- guardian.co.uk, Sunday December 8 2002 00.33 GMT
It would be an historic occasion because London has already staged them, in 1908 and 1948, and no city has ever held the Olympics three times. And the Prime Minister himself would benefit. He would get more votes if he backs a bid, because staging the Olympics here would be hugely popular. Going for it would increase his profile and people would respect him for doing it. America always moves with the times, but Britain tends to stay the way it is. Bidding for 2012 would show that we are capable of change.
America is always up for trying new things, and that's a big part of the reason they are so successful at so many things, including sport. In order to progress my own career, I have taken the advice of my management, Stellar Athletics, and am now spending a lot of time in America trying to find out what makes American sprinters tick. That's partly why my times have improved so much. Yes, America is a bigger country with more people than us, but we have just as much sporting talent. We just need to develop it. People here usually only experience the Games once every four years from an armchair, but I believe that, if they were held in London, then people would turn out in massive numbers. I'm from Archway in north London - and to have the Olympics in Stratford, which is only 20 minutes from where I now live in Essex, would be great.
Look at the vibe and the success created by the Commonwealth Games in Manchester last summer and the really positive way people responded to it. Even the weather held up! That should give us a taste of what an Olympic Games in London could be like, and show that we could do a good job with the Olympics if we were awarded them.
While the Commonwealth Games were not good for me personally, because I pulled up in the 100m final, they did boost the profile of athletics. The concentration on football means that athletics is always left behind, but Manchester had an inspirational effect and afterwards lots of kids began to get involved in the sport for the first time. Imagine that effect on an even larger scale, should London be allowed to host the Olympics.
The Commonwealth Games left a legacy of top-class sports facilities in Manchester, and that's something the Olympics could also do for London. At the start of my career, there were not many places to train. I used to train on a cinder track in Finsbury Park and then at Haringey Sports Centre, which I still use. There was also Crystal Palace stadium in south London, where we hold the Grand Prix meeting every August - another big event that we stage very well. The facilities built for the 2012 Games could be used for up-and-coming British sporting talents to train in addition to helping to stage other big events.
Of course, people will point to the problems surrounding the national athletics stadium at Picketts Lock for the World Athletics Championship and the on-going trouble with the rebuilding of Wembley.
It's true that these difficulties did not help Britain's reputation abroad, but I feel that, particularly where Picketts Lock was concerned, many of the snags were due to a lack of time. If we got the Olympics, we would have easily enough time to get it right.
If the Games came here, Britain would win more medals. Host countries always do. Again, look at how well British competitors performed at the Commonwealth Games with the home crowd behind them. I'll be retired by 2012, but I believe having the Olympics in London would help other British athletes to enjoy the sort of success I've had.
The British Olympic Association has chosen the right date, 2012, and the right venue, Stratford. I'm impressed with the work they've done so far on an Olympic bid. If Tony Blair sees that the BOA have done their homework correctly, he will do the right thing and say yes. Let's invest in something good and positive and different and creative; let's go for the 2012 Olympics.
