“Humanity-Equality-Destiny?

”
Implicating Tourism in the Commonwealth Games 2010

...displacement
fi ts for youth & sport
bene s?

.....soci
al benefi ts

...democratic participati
on?

...benefi ts from tou

rism
?

...inclusive growth?
...tax bu
rden on citizens

EQUATIONS
“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 www.equitabletourism.org

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: info@equitabletourism.org
Url: www.equitabletourism.org
Contents
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
DTL – Delhi Transco Limited
AAI – Airports Authority of India
DUAC – Delhi Urban Arts Commission
ASI – Archaeological Survey of India
EAC – Expert Appraisal Committee
ASSOCHAM – Associated Chambers of Commerce &
Industry of India EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment

ATEC – Australian Tourism Export Council ETOA – European Tour Operators Association

B&B – Bed & Breakfast EWS – Economically Weaker Section

BJP – Bharatiya Janata Party FEE – Foreign Exchange Earnings

BPBA – Bombay Prevention of Begging Act FICCI – Federation of Indian Chambers of

Commerce & Industry
BRT – Bus Rapid Transport
FIFA – Federation de International Football
CAG – Comptroller & Auditor General of India Association

CBCI – Commonwealth Business Club of India FTA – Foreign Tourist Arrivals

CEC – Central Empowered Committee GDP – Gross Domestic Product

CFA – Central Financial Assistance GEC – Commonwealth Games Evaluation

Commission
CGA – Commonwealth Games Association
GoI – Government of India
CGC – Commonwealth Games Association of Canada
GNCTD – Government of the National Capital
Territory of Delhi
CGF – Commonwealth Games Federation
GSSP – Games Statement of Securities Principles
CIC – Central Information Commission
GV – Games Village
CII – Confederation of Indian Industry
HIG – High Income Group
CoF – Conservator of Forests
IGI Airport – Indira Gandhi International Airport
COHRE – Centre on Housing Rights & Evictions
IITM – Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology
CSIR – Centre for Scientific & Industrial Research
IITTM – Indian Institute of Tourism & Travel
CWG – Commonwealth Games Management
DDA – Delhi Development Authority INR – Indian Rupees
DFS – Delhi Fire Service INTACH – Indian National Trust for Art & Cultural
Heritage
DIAL – Delhi International Airport Limited
IOA – Indian Olympic Association
DJB – Delhi Jal Board
ISS – Integrated Security System
DMRC – Delhi Metro Rail Corporation
ITPO – India Trade Promotion Organisation
DPCC – Delhi Pollution Control Committee

3
 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
4
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
Acknowledgements
.
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).

5
6
 Introduction
S 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 “world-
class 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 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
2010
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.

Section III: ACCESSORIZING TOURISM – pinning hopes,
uncovering myths
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.
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

7
8
 SECTION I
SPORTS TOURISM & MEGA EVENTS

9
 T 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 organising a mega-sports event that will not last

A ided and abetted by global competitiveness, more than 10 or 15 days?

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
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 infra­
structure 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.

10
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
11
 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
Signalling Progress through Sport
D 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.
12
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
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 have to be weighed against the huge opportunity
a new comprehensive sports policy. The “Draft costs involved and needs to be clearly evaluated
Comprehensive National Sports Policy, 2007”, was in the specific context of each country. While the
not presented in Cabinet, as the week it was to be hosting of such mega events undoubtedly gives a
presented, Mr. Aiyar was removed from his post, boost to the image of the country in the sporting
and the policy was never taken up by the Cabinet world and makes the promotion of sporting
subsequently.32 In a telephonic conversation33, S.P.S excellence an important agenda, these can be
Tomar, Under Secretary, MYAS confirmed that the reduced to very short-term benefits unless they
Draft Policy was “withdrawn” and that the existing are part of a well-formulated and comprehensive
policy (of 2001) is “sufficient” (quotation marks long term vision which aims at Sports for All
ours). and includes among the highest of our national
priorities the development of a National Sports
An examination of the Draft Policy34 indicates that Culture.”
it is rather progressive. Among its many insightful
observations are that “the economic, social and The Draft Policy goes on to say that “the direct
cultural benefits of hosting mega sporting events economic benefit in terms of the creation of

13
 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
14
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
P 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 Non Plan
CWG 2010 2000 264
PYKKA* 145 0 125
Total - Sports and
2403 316
Physical Education
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 2009-
10 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 Budget Estimate
2009-10 (in Rs. crore) 2010-11 (in Rs. crore)
Plan Non Plan Plan Non Plan
2268 615 1454 614.5
0 379 0
2671 679.67 2453 664.69
*Only Rs 70 crore was actually released
15
 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, http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/
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 www.cohre.org/mega-events.
5. India’s Bid CWG 2010, http://www.thecgf.com/games/intro.asp?yr=2010
6. Wildsmith, J. and Bradfield, M. (2007) “Halifax Commonwealth Games Bid: Were the Costs and Benefits Assessed?” Canadian Centre
for Policy Alternatives, http://nl1523.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/Nova_Scotia_Pubs/2007/Halifax_
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, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/
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, http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/
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 http://www.culture.gov.uk/publications/7091.aspx
13. ETOA (2006) “Olympic Report”, European Tour Operators Association, http://www.etoa.org/, data retrieved January 2010 and ETOA
(2008) “Olympics and Tourism: Update on Olympic Report 2006”, European Tour Operators Association, http://www.etoa.org/, 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.
gamesmonitor.org.uk/node/333, 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,http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sports/Events-Tournaments/
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, http://english.peopledaily.com.
cn/200703/09/eng20070309_355986.html, data retrieved January 2010
21. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_bid_for_the_2014_Commonwealth_Games, data retrieved January 2010.
22. The Associated Press (2010) “Government drops Auckland Commonwealth Games bid,” Business Week, 16th March 2010, http://www.
businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9EFRE2O0.htm, data retrieved June 2010.
23. Trinidad Tobago withdraws CWG 2018 bid” 29 March 2010, http://commonwealthdelhi2010.blogspot.com/2010/03/trinidad-tobago-
withdraws-cwg-2018-bid.html, data retrieved June 2010.
24. Ali, Q.M., “Elation as India wins Commonwealth Games Bid”, Asian Tribune; 14th November 2003, http://www.asiantribune.com/
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

