When is a corporate sponsor not a sponsor?

At the time of writing, there are 7 "tier one sponsors" for the 2012 Olympics: Adidas, BP, British Airways, BT, EDF Energy, Lloyds TSB and Nortel.

Your starter question for six: what is wrong with this?

• Lloyds TSB is sponsoring the London Olympics for £80 million.


• Lloyds TSB received £5.5 billion of last month's bail-out of the banks funded with taxpayers' money.

From where I am standing, that looks as if the London Olympics are to be funded by

1. the National Lottery (our money, after tax),


2. an additional levy, the Olympic Council Tax "precept" of £20 per annum per Band D household in all London boroughs (our money, after tax),


3. some real corporate sponsorship but not nearly enough, and


4. part of the bank bailout (revenues from our taxed income).

The newspapers reported last month that LOCOG is two-thirds of the way to fulfilling its targets for between £600m and £700m of sponsorship income. But, hey, no worries: LOCOG is underwritten by the Government - er, with our taxes.

NB: The London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006, Section 34, empowers the Greater London Authority to raise whatever money it wants for the London Olympics. If it turns out that £20 per annum per Band D household in London will not be enough to meet the ballooning costs of the Games, or if the Government decides to spread the load - to, say, the Council Tax payers of Hertfordshire and Essex - it can do so without introducing further legislation.