on the grounds that the land was not with the DDA and did not examine any other location for the Commonwealth Games Village. Moving from the specific documentation of the PIL, considering that the MoEF granted clearance to the Games Villages under the provisions EIA 1994 (amended up to 2004) public hearings are a mandatory requirement for environmental clearance. Since there seems to be no evidence that public hearings were actually conducted, a violation of the provisions of 1994 notification (and its amendments) is indicated. It also contradicts the claims of the MOEF that no ‘concessions were made with respect to procedure of EIA notification for CWG. The environment clearance letters for CWG village issued by the MoEF still remain unavailable to the public on the website of the MoEF. Several questions have been raised in both houses of the Parliament on the issue of environment clearances for the Games Village. The answer of the Ministry of Urban Development and the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports has been rather consistent and in the vein of “yes there have been some objections by environmentalists, but proper clearances have been given”. That the MoEF weakened its stand, and corrupted its own laws and procedures to allow for permanent instead of the original temporary structures to come up in the Games Village is a matter of grave concern. That this was the course of events despite alternative sites being available and in the face of vociferous public opposition on ecological and environmental grounds indicates its disregard for both public concerns and ecological concerns as well.



End Notes
1. Katyal A & Sharma S, “What Does A Beautiful Delhi Look Like?” Countercurrents; 22nd March 2010, katyal220310.htm data retrieved July 2010 2. See Annexure 6: For a case on similar impacts anticipated with FIFA World Cup 2010 3. “Commonwealth Games to have $4500 million impact: Kalmadi”, The Sports Campus; 28th November 2009 http://www.thesportscampus. com/200911282877/news-bytes/cwg-economic-impact, data retrieved January 2010. 4. News “Quebec’s Big Owe stadium debt is over”, CBC News; 19th December 2006, qc-olympicstadium.html, data retrieved March 2010. 5. Uppal, V., (2009) 6. “Where are the sponsors?: CWG OC Struggling To Raise Rs 1,600 Crore To Repay Loan”, Times of India; 2nd June 2010, data retrieved June 2010 7. See Citizens for Workers, Women and Children Factsheet,, data retrieved January 2010 8. “Commonwealth Games to have $4500 million impact: Kalmadi”, The Sports Campus; 28th November 2009 http://www.thesportscampus. com/200911282877/news-bytes/cwg-economic-impact, data retrieved January 2010. 9. Uppal, V., (2009) 10. HLRN (2010): Fact Sheet 3.The Economics of the Games: Necessary Expenditure? Wasteful Extravagance? Page 5 11. Subramanian, S., and Raghav, K., “The Economics of the Games”, Live Mint; 26th October 2009, http://www.livemint. com/2009/10/26205604/The-economics-of-the-Games.html, data retrieved January 2010 12. “2010 Commonwealth Games to create $6 Billion Business opportunity”; 3rd October 2009, http://2010commonwealthgamesindia., data retrieved January 2010 13. “Cwealth Games to boost Delhi GDP by 49%,” LiveMint; 17th June 2007 data retrieved June 2010 14. India’s Bid CWG 2010, Pg 36 15. “CBCI to promote India as business destination”, The Hindu; 22nd September 2009, article23677.ece, data retrieved January 2010. 16. “Corporates to sponsor events and sports in 2010 CWG”, 23rd September 2009, http://2010commonwealthgamesindia.blogspot. com/2009/09/corporates-to-sponsor-events-and-sports.html, data retrieved January 2010 17. “Corporates to sponsor events and sports in 2010 CWG”, 23rd September 2009, http://2010commonwealthgamesindia.blogspot. com/2009/09/corporates-to-sponsor-events-and-sports.html, data retrieved January 2010 18. HLRN (2010) Fact Sheet 3. The Economics of the Games: Necessary Expenditure? Wasteful Extravagance? 19. Smith, R.V., “Screening Ugly Scars”, The Hindu; 29th August 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 20. Estimates of the number of workers range from 25000 to 55000 skilled and unskilled workers 21. 22. Meaning work for no payment 23. “In the Name of National Pride - Blatant violation of Workers Rights in the Commonwealth Games Construction Sites” Peoples Union for Democratic Rights, April 2009 24. PUDR Team, “Violation of Workers’ Rights at the Commonwealth Games Construction Site”, Economic and Political Weekly; Volume 44, No, 24, 13th June 2009 25. Garg, A., “Workers at Commonwealth Games sites an exploited lot: Panel”, Times of India; 18th March 2010, http://timesofindia., data retrieved March 2010 26. “Commonwealth Games construction kills 43”, The Sydney Morning Herald; 18th March 2010, data retrieved March 2010 27. See Annexure 7: Mega Sports, Displacements and Forced Evictions - a dismal record 28. Menon-Sen K and Bhan G, (2008). Also see Menon–Sen, K “Better to have died than to live like this”, Economic and Political Weekly, 20th May 2006. 29. Jamwal N, “Violent Homecoming”, Down to Earth; Vol 13 ,No 5, 31st July 2004, name=news&sec_id=50&sid=54 data retrieved July2010. 30. Prasad R, ”Slums razed to suit Delhi’s middle class” The Observer; 2nd May 2004, raekhaprasad, data retrieved July 2010 31. HLRN (2010): Fact Sheet 4. The Social Legacy of the Games: Who Gains? Who Loses? Pg 2 32. Annexure 8: Evictions directly attributable to CWG 2010, based on HLRN (2010) 33. Ridge, M., “Delhi to jail beggars for 2010 Games”, The Telegraph; 24th June 2007 worldnews/1555519/Delhi-to-jail-beggars-for-2010-Games.html data retrieved January 2010 34. “Beggars off the roads before Games, Court Assured”, Kahabar Express; 14th March 2010,, data retrieved March 2010 35. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Researcher, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 6th March 2010 36. Kalyani-Menon Sen, feminist activist, researcher and writer, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 11th March 2010 37. Pattnaik, S. K. “Delhi’s Anti-Beggar Drive Faces Practical Problem”, Outlook; 14th February 2010 aspx?674559, data retrieved March 2010 38. Ramanathan, U. “Ostensible Poverty, Beggary and the Law”, Economic and Political Weekly; Vol. 43, No. 44; 1 November 2008 39. Ray, S., “Traffic police begin removing beggars”, Hindustan Times; 19th June 2010, data retrieved June 2010 40. Mahaprashasta A.A (2010) “War on Beggars” Frontline; Volume 27, Issue 13, 19th June- 2nd July


41. Shahri Adhikar Manch Commends High Court Order on Homeless Shelter in Delhi, Shahri Adhikar Manch: Begharon Ke Liye (Urban Rights Forum: For the Homeless), Press Release, 7th January 2010, 2010.pdf, data retrieved March 2010 42. Nundy, K., “A Judge Extraordinaire”, The Hindu; 12th February 2010, data retrieved March 2010 43. “HC pulls up MCD for demolishing night shelter”, Hindustan Times; 6th January 2010, HC-pulls-up-MCD-for-demolishing-night-shelter/Article1-494600.aspx, data retrieved January 2010 44. SEWA Delhi and One World Action (2007) “Transforming Lives: Protecting Livelihoods of Construction Workers and Street Vendors through organising and advocacy” 45. “Licences for 14,000 street vendors”, Hindustan Times; 20th January, 2010, data retrieved January 2010 46. “Street vendors association slams MCD ‘eviction threat” Hindustan Times; 8th June 2010, newdelhi/Street-vendors-association-slams-MCD-eviction-threat/Article1-554941.aspx, data retrieved June 2010 47. Kumar, V., “Ministry unveils code of conduct for tourism industry”, The Hindu; 2nd July 2010, article495393.ece, data retrieved July 2010 48. Dhawan H, “Government announce code of ethics to curb sex tourism during CWG”, Times of India; 2nd July 2010 http://timesofindia., data retrieved July 2010 49. See Annexure 9: Countries in the global south who have declared zero tolerance against child sexual abuse in tourism/signed the International Code of Conduct for Protection of Children 50. “In South Africa: 40,000 sex workers, 1 billion condoms and the World Cup, U.S. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention”, 21st May 2010, 51. Dhawan H, “Global sports events a trafficking hazard?”, Times of India; 3rd July 2010,, retrieved July 2010 52. Soofi, M.A., “Green signal for Red light”, Hindustan Times; 11th December 2009, Print/485369.aspx, data retrieved January 2010 53. “Brothels get a facelift ahead of Commonwealth Games”, Hindustan Times; 30th May 2010, newdelhi/Brothels-get-a-facelift-ahead-of-CWG/Article1-550705.aspx, data retrieved June 2010 54. Dastidar, A.G. and Mathur A, “The big, fat 14-day-long Delhi party”, Hindustan Times; New Delhi, 1st July 2010, http://www. data retrieved July2010 55. Singh B K, Singh A, “Game Plan” Mid Day; 20th October 2009, data retrieved July 2010 56. “Supreme Court proposes legalising prostitution” Livemint; 10 December 2009,, data retrieved June 2010 57. “South Africa mulls legalising prostitution to check HIV during World Cup”, DNA, 9th January 2010, report_south-africa-mulls-legalising-prostitution-to-check-hiv-during-world-cup_1332813, data retrieved January 2010 58. See, data retrieved June 2010 59. Bisht A and Naqvi S, Conquerors of the golden city, Hardnews; 14th May 2010, data retrieved June 2010 60. K., Shobhana, “To Promote Games, a star-studded List”, Indian Express; 2nd October 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 61. “Now, PR experts to firm up Delhi’s image”, 15th December 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 62. “Union Tourism Minister launches three new social awareness commercials of Ministry of Tourism (MoT) featuring Aamir Khan”, 17th December 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 63. Dastidar, A. G., “Delhi, smarten up before Games: CM”, Hindustan Times; 19th March 2010, newdelhi/Delhi-smarten-up-before-Games-CM/Article1-520726.aspx, data retrieved March 2010 64. Bhattacharya, S., “All aboard the ladies special”, Infochange News & Features; July 2009 Women/Features/All-aboard-the-ladies-special.html, data retrieved January 2010 65. “Delhites should learn to behave: Chidambaram”, 22nd September 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 66. Dastidar, A. G., “Delhi, smarten up before Games: CM”, Hindustan Times; 19th March 2010,, data retrieved March 2010 67. Slavin M., “IOC among the world’s least accountable organisations”, 17th May 2009, data retrieved January 2010 68. Horne, J. and Manzenreiter, W. (2006) “An introduction to the sociology of sports mega-events”, Sociological Review, Vol. 54, Issue. S2, December, data retrieved January 2010 69. “IOA rejects tenure regulations, Kalmadi called ‘dictator’”, India Today; 18th May 2010, Story/97915/SPORTS/IOA+rejects+tenure+regulations,+Kalmadi+called+’dictator’.html, data retrieved June 2010 70. “RTI applies to Commonwealth Games Organising Committee”, Hindustan Times; 7th January 2010,, data retrieved June 2010 71. “Sports ministry asks IOA, CGOC to fulfil RTI obligations”, IANS; 2nd February 2010, data retrieved in June 2010 72. “No data on officials’ foreign visits for CWG: Sports Ministry”, Times of India; 13th December 2009, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.


