By stewartb

The UK government and especially the Secretary of State for Scotland, Douglas Alexander have been commenting on their role in having the Commonwealth Games come to Glasgow: ‘a central role’; ‘instrumental’; ‘huge supporters of the Games’ etc.

From the UK government in a press release dated July 24, 2026: ‘Commonwealth Games return to Glasgow with UK Government backing’: ‘The UK Government is proud to have played a central role in bringing the 2026 Commonwealth Games to Glasgow and securing the future of the competition.’ (my emphasis)

Scottish Secretary Douglas Alexander is quoted in the press statement: “I am incredibly pleased that the UK Government was instrumental in helping to bring the Games back to Glasgow, including by underwriting the security costs.”

Minister for Sport Stephanie Peacock is also quoted: “I am immensely proud of the role the UK Government played in backing Glasgow’s bid and helping make the 2026 Games a reality. We are huge supporters of the Games and we know the value and benefits they can have for the local area.”

In Notes to Editors we learn: ‘The UK Government has backed Glasgow 2026, providing operational support and committing contingent funding to Games safety and security costs.’ It is understood the UK government has underwritten just £2.3m of the costs of the Games (see below).

Let’s examine these claims of a ‘central’, ‘instrumental’ and ‘hugely supporting’ role a little. From the Glasgow 2026 Commonwealth Games website (https://www.glasgow2026.com/about/questions ) on financing:

‘Commonwealth Sport has made £100 million available to fund the core budget, with additional funding made available for capital upgrades and city activation. 

‘Commonwealth Games Australia has also offered an investment of £2.3 million to support Games delivery. Whilst the Games does not require public funding for delivery, the UK Government has also made an additional £2.3 million available as contingency towards security costs if required.’

And more: ‘Glasgow 2026 is privately funded, and the delivery of the Games does not require – nor have we ever asked for – public funding or a public underwrite from Glasgow City Council, the Scottish Government or the UK Government. However, the UK Government has made an additional £2.3 million available as contingency towards security costs if required.‘

Some further background, from the House of Commons Library (June 8, 2026): ‘Government support for the Glasgow Commonwealth Games 2026 – Research Briefing’

Regarding finance: ‘The model does not involve direct public funding and includes a “streamlined budget of £150 million” (compared to £778 million allocated to the 2022 Commonwealth Games in Birmingham). The budget consists of investment by Commonwealth Sport alongside commercial revenue sources.’

Also from the same briefing: ‘On 11 September 2024, the BBC reported that the UK government had rejected a request from the Scottish government to underwrite the entire cost of Scotland 2026. In a letter which the BBC claimed to have seen, the sports minister, Stephanie Peacock, stated that the UK government “cannot commit to fully underwriting the risk for an event the Scottish government has committed to host”.

‘The letter reportedly said that “around £27m” had been earmarked as a contingency fund and that “an additional contribution of up to £2.3m” would be provided for the event.

‘It further stated the minister’s “strong preference” for the Scottish government to match that figure to “help cover any increase in safety and security costs if terror threat levels rise before the games.”

My understanding is the £27m contingency referred to here may not becoming from the UK government, only £2.3m is being made available (grudgingly?) from that source. (‘The Games’ budget, estimated at approximately £114 million (€135 million/$149 million), has been meticulously crafted by experienced event budgeting professionals to ensure cost-effectiveness. With a 24% budget contingency built in, there is flexibility to adjust service levels if needed.’ – source: https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/commonwealth-scotland-unveils-priv) Presumably the UK government is always having to put contingencies in place for all sorts of major events across the UK to “help cover any increase in safety and security costs if terror threat levels rise ..”?

So how for an event that doesn’t need and didn’t ask for UK government funding, does that same government justify its claim of a ‘central’, ’instrumental’ and ‘hugely supportive’ role?

For perspective

From the website of Birmingham City Council (July 25, 2019): ‘£778m investment into city and region to deliver Commonwealth Games’.

The breakdown of funding reports £594 million from the UK government.  Andy Street, the then Mayor of the West Midlands, is quoted: “This is a huge investment in Birmingham and the wider West Midlands to ensure the Commonwealth Games leaves a legacy far beyond 2022.” Yes, a huge UK government investment that was truly ‘central’, ‘instrumental’ and ‘hugely supportive’ with regards to the Birmingham Games!

Then from HM Government (2024): ‘Evaluation of the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games’ (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/660e99529f92ac001a516ca2/Evaluation_of_the_Birmingham_2022_Commonwealth_Games___One_Year_Post-Games_Evaluation_Report___March_2024.pdf  )

‘A total of £778 million of public funding was allocated, supplemented with £120 million of commercial income raised, to enable the investment that went into preparations for and delivery of the Opening and Closing Ceremonies and 11 days of sporting events … The public investment into delivering the Games events also helped to unlock approximately £85 million in additional funding from a range of public and third sector bodies to support wider legacy activities, and accelerated the delivery of planned capital investment.’

Appendix 1 Table 18 in the evaluation report sets out the full costs of the Birmingham Games: total cost was £958.3 million of which £829.2 million (at 2023 prices) was met by public funding.

The next obvious question?

From me to ChatGPT: “The UK Government invested a sum of c.£800m in the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games. Did this lead to an actual Barnett Consequential payment to the devolved administrations for NI, Scotland and Wales?”

The response: ‘The short answer is no evidence suggests that the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games funding resulted in a separate, identifiable Barnett consequential payment to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.’

‘What happened with Birmingham 2022? – Although DCMS repeatedly described the Games as delivering benefits for “the UK”, there is no published Treasury notification, Spending Review document, or Statement of Funding Policy identifying a Barnett consequential arising from the Birmingham 2022 Games funding.

‘If a significant Barnett consequential had been created, one would normally expect to find: Treasury Barnett tables, devolved government budget documents, or ministerial statements recording the additional allocations. There is no such published record.’

And: ‘Bottom line – No published evidence shows that the £778 million Birmingham 2022 funding generated a specific Barnett consequential for Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. The available evidence suggests the Games funding was treated in much the same way as other UK-wide major event expenditure, rather than as England-only spending triggering identifiable Barnett additions.

‘If any marginal Barnett effects existed, they were not separately identified or paid as a discrete “Commonwealth Games consequential”; under Treasury practice they would have been absorbed into wider departmental funding changes rather than attributed to the Games themselves.’

Now ChatGPT is not infallible but I’m in no mood to plough through obscure HM Treasury documents seeking evidence of a consequential payment which probably doesn’t exist.  However, taking all the above in the round, there is nothing which places the bombastic claims of attribution and ‘huge support’ by the Secretary of State for Scotland and his government concerning Glasgow 2026 in a better light!