After the controversy surrounding the London 2012 Olympic logo, reporters wondered just how wacky the design for the main stadium would be.

The jigsaw-like logo, which is supposed to resemble the date of the Games, was criticised for being too abstract, while its animated flashing version was said to pose a health hazard.

But when the press, sponsors and VIPs sat down on a pile of mud at the building site in Stratford in east London, you could feel the muted disappointment among the hacks. After all, hadn’t the cost of the stadium shot up by 77 percent to 496 million pounds?

Where were the towers or the arches? Where were the wings or the sails?

Not even being told we were sitting on the finishing line seemed to lift the spirits.

The designer tried to convince us, saying the wrap around the stadium may feature a mosaic, with pixelated images of athletes which will come into focus from afar.

Athletes attending did their best when they said they had goose pimples just seeing the warm-up area. And there was clapping among the VIPs.

But it was not another Wembley with its soaring arch, the designer himself admitted.

It was not a Cardiff Millennium Stadium with its metal arrows, and it was not a Beijing ‘nest’ with its intricate lattice of steelwork.

But it was practical, as the designer said. Temporary seating will be removed after the Games to leave a 25,000 seat stadium to be used for athletics and the community.

Let’s hope he’s right when he says its compactness will help create a special atmosphere inside.

Christmas stamps go on sale today: six special editions featuring angels in the snow and portraits of the Mother and Child.

Royal Mail could be forgiven for breathing a sigh of relief this year after the fuss of 2006 when it was accused of taking the Christ out of Christmas with its secular images of Santa Claus and snowmen.

This year is a religious one according to its policy of alternating between secular and religious themes and so Christian groups should be pleased — for another 12 months at least.

But in an increasingly multi-faith Britain, is Royal Mail right to concentrate solely on Christian themes. Has the time come to issue stamps to coincide with other religious festivals widely observed in Britain — like Ramadan?

Which other religious festivals would you like celebrated on British stamps?

At a time of record personal indebtedness, record bankruptcies, rising mortgage arrears and a string of hikes in the cost of borrowing, news of a boom in the savings market seems pretty remarkable. Since 2000, cash savings have soared at five times the rate of growth in unsecured debts — borrowings on credit cards and personal loans (in other words, debt excluding mortgages) — according to Alliance & Leicester (A&L).

But, look behind the headline figures of its “Changing Face of the Savings Market” report, and there emerges a very interesting picture.

On the positive side, the cash savings market has become increasingly competitive in recent years, with rates paid on the top accounts easily outstripping inflation. The rise of the Internet and price comparison Web sites have acted as a catalyst to this. Such sites, which allow people to compare financial products at the click of a mouse, have commercial tie-ups and, at times, vested interests in promoting one product over another. But, provided users are aware of this, these Web sits should be welcomed for their empowering effect on the consumer. “You don’t hear as much anymore about ‘lazy money’ - money sitting in poorly-paying accounts,” professor Merlin Stone, of Bristol Business School, tells Reuters.

Savers are becoming savvier, pumping their cash into high-interest instant-access accounts and tax-free savings products, and are becoming increasingly wary of locking it up unless the rewards are high. But this shift in the balance between risk and reward — inextricably linked whatever savings or investment product you consider — has also led to the recycling of money away from longer-term investment products. Pensions and other equity-based investments are the casualty of the growing attractiveness of cash savings, according to the A&L report. People are turning to cash savings to fund their retirement.

That is, at least a little, worrying. Any financial adviser will tell you that, although past performance is no guide to future returns, the stock market has, historically, yielded the best returns, far outstripping cash and other asset classes, such as property and bonds. The report, it should be noted, points to a long-term trend — a move towards liquid assets not simply owing to recent volatility in money markets and the resultant rise in cash savings rates. At a time of perceived financial uncertainty, when fears are mounting of a slowing property market, households tend to build cash balances. And they are likely to retreat even more into the “safety” of cash, with balances expected to top one trillion pounds by 2012. “Consumers don’t always behave hyper-rational,” says Stone. “When asset prices start to fall, the answer is to hold on. But people will take cash out (of their properties): they won’t trust property, investments or pensions.”

