I made a startling discovery this week. Contrary to all previous rumours, founded on scaremongering, Britain is definitely not skint, which will surprise nurses and others in the public sector, who have been told they can look forward to a "tripe supper" in the way of an annual pay rise.

However, before the rest of us start celebratory jigs, I should advise caution. The UK may not be skint now, but, in all probability, it certainly will be post-2012, the year London hosts the Olympic Games.

Unless your attention had been diverted by events in Weatherfield, Albert Square and Emmerdale, you must have been gobsmacked the night national newscasts revealed the cost of the Olympics had trebled to £9bn. In figures that is £9,000,000,000. And rising! Accountants responsible for monitoring this financial behemoth are revising their upward estimates still further, until it hits £12.5bn, or £12.5000,000,000 (I think), for those of you who prefer monster sums of money fully exposed, not truncated. Either way, it was enough to give me a headache, as it could well threaten the extra few quid in state pensions which we senior citizens are due to receive from April.

After all, the government has to find the money from somewhere and has already indicated it will raid the National Lottery to the tune of £2.2bn (£2.2000,000,000), diverting millions of pounds away from the arts, heritage and grassroots sports, thus deeply upsetting organisations responsible for running amateur athletics. London's success in being chosen to host the 2012 Olympics was meant to encourage emerging British athletes to devote the next five or so years towards making the home team able to compete at the very highest level, and aiming for a bronze medal, at least. Fat chance they have of so doing if their training facilities are hampered by lack of proper funding.

One had to feel sorry for Tessa Jowell, whose job as Olympics minister is looking more and more like the poisoned chalice represented by that of Home Secretary in a succession of Labour Government Cabinets. She had to face the Commons to deliver the latest estimates, which were tabulated on special wide sheets of paper. She did her best, which couldn't have been easy, given the ever-zooming costs, and sneers from the Opposition benches.

She again chose to play the patriotism card, inferring that anyone who questioned the government's staggering Olympics budget inaccuracies was undermining the very spirit of the Games. I'm unsure from where she conjured that opinion, though it sounded like a passage from New Labour's election manifesto. The subject could be anything from our Olympics bid to the invasion of Iraq. Opposition to either is a sign of disloyalty. Un-Britishness.

Mention of Iraq leads to another troubling revelation, and I'm not referring to the appalling violence and carnage inflicted upon its citizens daily. To date the cost of Britain's four-year involvement in that disaster is £4.9bn (£4.900,000,000,000). By 2012, it could outstrip the cost of staging the Olympics.

I'm beginning to feel guilty about my pension increase. I'll probably choke on the extra helping of fish, chips and mushy peas, with tea bread and butter, it will buy me.