com/sports/events-tournaments/commonwealth-games-2010/No-data-on-officials-foreign-visits-for-CWG-Sports-Ministry-/ articleshow/5332478.cms, data retrieved January 2010 73. The list of offices identifying the OC as the appropriate authority for the information sought are the Central Public Works Department (letter dated 26th January 2010), University of Delhi (letter dated 18th May 2010), Engineering Department, University of Delhi (letter dated 13th May 2010) and the Urban Development Department (letter dated 29th April 2010, which redirects the application back to the PIO, Organising Committee). 74. See Annexure 2: The Right to Information 75. George Mathew, PIO, IOA, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 8th July 2010. 76. “Siri Fort Games project gets SC’s okay”, Indian Express; 28th April 2009,, data retrieved January 2010 77. “Siri Fort residents protest “misuse” of funds for sports complex revamp”, Indian Express; 14th March 2009, http://www.indianexpress. com/news/siri-fort-residents-protest-misuse-of-funds-for-sports-complex-revamp/434343/0, data retrieved January 2010 78. Dutta, R. (2009) “The Unquiet River: An Overview of Select decisions of Courts on the River Yamuna”, published by PEACE Institute Charitable Trust, Delhi 79. See, data retrieved January 2010 80. Satyagraha- is a non violent protest. Letter to the President, CGF, written by Yamuna Jiye Abhiyan, dated 14th August 2007 endorsed by 91 local groups/individuals. 81. Rajendra Singh & Others vs. Govt. of Delhi and Others, PIL under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, (Filing No. 134027/2007) 82. Ritwick Dutta, Environmental Lawyer, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 4th March, 2010 83. “What Impact?” Down to Earth 15th May 2006 data retrieved July 2010 84. Bharat Bhushan, Director (Scientific), Ministry of Environment and Forests, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 4th March 2010 85. Annexure 10: Working around the EIA- Extracts from the PIL indicating the events leading to the Games Village getting an EIA clearance.



Humanity, Equality, Destiny”, are the three core values endorsed by the Commonwealth Games movement. Inspiring as this is intended to be, the Commonwealth Games 2010 impacts that are already visible have not reflected any of these values. Construction workers, street vendors, beggars, the evicted and displaced, the Yamuna, the environment, the tax-payer, the street child, the homeless, trees and birds, the government ex-chequer all emerge as casualties of the Commonwealth Games. Overarching these are the twin casualties of inclusive growth and democratic processes.

The Commonwealth Casualties
Casualty Two: Use of Public Funds


Casualty One: Democratic Processes & Public Accountability


he world’s largest democracy has not had any form of public consultation or public debate about hosting the Commonwealth Games, where it could be held and the implications it would have. Basic democratic processes have been sacrificed to satisfy the push ahead by a few vested interests to stage the Games. India went to bid for the Games without prior discussion in the Cabinet and without allowing for public debate before the decision was taken. Clearances have been expedited bypassing decisions of mandatory committees and courts have given “favourable” judgments with a view to avoid “further” delays. In an audacious attempt to bypass public scrutiny the Organising Committee of the CWG left no stone unturned to argue that it should not be under the ambit of the Right to Information Act 2005. While it failed in that attempt, its evasive responses to RTIs have not inspired confidence in its willingness to be accountable. As a result, numerous citizen watchdog groups, research studies and investigations, petitions and Public Interest Litigation, task forces on violations of rights, protests by street vendors, beggars, sanitary workers, residents forums, campaigns by child protection groups, RTI applications – all forms of vibrant civil society action has been set into motion – as the writing is clear on the wall – this is not “fair play”.

he Commonwealth Games has been an expensive affair and has seen obscenely escalating costs. The OC continues to insist that the cost of the Games is 1620 crores. Delhi’s state budget has also found novel ways of increasing taxes and removing subsidies that will go toward recovering the costs of the infrastructure and other expenditure commitments for the Commonwealth Games, an uninvited burden on its citizens. It is not surprising if citizens already burdened by rising prices and struggling to makes ends meet do not want to “pay for” the airfare and training of athletes of 70 other countries, even if it was the deal clincher in giving India the honour of staging the Games, and massive stadia, luxury accommodation and flyovers that they will not use. The huge discrepancy between social budgetheads and Games-budget-heads, is compounded by instances of funds having been diverted for Games-related expenditure from key heads like the Special Component plan, the health plan and the PYKKA. To inflict the Games on its masses already on the margins and battling to survive in a harsh and inhospitable city is both ironic and cruel.

Casualty Three: The Misfits in a World Class City


he Government of Delhi has a simple formula for all those who are termed misfits in their idea of the world class city - do away with them. This intolerance for those not good enough is alarming as there is a fine line between people being seen as inconvenient, to being intolerant of them, and then being totally inhuman. That this line has clearly been blurred is cause for deep concern. India’s Bid for the Games claims “Regional disparities on social and economic growth are on the decrease. The standard of living of the common man is rising. Individual liberties and rights are zealously safeguarded.” In various court ruling of great importance the word “life” in Article 21 of the Constitution holds


that life does not mean mere physical or animal existence. It also includes the use of every limb and faculty through which life is enjoyed and encompasses the right to live with basic human dignity and all that goes along with it namely, the bare necessities such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter. When Governments forget this primary obligation and treats its citizens with contempt and as disposable, all talk of national pride and the coming of age of India as a superpower is hollow and in fact dangerous.

sections of society. The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports in discounting the draft of a progressive sports policy has focussed its energy and funds on ensuring that world class infrastructure and facilities are available to our sportsperson guests and a few elites for a fortnight plus. It has in the process also discounted its own schemes and vision for sports for all.

Casualty Six: The Tourism Booster Dose
The contention of the Government that holding a sports mega-event will boost tourism is suspect at the least and more likely specious. The focus and promotion of high-end tourism through taxbreaks, and banks, and concessions being provided boosting the luxury sector, addresses an elite layer of both tourists and tourism service providers and a legacy of resource-intensive infrastructure, benefiting primarily the real estate lobby. Links between mega sports events and promised gains in terms of economic boost and boost in tourism, based on several research studies of other mega sport events have been discounted in a classic case of the ”Emperor’s New Clothes”. This is nothing new as tourism policy and plans in the country have rarely been based on well researched projections of likely impacts or empirical evidence actual impacts. In fact the Ministry has persisted in knee jerk reactions in the form of schemes to serious issues of tourism policy, plans and investments, refusing to learn from years of ground level evidence, or listening to a range of stakeholders in tourism. Furthermore, the Ministry fails to see its role as holding the stewardship of tourism policy for the benefits of a wide section of players and not cater only to the industry elites as the case of the Commonwealth Games 2010 sadly reconfirms.

Casualty Four: The Rights of Citizenship and Democratic Dissent
ith the shrinking spaces for public dissent, and removal of all signs of urban poverty the vision is to make Delhi a city amenable to perfect holidays but not to democratic dissent. Related with the need to transform the city into perfection, is doing away with spaces that have come to inculcate the idea of democracy and dissent. Jantar Mantar, which has been a site of protest for a wide array of people with different backgrounds and different issues from across the nation, who often come to the seat of ultimate power – the capital city as their last recourse. Their shabby tents have been their temporary homes of people, are now the target of the police and NDMC officials who forcibly evict protestors no longer allowed to be there “overnight”. No temporary structures will be tolerated till the Commonwealth Games are over, because the city needs to be beautiful. The move to apply Sec 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code to dedicated lanes for sportspersons and officials is also symptomatic to the ludicrous lengths to which such ideas can be taken.


Casualty Seven: Humanity, Equality, Destiny

Casualty Five: Sports Culture in India


he impact of Commonwealth Games on the sports culture of the country needs to be critically examined. The CWG has done little to help spot and develop sporting talent in the more established sports or promote indigenous sport. Sporting facilities set up may be “world-class” but the gates will be closed for the common citizen, and to genuine sporting talent that lies latent in rural and small towns in India or lesser-privileged


he mantra of inclusive growth without which no speech of the Prime Minister is complete, has failed to recognise the large number of casualties of the Games – those whose realties are of no consequence at the altar of national pride. To mark the 100 days countdown Mr Kalmadi gushed “CWG is a powerful tool that can strengthen social ties and networks, and promote ideals of peace, fraternity, solidarity, non-violence, tolerance and justice – all that independent


India has stood for and championed actively.” Mr Kalmadi could not get it wronger, and what is frightening is that he and many others in his camp may actually believe their own propaganda. There are millions of Indians not in Mr Kalmadi’s camp, and they are those who have been excluded. The Safai Karmachari Andolan - a peoples movement to eradicate manual scavenging in India has been waging a relentless legal battle in the Supreme Court since 2003 seeking implementation of the 1993 law abolishing scavenging that will “liberate” 1.3 million manual scavengers from this most inhuman practise. On the eve of the New Year 2008, they launched ‘Action 2010’ a concerted campaign to eliminate manual scavenging in India by 2010. The countdown on the website of the SKA is like the countdown on the website of the CWG 2010, only the goals are very different. One deals with national shame while the other claims it deals with national pride. As we go to press, thousands of temporary sanitary workers employed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi have gone on strike demanding permanent jobs and payment of arrears. The MCD hired them on a daily wage basis from 1994 promising that they would be regularised. However a few days later the MCD claimed it was broke and has no money to pay even salaries. Developments like the Commonwealth games arrogate the means of and for inclusive growth. The countdown of the SKA to abolish manual scavenging in India, the desperate action by sanitation workers to a regular job since 1994, are carelessly swept aside, as are many others, whose realities and struggles, dreams and destinies, do not count anymore in the India that has arrived.

