Forget the stiff upper lip, this was one uncharacteristic party under the Millennium Wheel last Tuesday. Champagne flowed all night following London?s nomination on the list of cities handpicked by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to host the 2012 games. The relief was palpable. Britain?s capital entered the race at a late stage but now finds itself in the final lap, with as many chances of winning as anyone else.

?We?ve now got to talk the talk, walk the walk and schmooze the schmooze,? said a member of the team behind the 2012 bid. After spending the last few months overlooking the capital from a plush office in Canary Wharf and constantly browsing ebay, she knows her work is cut out. London has a year to impress the IOC and pip Paris, Madrid, New York and Moscow to the finishing line.

London has a real fight on its hands. The latest IOC rankings place the English capital above Moscow and New-York but below Paris and Madrid. While most experts believe Paris has a strong bid which the IOC would find very hard to turn down for a fourth time, they remain optimistic about London?s chances. After all, it is presenting a united front.

After stuttering for a long time, the British government has given its full backing to the project. Its initial concern was about funding issues. It will have to invest around Rs 150 billion for London to be considered as an Olympic standard city while public services such as health, education and transport are crying out for more money.

Insiders insist the government wanted to make sure it got its figures right this time because it did not want any repeat of the Millennium Dome fiasco or the Wembley Stadium saga. The Dome sits idle in Greenwich despite costing Rs 30 billion. Construction on the new Wembley is under way with the grand opening scheduled for 2006, but the project was nearly shelved because of soaring costs. This time, the cabinet has taken care to inflate the costs so that the bidding committee does not have to keep running bowl in hand to the Exchequer.

?It took time to convince the government but they have been very supportive ever since they decided they would get involved. We have a very robust bid but we know that if we go back asking for more money, it will be considered as a failure,? said Steve Redgrave, former British Olympic champion.

Tony Blair, the Prime minister, is finally acting as a sales executive for London 2012 by flaunting its merits at every opportunity. Political leadership (not to be confused with interference) is essential if London is to succeed. It shows that everyone is on board and rowing in the same direction.

London?s seduction campaign will have to start on home soil. If Londoners are right behind the project, everyone else seems lukewarm towards the idea. Critics believe the government should not spend yet another huge sum of money on the capital and on one single item. They say the Olympic bid will absorb money which should have been earmarked for the development of sports at grassroots levels.

?Swimming pools are being closed and playing fields sold off. School sport is under funded, so is this the best way to spend lots of money?? asks Labour MP Kate Howey.

The showpiece of London 2012 will be an Olympic complex in the cultural melting pot which is East London. The new venues, which include a new stadium and aquatic centre, will be built on wastelands in this traditionally poorer area of the capital. Regeneration is welcome but then, there are hundreds of places around the UK (especially the former industrial cities), which would benefit from such a massive injection of cash. This has further enlarged the traditional rift between the Northerners with industrial roots and Southerners who are more into white-collar jobs and agriculture.

The London 2012 committee is at pains to explain the merits of hosting the Olympic games. The investment, it says, will be dedicated to building sporting facilities across England, Scotland and Wales. These sites will benefit local communities after the Olympic games which are expected to promote a sports culture.

?With the Commonwealth games last year, Manchester has shown the world that we Brits can organise high profile multi-sports events. For the IOC, no other British city except London is eligible to host the games, so we must realise this is a British and not just a London affair,? said Sir Steve Redgrave.

The national mood may swing the votes next year, but it is not the only aspect the bidding team has to work on. The IOC has praised London for its accommodation and security arrangements but has warned against the chaotic transport system. After years of under funding, the London Underground is on the brink. The government has committed Rs 850 billion to CrossRail, a new train network which would run across the capital. Works have yet to start and many believe it may not be fully operational by 2012.

London has rolled up its sleeves and is ready to fight off competition from the four other short listed cities. It knows that it will hit a pot of gold if it hosts the games. It will help rebrand the city, attract more foreign investment and boost tourism. Visitors to Sidney and Barcelona have soared since they hosted the Olympics. But London also knows that it will lose prestige and millions of pounds if the bid ultimately fails. Its fate lies in the hands of what critics call the ?unelected IOC belly scratchers?.

London has a year to convince and the clock is ticking away. This time next year, it could well be a two horse race between London and Paris. The old Anglo French rivalry will flare up over the next months, starting with an explosive football match on June in Lisbon. Euro 2004 will actually be a decisive moment for the London bid. If hooliganism raises its ugly head during the tournament and lager fuelled topless louts go on the rampage in Portugal, any chance of Britain hosting the Olympics will be booted into the long grass. Instead of winning with a bang, London may well go out with a whimper.

<B>by Ryan COOPAMAH</B> <I>Outlook correspondent in London E-mail: [email protected]</I>