16
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: http://www.g77.org/doc/)
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: http://www.g20.org/about_
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. cwgdelhi2010.org/
30. See http://yas.nic.in/index.asp?layid=2, 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, http://yas.nic.in/writereaddata/mainlinkfile/File371.pdf,
data retrieved January 2010
35. “Kalmadi’s plea to Prime Minister”, The Hindu; 3rd August 2007, http://www.thehindu.com/2007/08/03/stories/2007080355922100.htm
data retrieved January 2010
36. Kalra, Y.S, “From playgrounds to medals”, Live Mint; 24th September 2007 http://www.livemint.com/2007/09/24010235/From-
playgrounds-to-medals.html, 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, http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20070507/nation1.html, data retrieved January
2010
39. Mackay D, “India should not bid for Olympics says Sports Minister” 25th November 2009, http://insidethegames.biz/index.
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, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Aiyar-openly-
backed-Incheons-bid/articleshow/1940391.cms, 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, http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/2010/03/3497, data retrieved
April 2010.
43. “IOA postpones 34th National Games again”, India Today; 15th October 2009, http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/66454/India/IOA+
postpones+34th+National+Games+again.html, data retrieved March 2010
44. “35th National Games in May next year”, The Hindu; 11th February 2009, http://www.thehindu.com/2009/02/11/
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, http://www.yentha.com/news/view/1/385. Data retrieved July 2010.
46. “Chhattisgarh to host 37th National Games in 2013”, Sports News; 30th March 2010, http://blog.taragana.com/sports/2010/03/30/
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, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/dues-
issue-women-hockey-players-wear-black/570105/ data retrieved January 2010
48. See http://www.indianetzone.com/1/other_traditional_games.htm, data retrieved March 2010
49. MYAS http://yas.nic.in/index.html
50. India’s Bid CWG 2010, pg 22

17
18
 Section II
INVESTING OUR COMMON WEALTH

19
 T 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
I 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.
20
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 cost-
recovery basis.
• The Delhi-Commonwealth Village, a low-to-
medium 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”.
21
 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
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
22
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
K 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
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
First Budget approved by Cabinet
Estimated operating expenditure Rs. 635 crore. April 200719
Rs.3566 crore ± Rs. 300 crore.
Total expenditure (other than Games operating
expenses) estimated at Rs. 1200 crore, (US$ 792 million ± US$ 67 million)
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)

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

23
 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 Budget - 500 crores?
Hazards Centre, estimates that my daily wage = Rs. 100
the total expenditure taking all & they still
can’t pay me?
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 “revenue-
neutral”—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
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

24
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
I 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
25
 that organisers expect to sell around 17 lakh
tickets in all, with earnings hovering around the Rs
60 crore figure.
Legacy for Whom?
W 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 after-
thought 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
26
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

1. http://cabsec.gov.in/
2. See Annexure 2: The Right to Information
3. Mani Shankar Aiyar, interview
4. See Annexure 2: The Right to Information
5. Commonwealth Games Federation (2003)
6. See http://yas.nic.in/writereaddata/mainlinkfile/File728.pdf, data retrieved January 2010
7. “India to host 2010 Commonwealth Games”, The Hindu, 15th November 2003 http://www.hindu.com/2003/11/15/
stories/2003111507551800.htm, data retrieved January 2010
8. HLRN (2010), “The 2010 Commonwealth Games: Whose Wealth? Whose Commons?” http://www.hlrn.org/english/publication_det.
asp?catid=2&id=47.
9. Mani Shankar Aiyar, interview
10. India’s Bid CWG2010, http://www.thecgf.com/games/intro.asp?yr=2010
11. Commonwealth Games Federation (2003)
12. “India to host 2010 Commonwealth Games” The Hindu; 15th November 2003, http://www.hindu.com/2003/11/15/
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.
outlookindia.com/ 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.
cag.gov.in/html/commonwealth.pdf, 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”, http://tourism.gov.in/ 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, http://www.d-sector.org/article-det.asp?id=1228&idFor=1228,
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, http://in.news.yahoo.com/248/20100306/1582/tnl-
games-panel-whims-make-delhi-whine.html, data retrieved March 2010.
26. CWG: Delhi govt grants tax exemption, Rediff.com; 4th January 2010, http://business.rediff.com/report/2010/jan/04/cwg-delhi-govt-
grants-tax-exemption.htm 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, http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/newdelhi/To-pay-for-the-
Games/Article1-522206.aspx, data retrieved March 2010
29. “People Burdened due to CWG expenses: Dikshit”, Thaindian News; 22nd March 2010, http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/business/
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, http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/2010/02/3466, 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.
timesofindia.com/mobile.aspx?article=yes&pageid=26&edlabel=TOIBG&mydateHid=02-06-2010&pubname=&edname=&articleid=Ar02600&
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

27
28
 Section III
ACCESSORISING TOURISM
pinning hopes, uncovering myths

29
 B 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.

A 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’.
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
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!
Guessing Game: Arriving at the Numbers
T 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.”

30
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.
31
 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

EQUATIONS
Foreign Domestic
comments

Normal Sub total

For Games Total See note 1
visitors (domestic)

Expected number of tourists in Delhi during

1 61300 145185
12 days period of 3-14 October 2008

2 Growth rate of tourists in 2009 0.00% 10.7% 10.7%

Expected number of tourists in Delhi during

12 days period of 3-14 October 2009 based 61300 160720
on normal growth

Normal growth rate of tourists in 2010 8.3% 10.7%

Additional growth rate of tourists due to

3 5.31% 0 11.88% See note 2
CWG in 2010

4 Aversion effect 33.33% See note 3

5 Net growth rate of tourists in CWG 2010 13.61% 11.88%

Expected number of tourists in Delhi during

6 69643 118617 21137 139754 See note 4
12 days period of 3-14 October 2010

No of tourists staying in official

7 accommodation (not requiring hotel 10000
accommodation)

No of tourists requiring accommodation 59643

% of tourists staying with friends and

8 11.22% See note 5
relatives
No of tourists requiring hotel
9 52951 118617 21137 139754 See note 6
accommodation

10 Estimated number of nights of stay 9 2.51 9 See note 7

Total no of bed nights required during CWG
11 476559 297729 190233 487962 964521
2010

Average no of bed nights required per day

12 39713 24811 15853 40664 80377
during CWG 2010

Average no of rooms required per day

13 during CWG 2010 (assuming 2 beds per 19857 12406 7927 20333 40190
room)