What does the Government see as the role of tourism? If one studies the Ministry of Tourism’s own propaganda, and that of the Parliament Standing Committee, tourism is the magic wand – that will hide all warts and shameful things and present an idyllic picture postcard of all that we wish Delhi and our country to be. This is why most schemes of tourism departments have the word beautification, and people have to be trained to behave lest the tourist is not happy and runs away. However, what the Ministry of Tourism is running away from is dealing with the reality of the filth and squalor that are part of most of our tourist destinations, recognising that in a country with endemic poverty, local people who live in destinations gain little from tourism and exist on its crumbs. It refuses to recognise that its policy making and implementation priorities have little or no substantiation for claims on millions of jobs, projection of millions of future tourists and local economy economic multipliers. Continuing to provide sops and subsidies to a slim creamy layer of tourism elites disregarding their complete lack of accountability is what the government is obsessed with. Such a view results in a serious disconnect from reality and forbids any engagement or interrogation of facts. Symptoms such as these in an individual would be clinically termed psychotic disorder. It is time the Ministry of Tourism faces its delusion that its key role is to be the promotional agency for colourful Incredible India ad campaigns. Its culpability in the worst human rights abuses of ruthless and heartless evictions of the poor and vulnerable is what it needs to face and be accountable for. It is time we revision tourism.

Casualty Eight: Envisioning Tourism


he view of the city through the eyes of a foreigner has been a defining factor in sculpting the vision of Delhi as a “world-class city”. A Delhi with an international feel with its low-floor buses, modernised mine is bigger than yours airport terminals, extended metro, five star luxury hotels, world class stadia and swanky Games Village and flyovers is what constitutes the imagination.


Reports, Documents, Papers and Studies
Archaeological Survey of India, “Proposal for conservation, restoration and improvement of tourist amenities of the centrally protected monuments of Delhi for the Commonwealth Games 2010” Batra, L (2008) “Deconstructing the ‘world class’ city”, Seminar, Issue 581 Baviskar, A (2007) “Delhi’s Date with the Common Wealth Games 2010: Common Wealth or Kiss of Death?” Games Monitor Bisht, A “Once again Zero Sum Game”, 19 March 2010, Hardnews Black, D (2007) “The Symbolic Politics of Sport Mega-Events: 2010 in Comparative Perspective”, Politikon, Vol. 34, Issue 3, December 2007 COHRE (2007) “Fair Play for Housing Rights: Mega Events, Olympic Games and Housing Rights: Opportunities for the Olympic Movement and Others”, Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions Commonwealth Games Federation (2003) “The Report of the Commonwealth Games Evaluation Commission for the 2010 Commonwealth Games” Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2007) “Report No 2 of 2007” Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2009) “A Report on the Preparedness for the XIX Commonwealth Games” Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2010) “Report No 6 of 2009-10” Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism & Culture (2009) “Development of Tourism Infrastructure and Amenities for the Commonwealth Games 2010” Dutta, R. (2009) “The Unquiet River: An Overview of Select decisions of Courts on the River Yamuna”, published by PEACE Institute Charitable Trust, Delhi ECS “The Real Demand for Rooms” March 2008 ETOA (2006) “Olympic Report”, European Tour Operators Association ETOA (2008) “Olympics and Tourism: Update on Olympic Report 2006”, European Tour Operators Association ETOA (2009) “Beijing Olympic Update”, European Tour Operators Association Faulkner B (1993) “Evaluating the Tourism Impacts of Hallmark Events”, Occasional Paper No 16, Bureau of Tourism Research Canberra Australia Gratton, C., Shibili, S., and Coleman, R., (2005) “Sport and Economic Regeneration in Cities”, Urban Studies, Volume 42 Issue 5/6, May 2005 HLRN (2010) “The 2010 Commonwealth Games: Whose Wealth? Whose Commons?”, Housing and land Rights Network, New Delhi


Horne, J. and Manzenreiter, W. (2006) “An introduction to the sociology of sports mega-events”, Sociological Review, Vol. 54, Issue. s2, December 2006 Indian Olympic Association (2003), Delhi Commonwealth Games 2010 Bid Document. Matheson, Victor A., “Upon Further Review: An Examination of Sporting Event Economic Impact Studies” 2001, Games Monitor Matheson, Victor A. and Baade Robert A, (2004) “Mega -Sporting Events in Developing Nations: Playing the Way to Prosperity?” September 2004 Menon-Sen, K., and Bhan, G., (2008) “Swept of the Map: Surviving Eviction and Resettlement in Delhi” Yoda Press, New Delhi Ministry of Tourism (2003) “Twenty Year Tourism Perspective Plan for the State of Delhi” Ministry of Tourism (2006) “International Passenger Survey 2003” Ministry of Tourism (2007) “Action Plan to increase Flow of Foreign Tourists visiting India” Ministry of Tourism (2009) “Report of the Ministry of Tourism: Assessment of Number of Tourists Expected to Visit Delhi during Commonwealth Games 2010 and Requirement of Rooms for Them” Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, “Annual Report 2009-10” Mirabilis Advisory Pvt Limited, “Champion Cities: Recognising the Transformative Potential of Mega Sports Events 2008” Owen, G. J. (2005) “Estimating the Cost and Benefit of Hosting Olympic Games: What Can Beijing Expect from Its 2008 Games?” The Industrial Geographer, Vol. 3, Issue 1 Pillay, U.; Tomilson, R.; and Bass, O. (Eds.) (2009) “Development and Dreams: The urban legacy of the 2010 Football World Cup”; HSRC Press PUDR (2004) “India Shining – A report on the demolition and resettlement of Yamuna Pushta Bastis”, Peoples Union for Democratic Rights, New Delhi PUDR (2009), “In the Name of National Pride (Blatant Violation of Workers Rights at the Commonwealth Games Construction Site)”, April, Peoples Union for Democratic Rights, New Delhi Ramanathan U, (2005) “Demolition Drive”, Economic and Political Weekly, 2nd July 2005 Ramanathan U, (2006) “Illegality and the Urban Poor”, Economic and Political Weekly, 22nd July 2006 Ramanathan U, (2008) “Ostensible Poverty Beggary and the Law”, Economic and Political Weekly, 1st November 2008 Roy, D., “Nothing Common about this Wealth”, Hardnews, 24th March, 2010. Uppal, V., (2009) “The Impact of the Commonwealth Games 2010 on Urban Development of Delhi”, Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Vol. 4, Issue 10 Wildsmith, James and Bradfield, Michael (2007) “Halifax Commonwealth Games Bid: Were the Costs and Benefits Assessed?” Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives



Annexure 1: Tourism- Hit or Miss?
(Extracts from European Tour Operators Association Reports)
ourist potential is one of the significant rationales of hosting a mega-sports event. Alas! The trends, as analysed and understood by none other than the European Tour Operators Association point out quite the contrary. The ETOA distinguishes ‘sports visitors’ from ‘regular visitors’. Sports visitors are interested in sport and not in tourism, according to the ETOA, so the main spending is on hotel accommodation, which predominantly house officials, athletes, media persons and sport enthusiasts whose behaviour is akin to businessmen coming in for a convention. Regular visitors expect congestion and increased prices, which dissuades them from travelling to a country during a mega-event. This ‘post Olympic blight’ is supposed to have been common to all the cities that hosted the Games since Seoul in 1988, which were held in Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney, Athens and Beijing. In Barcelona, the hotel occupancy dipped from 70% in 1991 to 64% in 1992, the year that Barcelona staged the Olympics, and continued to dip for the following two years, when occupancy rates touched 54%. It was only in 1998 that it exceeded the 80%mark, where the implied increase in tourism, is attributed, not to the Olympics, but the arrival of cruise ships and low cost airlines in the late nineties. Also, compared to Venice, Florence and Lisbon, tourism growth in Barcelona is below average and post 1992, Barcelona barely kept pace with Prague, and was outstripped by Dublin in terms of tourist arrivals, and the gap was most acute in the five year period after the games. Infact in 1993, ‘Tourisme de Barcelona’ was established to promote tourism to in response to the decline in tourism after the games. Similarly, while Australia and New Zealand, being fairly similar regions, saw comparable tourist traffic in the run up to the Sydney Olympics in 2000, tourism in Australia saw a sudden decline post the event, and it was only in 2004 that it caught up with New Zealand again. Also, while the


occupancy rate in hotels stood at 80% during the Olympics, it had fallen up to 83% in March 2000. ETOA quotes David Mazitelli of the Australian Tourism Export Council (ATEC): ‘The Sydney Olympics had few long term positive impacts beyond 2000 on the growth of Australian tourism. The impacts were short-term and were contained within a relatively tight geographic region. The forecast of a remaining strong impact for the four years following the Games did not eventuate. As soon as the Olympics finished, we started to see a fall away in inbound activity. Australia went into three years of negative growth (2001, 2002 and 2003). Many commentators put it down to terrorism, but we were in decline well before September 11, the collapse of Ansett (an official Olympic airline) on September 14 and Bali. The decline started the day the Olympic focus shifted to somewhere else (World Cup Football in Japan/ Korea etc.).’ Athens which hosted the Olympics in 2004, and indeed Greece, suffered a setback post the Olympics, but ‘bounced back’ faster than its counterparts. Yet, between 2001 and 2007, Turkey far outstripped tourist footfalls as compared with Athens, and Athens, though on the path to recovery, has yet to match Croatia’s growth. Croatia and Athens had seen approximately the same tourist demand between 2001 and 2002, after which the gap widened, and was most pronounced in the year 2004. The Beijing Olympics was projected to attract 4.5 million tourists in 2008, while the actual figure was just below 3.3 million, of which 390,000 came during the Olympic period. However, China’s visa policies were being sighted as a deterrent for tourist arrivals, coupled with the economic slump. Figures available for Victoria which hosted the Commonwealth Games in 1994, indicated that it had more visitors four years before the Games, and Manchester, which hosted the Games in 2004 claimed to have attracted 1 million visitors, but ticket sales indicate that the figure is much lower. In addition 31.5% of the tickets were sold to residents of Greater Manchester.


