andMr. Quinn asked the Minister for Education if the Government have sought the opinion of Cospóir in relation to the proposed boycott of the Moscow Olympics and, if so, if he will indicate the response received from Cospóir.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Olympic Games.
21.
The Government have not sought the opinion of Cospóir in this matter.
The Minister for Education is the senior Minister in his Department with overall responsibility for sport. Can he say if the Government think that the Sports Council. Cospóir, have informed views on this matter and does he not think it worth while for the Government to seek the view of Cospóir in this matter?
The Minister does not consider. It is not an appropriate matter for Cospóir. It is simply a matter for the Irish Olympic Council.
22.
andMr. Quinn asked the Minister for Education the amount of the Government's contribution to Ireland's participation in the Olympic Games both directly by way of grants and by way of indirect assistance and the number of athletes who will participate on behalf of the Irish Olympic team.
To date the Government have contributed £135,000 by way of direct financial assistance, through the Olympic Council of Ireland, to Ireland's participation in the 1980 Olympic Games. A decision on this year's grant has not yet been made.
In addition, special arrangements have been made for Olympic panellists to avail of the expertise and facilities of Thomond College, Limerick, and to train at Ballinteer Community School Sports Complex where, with the co-operation of the school authorities, a fully equipped training centre with dining room has been established. The cost of these special initiatives, which are ongoing, is £20,000 to date. The number of athletes who may participate on behalf of the Irish Olympic team is a matter for determination by the Olympic Council of Ireland.
Has the decision not to make a decision yet in relation to this year's allocation to the IOC any connection with the Government's attitude on whether they will recommend the attendance of Ireland at the Moscow Olympics?
The amounts are given through the Department's grant-in-aid scheme to the national governing bodies of sport and to the IOC.
Is the decision of the Government not to allocate any money this year, or to suspend or postpone the allocation this year, in any way connected with the Government's political decision on the participation of Ireland in the Moscow Olympics?
In fact the Government have paid £19,372.09 to the IOC for the training of the Olympic panelists.
In his reply the Minister indicated that a decision has not been taken in relation to the final allocation this year. Can the Minister indicate if there is any connection between the non-decision and the possibility of the Government recommending that we do not participate in the Moscow Olympics?
I do not think there is any connection.
Therefore, can the IOC expect to receive the same amount of funding pro rata, as they received last year and that there are not political considerations involved in the current delay?
The decision will be made in the light of the facts put before the Government by the IOC.
A number of athletes are in training and wondering if there will be funds made available. Can I take it that any question about this has not political connections with pressure from any other Government in relation to Ireland's attendance at these games—and that, subject to normal hitches, the money will be made available in due course? In other words, are our athletes wasting their time?
The Deputy can assure the athletes who he claims to know are worried that the Government will provide them with funds to enable them to train. I should like to add by way of rider that any money spent on the training of athletes for the Olympic Games is not and could not be regarded as wasted money because the actual training is a virtue in itself.
When, last year, was the decision made on the amount of grant that would be made available for that year?
I have not got that information available to me immediately.
Will the Minister accept that the end of April is rather late to be telling the House that, to quote the Minister, a decision on this year's grant has not yet been made?
I would agree with the Deputy if the result was that there was an interruption or a lack of facilities for training the athletes. There has not been a an interruption and there has not been a lack of facilities as far as the Olympic Games are concerned. Indeed, facilities were made available to our athletes such as were never made available before on the ever of the Olympic Games.
When does the Minister expect the decision to be made? Will it be before 24 May?
I can assure the House that the Department will finance the whole training activity adequately, irrespective of any outside consideration.
Is the Minister kicking for touch?
I follow a different code.
23.
asked the Minister for Education the reasons he attended the Strasbourg meeting of the Council of Europe Sports Ministers on 21 March 1980 to discuss proposals for an alternative Olympic Games in view of his recent public statement favouring Irish participation in the Moscow Olympic Games 1980.
Since 1975 the Ministers with responsibility for sport in the member countries of the Council of Europe meet in plenary session every three years to formulate policy on matters of common interest.
Between these plenary sessions, however, meetings of Ministers of Sport take place on an informal basis in order to keep in touch with trends in sport affairs. The meeting which my Minister of State attended in Strasbourg on the 21 March 1980 was the eighth such meeting of Ministers of Sport on an informal basis since 1975. A proposal for an alternative Olympic Games was not on the agenda for the meeting.
Will the Minister say why the Minister of State made it quite clear on at least one occasion that a team from Ireland will be attending Moscow when subsequently the Minister for Foreign Affairs said that such a decision had not been made? According to newspaper reports, consideration was given to possible alternative games.
The question asks something completely different. The Minister need not answer the question if he chooses.
I have the agenda and, as I stated in my reply, proposals for an alternative Olympic Games were not on the agenda for the meeting which Deputy Tunney attended.
Will the Minister say why the Minister of State said categorically in public that the Irish Olympic team will attend Moscow and the Minister for Foreign Affairs seemed to contradict——
That is a separate question. The Chair has ruled that that question is not on the Order Paper.
The Minister is dodging the issue.
In relation to the agenda of the meeting which the Minister of State, Deputy Tunney, attended, could the Minister indicate to the House if the Minister of State—in the informal discussions which were part of the general discussions on sport— confirmed the statement he made on 29 January on RTE's "Frontline" programme that Ireland's team would be participating at the 1980 Moscow Olympics?
That is a separate question too. Deputies should put down direct questions. Deputies are seeking to ask an important question irrelevantly.
Are the Government considering the American suggestion for the re-siting of the Olympic Games at some venue other than Moscow for this year?
That is a separate question also.
On a point of order, the question relates directly to proposals for an alternative Olympic Games. I am asking the Minister if the Government are considering any such proposal.
I would point out to the Deputy that the question was answered. The Minister said the question was not on the agenda——
That question was not answered.
——and the Chair must have regard to both sides of the House. The Chair is being overly indulgent.
Surely I am entitled to ask the responsible Minister if his Government are considering proposals for a re-siting of the 1980 Olympic Games?
The Deputy may put down a separate question.
Might I raise a point of order? This arises out of our attempt to elicit exactly what is Government policy in this area and out of conflicting speeches and statements made by Ministers and junior Ministers. The point of order I am making arises out of the Chair's suggestion that a separate question be put down. I would remind you, a Cheann Comhairle, that recently I put down a question in regard to a statement by a junior Minister on the Moscow Olympics, saying that our team were going there. The question was rejected on the ground that it contained argument. How can we raise this question in the House——
The Deputy is raising a matter now which is disorderly.
It would appear that we have to be disorderly, according to your interpretation, if we are——
There is no need.
How can we raise it in this House, I might ask, if not through supplementaries, if not by way of asking a question? How can we raise the tact that the Ministers of State, Deputy Tunney and Deputy Calleary, said we were going to Moscow while the Minister for Foreign Affairs and other Ministers have said that no decision has been made? How can we raise this point——
They do not even know themselves, therefore how can they give the Deputy an answer?
That is not a matter for the Chair now. The Deputy is seeking to ask a question which is not on the Order Paper and the Chair surely cannot allow that.
And I cannot put down a question about it on the Order Paper.
Can the Minister state Government policy in relation to participation in the Moscow Olympic Games 1980, as is requested in the tailend of my question here?
I answered the question put down to me here. In fact it is quite clear, from the answer——
It is not at all clear.
——and from the answers to other questions that the matter is one for the Irish Olympic Council and I think the House knows that the deadline is 24 May.
I cannot allow these supplementaries to continue. I am calling on the Minister for Agriculture.
Do the Government intend making any recommendation to the Irish Olympic Council in relation to their participation in the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games?
Order, please.
If the Deputy puts down a question I will answer it.
The Minister is kicking for touch again, as usual.