32
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 non-
commonwealth 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
33
 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.
The Obsession with Hotel Rooms
T 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
34
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
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 Menon-
Sen,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
35
 Rea(i)lty Scam?
I 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
36
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
37
 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.
The Spill-Over
T 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,
38
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
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
Map 1: Travel Destinations in India on official website of CWG 2010
Source: CWG Delhi 2010 Website (http://www.cwgdelhi2010.org/)
Marketing the Games, Marketing India
T 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
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.
“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,
39
 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.
Training and Awareness Programmes
T 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
40
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
Athithi Devo Bhava
T 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.
41
 End Notes
1. “Tourism in India has grown steadily despite economic meltdown: Selja”, Thaindian News; 18th August 2009, http://www.thaindian.com/
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, http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090607/
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”, http://tourism.gov.in 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” http://rajyasabha.nic.in/rsnew/rsweb.asp, 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.
hospitalitybizindia.com/detailNews.aspx?aid=7768&sid=41, data retrieved March 2010
14. Dhawan S, Games: Haryana crosses hotel target, Tribune News Service; 15th June 2010, http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20100616/
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, http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report_supply-
deluge-hotel-room-rates-look-capped_1365914
18. 21 hotel set to increase room tariffs from October 1, Moushmi Das Gupta, Hindustan Times; 3rd September 2009 http://www.
hindustantimes.com/21-hotels-set-to-increase-room-tariffs-from-Oct-1/Article1-449675.aspx, data retrieved July 2010
19. “Union Tourism Minister reviews progress of creation of additional accommodation for CWG-2010”, DARE; 21st October 2009,http://
www.dare.co.in/news/others/union-tourism-minister-reviews-progress-of-creation-of-additional-accommodation-for-cwg-2010.htm data
retrieved January 2010
20. “Luxury tents for Commonwealth Games visitors at Surajkund”, DNA; 10th January 2010, http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report_luxury-
tents-for-commonwealth-games-visitors-at-surajkund_1332988, data retrieved January 2010
21. “Homestay in Delhi for the Games” 12th May 2009, http://www.thecommonwealthgames.org/delhi-2010/travel-to-delhi/places-to-stay/
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://
www.accommodationtimes.com/real-estate-news/2010-commonwealth-games-accommodation-delhi-pulling-out-all-the-stops/, 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, http://www.mid-day.com/news/2010/mar/080310-
Delhi-Paharganj-hoteliers-boycott-CWG.htm, 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.
hospitalitybizindia.com/detailNews.aspx?aid=8310&sid=1, data retrieved June 2010
27. “Delhi guest house owners not to accept Delhi state approval”, Hospitality Biz India; 13th July 2010, http://www.hospitalitybizindia.com/
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.
hospitalitybizindia.com/detailNews.aspx?aid=6848&sid=6, 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”, http://www.ecs-limited.com/download/78.pdf, data retrieved, January 2010
40. K.T. Ravindran, interview

42
41. Singh, P. K. “Scorching land deals”, Express Hospitality; 01-15 April 2008, http://www.expresshospitality.com/20080415/management06.
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://
www.articlesbase.com/travel-tips-articles/golden-triangle-tour-in-india-gets-booster-shots-for-2010-commonwealth-games-1563213.html,
data retrieved January 2010
44. “Rajasthan Readies for Commonwealth Games Tourists”, Thaindian News; 28th April 2008, http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world-
news/rajasthan-readies-for-commonwealth-games-tourists_10042692.html, 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, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Taj-
expressway-to-open-before-Games/articleshow/5644679.cms 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, http://www.medinetindia.com/
news.php?n_id=76
49. “Plan to promote CW Games abroad” Business Line; 26th January 2010, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2010/01/27/
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, http://www.4to40.com/indian_travel_places/indian_travel_news_index.asp?id=471&travel_news=Sujit_
Banerjee
51. “Incredible India road show held in Johannesburg”, NetIndian; 13th January 2010, http://netindian.in/news/2010/01/13/0004814/
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, http://www.pib.nic.in/release/
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.
travelbizmonitor.com/PrintArticle.aspx?aid=9354&sid=0, 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, http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/
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, http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/
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, http://www.thaindian.com/
newsportal/uncategorized/30000-volunteers-to-be-roped-in-for-commonwealth-games_100284417.html
62. See http://www.cwgdelhi2010.org/delhiunited/?q=node/412, 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 http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/punjab/Put-
immediate-halt-to-Queen-s-Baton-Former-Punjab-Dpty-Speaker/Article1-567289.aspx 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.