• • • ETOA (2006) “Olympic Report”, European Tour Operators Association,, data retrieved January 2010 ETOA (2008) “Olympics and Tourism: Update on Olympic Report 2006”, European Tour Operators Association,, data retrieved January 2010 ETOA (2009) “Beijing Olympic Update”, European Tour Operators Association,, data retrieved January 2010


Annexure 2: The Right to Information

Colour Key

Response received No response received 1st transfer of Application

2nd transfer of Application

3rd transfer of Application

1. RTI application submitted to Organising Committee, CWG, 2010 dated 13 April 2010 on Commonwealth Games, Delhi, 2010 EQUATIONS’ Query Q2 Please provide a copy of India’s bid document submitted to the Commonwealth Games Federation. Please provide a copy of the host-city contract. Why were temporary, dismantable structures not considered for the games village? Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 The Report of Commonwealth Games Evaluation Commission for 2010 CWG released by the CGF states that there is strong evidence of community support from sections of the general public. How was support from general public determined for the purposes of the bid? Please provide copies of any studies/ surveys/other indicative sources upon which this statement is based. Q7 Have studies on the carbon footprint of the Games being undertaken? Please provide a copy. Q8 Is a voluntary carbon-offset programme being considered? Please provide details of the scheme/s. Also please provide information on which individuals / companies are participating in the programme and what actions are being undertaken by them. Status

Response received by

Response date


Have economic impact studies of the Commonwealth Games in Delhi been done? By whom and in which year? Please provide a copy.

Is an economic impact study being planned post the Commonwealth Games? If yes, by when and by whom?



Application forwarded to the following Departments / Officials Received response on 23.04.2010

1.1. OP Wadhwa, OSD to Chief Secretary / PIO, Govt of Delhi & NCT Secretariat

1.2. Secretary, Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports

No response received - Appeal filed to Appellate Authority on 02.07.2010 Response dated 26.04.2010 Response dated 28.04.2010 Response dated 26.04.2010 Response dated 23.04.2010 Response dated 23.04.2010 Response dated 21.04.2010 No response received Response dated 17.05.2010 Response dated 26.04.2010

1.3. DG, SAI

1.4. Chairman, NDMC

1.5. ADG, CPWD (CWG)

Organising Committee Secretariat, CWG 2010


1.6. Principal Commissioner (CWG) DDA

1.7. Shri B. B. Popli, Director (Maintenance)-cum-PIO, Office of the Engineer-in-Chief, GNCTD

1.8. Prof Zubair Meenai, Nodal Officer, CWG 2010, Office of the Dean Students Welfare, Jamia Milia Islamia University

1.9. Col (Retd) Ambarbir Singh, R.K Khanna Tennis Stadium

1.10. Finance Officer, Delhi University

1.11. DG, CRPF Headquarters

1.12. George Mathew, CPIO, Indian Olympic Association

No response received - Appeal filed to Appellate Authority on 28.05.2010

1.8. Coordinator, CWG 2010, Office of the Dean Students Welfare, Jamia Milia Islamia University


Information pertaining to Q 1 -8 does not concern with Jamia Milia Islamia


1.6. Director (CWG), Delhi Development Authority, Office of PR. Commissioner (CWG)


1.6.1 Application forwarded to SE (HQ) CWG, Office of CE (CWG), DDA requesting them to send the requisite information

Response dated 14.05.2010

1.1. OSD to Chief Secretary / PIO, Govt of Delhi & NCT Secretariat


1.1.1. Application transferred in original to OSD, CWG, Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi

Response dated 29.04.2010

1.7. Director (Maintenance)cum-PIO, Office of the Engineerin-Chief, GNCTD


Requested information does not fall under jurisdiction.

1.7.1. Application transferred to Executive Engineer (P) cum PIO, PWD Zone CW1, NCTD, New Delhi.

Response dated 06.05.2010

1.3. Director (Coord), Sports Authority of India, Coordination Division


1.3.1. Application transferred in original to C.A. (Stadia) & CPIO

Response dated 12.05.2010

1.5. Executive Engineer (MIS / PIO), CWGP, CPWD, Office of the ADG (CWG), CPWD Q3: Pertains to OC-CWG, 2010 Q4: Pertains to OC-CWG, 2010 and Govt of Delhi


Q1: Pertains to OC-CWG, 2010

Q2: Pertains to OC-CWG, 2010

Q5: Pertains to DDA/ OC-CWG, 2010

Q6: Pertains to OC-CWG, 2010

Q7: No such study has been undertaken by CPWD

Q8: No such programme is being considered by CPWD


1.11. DIGP (Adm) & CPIO, DG, CRPF, Ministry of Home Affairs


As per Sec 24 (1) of RTI Act 2005, Central Police Forces as listed in II Schedule of the Act, have been given qualified exemption from the Act in so far as allegations of other than those connected with human rights violations & corruption are concerned. From the facts of the case mentioned in your application cited above, there appears to be no violations of human rights as well as facts of the case do not attract ingredients to constitute allegations of corruption. Hence this department is not liable to provide information sought by you.


1.10. Assistant Registrar (Information) & PIO, University of Delhi Response dated 17.05.2010

27/ 28.04.2010

Interim communication made to convey status of application. Information sought in the application and / or comments thereon, wherever necessary, are being requisitioned from the offices / sections/ departments / faculties / centres concerned. On receipt of relevant input, it will be processed in the Information Section and a reply will be sent to the applicant in due course.

1.4 APIO (Civil)-I/EO (Civil), Civil Engineering Department, New Delhi Municipal Council


1.4.1. Application is transferred to Executive Engineer (Stadia Project), New Delhi Municipal Council

Response dated 30.04.2010

OC response dated 29.04.2010

29.04.2010 Application transferred to PIO, Organising Committee and PIO, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS) No response received from MYAS

1.1.1. OSD (CWG), GNCTD, Urban Development Department (CWG Cell), Delhi Secretariat


Q8: OC - CWG is seeking to reduce its carbon footprint through: Energy efficiency at venue and other games related infrastructure like family hotels; Introduction of clean fuel Games related use promoting use of public transport; OC is conducting an extensive plantation Pan India and NCR plantation programme with at least 50,000 saplings. GEF is funding this project and it holds potential for offsetting at least 15,000t C02e per year upon maturity. Additionally, another 50,000 saplings are being planted by DoE with the objectives of neutralizing the Games emissions. It too holds potential for offsetting at least 15,000t C02e per year upon maturity. OC CWG will provide platforms for tourists and spectators to be able to offset their travel emission through procuring carbon credits during Games at atleast 6 venues

1. SPIO (RTI Cell), Organising Committee Secretariat, CWG 2010

Due to inadequate response to the application an appeal was filed to Appellate Authority on 26.05.2010 Meeting with Appellate Authority on 07.07.2010 Appellate Authority responded on 08.07.2010

Q7: Yes we have studied the carbon foot print of the Games. Currently it is estimated that the total footprint of the Games will be between 1,30,000 -155,402 tons of CO2e. Details of emission have been given. The numbers and figures used are being reviewed with different stakeholders including UNEP and revised as per their feedback. The figures are subject to change based on emerging data.

1.4.1. EE (Stadia Project), Office of Executive Engineer (STADIA Project), Civil Engineering Department, NDMC


Does not pertain to this division

Q7 - 8: This information is not available in this office

1.7.1 Project Manager, PWD, GNCTD


Nil information as far as concerned to this office circle.

1.7.1. Project Manager, R&R Project Circle, PWD, GNCTD Q3 - 6: Does not pertain to this office


Q1 - 2: Not known to this office

Q8: It is not in the knowledge of this office

1.3.1. Deputy Director (Stadia) / Administrator, Sports Authority of India Q3: Para does not apply to this office Q4: Para does not apply to this office Q6: No comments as para does not pertain to this office


Information sought does not pertain to Stadia Division

1.6.1. SE(HQ)CWG, Delhi development Authority, Office of Chief Engineer (CWG)


Q1: No such studies were conducted

Q2: There is no proposal to get economic impact study conducted after the Games

Q5: It is not possible to construct temporary, dismantable structures to accommodate 8000 persons as a lot of space should have been needed for the same. In case of temporary, dismantable structures, the amount spent would have been infructous

Q7: No study on carbon footprint has been under the charge of this office


1.10.1 Assistant Registrar (Information) & CPIO, University of Delhi


Q1 - 7: To be replied by MoYAS/OC.

Q8: To be replied by MoYAS/OC. Details being asked about green features of the building are intimated timely to OC



1. Project Officer, APIO, Organising Committee, CWG 2010, FA Coordination received a copy directly from the Appellate Authority during the hearing of the case on 07.07.2010


Q4: The host city contract has the following provisions “the signatories to the HCC agree that all information obtained from each other including through discussions and negotiations relating to this contract and the other Games documents, are confidential and will not be disclosed to any person except required b law or with prior written consent of the owner of the confidential information. There also is a provision in the HCC that the contract will be governed by the Law of England.

Q6: During the bid process, IOA secured signatures of more than 10000 persons from a cross section of the society, including Members of Parliament, youth, school children, etc demonstrating public support for the Games.

1. Appellate Authority, Organising Committee Secretariat, CWG 2010


Q1: Study conducted by Price Water House. Need to send a postal order to get copy of the study

Q4: “As it involves third party concerned, necessary legal views are to be obtained and resultant decision will be intimated”

Q7: More details provided in relation to which venues have been made more energy efficient, which clean fuel will be used, carbon offsetting through plantations, who is providing the saplings, how will it be maintained, where will it be planted and what activities amounted to the carbon credits sold.

