While the F1 community is clearly enjoying its stay in India thus far – exploring Delhi, tweeting about tuk tuks, and marvelling at the lawlessness on the roads out here – there is an elephant in the paddock. The poverty which is so apparent when out and about has led some to question the wisdom/taste of laying on such a feast of excess while millions live in squalor just miles away.
It certainly makes one feel uncomfortable, when out and about, knowing that only the extremely privileged will attend the race this weekend while it is beyond the means (and, let's face it, the interest) of everyone else.
But should that mean India is denied the chance to host a grand prix? Should that mean it is criticised for hosting one? I mean, isn't this the case in every country F1 visits to a greater or lesser degree? From China to Britain?
Surely it is hypocritical to dictate who can and cannot stage a race, and what is or isn't tasteful, based on how exclusive it is. F1 is exclusive, that much we already knew. The difference is that Delhi probably has the greatest disparity in wealth of any city F1 has yet visited, with the possible exception of Sao Paulo where slums border the Interlagos race track. So the elephant in the room seems bigger.
The charges against the Indian GP, of course, run deeper than tastelessness; that the organisers are only out to line their own pockets through the development of the land around the track and to dress the grand prix up as a boost for India and an example of the country being able to put on a great show one year after the chaotic Commonwealth Games is just marketing spiel; that it is not helping the local villager who has no electricity and has to walk for hours every day to get fresh water; that the $400million would have been better spent on education or inner city projects.
These arguments are flawed. The truth is the Jaypee Group is a privately-owned company and is out to make money. That is the way of business. It paid that sum as an investment in order to make a return on real estate, by building a city around the track which will house one million. Whether it has done anything shady with regard to the purchase of land out here is a matter for the Indian authorities. If it has, it would clearly be a black mark against it.
I asked Vicky Chandhok, the president of the Indian motor sports federation, about it on Monday and he claimed that the land on which Jaypee Sports City is being built is not in dispute; it was bought way before F1 was even a possibility and that "the problems with the land are over 20km away in a small town" and that the farmers are simply piggybacking on the GP in an attempt to leverage more money from future sales or ones that are already in motion. Maybe he would say that, I don't know.
But as for not helping the poorest, I can't see how this race isn't benefiting the local economy – hotels, restaurants, taxis, shops, construction etc - however trifling that benefit might seem when weighed against the scale of poverty in India. As Chandhok pointed out: "The race is privately funded so it is no sweat off anyone’s back. It is Jaypee’s risk. The government has not contributed anything.
“There were 10,000 people working on site during the construction. 7000 from day one. There will be over 1400 staff employed here. Their families will get a better education and a better living. So when all is said and done I can’t see a negative from this."
India may be the most gratuitous example yet of sport's skewed economic benefit, it may seem tasteless to some, but that's not a good enough reason to deny it to the many millions who will enjoy it, or criticise India for attempting to put on a good show with all the razzmatazz that other countries enjoy. Maybe it will inspire in a new an improved motorsport infrastructure nationwide which could help thousands.
The fact is that both Bernie and the race organisers are out to make money. We must accept that. The hope is that the wider economy will benefit and enough of it will trickle down to help all Indians.
No comments:
Post a Comment