43
44
 Section IV
THE MAKING OF THE WORLD CLASS CITY

45
 T 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 so-
called ‘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 world-
class city ahead of the Commonwealth Games,”
she said.
46
Fortifying Infrastructure
T
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
T
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 world-
class “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
L 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
47
 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
48
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
T 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 hydro-
policy 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
49
 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
50
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 2009-
10 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.
51
52
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.
Greenwash Games
“ Green” is part of the rhetoric of the world-
class 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
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
53
 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 eco-
compliant 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.
54
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
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
Source: Maps of India61
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
55
 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 http://www.india-seminar.com/2008/582/582_lalit_batra.htm
data retrieved May 2010
2. Romana M, “Slums, Shops Make Way for ‘World-Class’ Delhi”, SAWF; 1st May 2006, http://www.sawf.org/newedit/edit05012006/places.asp
data retrieved July2010.
3. Singh, S. S., “We want to make Delhi a world-class city”, Project Monitor; 14th March 2005, http://www.projectsmonitor.com/detailnews.
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, http://www.thehindu.com/2009/04/20/
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, http://news.in.msn.com/business/article.aspx?cp-
documentid=3075910, data retrieved January 2010
9. “Air India to be official carrier of Commonwealth Games”, Live Mint; 6th October 2009, http://www.livemint.com/2009/10/06195638/Air-
India-to-be-official-carri.html, data retrieved January 2010
10. See http://www.indiaprwire.com/pressrelease/aviation/2009122240056.htm, data retrieved June 2010
11. “2010 dawns, but Delhi unprepared for Commonwealth Games”, Prokerala; 31st December 2009, http://www.prokerala.com/news/
articles/a104157.html, data retrieved January 2010
12. See Citizens for Workers, Women and Children Factsheet, http://cwg2010cwc.org/factSheet.php, data retrieved January 2010
13. Rains, S., “Preparations for Commonwealth Games 2010 in New Delhi”, Rolling Rains Report; 30th September 2009, http://www.
rollingrains.com/2009/09/preparations-for-commonwealth-games-2010-in-new-delhi.html, data retrieved January 2010
14. Ranjan R., “Police plan to impose Sec 144 on Games restricted lanes”, The Pioneer; 10th June 2010, http://epaper.dailypioneer.com/
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, http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_16-
railway-under-bridges-to-come-up-in-delhi-before-cwg_1318959, 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.
gov.in/html/commonwealth.pdf data retrieved January 2010
18. “No DTC depot here”: Dwarka residents protest land acquisition”, Indian Express; 13th May 2009, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/
no-dtc-depot-here-dwarka-residents-protes/458331/, data retrieved January 2010
19. “DDA sells encroached land to builder”, Indian Express; 14th January 2008, http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/dda-sells-
encroached-land-to-builder/261142/, 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,
http://www.gamesmonitor.org.uk/node/488, data retrieved January 2010
22. Uppal, V. (2009)
56
23. “DDA lost Rs 150 cr on C’wealth Games Village project: CAG”, Hindustan Times; 7th May 2010 http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/
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? http://www.gamesmonitor.org.
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.
outlookindia.com/article.aspx?264893, data retrieved July 2010
29. Panda, S., “Builders & developers new projects - Akshardham, New Delhi - Commonwealth Games Village”, Real Estate Times; 29th March
2010 http://www.realestatetimes.in/city-profile/builders-developers-new-projects-akshardham-new-delhi-commonwealth-games-village
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; tourism.gov.in/pplan/Delhi.pdf, 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,
http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2105/stories/20040312003304400.htm 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 http://119.82.71.32/full6.asp?foldername=20040515&filena
me=news&sec_id=4&sid=29, data retrieved July 2010.
39. “Shifting of Yamuna Pushta slums approved”, The Hindu; 11th March 2004, http://www.hindu.com/2004/03/12/
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 www.cag.gov.in/html/reports/civil/2007_2_
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 http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.as
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://
epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:LowLevelEntityToPrint_TOINEW&Type=text/html&Locale=english-skin-c
ustom&Path=CAP/2010/03/20&ID=Ar00401, data retrieved March 2010
45. Available at http://www.unep.org/publications/UNEP-eBooks/BeijingReport_ebook.pdf
46. UNEP partners with Vancouver 2010 on environmental initiatives for the 2010 Winter Games. UNEP News Centre. 29 October, 2007
http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=519&ArticleID=5691&l=en
47. See http://www.unep.org/PDF/AnnualReport/2007/4_AnnualReport2007_en_Governance.pdf, data retrieved January 2010
48. Dastidar, A G., “Greens to confront Delhi govt at sapling planting”, Hindustan Times; 30 October 2009, http://www.hindustantimes.com/
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 http://www.cwgdelhi2010.org/greengames/index.php?q=node/536, 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, http://www.hinduonnet.com/mag/2003/08/24/
stories/2003082400130200.htm, data retrieved January 2010
55. Vancouver 2010 organisers pressing for carbon-neutral status”, 4th November 2009 http://www.morethanthegames.co.uk/other-
sports/047041-vancouver-2010-organisers-pressing-carbon-neutral-status, data retrieved January 2010
56. See Annexure 2: The Right to Information
57. Soumya Dutta, Activist, Delhi Platform
58. The Corner House http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk, Carbon Trade Watch http://www.carbontradewatch.org/ are excellent resources
for civil society critique on Carbon trading and Offsets. The World Rainforest Movement http://www.wrm.org.uy/ and Sinkswatch
http://www.sinkswatch.org/ provide additional references on the fallacy of using monoculture plantations as carbon sinks.
59. See http://www.naturefirst.in/, data retrieved June 2010
60. Uppal, V., (2009)
61. Maps of India, http://www.mapsofindia.com/2010-commonwealth-games/commonwealth-games-map.html# data retrieved July 2010
62. COHRE (2007), “Fair Play for Housing Rights: Mega-Events, Olympic Games and Housing Rights”

57
58
 Section V
COLLATERAL DAMAGE
Impacts Of CWG 2010

59
 In 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

T 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 mega-
event proclaims are being found to be an
increasingly grey area, in the limited post-games
research that takes places. Even as the cost of

60
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 sports-
media-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 budget-
heads and Games-budget-heads, it also finds
instances of funds having been diverted for Games-
related 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
T 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.
61
 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
E 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 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.
62
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 time-
bound 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
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 non-
payment 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.
63
 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
M 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.
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,
64
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
B 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
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
65
 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
W hile there has been no official word, it
is expected that street children will be
dissuaded from locating themselves in South and
66
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
N 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
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
I 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
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
67
 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!
Democratic Deficit and Public Participation
P 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
68
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
C 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.
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 Games-
related 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
A 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 go-
ahead, 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
69
 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 non-
profit 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 climate-
change 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
70
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
A 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.
71
 End Notes

1. Katyal A & Sharma S, “What Does A Beautiful Delhi Look Like?” Countercurrents; 22nd March 2010, http://www.countercurrents.org/
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, http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2006/12/19/
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, http://cwg2010cwc.org/factSheet.php, 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.
blogspot.com/2009/10/2010-commonwealth-games-to-create-6.html, data retrieved January 2010
13. “Cwealth Games to boost Delhi GDP by 49%,” LiveMint; 17th June 2007 http://www.livemint.com/2007/06/17110831/Cwealth-games-to-
boost-Delhi.html 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, http://beta.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/
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, http://beta.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/article11228.ece, data
retrieved January 2010
20. Estimates of the number of workers range from 25000 to 55000 skilled and unskilled workers
21. http://www.scribd.com/doc/24219905/Asiad-Case-People%E2%80%99s-Union-for-Democratic-Rights
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.
indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Workers-at-Commonwealth-Games-sites-an-exploited-lot-Panel/articleshow/5695682.cms, data retrieved
March 2010
26. “Commonwealth Games construction kills 43”, The Sydney Morning Herald; 18th March 2010, http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-
sport/commonwealth-games-construction-kills-43-20100318-qi6s.html 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, http://119.82.71.32/full6.asp?foldername=20040731&file
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, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/may/02/india.
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 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/
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, http://www.khabarexpress.com/14/03/2010-
171846/Beggars-off-Delhi-roads-before-Games-court-assured-news_144090.html, 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 http://news.outlookindia.com/item.
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
http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/newdelhi/Traffic-police-begin-removing-beggars/Article1-559878.aspx, data retrieved June
2010
40. Mahaprashasta A.A (2010) “War on Beggars” Frontline; Volume 27, Issue 13, 19th June- 2nd July

