ty. But British government officials alarmed by the ever-rising estimates claim that the 'predictable' increases of both of those costs – and several others – were not factored into tLondon's jubilation over being selected as the site of the 2012 Olympics is already having disquieting echoes for many Londoners. The estimated costs of holding the games, one of the world's biggest spectacles, in the British capital have already risen at least 40% since the city was awarded the honour in 2005. Were that not bad enough, many people think that the additional ?900 million figure put forth by the UK’s Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, last November, is itself a significant underestimate.

The reasons for the cost rises would appear to be mostly the predictable ones: inflation of construction costs for all of the new facilities needed to host the event and that ever-rising price of all modern events: security. But British government officials alarmed by the ever-rising estimates claim that the 'predictable' increases of both of those costs – and several others – were not factored into th

world's biggest spectacles, in the British capital have already risen at least 40% since the city was awarded the honour in 2005. Were that not bad enough, many people think that the additional ?900 million figure put forth by the UK’s Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, last November, is itself a significant underestimate.

The reasons for the cost rises would appear to be mostly the predictable ones: inflation of construction costs for all of the new facilities needed to host the event and that ever-rising price of all modern events: security. But British government officials alarmed by the ever-rising estimates claim that the 'predictable' increases of both of those costs – and several others – were not factored into t

additional ?900 million figure put forth by the UK’s Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, last November, is itself a significant underestimate.

The reasons for the cost rises would appear to be mostly the predictable ones: inflation of construction costs for all of the new facilities needed to host the event and that ever-rising price of all modern events: security. But British government officials alarmed by the ever-rising estimates claim that the 'predictable' increases of both of those costs – and several others – were not factored into t

ppear to be mostly the predictable ones: inflation of construction costs for all of the new facilities needed to host the event and that ever-rising price of all modern events: security. But British government officials alarmed by the ever-rising estimates claim that the 'predictable' increases of both of those costs – and several others – were not factored into tty. But British government officials alarmed by the ever-rising estimates claim that the 'predictable' increases of both of those costs – and several others – were not factored into the original bid.

'Today’s increase is just a starting point,' Shadow Olympics minister Hugh Robertson told the BBC News. 'While the figures remain ambiguous, we can only expect further increases.'

More immediately, the 2008 Olympics, to be held in Beijing, may hold hidden costs of a different kind for China, some observers are beginning to speculate. There seems little reason to doubt that the country's famously booming economy can pay whatever sticker is attached to the global sporting event. Because actual costs are not only sustained but controlled by the central government, only officials deepest inside the Communist state may ever know the true final costs of the event.

Still, people who view the event