2. RTI application submitted to the Prime Ministers Office, dated 31st May 2010 on Commonwealth Games, Delhi, 2010 EQUATIONS Query Q2 What were the procedures undertaken to come to a decision taken to bid for the CWG, 2010? Please provide a copy of the minutes of the meetings of the Cabinet where the decision to bid for the CWG, 2010 was discussed and finalised. Please provide a copy of the minutes of all meetings called by/attended by the Prime Minister’s Office, where the decision to bid for the CWG, 2010 was discussed and finalised. Has the Draft Comprehensive National Sports Policy, 2007 been discussed in the Cabinet? Please provide minutes of all meetings of the Cabinet where it was discussed. Has the Draft Comprehensive National Sports Policy 2007 been discussed by the Prime Minister’s Office? Please provide minutes of all meetings called by/ attended by the Prime Minister’s Office where it was discussed. What is the present status of the Draft Comprehensive National Sports Policy, 2007 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Status

Response received by

Response date


When and how was the proposal for India hosting the CWG made?

Application transferred to Secretary, Department of Sports, New Delhi on Question 1, 2 and 7

No response received No response received

Deputy Secretary and CPIO, Prime Minister’s Office


Application transferred to CPIO, Cabinet Secretariat, New Delhi on Question 3 and 5

Information will be provided in due course by this office on Question 4 and 6

Interim reply dated 02.07.2010

Deputy Secretary and CPIO, Prime Minister’s Office


The matter is being processed by the office and reply / information will be sent

The matter is being processed by the office and reply / information will be sent

Response dated 09.07.2010

Deputy Secretary and CPIO, Prime Minister’s Office


No such meeting was called / attended by the Prime Minister’s Office

No such meeting was called / attended by the Prime Minister’s Office



3. RTI application submitted to Organising Committee, CWG, 2010 dated 10 June 2010 on (Tourist arrival data for CWG 2010) EQUATIONS Query Q2 Were there any studies/research undertaken or relied on to establish the expected number of foreign and domestic tourists? Please provide a copy of the studies. Q3 How many tickets are being printed for the CWG 2010? What denomination values are they? (Kindly give numbers for each denomination category). Q4 What is the amount of revenue through tickets that the OC expects to achieve? Q5 How many tickets are being sold to public and how many are being given on complimentary basis or subsidised. What is the set of criteria for complimentary and subsidised tickets? Status

Response received by

Response date

Q1 What is the estimated number of tourists expected for the CWG? Please provide a break-up of domestic and foreign tourists, with source country information for foreign tourists and information of tourists state wise for domestic tourists.

Application transferred to Secretary, Ministry of Tourism on Question 1 - 2

Response dated 02.07.2010 Response dated 30.06.2010 Response dated 21.06.2010

SPIO (RTI Cell), Organising Committee Secretariat, CWG, 2010


Application transferred to Shri O P Wadhwa, OSD to Chief Secretary / PIO, Government of Delhi and NCT on Question 1 - 2

OC-CWG, 2010 is taking necessary action to furnish information in respect of Q 3, 4 and 5.

SPIO (RTI Cell), Organising Committee Secretariat, CWG, 2010


Q3: 1.7 million tickets are being printed for CWG, 2010. Rs. 50/- to Rs.1000/- for Sports and Rs. 750/to Rs. 50,000/- for the Ceremony

Q4: Rs 70 crores is the amount of revenue through tickets that OC expects to achieve

Q5: 20,000 tickets of various denominations has been sold so far. With regard to complementary tickets policy no decision has been finalised yet, there is no provision for subsidised tickets.


O P Wadhwa, OSD to Chief Secretary / PIO, Government of Delhi and NCT


Q1 - 2: Application transferred to Joint Secretary (Tourism), Tourism Department

Deputy Director (MR), Ministry of Tourism


Q1 - 2: MoT commissioned a study “Assessment of Number of Tourists expected to visit during the CWG 2010 and Requirements of the Rooms for Them”. The report of the aforesaid study may be seen in the official website of the Ministry of Tourism in the hyperlink of survey and studies. The report provides information related to number of foreign and domestic tourist expected to visit Delhi during CWG 2010 along with other information. In the study, the source country information for foreign tourist and information of tourists state wise for domestic tourists were not worked out.


Annexure 3:
A - Foreign Tourist Arrivals to India
Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Official Tourism Statistics & Analysis
Foreign tourist arrivals 2481928 2649378 2537282 2384364 2726214 3457477 3918610 4447167 5081504 5282603 5108579#

Provisional Estimates, Annual report 2009-2010, Ministry of Tourism

Source: • Ministry of Tourism (2009) “India Tourism Statistics, 2008”, Market Research Division, Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi • Ministry of Tourism (2010) “Annual report 2009-2010”, Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi

B - Factors Influencing Choice of Destination of Foreign Tourists visiting India (in %) Factors
Sightseeing Landscapes / Scenic Beauty Monuments/ Archaeological Sites Museums / Art Galleries Wild Life / Sanctuaries Rural life Cities and Markets Cultural Activities Art/ Theatre/ Music/ Dance Festivals/ Fairs Literary Resorts Beaches Hills 39.07 21.88 40.00 40.31 20.93 37.81 37.74 31.63 14.44 42.47 41.34 43.16 19.79 27.03 42.40 74.32 49.99 47.28 20.92 18.75 44.06 19.91 40.10 27.62 37.06 58.19 39.06 5.77 9.91 25.10 42.03 23.06 16.88



Not important


Participatory Sports Water Sports Winter Sports Trekking Mountaineering Rafting Fishing Golf Shopping 10.91 5.74 11.79 6.19 6.57 8.38 3.24 10.77 21.71 17.67 26.21 15.77 15.68 19.42 14.32 64.48 67.38 76.59 62.00 78.04 77.75 72.20 82.45 24.76

Source: • Ministry of Tourism (2006) “International Passenger Survey 2003,” Market Research Division, Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi

C - Percentage Distribution of Tourists using various Categories of Accommodation Twenty year perspective plan (Delhi) 2003
Accommodation type Starred Economy Guest House Youth hostels Tourists camps Conference centre Private Rented Dharmshalas Friends Relatives Others (unapproved) Foreign Tourist 22.00% 8.40% 2.30% 0.50% 0.20% 0.50% 7.20% 1.70% 57.30% 100.00% 8.10% 13.90% 36.90% 30.30% 100.00% Domestic Tourist 10.80%

International Passenger Survey, 2003 - India
Foreign Tourist 20.10% 47.46% 9.72% 1.12% 1.27% 0.14% 8.89% 11.22% 0.08%


Source: • Ministry of Tourism (2003) “Twenty year perspective plan for the State of Delhi” http://www.tourism. data retrieved June 2010 • Ministry of Tourism (2006) “International Passenger Survey 2003”, Market Research Division, Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi


D - Data from Twenty year Tourism Perspective Plan for the State of Delhi (2003), Ministry of Tourism
I. Forecast of Visitor Volumes Forecast of visitor volumes both international and domestic based on the past data serves as a basis for the critical analysis. The international tourist visits to Delhi in 2000 were 1274177. It is estimated to touch 1.50 million in 2005 and 1.80 million in 2010 reaching 2.50 million in 2022. In 2000, there were 1728899 domestic tourists visits to Delhi. Estimated 2.20 million tourists to Delhi in 2005 is forecasted. It will reach to 3.58 million tourist visits in 2010 and 3.76 million domestic tourists visits in 2022. The detailed forecast methodology in Chapter 8.

II. Supply Demand Gap for Accommodation Units There are about 1161 accommodation units with more than 20600 rooms in various categories of accommodation in Delhi. The average duration of stay of foreign tourists is three days and 80 per cent prefer star categories, ideal occupancy being 60 per cent. The estimated rooms required by foreign tourists would be 8745 rooms in 2005, 10412 rooms in 2010 and 14411 rooms in 2022. About 11 per cent domestic tourists to Delhi stay in star category hotels. The average duration stay being 2.5 days double occupancy factor of 60 per cent. Ideal occupancy is 70 per cent. The rooms required by domestic tourists in star category will be 1457 rooms in 2005, 2366 rooms in 2010 and 2487 rooms by 2022. Thus, there would be demand supply gap of 1018 rooms in 2005, 2988 rooms in 2010 which will increase to 7714 rooms by the end of 2022.

E – Accommodation Scenario – Delhi
Assessment of Number of Tourists Expected to Visit Delhi during CWG 2010 & Requirement of Rooms

Twenty year perspective plan for the State of Delhi
Year of publication Star High end Star budget Heritage Supplementary Unclassified Total No of Hotels Total no of Rooms

Bid Document

Bid Evaluation

India Tourism Statistics 2008

2003 33 37 1091 1161 20614

2003 30 22 1 53 7927 in star categories


2009 34

Delhi has 9000 first class hotels. Even if this was a typo and they meant 9000 first class hotel rooms, it is incorrect.

12 5 51 9554 Not given

Source: • Ministry of Tourism (2003) “Twenty year perspective plan for the State of Delhi” http://www.tourism. data retrieved June 2010 • Indian Olympic Association (2003), Delhi Commonwealth Games 2010 Bid Document. • Commonwealth Games Federation (2003) “The Report of the Commonwealth Games Evaluation Commission for the 2010 Commonwealth Games” • Ministry of Tourism (2009) “India Tourism Statistics, 2008”, Market Research Division, Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi • Ministry of Tourism (2009) “Report of the Ministry of Tourism: Assessment of Number of Tourists Expected to Visit Delhi during Commonwealth Games 2010 and Requirement of Rooms for Them”,, data retrieved June 2010


F – Tourist visitations to the Taj Mahal, Agra
Domestic Visitors 2005 2006 2007 2008 1885286 2048120 2624085 2635283 Foreign Visitors 593637 491351 586105 591560

Source: • Ministry of Tourism (2008) “India Tourism Statistics, 2007”, Market Research Division, Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi • Ministry of Tourism (2009) “India Tourism Statistics, 2008”, Market Research Division, Ministry of Tourism, New Delhi


Annexure 4:

Plan to Augment Amenities and Utilities
xtending an invitation to approximately 100,000 elite visitors in a city where the population is projected to be 192 lakhs by 2010 is likely to pressure on supply of water, power, waste management and pollution. The “city” is projected as a uniform space bereft of conflict and discrimination, glazing over the poor and marginalised who in any case do not legitimately access these amenities, many of who have been displaced to make way for power, water supply, and other projects. to estimates, with all the power planning taking place to give Delhi 7000 MW of power in 2010, the total power production in Delhi will only reach 2300MW, leaving a shortfall of around 4700MW. In all probability, Delhi will have to rely on the Northern Grid for power which presently caters to UP, Uttaranchal, Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan.6 In addition to a sub-grid station being laid out near the Akshardham Temple for the Games Village, the 1,500-MW Bawana project 750 MW would be allocated from Jhajjar, around 500 MW from the Dadri NTPC plant and the 750-MW Bamnauli project are going to supply power to Delhi in time for the Games.7 The Delhi Government is also funding the construction of the Renuka Dam in Himachal Pradesh, from where it will receive 40 MW of power.8