72
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, http://www.hic-sarp.org/documents/SAM%20PR_HC%20order_7%20Jan%20
2010.pdf, data retrieved March 2010
42. Nundy, K., “A Judge Extraordinaire”, The Hindu; 12th February 2010 http://beta.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article105729.ece, data
retrieved March 2010
43. “HC pulls up MCD for demolishing night shelter”, Hindustan Times; 6th January 2010, http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/newdelhi/
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” http://www.oneworldaction.org/OneStopCMS/Core/CrawlerResourceServer.aspx?resource=2D8C2A00-2073-
41ED-9B70-2FE0960C08CC&mode=link&guid=0e1168e4c3f1451487f8dd0ff3b0f0b6
45. “Licences for 14,000 street vendors”, Hindustan Times; 20th January, 2010 http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/newdelhi/Licences-
for-14-000-street-vendors/Article1-499540.aspx, data retrieved January 2010
46. “Street vendors association slams MCD ‘eviction threat” Hindustan Times; 8th June 2010, http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/
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, http://www.thehindu.com/news/
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.
indiatimes.com/India/Govt-announces-code-of-ethics-to-curb-sex-tourism-during-CWG/articleshow/6117297.cms, 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, http://www.thebody.com/content/news/art56727.html
51. Dhawan H, “Global sports events a trafficking hazard?”, Times of India; 3rd July 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Global-
sports-events-a-trafficking-hazard/articleshow/6122532.cms, retrieved July 2010
52. Soofi, M.A., “Green signal for Red light”, Hindustan Times; 11th December 2009, http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/
Print/485369.aspx, data retrieved January 2010
53. “Brothels get a facelift ahead of Commonwealth Games”, Hindustan Times; 30th May 2010, http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/
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.
hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/newdelhi/The-big-fat-14-day-long-Delhi-party/Article1-566135.aspx data retrieved July2010
55. Singh B K, Singh A, “Game Plan” Mid Day; 20th October 2009, http://www.mid-day.com/news/2009/oct/201009-delhi-commonwealth-
games-escort-agencies.htm data retrieved July 2010
56. “Supreme Court proposes legalising prostitution” Livemint; 10 December 2009,
http://www.livemint.com/2009/12/10155738/Supreme-Court-proposes-legalis.html, data retrieved June 2010
57. “South Africa mulls legalising prostitution to check HIV during World Cup”, DNA, 9th January 2010, http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/
report_south-africa-mulls-legalising-prostitution-to-check-hiv-during-world-cup_1332813, data retrieved January 2010
58. See http://www.indiademocracy.org/article/viewArticle/id/277, data retrieved June 2010
59. Bisht A and Naqvi S, Conquerors of the golden city, Hardnews; 14th May 2010, http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/2010/03/3490 data
retrieved June 2010
60. K., Shobhana, “To Promote Games, a star-studded List”, Indian Express; 2nd October 2009, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/to-
promote-games-a-starstudded-list/524129/0, data retrieved January 2010
61. “Now, PR experts to firm up Delhi’s image”, 15th December 2009, http://common-wealth-games-2010.blogspot.com/2009/12/now-pr-
experts-to-firm-up-delhis-image.html, 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, http://www.4to40.com/indian_travel_places/indian_travel_news_index.asp?id=490&travel_news=Sujit_Banerjee, data
retrieved January 2010
63. Dastidar, A. G., “Delhi, smarten up before Games: CM”, Hindustan Times; 19th March 2010, http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/
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 http://infochangeindia.org/200907077819/
Women/Features/All-aboard-the-ladies-special.html, data retrieved January 2010
65. “Delhites should learn to behave: Chidambaram”, 22nd September 2009, http://news.oneindia.in/2009/09/22/delhites-should-learn-to-
behave-chidambaram.html, data retrieved January 2010
66. Dastidar, A. G., “Delhi, smarten up before Games: CM”, Hindustan Times; 19th March 2010, http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-
Feed/newdelhi/Delhi-smarten-up-before-Games-CM/Article1-520726.aspx, data retrieved March 2010
67. Slavin M., “IOC among the world’s least accountable organisations”, 17th May 2009 http://www.gamesmonitor.org.uk/node/820, 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 http://kenkyuu.jpn.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/STAFF_DIRECTORY/Manzenreiter/SME_Horne_Manzenreiter.pdf, data retrieved
January 2010
69. “IOA rejects tenure regulations, Kalmadi called ‘dictator’”, India Today; 18th May 2010, http://www.indiatoday.intoday.in/site/
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, http://www.hindustantimes.com/RTI-
applies-to-Commonwealth-Games-HC/Article1-494930.aspx, data retrieved June 2010
71. “Sports ministry asks IOA, CGOC to fulfil RTI obligations”, IANS; 2nd February 2010 http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/sports/sports-
ministry-asks-ioa-cgoc-to-fulfil-rti-obligations_100313603.htm, 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.

73
 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, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/siri-fort-games-project-
gets-scs-okay/451941/0, 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 http://www.whatswiththeclimate.org/2009/11/12/green-commonwealth-games/, 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 http://119.82.71.32/full6.asp?foldername=20060515&filename=news&sec_id=4&sid=15
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.

74
 In CONCLUSION
The Commonwealth Casualties
“ 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.
Casualty One: Democratic Processes &
Public Accountability
T 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”.
Casualty Two: Use of Public Funds
T 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 budget-
heads 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
T 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
75
 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.
Casualty Four: The Rights of Citizenship
and Democratic Dissent
W 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 Five: Sports Culture in India
T 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
76
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 tax-
breaks, 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 Seven: Humanity, Equality,
Destiny
T 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.
Casualty Eight: Envisioning Tourism
T 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.
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.
77
 References
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

78
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

79
80
Annexure 1: Tourism- Hit or Miss?
(Extracts from European Tour Operators Association Reports)
T 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.
81
 Reference:
• ETOA (2006) “Olympic Report”, European Tour Operators Association, http://www.etoa.org/, data
retrieved January 2010
• ETOA (2008) “Olympics and Tourism: Update on Olympic Report 2006”, European Tour Operators
Association, http://www.etoa.org/, data retrieved January 2010
• ETOA (2009) “Beijing Olympic Update”, European Tour Operators Association, http://www.etoa.org/,
data retrieved January 2010

82
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
Response
Response
received EQUATIONS’ Query Status
date
by
    Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8  
     
Have economic Is an economic Please provide Please Why were The Report of Have Is a voluntary
impact impact study being a copy of India’s provide a temporary, Commonwealth studies on carbon-offset
studies of the planned post the bid document copy of the dismantable Games Evaluation the carbon programme
Commonwealth Commonwealth submitted to the host-city structures not Commission footprint of being
Games in Delhi Games? If yes, Commonwealth contract. considered for 2010 CWG the Games considered?
been done? By by when and by Games for the games released by being Please provide
whom and in whom? Federation. village? the CGF states undertaken? details of the
which year? that there is Please scheme/s. Also
Please provide a strong evidence provide a please provide
copy. of community copy. information
support from on which
sections of individuals /
the general companies are
public. How was participating
support from in the
general public programme and
determined for what actions
the purposes of are being
the bid? Please undertaken by
provide copies them.
of any studies/
surveys/other
indicative sources
upon which this
statement is
based.