Even more worryingly, perhaps, is the growing divide between the haves and have-nots. While those with disposable income turn to the historically poorest-performing asset class to fund their retirement, there are scores of others with no scope to save at all. A growing tax burden, increases in the cost of living and the mounting financial load of buying a property and servicing a mortgage have put huge pressure on household finances. “The bad news is the structural issue around overall savings that’s been caused by political policy and can only be resolved if tax rates fall and people can save more,” says Stone. “The property market isn’t going to fall and make property affordable overnight. There might be some short-term relief, but it will always be a problem.” It’s unsurprising, then, that a quarter of Britons have no savings at all. Three-quarters of them say they simply cannot afford to save — in cash, pension pot or otherwise.

Many people are willing to make changes to their routines, some even to their lifestyles in the greater cause of saving the planet.

But when it comes to paying out hard cash, firm green intentions often become a little wobbly, previous surveys have shown.

Now, however, a poll of 22,000 people in 21 countries shows that many would be prepared to pay higher bills, so long as they could be sure their money was going direct to help stop global warming by raising energy efficiency or developing clean energy sources.

Even green taxes could were grudgingly accepted if they were offset by cuts in taxation elsewhere.

How much would you be willing to pay for the planet in this way? Or do you think a change to the way we live is enough for now?

It was the education U-turn that never was.

An apparently innocuous paragraph in a speech by Gordon Brown set pulses racing at teaching unions this week.

“As we start to move to personalised testing we must keep assessment under review to ensure it supports learning and achievement, and does not dominate teaching,” the prime minister told an audience at Greenwich University in a detailed exposition of his vision for education.

Could this “review” be the first signal that assessment - the national testing and school league tables hated by the education unions - was set for the chop?

The National Union of Teachers certainly hoped so. “Gordon Brown’s commitment to keeping assessment under review must be followed through with a fundamental and independent review of damaging tests, targets and tables,” said NUT General Secretary Steve Sinnott.

The Association of Teachers and Lecturers wasn’t far behind. “”We agree with Gordon Brown’s assertion that assessment must be kept under review to ensure that it supports learning and achievement and does not dominate teaching,” it said.

Referring to three reports from the Cambridge University Primary Review that attacked testing and league tables from virtually every angle, the union added: “These reports, along with previous reports from ATL and others, show that this review is already happening.”

The unions’ pronouncements sent officials at the Department for Schools, Children and Families scurrying for clarification from Downing Street.

Had Brown seen the writing on the wall? Was he really preparing to put his hands up and declare a spectacular education U-turn?

Eventually the answer came: “We are not planning any review of testing, and nor is the prime minister,” said DSCF spokesman.

“The prime minister was referring to our progression pilot, which is piloting new ways to measure, test and boost children’s progress.”

“No 10 are confirming that this was definitely not intended to signal a new review or a policy change,” the spokesman added.

It was time for the teachers to put away the champagne.

London’s Metropolitan Police has been found guilty of endangering public safety over the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes and fined 175,000 pounds.

Opposition parties have called for the resignation of police chief Sir Ian Blair but he has made it clear he will stay in the absence of any evidence of systemic and persistent failures within the force which led to the 2005 shooting.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has said she has full confidence in Blair.

The Crown Prosecution Service has decided there is insufficient evidence to charge any of the individual officers involved in the killing and the Old Bailey jury has stressed they believe the operational commander on the fateful day, Cressida Dick bore no personal responsibility.

Do you believe justice has been done in the case? Do you think Blair should resign?

Tell us your views

Just how long should police be able to keep records of people’s criminal convictions?

Data watchdog, the ICO , has unearthed one case where Humberside police still had a record of the theft of 99 pence worth of meat by a youth in 1984.

In another, a girl cautioned for minor assault when she was under 14 was told by Staffordshire Police that the record would stay on file until she was 100.

They will fuel a growing debate about privacy in Britain, which already has more CCTV surveillance cameras on its streets than any other European country.

Is it justified for police to hang on so long to records of what may often be just isolated instances of youthful indiscretion and which could damage people’s jobs prospects years afterwards?

The police obviously think so. Four forces that have been told by the ICO to delete such records are challenging the demand and the issue will now go to the Information Tribunal.

What do you think?

What is the best way to encourage recycling?

Councils are to be given the green light to charge householders for the amount of rubbish they throw away.

Some estimates say such a move would cost the average household 250 pounds a year.

The idea is back on the agenda after MPs warned the European Commission could fine Britain up to 180 million pounds a year if it does not cut the amount of waste being piled into landfill sites.

The first steps to “pay as you throw” will be introduced next month in the Climate Change Bill, although details of how the scheme will work remain to be worked out.

Those who recycle more and throw out less could end up earning rebates on their council tax.

But already the Conservatives have attacked the whole idea, saying it would unfairly penalise large housholds on low incomes, encourage fly-tipping and even prompt people to burn rubbish in their back gardens.

Better, they say, to increase recycling.

Do you think the polluter should automatically pay? Or would a system of stick and carrot be an acceptable way of reducing the amount of rubbish householders in England throw out?

What kind of welcome should Britain give King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia? He was flying to London on Monday for a state visit, but the event is provoking controversy.

"By any standards, and in the assessment of our own Foreign Office, the human rights record of this government is in many ways appalling," said Liberal Democrat acting leader Vince Cable, who is boycotting lavish receptions for the Saudi king's visit.

Cable points to discrimination in Saudi Arabia against women and people of other religions and to corporal punishment including amputations and public beheadings.

The state visit, from the leader of Britain's most important Middle Eastern ally and trading partner, comes just weeks after Saudi Arabia agreed to buy 72 Eurofighter Typhoon fighter planes from Britain for 4.43 billion pounds.

It also follows the insistence in December by former Prime Minister Tony Blair that the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) drop an investigation into alleged corruption in a huge BAE Systems arms sales to Saudi Arabia, on national security grounds.

The SFO had been investigating allegations that members of the Saudi ruling family received kickbacks as part of the 43-billion pound al-Yamamah arms deal negotiated in the 1980s.

Should business interests and the need for cooperation against terrorism in the Middle East take precedence over other concerns? Do you think the Saudi King should have been invited to Britain?

Let us know your views.

A new consumer revolt is gathering steam - this time over payment protection insurance (PPI). Cast your mind back to the last time you took out a mortgage, personal loan, credit card or store card, or bought something on credit. The chances are you were also offered PPI too. It is designed to meet debt repayments if you are out of work due to sickness, accident or redundancy, but has long been criticised as being aggressively sold, hugely expensive and virtually useless.

Premiums are generally added to the cost of the loan amount, and interest rolls up on them too. To make matters worse, most PPI policies last for five years; if your credit agreement is for longer that that, you’ll wind up paying interest on insurance no longer in force. The cover also only pays out for a limited amount of time - usually 12 months - and often only covers minimum credit card repayments, so the outstanding level of debt is never reduced. Policies come with a host of exclusions too: there is no guarantee any claim will be successful. Little wonder, then, that margins are far more lucrative than those on other insurance products: only 20 percent of the money collected in PPI premiums is ever paid out in claims.

Amid such concerns, the Office of Fair Trading and Financial Services Authority have been clamping down, referring the sector for investigation and fining a string of firms for PPI failings. Consumers, however, are taking matters into their own hands. Two months ago, consumer advice Web site MoneySavingExpert.com launched a trial to help people claim compensation amid PPI mis-selling, and 70,000 people have so far downloaded template letters in a bid to do just that. Founder Martin Lewis estimates that around half of the 20 million PPI policies in force have been mis-sold, and says: “This big protection racket isn’t run by underworld crime barons - but genteel bankers in posh suits.” Consumer group Which? has launched its own drive to help people who have been mis-sold the insurance get their money back. “Protection money - stake your claim” cries the headline in its November magazine.

It brings back memories of the height of the endowment mis-selling scandal. Dating back to the 1980s, it has seen thousands of homeowners claim compensation on the grounds that they were not warned of the potential for the maturity value to fall short of the value of their mortgage. But this is just the latest development in case of The People versus The Banks: the consumer revolution is now being played out on a much larger stage. Scores of consumers have, in recent times, tried to reclaim “unfair” bank charges (an estimated billion pounds has been dished out to date), while others have complained about mortgage exit fees and anomalies in council tax bands. All power to the people. But lenders are unlikley to take any threat to their profitability lying down and will do their utmost to recoup the revenue by alternate means. In one way or another, it will be the consumer who foots the bill.