Delhi Jal Board is planning to augment water supply considerably by 2010. Two new initiatives have been initiated to increase water supply from the current 670 million gallons per day (MGD) to 941 MGD.1 A major focus is on new distribution networks and augmentation in the Games Village, and Stadia and a new water treatment plant with the capacity to treat a million gallons of water per day is also being worked upon.2 Waste Water treatment plants are also to be set up in Haiderpur, Sonia Vihar, Wazirabad and Chandrawal.3 However, the DJB facing a fund crunch to finish all its Games related projects had requested the Delhi Government for an additional Rs. 600 crore in October 2009.4

Solid Waste Management
Solid waste management is a major concern given that Delhi’s track record of waste collection, segregation, recycling and disposal is poor, and its landfills are bursting at their seams. The Games have brought on privatisation of waste management in the hope of improvement. Waste management has been privatized in 6 of the 12 MCD zones already and 4 of the remaining 6 are due for privatisation.9 10 In addition, independent initiatives of managing waste are being undertaken under the banner of “Green Games,” predominantly at sporting venues. The installation of an integrated security system (ISS), estimated to cost Rs.370 crore, to cover all the venues11 and Rs. 200 crore on installing streetlights on important roads12 are also planned.

Colossal energy consumption goes hand in hand with staging a mega event. Delhi needs to have uninterrupted power supply during the Games and much is being done to augment power supply in the city, with the aim of providing Delhi with 7000 MW of power, when the estimated need is 5200 MW and is unlikely to cross 6000 MW at any rate.5 According

End Notes
1. Sharma, M., (2009) “Commonwealth Games 2010 and Use of the facilities after the Games: A business of hope”, Centre for Civil Society, Working Paper No 214,, data retrieved January 2010 2. Uppal, V., (2009) “The Impact of the Commonwealth Games 2010 on Urban Development of Delhi”, Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Vol. 4, Issue 10,, data retrieved January 2010 3. Gupta, G., “DJB plans for tough year ahead”, Indian Express; 4th January, 2010,, data retrieved January 2010 4. “DJB needs Rs 600 cr extra for 2010 work”, Times of India; 27th October 2009 , http://commonwealthgamesdelhi2010mahi.blogspot. com/2009/10/djb-needs-rs-600cr-extra-for-2010-work.html, data retrieved January 2010 5. “Power Arrangements for Delhi Commonwealth Games” 7th May 2008, power-arrangements-for-delhi.html, data retrieved January 2010


6. Uppal, V., (2009) 7. “Move to step up power supply for 2010 Games”, The Hindu; 18 January 2009, stories/2009011854240400.htm, data retrieved January 2010 8. “Delhi eager to start Renuka dam in Himachal before commonwealth games”, Northern Voices Online; 16th May 2010, data retrieved July 2010 9. Sharma, M., (2009) 10. Uppal, V., (2009) 11. “2010 dawns, but Delhi unprepared for Commonwealth Games”, Prokerala; 31st December 2009, articles/a104157.html, data retrieved January 2010 12. “Rs 200 cr to be spent on streetlights”, Times of India; 25th March 2009,


Annexure 5:

EQUATIONS petition Opposing Plan for Section 144 during CWG 2010 for the Uninterrupted Movement of the Commonwealth Games Officials & Athletes
recent media report indicates that in order to prevent the general commuters from infringing the dedicated lanes, Delhi Traffic Police is preparing to impose Section 144 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) on the demarcated areas for the duration of the Commonwealth Games (CWG 2010). This according to them is to ensure uninterrupted movement of the officials and athletes during the Games. According to the media report, this step has been resorted to following the rejection of the request of the Delhi Police for imposing a hefty penalty on violators, by the Delhi Government. We are alarmed at this proposal of Delhi Traffic Police. Imposing Section 144 CrPC is unreasonable, unjustified and a disproportionate use of a provision that has been provided in the criminal justice system to deal with emergency/urgent situations like riots and arson. It is a complete mockery of the law that Delhi Traffic Police proposes to impose such a section for controlling traffic in Delhi during the CWG 2010. Another news report subsequently makes no mention of Sec 144 CrPC. We along with other concerned groups wish to express our alarm at such a move by the Delhi Police, in case better sense has not dawned, and it has not been quashed already. Action under this section is anticipatory, imposed generally in cases of emergency and meant to be used sparingly. Orders under this section are justifiable only when it is likely to create annoyance, injury or risk of injury to human life or safety, obstructions, or disturbance of the public tranquillity, imperilling public safety and health. During the CWG 2010, the athletes and officials will be transported from the games village to the respective games venues in specially designated vehicles. The commuters of Delhi going about their daily lives pose no risk or danger to their life and health. Declaring a certain portion of the road as “disturbed” under Section 144 of CrPC in this situation is blatantly absurd. The nature of


the punishment of seizure of vehicle is not commensurate with the nature of the supposed crime. When the Delhi government was rightly unwilling to impose fines, the imposition of far more severe rule is unwarranted. Preservation of the public peace and tranquility is the primary function of the government, and the law is not to be resorted to, when there are gaps in implementing policy. Penalizing common citizens in their zest to provide special arrangements for the participants and officials of the ensuing CWG is certainly not the way to do it. The obsession of the Central as well as Delhi Government of showcasing CWG 2010 as a gala event is coming at the cost of undermining basic rights of the its citizens and treating them as criminals in their own city – while they go about conducting their daily lives. Civil society protests about numerous other violations of basic rights of citizens – the right to be consulted and informed, the right not to be evicted, the right to fair labour conditions, the right to their environment, the right to development that benefits the common man, the right not to be criminalized if you are a beggar, a street vendor, homeless – the CWG 2010 is increasingly standing for the gross violation of such rights instead of what it is supposed to stand for – Humanity, Equality, Destiny – ironic indeed! Indeed as the countdown to the Games begins, the concerns and protests of civil society groups and peoples organisations at “the Games at any Cost” is on the increase. Unfortunately, the behavior of the state when seized with real and imagined security concerns, along with the pursuance of its “development” agenda, has only led to the infringement of basic civil political and human rights of ordinary people. The disenfranchisement of citizens of their dignity and rights is such a common occurrence now that we are urged to accept this as the cost of progress and development. In the case of the CWG 2010 – we are urged additionally to accept this as a necessary sacrifice for “national pride”.


• •

To refer to Sec 144 of the CrPC: http://www. Media Reports

Daily Pioneer
Police plan to impose Sec 144 on Games restricted lanes, Rakesh Ranjan, New Delhi, 10th June 2010, http://epaper.dailypioneer. com/THEPIONEER/PIONEER/2010/06/10/ ArticleHtmls/10_06_2010_003_047.shtml?Mode=1 Trespassing into the road areas segregated for uninterrupted movement of athletes and officials during the Commonwealth Games might attract a criminal case against violators. The Delhi Traffic Police, in order to prevent the general commuters from infringing on the dedicated lanes, is preparing to impose Section 144 (CrPC) on the demarcated areas throughout the duration of the Games. According to the Traffic Police, any motorist found violating the order, would be booked under the provision of the IPC and the vehicle would be seized. The move comes following the request of the Delhi Police for imposing a hefty penalty on violators, which was rejected by the Delhi Government. “The objective is to ensure uninterrupted movement of the Commonwealth Games officials and athletes during the event. We are left only with the option of imposing section 144 as our request for levying hefty penalty was turned down,” said Ajay Chadha, special commissioner of police (Traffic). He further said no vehicle would be allowed to enter the segregated area, which is one third of the total road space “Violation of the orders would attract legal action that may result into seizure of the vehicle,” he added. Notably, section 144 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) enables a magistrate to restrain an individual or public from a certain act by a written order, which is valid for two months. At the same time, violation of the order amounts to a criminal offence with provisions in section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The disobedience to the order promulgated by the magistrate might lead to imprisonment and fine. The traffic police chief said that they would ask the authorities to delegate the power to power to this effect to an officer of the rank of assistant Commissioner of police.

Chadha further said the trials for the dedicated lanes are likely to be started next week. “The NDMC has been carrying out the work of painting the dedicated lanes so that the commuters can identify them easily. The work is likely to be completed soon following which the lanes would be ready for trials,” he added. In order to separate the dedicated lanes, they would be coloured differently and signages will be put along the route for the convenience of the motorists at every 500 metre. It is noteworthy that the traffic police will be providing dedicated lanes only to the athletes and the members of the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF), who will be staying in the Games Village and The Ashok and Samrat hotels respectively. It has denied providing separate lanes to the officials and guests. “The organising committee (OC) has identified 19 hotels across the city for providing accommodation to the officials. We are not inclined to facilitate them with dedicated lanes as it would pose traffic disruption on several arterial routes,” said the special commissioner. The dedicated lanes will be in addition to the route taken to ferry them from IGI Airport to their respective accommodations, he added. Indian Express L-G clears track for Games traffic plan Posted: Mon 21st June 2010, 04:07 hrs, New Delhi The Commonwealth Games might be scheduled for October, but the traffic plan for the event is already being put in place. The extreme right lane on all routes leading to the venues will be set aside for Games-related traffic. After the lanes are painted blue by the end of June, the traffic police is expected to start awareness drives to sensitise drivers on how to use roads with lane restrictions. At a high-level meeting of the core group on Commonwealth Games chaired by LieutenantGovernor Tejendra Khanna earlier this month, detailed transport and traffic circulation plans, entry and exit points and parking slots were finalised. The plans will get a final shape at the next meeting to be chaired by the L-G in June-end.