83
 84

Application forwarded to the following Departments / Officials  

Received response on
1.1. OP Wadhwa, OSD to Chief Secretary / PIO, Govt of Delhi & NCT Secretariat
23.04.2010

No response received
- Appeal filed to
1.2. Secretary, Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports
Appellate Authority
on 02.07.2010

Response dated
1.3. DG, SAI
26.04.2010
Response dated
1.4. Chairman, NDMC
28.04.2010
Response dated
1.5. ADG, CPWD (CWG)
26.04.2010
Organising
Committee Response dated
19.04.2010 1.6. Principal Commissioner (CWG) DDA
Secretariat, 23.04.2010
CWG 2010 Response dated
1.7. Shri B. B. Popli, Director (Maintenance)-cum-PIO, Office of the Engineer-in-Chief, GNCTD
23.04.2010
Response dated
1.8. Prof Zubair Meenai, Nodal Officer, CWG 2010, Office of the Dean Students Welfare, Jamia Milia Islamia University
21.04.2010

1.9. Col (Retd) Ambarbir Singh, R.K Khanna Tennis Stadium No response received

Response dated
1.10. Finance Officer, Delhi University
17.05.2010
Response dated
1.11. DG, CRPF Headquarters
26.04.2010

No response received
- Appeal filed to
1.12. George Mathew, CPIO, Indian Olympic Association
Appellate Authority
on 28.05.2010

1.8. Coordinator,
CWG 2010,
Office of the
Dean Students 21.04.2010 Information pertaining to Q 1 -8 does not concern with Jamia Milia Islamia
Welfare, Jamia X
Milia Islamia
University
1.6. Director
(CWG), Delhi
Development
Response dated
Authority, 23.04.2010 1.6.1 Application forwarded to SE (HQ) CWG, Office of CE (CWG), DDA requesting them to send the requisite information
14.05.2010
Office of PR.
Commissioner
(CWG)

1.1. OSD to
Chief Secretary
Response dated
/ PIO, Govt of 23.04.2010 1.1.1. Application transferred in original to OSD, CWG, Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi
29.04.2010
Delhi & NCT
Secretariat

1.7. Director
(Maintenance)- Requested information does not fall under jurisdiction. Response dated
cum-PIO, Office 23.04.2010
1.7.1. Application transferred to Executive Engineer (P) cum PIO, PWD Zone CW1, NCTD, New Delhi. 06.05.2010
of the Engineer-
in-Chief, GNCTD

1.3. Director
(Coord), Sports
Authority Response dated
26.04.2010 1.3.1. Application transferred in original to C.A. (Stadia) & CPIO
of India, 12.05.2010
Coordination
Division

1.5. Executive Q4:
Q5: Q7: No Q8: No such
Engineer (MIS Q1: Pertains to
Pertains such study programme
/ PIO), CWGP, Pertains to Q2: Pertains to Q3: Pertains to OC-CWG, Q6: Pertains to
26.04.2010 to DDA/ has been is being
CPWD, Office of OC-CWG, OC-CWG, 2010 OC-CWG, 2010 2010 and OC-CWG, 2010
OC-CWG, undertaken considered X
the ADG (CWG), 2010 Govt of
2010 by CPWD by CPWD
CPWD Delhi

1.11. DIGP 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
(Adm) & CPIO, from the Act in so far as allegations of other than those connected with human rights violations & corruption are concerned.
DG, CRPF, 26.04.2010 From the facts of the case mentioned in your application cited above, there appears to be no violations of human rights as
Ministry of Home well as facts of the case do not attract ingredients to constitute allegations of corruption. Hence this department is not liable X
Affairs to provide information sought by you.

85
 86

1.10. Assistant
Interim communication made to convey status of application. Information sought in the application and / or comments
Registrar
27/ thereon, wherever necessary, are being requisitioned from the offices / sections/ departments / faculties / centres Response dated
(Information) &
28.04.2010 concerned. On receipt of relevant input, it will be processed in the Information Section and a reply will be sent to the 17.05.2010
PIO, University
applicant in due course.
of Delhi

1.4 APIO
(Civil)-I/EO
(Civil), Civil
Engineering Response dated
28.04.2010 1.4.1. Application is transferred to Executive Engineer (Stadia Project), New Delhi Municipal Council
Department, 30.04.2010
New Delhi
Municipal
Council

1.1.1. OSD OC response dated

(CWG),
GNCTD, Urban
Development 29.04.2010 1.1.1.1. Application transferred to PIO, Organising Committee and PIO, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS)
Department
(CWG Cell),
Delhi Secretariat
1. SPIO (RTI 29.04.2010 Q7: Yes we have studied
Cell), Organising the carbon foot print of
Committee the Games. Currently it is
Secretariat, estimated that the total
CWG 2010 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.
29.04.2010
No response received
from MYAS
Q8: OC - CWG is seeking to reduce its carbon Due to inadequate
footprint through: response to the
Energy efficiency at venue and other games related application an
infrastructure like family hotels; appeal was filed to
Appellate Authority
Introduction of clean fuel Games related use
on 26.05.2010
promoting use of public transport;
OC is conducting an extensive plantation Pan India
and NCR plantation programme with at least 50,000 Meeting with
saplings. GEF is funding this project and it holds Appellate Authority
potential for offsetting at least 15,000t C02e per on 07.07.2010
year upon maturity.
Additionally, another 50,000 saplings are being Appellate Authority
planted by DoE with the objectives of neutralizing responded on
the Games emissions. It too holds potential for 08.07.2010
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
1.4.1. EE (Stadia
Project), Office of
Executive Engineer
30.4.2010 Does not pertain to this division
(STADIA Project), X
Civil Engineering
Department, NDMC

1.7.1 Project
Manager, PWD, 06.05.2010 Nil information as far as concerned to this office circle.
GNCTD X
1.7.1. Project
Manager, R&R Q1 - 2: Not known Q7 - 8: This information is not
06.05.2010 Q3 - 6: Does not pertain to this office
Project Circle, PWD, to this office available in this office X
GNCTD
1.3.1. Deputy
Director (Stadia) /
12.05.2010 Information sought does not pertain to Stadia Division
Administrator, Sports X
Authority of India

1.6.1. SE(HQ)CWG, 14.05.2010 Q1: No Q2: There Q3: Q4: Para Q5: It is not possible Q6: No Q7: No study Q8: It is not in
Delhi development such is no Para does not to construct comments on carbon the knowledge
Authority, Office studies proposal does apply temporary, as para footprint has of this office
of Chief Engineer were to get not to this dismantable does not been under
(CWG) conducted economic apply office structures to pertain to the charge of
impact to this accommodate 8000 this office this office
study office persons as a lot
conducted of space should X
after the have been needed
Games for the same. In
case of temporary,
dismantable
structures, the
amount spent would
have been infructous

Q8: To be replied
by MoYAS/OC.
1.10.1 Assistant
Details being
Registrar
asked about
(Information) & 17.05.2010 Q1 - 7: To be replied by MoYAS/OC.
green features of
CPIO, University of X
the building are
Delhi
intimated timely
to OC

87
 88

             
1. Project Officer, 22.05.2010 Q4: The host city contract has Q6: During the bid
APIO, Organising the following provisions “the process, IOA secured
Committee, signatories to the HCC agree signatures of more
CWG 2010, FA that all information obtained than 10000 persons
Coordination - from each other including from a cross section
received a copy through discussions and of the society,
directly from the negotiations relating to this including Members of
Appellate Authority contract and the other Games Parliament, youth,
during the hearing documents, are confidential school children,
of the case on and will not be disclosed to etc demonstrating
07.07.2010 any person except required public support for the
b law or with prior written Games.
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.

       
1. Appellate 08.07.2010 Q1: Study Q4: “As it involves third party Q7: More details provided
Authority, Organising conducted by Price concerned, necessary legal in relation to which venues
Committee Water House. Need views are to be obtained and have been made more
Secretariat, CWG to send a postal resultant decision will be energy efficient, which
2010 order to get copy intimated” clean fuel will be used,
of the study 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
Response Response
EQUATIONS Query Status
received by date

    Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7  

When and What were the Please provide Please provide Has the Draft Has the Draft What is the
how was the procedures a copy of the a copy of the Comprehensive Comprehensive present status
proposal for undertaken minutes of the minutes of all National Sports National Sports of the Draft
India hosting to come to a meetings of the meetings called Policy, 2007 Policy 2007 been Comprehensive
the CWG decision taken Cabinet where by/attended been discussed discussed by the National Sports
made? to bid for the the decision by the Prime in the Cabinet? Prime Minister’s Policy, 2007
    CWG, 2010? to bid for the Minister’s Please provide Office? Please  
CWG, 2010 was Office, where minutes of all provide minutes
discussed and the decision meetings of the of all meetings
finalised. to bid for the Cabinet where it called by/
CWG, 2010 was was discussed. attended by the
discussed and Prime Minister’s
finalised. Office where it
was discussed.

No response
Application transferred to Secretary, Department of Sports, New Delhi on Question 1, 2 and 7
received
Deputy
Secretary and No response
Application transferred to CPIO, Cabinet Secretariat, New Delhi on Question 3 and 5
CPIO, Prime 08.06.2010 received
Minister’s
Office Interim
Information will be provided in due course by this office on Question 4 and 6 reply dated
02.07.2010

The matter is The matter is

Deputy
being processed being processed
Secretary and
by the office by the office Response dated
CPIO, Prime 02.07.2010          
and reply / and reply / 09.07.2010
Minister’s
information will information will
Office
be sent be sent

Deputy No such meeting No such meeting

Secretary and was called / was called /
CPIO, Prime 09.07.2010       attended by the   attended by the  
Minister’s Prime Minister’s Prime Minister’s X
Office Office Office

89
 90

3. RTI application submitted to Organising Committee, CWG, 2010 dated 10 June 2010 on (Tourist arrival data for CWG 2010)

Response received Response

by
 
   
SPIO (RTI Cell),
Organising Committee
15.06.2010
Secretariat, CWG,
2010
EQUATIONS Query Status
date
  Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5  
What is the estimated Were there any How many tickets What is the amount How many tickets
number of tourists studies/research are being printed for of revenue through are being sold to
expected for the undertaken or relied the CWG 2010? What tickets that the OC public and how many
CWG? Please provide on to establish the denomination values expects to achieve? are being given on
a break-up of expected number of are they? (Kindly complimentary basis
domestic and foreign foreign and domestic give numbers for or subsidised. What is
tourists, with source tourists? Please provide each denomination the set of criteria for
country information a copy of the studies. category). complimentary and
for foreign tourists subsidised tickets?
and information of
tourists state wise for
domestic tourists.
Response dated
Application transferred to Secretary, Ministry of Tourism on Question 1 - 2
02.07.2010
Response dated
Application transferred to Shri O P Wadhwa, OSD to Chief Secretary / PIO, Government of Delhi and NCT on Question 1 - 2
30.06.2010
Response dated
OC-CWG, 2010 is taking necessary action to furnish information in respect of Q 3, 4 and 5.
21.06.2010

Q5: 20,000 tickets of

Q3: 1.7 million tickets various denominations
are being printed has been sold so
SPIO (RTI Cell), Q4: Rs 70 crores is the
for CWG, 2010. Rs. far. With regard to
Organising Committee amount of revenue
21.06.2010   50/- to Rs.1000/- for complementary tickets
Secretariat, CWG, through tickets that OC
Sports and Rs. 750/- policy no decision has X
2010 expects to achieve
to Rs. 50,000/- for been finalised yet,
the Ceremony there is no provision
for subsidised tickets.

O P Wadhwa, OSD to
Chief Secretary / PIO,  
30.06.2010 Q1 - 2: Application transferred to Joint Secretary (Tourism), Tourism Department
Government of Delhi
and NCT

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
Deputy Director (MR),
02.07.2010 of Tourism www.tourism.gov.in in the hyperlink of survey and studies. The report provides information related to number of
Ministry of Tourism
foreign and domestic tourist expected to visit Delhi during CWG 2010 along with other information. In the study, the source X
country information for foreign tourist and information of tourists state wise for domestic tourists were not worked out.
Annexure 3:
Official Tourism Statistics & Analysis
A - Foreign Tourist Arrivals to India

Year Foreign tourist arrivals

1999 2481928
2000 2649378
2001 2537282
2002 2384364
2003 2726214
2004 3457477
2005 3918610
2006 4447167
2007 5081504
2008 5282603
2009 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 Primary Secondary Not important

Sightseeing

Landscapes / Scenic Beauty 74.32 19.91 5.77

Monuments/ Archaeological Sites 49.99 40.10 9.91
Museums / Art Galleries 47.28 27.62 25.10
Wild Life / Sanctuaries 20.92 37.06 42.03
Rural life 18.75 58.19 23.06
Cities and Markets 44.06 39.06 16.88

Cultural Activities

Art/ Theatre/ Music/ Dance 37.74 42.47 19.79

Festivals/ Fairs 31.63 41.34 27.03
Literary 14.44 43.16 42.40

Resorts

Beaches 39.07 40.00 20.93

Hills 21.88 40.31 37.81

91
 Participatory Sports

Water Sports 10.91 21.71 67.38

Winter Sports 5.74 17.67 76.59
Trekking 11.79 26.21 62.00
Mountaineering 6.19 15.77 78.04
Rafting 6.57 15.68 77.75
Fishing 8.38 19.42 72.20
Golf 3.24 14.32 82.45
Shopping 10.77 64.48 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) International

2003 Passenger Survey,
2003 - India
Accommodation type Foreign Tourist Domestic Tourist Foreign Tourist
Starred 22.00% 20.10%
10.80%
Economy 8.40% 47.46%

Guest House 2.30% 9.72%

Youth hostels 0.50% 1.12%

Tourists camps 0.20% 1.27%

Conference centre 0.50% 0.14%

Private Rented 7.20% 8.89%

Dharmshalas - 8.10% -
Friends 13.90%
1.70% 11.22%
Relatives 36.90%
Others (unapproved) 57.30% 30.30% 0.08%

Total 100.00% 100.00%

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

92
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
Twenty year Number of Tourists
India Tourism
perspective Expected to Visit
Bid Document Bid Evaluation Statistics
plan for the Delhi during CWG
2008
State of Delhi 2010 & Requirement
of Rooms

Year of
2003 2003 2003 2009 2009
publication
Star High end 33 30 34
Star budget 37 22 Delhi has 9000 12
first class
Heritage - 1 hotels. Even -
Supplementary 1091 - if this was a -
typo and they Not given
Unclassified - - meant 9000 5
Total No of first class
1161 53 hotel rooms, it 51
Hotels
is incorrect.
Total no of 7927 in star
20614 9554
Rooms categories

Source:
• Ministry of Tourism (2003) “Twenty year perspective plan for the State of Delhi” http://www.tourism.
gov.in/pplan/Delhi.pdf 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”,
http://tourism.gov.in/, data retrieved June 2010

93
 F – Tourist visitations to the Taj Mahal, Agra

Domestic Visitors Foreign Visitors

2005 1885286 593637
2006 2048120 491351
2007 2624085 586105
2008 2635283 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

94
Annexure 4:
Plan to Augment Amenities and Utilities
E 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.
Water
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
Power
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
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
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.

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, http://www.ccsindia.org/ccsindia/downloads/intern-papers-09/cwg-and-use-of-the-facilities-214.pdf, 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, http://econpapers.repec.org/article/romterumm/v_3a4_3ay_3a2009_3ai_3a10_3ap_3a7-29.htm,
data retrieved January 2010
3. Gupta, G., “DJB plans for tough year ahead”, Indian Express; 4th January, 2010, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/djb-plans-for-
tough-year-ahead/562952/, 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, http://2010commonwealthgamesindia.blogspot.com/2008/05/
power-arrangements-for-delhi.html, data retrieved January 2010

95
 6. Uppal, V., (2009)
7. “Move to step up power supply for 2010 Games”, The Hindu; 18 January 2009, http://www.thehindu.com/2009/01/18/
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
http://nvonews.com/2010/05/16/delhi-eager-to-start-renuka-dam-in-himachal-before-commonwealth-games/,
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, http://www.prokerala.com/news/
articles/a104157.html, data retrieved January 2010
12. “Rs 200 cr to be spent on streetlights”, Times of India; 25th March 2009, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Rs-200-cr-to-be-
spent-on-streetlights/articleshow/4311432.cms

96
Annexure 5:
EQUATIONS petition Opposing Plan
for Section 144 during CWG 2010 for
the Uninterrupted Movement of the
Commonwealth Games Officials & Athletes
A 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”.
97
 Reference:
• To refer to Sec 144 of the CrPC: http://www.
mha.nic.in/pdfs/ccp1973.pdf
• 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.
98
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
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lg-clears-
track-for-games-traffic-plan/636432/0
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 Lieutenant-
Governor 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
A 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 mega-
sports 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
99
 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.
100
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. Non-
host 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
T 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 minori­
ties, 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
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
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.
101
 Annexure 8: Evictions in Delhi
directly attributable to CWG 2010
Quantum of
Date/Year Location Displacements/ Reasons and Other Observations
Evictions
Towards a beautification and tourism project
Eviction along the
2004 35000 families on land that is adjacent to the Commonwealth
banks of the Yamuna
Games Village
Settlements at Banuwal
2006 Nagar, Vikaspuri    
demolished
Towards constructing a road under bridge
connecting Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium to
Thyagraj Stadium. A writ petition was filed
Around 15 jhuggies in 2009 seeking the court’s intervention to
and part of a larger rehabilitate the petitioners. The MCD insisted
12 January
th
MCD demolished Gadia
settlement of 1000 that the demolition was carried out after
2009 Lohar Basti
jhuggies. Displaced receiving prior “no-objection certificate”
more than 200 people from the Slum Department. The settlement
was neither notified nor covered under
any rehabilitation programme of the Delhi
Government
MCD demolished a slum Those displaced
cluster alongside a included over 50 people Done to make way for a parking lot in view of
June 2009
drain behind Jawaharlal suffering from a high the Commonwealth Games in the Capital in 2010
Nehru Stadium degree of disability

25th November MCD demolished Kirti No proper notices, or alternative allotment

348 slum houses
2009 Nagar provided
MCD demolished a
settlement in J. Prabhu Towards a parking lot to come up along Kushak
2009 Market and Prabhu 1000 residents Nullah near the Seva Nagar Railway Crossing for
Market Extension near the opening and closing ceremony of the games.
Lodi Colony
MCD officials Reason for the demolition of the shelter was to
demolished a night grow grass as part of the “beautification” drive
24th December shelter for the in the run-up to the Commonwealth Games. This
250 homeless people
2009 homeless at Pusa Road left many without shelter in the bitter cold, and
Roundabout (Rachna officials also confiscated their blankets. Two
Golchakkar) deaths reported.
Done in order to construct a parking lot for the
Slum cluster at
368 families of Dalit Games. The Tamils had been living there for
15th April 2010 Jangpura’s Barapullah
Tamils the past 35 years. They have not received any
Nullah bull dozed
compensation or rehabilitation
The road will connect the Commonwealth
Games Village to Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium.
Construction work is likely to be completed by
400 jhuggies likely to be June 2010. Despite the fact that authorities plan
Near Barapullah Nullah
demolished 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.
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 30,000-
40,000 families
Source: HLRN (2010): “The 2010 Commonwealth Games: Whose Wealth? Whose Commons?”

102
Annexure 9:
Countries in the global south who have
declared zero tolerance against child sexual
abuse in tourism/signed the Code of Conduct
Kenya:
I 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.
dancewithshadows.com/travel/sex-tourism-kenya.
asp
Thailand:
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: http://www.thailawforum.com/sex-crimes-
in-thailand-part3-2.html
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: http://www.unicef.org/media/
media_34596.html
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: http://www.traveldailynews.com/pages/
show_page/37465-The-Tourism-Child-Protection-
Code-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.
103
 Annexure 10:
Working around the EIA: Extracts from
the PIL indicating the events leading to the
Games Village getting an EIA clearance.
(Rajendra Singh & Others vs. Govt. Of Delhi and
Others, Constitution Filing No. 134027/2007)
C 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.
104
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. 21-
475/2006-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. 21-
475/2006-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. 21-
475/2006-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

105
 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 spill-
over 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.

www.equitabletourism.org