Annexure 6:

The FIFA World Cup Fever in South Africa, a Case Study
s South Africa prepares to host, the 2010 FIFA World Cup, does it spread the fever of excitement or illness? FIFA (Federation de International Football Association) is said to have more member nations than the International Olympic Committee or the UN, and FIFA games are supposed to be extremely profitable for FIFA through sale of television rights, and its dealings with corporate and event-based sponsors. But the benefits that would accrue to the host nation are a matter of small debate. With South Africa having 9 host cities, the FIFA tournament is supposed to help cities spread their wings and fly. However, critical reflections made in essays in the book titled “Development and Dreams: The Urban Legacy of the 2010 Football World Cup” edited by Udesh Pillai, Richard Tomilson and Orli Bass” articulates apprehensions, giving some instances of what has taken place in South Africa so far in the name of the Games. India and South Africa are third-world cities, in the process of creating “world-class city” enclaves to host a mega-sporting event, and the laying of the grounds has seen much in common, in the rationale behind staging a megasports event, and the gap between the expectation of positive social and economic impacts which are far from being realised. S.A has already hosted the Rugby World Cup in 1995, 1996 African World Cup of Nations, All African Games in 1999 and the Cricket World Cup in 2003, and lost the bid to host the 2004 Olympics. With experiences of opposition to sports-mega event in other countries and its own failed Olympic bid, at least at the planning stage, South African Planners attempted to focus on “improving life conditions of the historically disadvantaged and, second, redesigning the apartheid city in order to create new functional linkages” in bringing the FIFA World Cup to South Africa. Also on top priority is to use the event to present a “contemporary, reinvigorated image of Africa, and through celebration of African culture and identity” in addition to promoting economic development and halving unemployment rates by 2014. However, purposeful intentions have come with a lot of compromise in implementing this vision as FIFA comes with a contract that does not distinguish between developed and developing countries, and deliverables by the host-city entail compromises with regard to what would suit the county best, as making cities suitable for the tournament is given precedence. Roads, ports, supporting infrastructure and transport projects are for instance, are difficult to align to existing projects and plans. The FIFA World Cup is slated to be staged across 9 host cities and 10 stadiums within South Africa. S.A’s National Government has had to enact special legislation to meet FIFA’s conditions, which involves a suspension of laws which contradict FIFA’s stipulations, and these laws also apply to the private sector and civil society organisations. Laws enacted specifically to accommodate the event are the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa Special Measure Act (No.11 of 2006) and Second 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa Special Measure Act (No.12 of 2006), while the two acts amended were the Merchandise Marks Amendment Act (No.61 of 2002) and the Revenue Laws Amendment Act (No.20 of 2006). Clearly, South Africa’s vision for itself in bringing the FIFA World Cup to its shores and FIFA’s own vision cannot possibly be fully compatible, and it is not surprising therefore that critics and others concerned with the bringing of the international mega-event in their midst do not expect the positive social and economic fallouts claimed by the South African government in its bid to provide a platform of new opportunity to South Africa. Opposition to a mega-event such as this also lies in the experiences of other countries for which the there is no simple equation to be made between the ideas of sports and the argument of city regeneration, and branding of a city/country through tourist arrivals promoted through this particular strategy. The question of the opportunity cost at which the FIFA World cup will be played in South Africa is already being asked, as the projection of the cost in the bid-book of 2003 has proved to be a significantly large under-estimation of actual costs. The high profile nature of the event has clearly been a factor in escalating costs. For instance, though both Cape Town and Durban were found to have satisfactory stadiums that already exist, both cities are getting new stadiums. While Cape Town sought to build a new stadium in a suburb in the hope for development of the suburb, Durban’s new stadium is at a location which provides the best view of the city, and the stadium is constructed to Olympic standards in anticipation of a future Olympic bid. While expenditure on stadiums alone is estimated at US$ 1.35 billion, the usefulness of


stadiums beyond the FIFA tournament is also being questioned. Ticket prices are also extremely high, and 15% of the seats have been reserved for South Africans at differential, more affordable pricing in Rands to accommodate domestic fans. Essentially, the “vision remains that of halving poverty and unemployment by 2014, and the 2010 World Cup provides an opportunity to fast track development towards attainment of this vision” as The Star put it, and yet, grave doubts are being expressed about the poverty alleviation strategy based on the “trickledown effect” and “developments linked with the World Cup is not pro-poor as pro-growth strategies that involve job creation does not necessarily impact poor and marginalised communities positively.” Even urban development taking place in honour of the FIFA Games is unlikely to be beyond the need of the games itself. A significant social fallout has been in ushering in the process of gentrification, as did many other mega-sports events. Housing created tends to be unaffordable to the poor, and bringing stadiums to poorer areas impacts property prices as the social composition of people living around that area changes, leading to a process of gentrification. The stadium at Ellis Park, Johannesburg also had had low-income groups being displaced – in the name of urban renewal and regeneration.

With respect to tourism, though FIFA World Cup held in Korea in 2002 and Japan, and 2004 in Germany experienced a decline in tourists, it may not be the case in South Africa as the FIFA is being held during low tourist season. However, South African host-and non-host cities are gearing up for tourism in their own strategic ways. Host cities such as Johannesburg, Durban and Cape Town, are trying to integrate stadiums into the city, but other host-cities have their focus on just delivering the stadium with the required seating capacity. Nonhost cities are vying for spill-over tourists, seeking to benefit from the “displacement effect” caused in host cities, and hoping that spill-over tourism contributes to establishing non-host cities as major tourist destinations at a later period. While accommodation in particular is being arranged in many non-host cities, these cities also designed to support certain spin-offs, for instance, Mbombela’s tourism economy is designed at capturing tourism spin-offs from surrounding game parks, and Rustenberg is close to Sun City, and hopes to benefit from it. Promoting training venues in non-host cities also helps boost the economy. However, it is also found that people in non-host cities are likely to be more favourably disposed to mega-events as they benefit from spill-over tourism that does not require an vast resources to ready places for a tourist influx, and neither are they subject to inflated prices, traffic congestion and other associated inconveniences of mega-sports events.


Annexure 7:

Mega Sports, Displacements and Forced Evictions - a dismal record
he Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) is Geneva-based international human rights organisation, focusing on the human right to adequate housing, and on halting and remedying forced evictions. COHRE has consultative status with the United Nations. An unfortunate commonality between host countries of mega events is that evictions, displacement and clean-ups, are the order of the day. More often than not, these are large-scale operations, affecting a significant number of people, who find many of their rights infringed upon as they become victims of human violations. Investigations and studies1 conducted by Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) found that mega sports events act as a catalyst for processes of “gentrification” and the impact is “often felt disproportionately by marginalised groups who are discriminated against throughout the process, including the poor, low income earners, those with insecure tenure, the homeless, ethnic minorities, the elderly, the disabled, street vendors, sex workers, migrants, the mentally ill, and other vulnerable groups.” COHRE reported that “Displacements and forced evictions prompted by gentrification (under the rubric of redevelopment) have been accelerated by the Olympic Games. Some 720,000 people were forcibly evicted in Seoul and Inchon prior to the 1988 Olympic Games, while conservative estimates show at least 1.25 million people have already been evicted in Beijing in the lead up to the 2008 Summer Olympic Games (with approximately 250,000 more displacements expected before the Games are staged). Furthermore, thousands of people were evicted or relocated in Barcelona (1992), Atlanta (1996) and Sydney (2000) and Roma were evicted from their settlements Athens in relation to the 2004 Olympic Games. In Barcelona, almost 200 families were displaced specifically for the construction of the ring roads surrounding the city, and countless more due to gentrification of the inner city areas. In Atlanta, it is estimated that 30,000 people were affected by displacement due to Olympics-related gentrification and the associated escalation in housing costs, with specific examples of over 4,000 people being displaced from just one housing community.” COHRE also reported that “street-cleaning operations” to rid host cities of homeless people and detaining them in facilities during the games is not unusual. 9000 people were arrested in Atlanta under special laws enacted to assist the “clean-up”, Seoul’s clean-up operation involved detaining people in facilities outside the city, 300 homeless people in Osaka were similarly affected before the 2002 FIFA World Cup, “undesirables” were prohibited from sleeping and doing business in Bangkok during the 1988 Asian Games, and homeless people were also displaced in Chicago in honour of the 1994 World Cup. The only silver lining unearthed by COHRE in this regard is that there some are instances where host cities try to protect vulnerable populations. Vancouver which is set to stage the Winter Olympics in 2010 makes a series of commitments to ensure that housing for local populations will not be adversely affected in its bid document. In Sydney, the government was pressured into instituting a protocol to ensure that homeless people would not be targeted for removal during the Olympic Games. Gentrification and its associated impacts is one of the major social fallouts of mega-sport events that go unacknowledged by official evaluations of sporting events, which have a tendency to focus on volunteer programmes and sports participation, and sporting legacies that they leave behind. However, the usefulness of the ‘legacy’ of sporting facilities also needs to be questioned as the fact that Stadium Australia, constructed for the Sydney Olympics has not found any sustainable use and, the stadium incurred operating losses of Aus $11.1 million and the total subsidies were Aus $46 million annually for unprofitable Olympic venues, four years after the event. Similarly, Munich’s Olympic Park shows annual losses of more than US $30 million.2 When common people don’t require world class, facilities with prohibitive entry and access fees, there is no guarantee that a sporting legacy left behind for the host city will be a positive social outcome.

End Notes

1. COHRE (2007) “Fair Play for Housing Rights: Mega Events, Olympic Games and Housing Rights: Opportunities for the Olympic Movement and Others”, Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions 2. Wildsmith, James and Bradfield, Michael (2007) “Halifax Commonwealth Games Bid: Were the Costs and Benefits Assessed?” Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives


Annexure 8: Evictions in Delhi
directly attributable to CWG 2010

Eviction along the banks of the Yamuna Settlements at Banuwal Nagar, Vikaspuri demolished

Quantum of Displacements/ Evictions
35000 families

Reasons and Other Observations
Towards a beautification and tourism project on land that is adjacent to the Commonwealth Games Village


12 January 2009

MCD demolished Gadia Lohar Basti

Around 15 jhuggies and part of a larger settlement of 1000 jhuggies. Displaced more than 200 people

Towards constructing a road under bridge connecting Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium to Thyagraj Stadium. A writ petition was filed in 2009 seeking the court’s intervention to rehabilitate the petitioners. The MCD insisted that the demolition was carried out after receiving prior “no-objection certificate” from the Slum Department. The settlement was neither notified nor covered under any rehabilitation programme of the Delhi Government Done to make way for a parking lot in view of the Commonwealth Games in the Capital in 2010 No proper notices, or alternative allotment provided Towards a parking lot to come up along Kushak Nullah near the Seva Nagar Railway Crossing for the opening and closing ceremony of the games. Reason for the demolition of the shelter was to grow grass as part of the “beautification” drive in the run-up to the Commonwealth Games. This left many without shelter in the bitter cold, and officials also confiscated their blankets. Two deaths reported. Done in order to construct a parking lot for the Games. The Tamils had been living there for the past 35 years. They have not received any compensation or rehabilitation The road will connect the Commonwealth Games Village to Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium. Construction work is likely to be completed by June 2010. Despite the fact that authorities plan to demolish this settlement, the modalities of rehabilitation have still not been worked out. An MCD survey revealed that most families living in these jhuggies are eligible for rehabilitation.

June 2009

MCD demolished a slum cluster alongside a drain behind Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium MCD demolished Kirti Nagar MCD demolished a settlement in J. Prabhu Market and Prabhu Market Extension near Lodi Colony MCD officials demolished a night shelter for the homeless at Pusa Road Roundabout (Rachna Golchakkar) Slum cluster at Jangpura’s Barapullah Nullah bull dozed

Those displaced included over 50 people suffering from a high degree of disability 348 slum houses

25th November 2009


1000 residents

24th December 2009

250 homeless people

15th April 2010

368 families of Dalit Tamils

Near Barapullah Nullah

400 jhuggies likely to be demolished

The Delhi Govt. has prepared a list of 44 jhuggi jhopadi clusters which would be relocated prior to the CWG 2010 under the Rajiv Awas Yojna. The Delhi Shramik Sangathan puts the figure to be displaced at 30,00040,000 families
Source: HLRN (2010): “The 2010 Commonwealth Games: Whose Wealth? Whose Commons?”


Annexure 9:

Countries in the global south who have declared zero tolerance against child sexual abuse in tourism/signed the Code of Conduct
n 2006, the Kenyan Tourism Ministry, along with the Kenyan Association of Hotel Keepers and Caterers and Respect, introduced the ‘International Code of Conduct for the Protection of Children from Sexual Exploitation in Travel and Tourism. Source: “Sex tourism rising rapidly in Kenya, reveals UNICEF survey” http://www. asp


South Africa:
In 2010 FTTSA announced the first ever South Africa Code signatories on the eve of the 2010 FIFA World Cup. CEO of Cape Town Tourism, Mariette du-Toit Helmbold, takes seriously the subject of child sex tourism and human trafficking; “We are pleased to have the backing of the South African government and Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa (FTTSA), as well as Cape Town Tourism members behind our message to people coming to Cape Town with the intention of causing trouble. Cape Town Tourism has always maintained that there is a dark underbelly to tourism that ultimately needs to be proactively dealt with. The sexual exploitation of women and children is a global problem, but it often goes hand in hand with developing societies such as ours and major international events like the FIFA World Cup,” Du-Toit goes on to say,”Cape Town’s message to the world is simple; If you are coming to our city to take advantage of our children, you are not welcome!”. Source: show_page/37465-The-Tourism-Child-ProtectionCode-of-Conduct-is-launched-in-Cape-Town In other countries such like Cuba, Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Ivory Coast, Maldives, Peru, Philippines to work on the code of conduct is ongoing.

Independent agencies and private sector actors have also taken the initiative to protect children in the absence of a coherent Thai national program to fight the sexual exploitation of children. Working with ECPAT, an international network of organizations working to eliminate the commercial sexual exploitation of children, the World Tourism Organization (WTO), and UNICEF, Thailand’s Tourism Authority (TAT) has adopted the Code of Conduct for the Protection of Children from Sexual Exploitation in Travel and Tourism. Source:

Sri Lanka:
Zero tolerance for child sex tourism in Sri Lanka: In June 2006, Sri Lanka Tourist Board, with UNICEF support, launches action plan against Child Sex Tourism. Source: media_34596.html


Annexure 10:
(Rajendra Singh & Others vs. Govt. Of Delhi and Others, Constitution Filing No. 134027/2007)

Working around the EIA: Extracts from the PIL indicating the events leading to the Games Village getting an EIA clearance.
lause 1 (vi) of the Environmental Clearance letter dated 14th December,20061 stated “Since the design of the proposed structures is yet to be made, so far as possible, the works should not be of a permanent nature. It should be possible to take this point into consideration and adopt dismantable structures. Unless detailed studies lead to the conclusion that the proposed structures can be left behind permanently, the proposals should proceed with the assumption that the riverbed may have to be restored to the river.” In a modification letter dated 22nd January, 20072, the above clause was expanded with the addition that “[The] DDA could go ahead with the planning of their construction works, permanent or temporary, subject to the condition that the actual work on permanent structures will not start till such a time that the mitigation/ abatement measures against the upstream flooding are identified after the Studies and their implementation begun in such a way that the work is completed on or before the date when the buildings will be completed.” The modification letter dated March 29, 20073 mitigation and abatement measures against upstream flooding identified in the study by Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune. In a final modification letter dated April 02, 20074, the entire clause was replaced with “the DDA could go ahead with their construction works, permanent or temporary, subject to the condition that the following mitigative/abatement measures against upstream flooding as identified in the study by Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune, shall be completed on or before the date when the buildings for the Commonwealth games will be completed.” A significant omission in the final form the clause has been given is that it does not acknowledge that the structure will be laid out on the riverbed.


The events that lead to the series of modifications that one conditional clause were subjected to is deeply disturbing. The clause has undergone significant changes even though the EAC meeting with the officers of the DDA on 01.12.2006 resulted in the EAC opining (as officially recorded) that “the DDA is not able to provide an assessment of the loss of recharge of ground water and magnitude of efflux in the river resulting from the proposed works and the curtailment of the width of the river to provide space for the proposals”. The EAC also records that “While the Committee does not doubt that time has become a constraint, the Committee is not convinced that their environmental impacts and their mitigation have been studied to a satisfactory level. Under the circumstances, the committee will go by the “Precautionary Principle” and emphasise the point that as far as possible, the proposed works should not be of permanent nature. Since the design of structures is still not made, it should be possible to take this point into consideration and adopt dismantleble structures. Unless detailed studies [....] lead to the conclusion that the structures can be left behind permanently, the proposal should proceed with the assumption that the river bed may have to be restored to the river.” Thus the EAC very clearly rejected the idea of changing the conditional clause with respect to allowing permanent structures on river bed, and has not been involved in subsequent modifications to the clearance letter, as was confirmed by Mr. Ravindran,5 a member of the EAC. Subsequent to the rejection of the request by the EAC, file notings dated 12th December 2006 by Joint Secretary J.M Mauskar, says “For soliciting kind approval of M(EF) to grant EC as above, at this juncture since DDA is pressing hard” and is followed up with a file noting dated 13th December 2006 initialled as AS(SB) saying “Some other concerns are difficult for DDA to comply immediately and time is a major constraint. We may therefore incorporate them also in the


clearance letter. With all conditions stipulated, an environmental clearance letter may be issued”. Despite the DDA’s pressure, the original EC letter was released on 14th December 2006 with no leniency being shown to the DDA with respect to allowing for permanent structures on the riverbed. However, file notings by Additional Director, K.C. Rathore on meetings held on 9th, 10th and 16th

January 2007 say that “[the] DDA has informed that they are going ahead with the planning and construction of the structure to meet deadlines” and then a similar noting dated 07th March 2007 says that “The DDA has informed that they are “going ahead” with the construction of residential units (on permanent basis) and other structures which is not in conformity with the condition number “para VI of Part A- Specific Conditions of EC issued by the Ministry.

End Notes
1. Ministry of Environment and Forests (2006) Letter No. 21-475/2006-IA.III Commonwealth Games Village, Delhi, by M/s Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi – Environment Clearance – regarding; 14 December 2. Ministry of Environment and Forests (2007) Letter No. 21-475/2006-IA-III, Regarding Environmental Clearance issued vide letter No. 21475/2006-IA.III dated 14.12.2006 for Commonwealth Games Village, Delhi; 22 January 3. Ministry of Environment and Forests (2007) Letter No. 21-475/2006-IA-III, Regarding Environmental Clearance issued vide letter No. 21475/2006-IA.III dated 14.12.2006 and amended vide letter dated 22.1.2007 for Commonwealth Games Village, Delhi; 29 March 4. Ministry of Environment and Forests (2007), Letter No. 21-475/2006-IA-III, Regarding Environmental Clearance issued vide letter No. 21475/2006-IA.III dated 14.12.2006 and amended vide letters dated 22.1.2007 and 29.3.2007 for Commonwealth Games Village, Delhi; 02 April 5. K.T Ravindran, Urban Designer, School of Planning and Architecture, in an interview with EQUATIONS on 4th March 2010


The Commonwealth Casualties
Tracing how mega-sports events are used as a strategy for growth and global recognition the report attempts to understand what India hopes to achieve politically and in development terms by staging the Commonwealth Games 2010. The history of India’s bid, the story of exponentially growing budgets and the pledging of public funds, all in the name of national pride are examined. A significant part of the report is focussed on tourism and the Games. The report examines critically the hopes and myths, as well as assumptions and mental models about the tourism potential of the Games. Linked to this are the preparations being undertaken for tourists, the spillover potential of the Games and making the city of Delhi a more hospitable environment for foreign tourists. One of the key aspects of that idea is the transformation of Delhi into a world class city. Calling for a re-visioning of tourism policy and practise in India the research study debunks the myth of tourism being used as a development tool – indicating how it addresses only the needs of an elite section of the industry and tourists. The social, cultural, economic, environmental, political, and human rights impacts ensuing from the preparations under way are examined. In particular, the place of accountability, democratic process and public consensus in hosting the CWG 2010 in Delhi are explored. The report concludes that scant attention is paid to the impacts of these decisions and developments - some being labelled as unintended consequences and others simply dismissed as collateral damage. EQUATIONS is a research, advocacy and campaigning organisation working on the impacts of tourism on local communities in India. Supporting grassroots struggles against unsustainable tourism developments and practices, it calls for policies that ensure equitable, democratic and non-exploitative forms of tourism development.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful