Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 1 May 2001

Vol. 535 No. 1

Private Members' Business. - Stadium Ireland: Motion.

Mr. Noonan

I move:

That Dáil Éireann:

–condemns the blatant disregard of proper Cabinet financial procedures in relation to Stadium Ireland and related spending;

–expresses its alarm at the continuing escalation of the cost of the project to over £1 billion and the willingness of the Taoiseach to commit to any spending to facilitate its realisation;

–believes that these monies would be better spent on health, education and local sports facilities around the country;

–rejects the sporting priorities of the Government, which has set Stadium Ireland ahead of the need to develop the basis in the community for sporting participation and for sporting excellence, and resolves that all preparatory work on Stadium Ireland be immediately suspended and that no further commitments be entered upon in relation to it.

I propose to share my time with Deputies Deenihan, Creed and Coveney.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Noonan

When the stadium was first proposed on 26 January 2000 at a cost of £281 million, of which £50 million would be donated by J.P. McManus, it looked like an interesting idea. A feasibility study was carried out by Price Waterhouse, and it appeared as if the Government was moving forward in a prudent fashion.

All that has changed. The estimated costs have grown out of all proportion and we know from statements made by the Tánaiste that money is now being committed on the word of the Taoiseach alone without any decision by Cabinet or any adherence to ordinary budgetary procedures. The Government has acknowledged that the estimated construction cost of the project has risen to £550 million. This estimate does not include the costs of relocating the agriculture facility, Marine Institute and State Laboratory from the site, estimated by the Department of Finance at £193 million. It does not include the £20 million estimate for associated infrastructure around the stadium, or the further £20 million for road, rail and bus services to and from the stadium. The Government's estimate ignores the financial package agreed with the FAI, valued by the FAI at £125 million and not contradicted by the Government. The recent commitment of £60 million to the GAA for the development of Croke Park is also excluded.

If all the above costs are added they total £968 million. This figure allows for no cost overruns, it includes no valuation for the 500 acres of prime development land in State ownership on which the stadium will be sited, nor does it include the additional £70 million for the development of gaelic games around the country which seems to be part of the Taoiseach's deal with the GAA.

Supporters of the project have claimed that the £1 billion estimated cost of the stadium was a figure pulled out of the air by Deputy Allen. This is not so. The stadium, together with all the side deals made by the Taoiseach to try to ensure that his field of dreams has a monopoly over all major games, will cost in excess of £1 billion. This is the first reason Fine Gael opposes the project.

The costs are totally out of control. The Taoiseach, without consultation with his partners in Government or without sanction from the Minister for Finance, is prepared to throw any amount of money at the project to ensure that this monument to his ego is put in place. It is time that the Dáil shouted stop. Fine Gael is now shouting stop.

Even if the cost could be justified, proper procedures for the spending of public money should be adhered to. It is simply not good enough that the Taoiseach should make multi-million pound commitments without consultation with his partners in Government, without Cabinet discussion or without Department of Finance sanction. This is the style of leadership and cavalier attitude to the public finances which were the hallmarks of his predecessor, Mr. Haughey.

Public money should only be spent after proper budgetary procedures are followed. This quite clearly has not happened in this case and it is the primary cause of the well publicised row between the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste. Deputy Harney is entitled to be aggrieved. No Tánaiste who leads the minority party in a coalition Government should have to endure a situation where the first she learns of the expenditure of millions of pounds is from the media or from passing remarks made by colleagues.

I am sure that the Tánaiste would be equally concerned about the fact that the aquatic centre, which was not part of the original memorandum for Government, was added to the project at a cost of £48 million without proper Cabinet approval. The reason being given for the urgency with this element of the project is that it must be completed in time for the Special Olympics. However, I understand that the proposal that the Special Olympics use the aquatic centre at Abbotstown actually arose from an approach from the Government to the organisers of those games, who had already made other arrangements to run the swimming events elsewhere. This is the second reason Fine Gael opposes the project – no proper financial procedures have been followed.

Even if the cost of the project was moderate, there is now serious doubt about the viability of the proposed stadium. It is in the wrong place and the international experience shows that stadiums built far from the city centre are not viable. Some international comparisons make the point. In Montreal, a 55,000 seater stadium was built for the 1976 Olympics at a cost of £600 million. The debt still has not been cleared despite a special tax levy on Montreal residents. The stadium is ten miles from the city centre with a direct tram link. The average attendance at baseball games, the principle activity, is 9,000 persons. It is also used for dog shows and monster tractor pulls. The location of the stadium is regarded as the major problem. A soccer team which played there attracted crowds of 10,000 on average. Since this team moved to the city centre two years ago it is attracting crowds of 20,000 to their games.

Stadium Australia at Homebush Bay in Sydney is on the brink of bankruptcy with debts of AU$196 million. The initial private sector investors are demanding further State subsidies and one of the rugby league tenants has already moved out. Australian Rules football has yet to schedule any games in the stadium. As with Montreal, the location of Stadium Australia away from the city centre is seen as a huge drawback with most sports supporters not enthusiastic about peripheral locations. Stade de France is in similar trouble, again due to its location in Paris outside the Rue Periphique and the Metro lines. It faces the same problems as those in Sydney and Montreal.

Paris, Montreal and Sydney have populations in their catchment area well in excess of Dublin. There are many recently built stadia abroad which have been successful and others are planned. The Welsh Football Association and Welsh Rugby Union built the 75,000 capacity stadium in Cardiff for £140 million. It is a fine stadium and looks like being successful. Several English soccer clubs are planning new stadia. Arsenal are planning a 60,000 capacity stadium in London costing £125 million, while Manchester City's 48,000 seater ground will cost £113 million. In Germany too new stadia are planned at comparatively low cost. Bayern Munich are planning a 75,000 capacity stadium at a cost of £141 million, and a new stadium with 61,000 seats will open in Gelsenkirchen next August at a cost of £144 million. Probably they will be as successful as they are in city centre locations. They are dedicated to a particular game. They will be open to offers from other tenants and will come in at a low cost of between £120 million and £140 million. One could build ten of them for the cost of Stadium Ireland when the last coat of paint is put on the ancillary buildings. Why should the Government build a stadium on the periphery of Dublin costing in excess of £1 billion when there are several examples, as I have outlined, of stadia in accessible locations in cities in Great Britain and Germany costing far more modest amounts? The stadium is in the wrong place and this is the third reason Fine Gael opposes it.

It is quite clear that the Taoiseach fears for the future viability of his proposal as he has attempted from the start to monopolise all major games, including some GAA games. The Government does not believe in competition despite its protestations. This is quite clear from the way both Aer Rianta and Aer Lingus run their businesses and in the slow progress being made in the deregulation of the electricity and telecommunications sectors.

The Taoiseach has tried to create a monopoly to ensure the viability of Stadium Ireland. He dealt with the FAI through pressure and inducement until the Eircom Park project was abandoned. The Minister for Defence, no doubt at the behest of the Taoiseach, sought a judicial review of the planning approval for Eircom Park on the grounds that it would adversely affect Baldonnel Aerodrome. No such judicial review was sought in respect of the City West business park, buildings and hotels, even though they are situated just as close to Baldonnel as was the proposed Eircom Park site. If pressure was used in the case of the FAI, the Taoiseach used inducement with the GAA. It cost the Government £125 million to ensure the FAI did not build its own stadium and to ensure international soccer matches will be played in Stadium Ireland.

Mr. Creed

It was bribery.

Mr. Noonan

The latest threat to the Taoiseach's proposed monopoly has come from the GAA. It was clear that the Roscommon motion at Congress would get the two-thirds majority required to open Croke Park to soccer and rugby. This would destroy the Taoiseach's monopoly and undermine the future viability of the stadium so before the vote was taken the traditionalists in the GAA were promised £60 million. This ensured that Croke Park would not need to be used for soccer and rugby to make ends meet, and that the GAA would fix two matches a year, probably all-Ireland semi-finals, in the Taoiseach's stadium. The Taoiseach was right to fear for the viability of his stadium in an open market. There are not enough matches across the codes which generate sufficient crowds to ensure the viability of the stadium and if these matches were spread across Eircom Park and Croke Park the Taoiseach's pet project would be a dead duck.

The capacity of Lansdowne Road is 49,000 for rugby matches and 34,000 for international soccer matches, as full seating is required. Lansdowne Road has two or three six nations rugby matches each year, for which 49,000 tickets are always sold. Another three or four non-championship rugby internationals each year are rarely sold out unless the opposition is Australia or New Zealand, which only happens every three or four years. Between six and eight international soccer matches are held in Lansdowne Road each year, but 34,000 tickets are not always sold. Last Wednesday's match against Andorra was played before a large attendance as it was an important World Cup qualifier. There was no great difficulty in getting tickets up until the last minute, however, and it was clear from looking at television that there were unoccupied seats behind both goals, even though the match was sold out.

Croke Park is always full on all-Ireland Final days but such games will continue to be played in Croke Park and not in Stadium Ireland. Last Sunday's league final between Mayo and Galway attracted 22,000 supporters to Croke Park. Attendance at all-Ireland semi-finals varies, but few would be likely to attract a crowd of 80,000. It is very difficult to see how a stadium on the periphery of the city with a capacity of 80,000 will be viable when an assessment of the possible matches to be played there is made. It seems inevitable that Croke Park will open its doors to rugby and soccer and, having the advantage of a location that will attract bigger crowds than Stadium Ireland, the Taoiseach's monopoly will be broken. The fourth reason Fine Gael opposes the project is we do not believe it is viable.

At present, when budgetary surpluses are the order of the day, £1 billion is still a huge sum of money. When we compare the availability of this sum for Stadium Ireland with the small sums of money which would satisfy many of society's needs, we realise the Government's warped set of priorities. No money is provided for chemotherapy for cancer patients. Wheelchair bound passengers sit in the dark in the guard's van on CIE trains because of the lack of investment in accessible transport. There is no money for aids and appliances for the disabled, to increase nursing home subventions or for remedial teachers yet there is a £1 billion for the Taoiseach's pet project.

Let us look at the record of this visionary Taoiseach in relation to services for the people of his home town, the people of north-west Dublin in particular. The hospital nearest to the proposed site for the stadium is James Connolly Memorial Hospital in Blanchardstown. During the Taoiseach's term of office the number of people awaiting inpatient treatment in that hospital increased by 214%. One woman from Blanchardstown said on "Morning Ireland" this morning that we have a Taoiseach who is sports minded, and good luck to him, but it would be better if we had a Taoiseach who was health minded. Certainly it would be better for the people of Dublin.

The waiting lists for Dublin's six general hospitals have risen by an average of 77% since this Government took office and in the Eastern Regional Health Authority by 12%. In breach of the Government's guidelines, 10,337 adults have been waiting over a year for inpatient treatment for target specialities and 10,786 have been wait ing up to a year. An average of 50% of the adults on waiting lists for target specialities have been waiting over a year, including 53% of those waiting for heart surgery.

Children's health fares no better as 2,146 of them have been waiting for inpatient treatment for over six months and some for over three years. An average of 66% of all children on the waiting list for target specialities have been waiting for over six months, including 80% of those waiting for ear, nose and throat operations and 67% of those waiting for cardiac surgery. A child placed on the hospital waiting list in 1997 for a urology procedure is still waiting for treatment today. Bed shortages in the Mater Hospital, the Taoiseach's local hospital, mean that cancer patients are denied potentially life-saving treatments. This is contrary to the national cancer strategy and is a national disgrace. It shows that it would be better to have a health minded Taoiseach as the Government has been content to let the planning of our health services slide while powering ahead with the Stadium Ireland project for the greater glory of the Taoiseach.

Public transport in Dublin grinds to a halt every day, but £1 billion would pay for the Luas project, the urgently needed increase in the bus fleet and depot capacity and for the provision of an enhanced network of quality bus corridors. These improvements would make a real difference to the lives of the people of Dublin, but the Taoiseach has other priorities. He wants to spend £1 billion on a monument to himself, regardless of the real needs of the people. The warped priorities of the Government are the fifth reason Fine Gael opposes this project.

I would like to reflect on why the Taoiseach is acting in this manner. Politics is unpopular at present whereas sport is very popular. Political personalities are generally unpopular but sporting personalities, the GAA and Manchester United, are popular. Any sensible Taoiseach would try to associate himself with Hill 16, Manchester United and Dublin GAA rather than be seen as the leader of the party of Mr. Haughey, Mr. Burke, or Deputies Lawlor, Foley, Ellis or Cooper-Flynn. This transfer of branding, where a politician tries to rebrand himself as the leading sports supporter in the country, has a long tradition and has been attempted by many politicians. There are still people in Ireland who think Mr. Haughey rode in the Tour de France.

The Taoiseach, however, has raised the identification of politicians with sport to a new plane. In proposing Stadium Ireland, he hopes that when he faces the electorate he will be seen not as the leader of Fianna Fáil but as the stadium builder and the hero of sports spectators. There is nothing wrong with this ambition as the Taoiseach has a genuine interest in sport, as have many other Deputies. I strongly object, however, to the use of £1 billion of taxpayers' money in a gross attempt to rebrand Fianna Fáil.

Even if one were to invest £1 billion in sport, the Taoiseach's priorities are wrong. Stadium Ireland is about spectators and not participants, but the national sports policy should be more concerned with participants than spectators. The facilities for sport in Dublin and throughout the country are appalling. The clubs in the various codes do an excellent job but are very badly supported by the State and there is no policy to provide facilities on a national basis to be used by those who want to participate in sport rather than by those who want to watch it. We should remember that primary schools still have no PE teachers or facilities. Most second level schools have no sports halls. The development of sport in schools depends on the voluntary activity of teachers and parents using their free time to coach and their cars to ferry children to and from games. There is a dearth of outlets for young people interested in sport and the activity of most clubs is dominated as much by fundraising as by training. This is the background against which the Taoiseach's proposal on sport should be judged.

It is also important to take into account the fears of the local community. They have been widely and forcefully expressed, their opposition is well known and they should not be ignored. The Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation will propose an amendment to this motion and I presume the Progressive Democrats will join their Fianna Fáil colleagues in the division lobby. They will survive in Government to cry wolf again. The Tánaiste, Deputy Harney, will huff and puff, but she will not blow the house down on this occasion, and the Government will stagger forward continuing to attempt to be all things to all men and women, while it continues to miss the best opportunity any Government has ever been given to address the real social and economic needs of our people.

Mr. Deenihan

The role and responsibility of an Opposition party is to question the Government on all aspects of Government policy and public expenditure. This principle applies to Campus Ireland and Stadium Ireland just as it does to any other aspect of Government policy. Deputy Noonan, as leader of Fine Gael, and we, his party colleagues, would be reneging on our responsibilities to the people and the taxpayer if we did not ask the pertinent questions.

Mr. Paddy Teahon, Chairman of Sports Campus Ireland, in an article in The Irish Times last Saturday, also supported this principle. He wrote:

The people of Ireland are entitled to absolute assurance that their money is being wisely used in their interests. In a democracy, every public project should be debated, and it is absolutely right that serious questions be posed about decisions that will have repercussions into the future.

This is precisely what Fine Gael is now doing and being criticised for by some commentators.

Deputy Noonan and Fine Gael are certainly not "late-comers", as we were described, to the controversy surrounding Stadium Ireland. On 19 October last, the main national newspapers carried a statement by the former Minister of State with responsibility for sport and the then Fine Gael spokesperson on sport, Deputy Allen, expressing serious concern about the cost implications for Campus Ireland and indicating that the total cost of Campus Ireland, including the stadium and the relocation of the State Laboratories at Abbotstown, could be up to £1 billion. This is the figure now being used by many of the experts in the media and seems to have become the expected final cost. Deputy Allen has been vindicated despite the criticism he received then.

Some commentators have also implied that the Fine Gael Party lacked vision on sports policy. I remind those people that it was a Fine Gael Minister, Deputy Donal Creed, the father of my colleague, Deputy Michael Creed, who, in the coalition Government of 1983-87, introduced and guided through the Oireachtas the legislation for the national lottery. Fianna Fáil, on returning to Government in 1987, certainly made good political use of the proceeds from the lottery.

In 1995, when he was appointed Minister of State with responsibility for sport in the rainbow Government, Deputy Allen, set up an expert group under the chairmanship of John Treacy to provide a future strategy for sport. The main recommendation of this expert group was the establishment of a statutory Irish sports council, which is now in place. Last year it published its first strategy entitled A New Era for Sport. Therefore, the past two Governments in which Fine Gael served have provided the finance for sport through the national lottery and a strategy for the development of sport through the Irish Sports Council. No one can accuse Fine Gael of ignoring the needs of Irish sport. We have a proven track record when it comes to sport and we have credibility when it comes to this subject.

Fine Gael is opposed to Stadium Ireland and other developments on Campus Ireland strictly on cost grounds, scale and location. It is unfortunate that the Government did not commission independent consultants earlier to carry out an overview of the project along the lines outlined by the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation in the Dáil today. I am sure that the independent consultants will arrive at the same conclusions and reservations that Deputy Noonan and Fine Gael is expressing here this evening. I publicly sought this type of review over four weeks ago.

If Fine Gael is opposed to the national outdoor stadium on Campus Ireland, what alternative strategy are we proposing? The significant vote at the GAA congress in favour of change of Rule 42 is a clear indication that the rank and file members of the GAA are now receptive to the idea of the playing of rugby and soccer in Croke Park. The size of the vote surprised many commentators. However, it reflects a major change of attitude among GAA members across the country. No doubt if it was a secret ballot or if there was a second vote taken that day, the motion would have been carried, and I am convinced that it will be carried at next year's congress.

There are good reasons why Croke Park should be the national stadium. First, it is the home of our national games of Gaelic football and hurling. It is located close to the city centre. It is within walking distance of Heuston, Connolly and Pearse Street stations. It is also very convenient for people using Dublin airport and the car ferry ports and there are other commercial services close at hand.

For a fraction of the cost of providing Stadium Ireland with its associated developments, which is now estimated to be in the region of £1 billion, the Government could not only complete Croke Park but be in a position to spend a considerable amount of money on the regeneration of the area around Croke Park, removing derelict sites and replacing them with car-parking facilities to serve both the spectator at Croke Park and the public doing business and working in the city centre and, in co-operation with Dublin Corporation, providing better housing for some of the communities in the vicinity of the stadium. I am sure the residents around Croke Park would enthusiastically embrace this type of development. They would no longer suffer the types of problems they have experienced over the years with parking and other inconveniences. Surely this approach would appeal to the Taoiseach, as Croke Park is in his heartland.

The question of traffic congestion on the M50 has yet to be addressed. I appreciate that the Minister is waiting for the high level group, which he has set up to examine the public transport needs of the campus, to report back to him. However, as the M50 is already congested at peak periods and has become a thoroughfare for access to recently developed shopping centres, business parks, future housing developments and other facilities which attract huge volumes of traffic, it will be very difficult, irrespective of what the Government will put in place, to meet the additional traffic requirements of a major sporting event at the proposed Stadium Ireland. No doubt the campus will lead to traffic chaos.

The greater city centre area, with its existing facilities, has proven that it can absorb a massive influx of people for big sporting events and St. Patrick's Day parades, which draw crowds of up to one million people. The Taoiseach should look to the American cities of Cleveland, Baltimore, San Francisco, San Diego, Phoenix or Denver to see how sports facilities and revitalisation plans can change the face of an urban landscape and can have huge beneficial long-term effects. All these stadia, which also attract large volumes of pedestrian traffic, are in areas where there are existing hotels, restaurants, guesthouses and other facilities. These facilities do not exist at Abbotstown. It will be impossible to create this type of infrastructure overnight or even in the medium term.

Part of the novelty of attending big games in Croke Park or Lansdowne Road is the atmosphere in the local bars and hotels leading up to the game. This is all seen as part of the day out or even the weekend. You will lose this with a stadium in Abbotstown.

I was in Boston two weeks ago and stayed in a city centre hotel. I went to see the Boston Celtics play an NBA match in their new stadium, The Fleet Centre. The following day I saw the Red Sox baseball team play the New York Yankees. Both of these stadia were within walking distance of the centre of Boston and are integrated into the commercial life of the city.

The working model cited at the launch of Sports Campus Ireland was Homebush Bay, the site of the Sydney Games. We now know that the operators are facing huge difficulties with the financial sustainability of the stadium because of its comparative remoteness from Sydney city centre. The Aquatic Centre at Homebush has proven to be very successful and has a throughput of 100,000 customers a month. However, the 20,000 seater indoor stadium, which is host to the Sydney Kings Basketball Team, has failed to attract other activities, which it needs to pay its way. Serious financial problems surround the Olympic Stadium.

The Australian Football League has pulled its games out of the stadium. The Sydney Swans, the local football team, has shown no interest in using the stadium and the rival Bulldogs are also seeking a more convenient venue for their games. They all say that huge stadium lacks atmosphere when the crowd is not at capacity level.

During a recent visit to Homebush Bay, New South Wales Premier, Bob Carr, said that, "With the best will in the world it is going to take some effort over some years to get this seen as part of the life of the city." The same could be said of Abbotstown. Michael Knight, the chief executive of the Sydney Games, said, "I don't know how much it will take to prevent Homebush Bay from becoming a giant white elephant."

Massive investment was made in a transport system and in providing hotels and other services at Homebush Bay and it appears to be in deep financial trouble. In the first six months of this year it has lost AU $5.7 million. The Homebush Bay Sports Campus is located at the edge of Sydney, a city with a population of 3.5 million. If an 80,000 seater stadium and all the ancillary facilities are not viable in Sydney, it is hard to expect Dublin, with one third of Sydney's population, to sustain two 80,000 seater stadia. The Government should not ignore the lessons of Homebush Bay.

At the launch of the Sports Campus Ireland project on 23 February, the Minister said, "I believe what we are building here represents a major national and community amenity, and that it will contribute to Ireland's quality of life in the medium term". My view is that it will be very difficult to find a balance between community usage of the facilities and catering for the needs of our elite athletes. How would concerts and other events involving large numbers fit into a campus where some of our top athletes would be preparing for major events? Professional sports people need space to train and reflect. Individuals and teams need to train in comparative privacy. Team managers and coaches will not be comfortable with a campus that serves the broader community at the same time as professional athletes, for example, in a case where a local community group may be using the pool when professional swimmers need it.

When talking to one of the country's top sports coaches recently he expressed a number of reservations about centralising facilities on Campus Ireland. He favoured a more regional and local approach and pointed out that to nurture and develop young athletes with potential, it is the daily contact with a qualified coach and back-up facilities that develops the athlete.

It seems the policy of the Government and the Irish Sports Council is more concerned with the promotion of elite sports and spectator accommodation at national level than with mass participation. Study after study highlights how unfit and overweight Irish people are becoming. A study launched by the Food Safety Promotion Board on 13 March delivered a worrying picture for large numbers of the population who, in some cases, spend up to 25 hours a week watching television when they should be exercising. The report of that study shows that vigorous physical activity among both sexes is low, with 41% of men and 60% of women describing walking as their most important recreational pursuit. Nearly half of women between 51 and 64 do no strenuous exercise. That study also pointed out that two and a half times more men, 20% more, are obese now than was the case only ten years ago. That shows that our sports policy on mass participation is not working.

Any sports policy should place emphasis on the provision of physical education in our schools, a point which Deputy Noonan made. I carried out a national survey in 1990 to which I received a response from 1,500 schools. That survey showed physical education was at a very low level in our schools. It was not being provided because of a lack of facilities and a lack of expertise and confidence among teachers. The recent survey bears out what I warned about at that time, that we were sitting on a medical time bomb. That is now coming to fruition.

After the Atlanta Olympics, the British Government reviewed its sports policy. We saw the results of that last year. It also committed 20% of lottery funds to school facilities and it placed major emphasis on the provision of school facilities. Any future sports policy should concentrate on the provision of school facilities.

We are putting the cart before the horse. We need to put a massive amount of money into fostering mass participation. I agree we need to look after our elite athletes and provide facilities. It is difficult to justify expenditure of £1 billion on a campus when we are neglecting several other aspects of our sports policy.

Mr. Creed

Stadium Ireland is the wrong sports policy for Ireland at this juncture. It is wrong because of the cost and location and for numerous other reasons outlined by previous speakers. It is primarily wrong as a sports policy because it is based on the premise of facilitating the development of elite sports at the expense of mass participation in sports. There was never a greater need, and there is ample documented evidence for—

Dr. McDaid

What did the Deputy do for sport?

Mr. Creed

With due respect, my father was responsible for introducing the national lottery, which funds substantial amounts of the money the Minister disburses.

Dr. McDaid

I accept that. I was talking about the Deputy's party.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister should refrain from intervening. He will have an opportunity to contribute shortly.

Mr. Creed

There is more largesse now than there was when we were in government. We distributed as much money to sport as was possible when we were in government.

This is a policy to facilitate elite participation in sport at the expense of public participation. It is about bums on seats watching sports when we need to get bums off seats and encourage people to participate in sports.

Fine Gael believes that our sports policy should be about sport for all. It is interesting to note that the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods, in a press statement some weeks ago acknowledged that 40% of students in primary schools do not participate in any form of sports. Fine Gael also believes that in prioritising development, we should develop facilities at local level initially, as there is great interest at that level but poor facilities. We should then develop regional facilities and the icing on the cake would be the kind of facility, a national sports stadium, envisaged for Stadium Ireland but not in that location. We should foster a greater understanding of the link between participation in sport and good health. For that reason the role of education and educational institutions throughout the country is a key instrument to developing sports policy.

We heard the Minister musing publicly about why we had such an Olympic fiasco in Sydney, why we did not win more medals. We believe it is not because we did not have Stadium Ireland but because many people have been lost to participating in sports at a much earlier stage.

Dr. McDaid

It is because we did not provide the facilities. All of us paid lip service to it.

Mr. Creed

The Minister is putting in place an infrastructure that will operate on the basis of diminishing returns, as the resources are not going into fostering development at local level. The Minister will have an opportunity to contribute shortly. I only have a few minutes remaining to make my contribution.

Mrs. Owen

The Taoiseach handed this over to the Minister when it started to go wrong.

Mr. Creed

The Taoiseach appears to operate a sports policy that is based on see and be seen at sports facilities. He rounded on the critics of Stadium Ireland because he did not see them at a match. That speaks volumes. What we need is more people participating, not bums on seats.

At a time when the State spends a grand total of £3.25 per student per year on promoting sports in primary school, the Government proposes to spend £1 billion, that is, £1 million every week for 20 years, on the construction of Stadium Ireland. This figure takes no account of the ongoing financial costs of running the complex which, if the Olympic Stadium in Sydney is anything to go by, will require enormous amounts of Exchequer funds annually to keep it afloat. Croke Park, which has the support of the largest sporting organisation in the country and can guarantee, on a regular basis, the largest gate for any sporting organisation, finds itself in difficulty in terms of its financial viability. How can Stadium Ireland be viable if Croke Park is not viable? At a time when 54% of all primary schools do not have a general purposes room, when 78% of our primary schools report that they cannot implement the physical education programme because of inadequate space and 67% of primary schools report that they need either additional or replacement physical education equipment, it is madness in the extreme to spend £1 billion on Stadium Ireland when the most basic elements of a national sports infrastructure are absent at local community and schools level.

The Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods, has acknowledged that 40% of students do not participate in school sports. This, along with documented evidence of increasing levels of obesity, is a wake-up call which the Government is not heeding. Sports policy should be based primarily on maximum participation levels, rather than bums on seats as in Stadium Ireland. The money should be spent on improving local facilities and fostering maximum participation in sports.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I call the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation, Deputy McDaid.

(Interruptions.)

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all the words after "Dáil Éireann"and substitute the following:

"recognises the Government's support for sport at all levels and the substantial increase in current and capital funding for sport from £13.5 million in 1997, when this Government took office, to £83 million in 2001;

recognises the importance of sport in the social, cultural and economic life of the nation and the contribution which it makes to a healthy society; recognises the need for the development of new sporting infrastructure; notes the work done to date in advancing the development of Stadium and Sports Campus Ireland;

welcomes the decision of the Government to develop an aquatic and leisure centre at Abbotstown as part of the country's preparations to host the Special Olympics in 2003; supports the Government's decision to undertake a comprehensive review of the direct and indirect costs and benefits of the Stadium and Sports Campus Ireland project; and notes the terms of reference of such review agreed by the Government on 1 May 2001".

I am somewhat surprised at the contributions of Deputy Deenihan and Deputy Creed to this debate. I am not so surprised at Deputy Noonan's contribution. He has come into the situation quite recently and has assumed an interest in sport, perhaps to mark the Taoiseach's interest in this regard. In contradiction to his own terms, since he understands the benefit of sport to the community, it is due to the lip service which has been paid to sport for many years that we have had to listen to drivel from Deputy Noonan with regard to the health services. The resources being put into the health services have increased from £2.6 billion to £5.3 billion and—

(Interruptions.)

Dr. McDaid

Unless we move to change attitudes to sport and increase participation in sport, we will not just need one or two extra hospitals but, with the levels of obesity and adolescent type 2 diabetes to which Deputy Creed referred, we will need to continue building hospitals. The Fine Gael attitude towards health is to keep building hospitals. Instead of arguing about the health services, we should take preventive action in the first instance.

As I address the House in support of the Government's motion on Campus Stadium Ireland, I have a very interesting document which serves to expose the blatant opportunism that has prompted the negative and timid motion put forward this evening by the Fine Gael Party. The document in question was produced in response to a request from Deputy Gay Mitchell as Pres ident of the Dublin International Sports Council when he was Lord Mayor of our capital city.

Mr. Rabbitte

On a point of order, may we have copies of the Minister's script, as is normal practice?

Dr. McDaid

Yes, it should be available.

An eminent firm of international accountants, PricewaterhouseCoopers, was asked by Deputy Mitchell to report on the challenges facing Dublin should it decide to make a bid for the Olympic Games. That was under Deputy John Bruton's leadership of Fine Gael, not Deputy Noonan's 12-week-old "new Fine Gael". I should point out that Deputy Mitchell was at that time an enthusiastic proponent of Dublin as a venue for the Olympic Games and one is entitled to assume that his enthusiasm was shared by his party colleagues. Certainly, none of them expressed any word of dissent in regard to that ambitious objective.

That PricewaterhouseCoopers report noted some essential requirements which must surely cause embarrassment on the Fine Gael benches this evening under Deputy Noonan's leadership. High on its priorities was a stipulation that we would need a main stadium capable of accommodating 70,000 to 100,000 spectators. There was an impressive list of ancillary arenas to accommodate baseball, basketball, boxing, fencing, a velodrome, four fully seated football stadia, arenas for volleyball, hockey, handball and, of course, a 50 metre pool. It may come as a source of some consolation to Deputy Mitchell that even Fine Gael seems to agree to the 50 metre pool and he will no doubt be glad to learn that the Government intends to provide two. One is already under construction in Limerick and the other will be part of Campus Stadium Ireland, where it will be used by competitors in the Special Olympics of 2003.

I wish to share my time with the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Molloy.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Dr. McDaid

This serves to highlight the rather obvious fact that there is no point in going out to the sporting world canvassing for major international events, whether they be world championships or European Cup games, unless we have the facilities to accommodate them. In short, there is no point in seeking 21st century events with early 19th century facilities, as the Ryder Cup experience proves.

There are many excellent arguments to bring forward in support of a project of the magnitude of Campus Stadium Ireland. One of the most compelling of those arguments is that an ultra modern state-of-the-art sports facility such as the one envisaged at Abbotstown will put Dublin and Ireland in a position to bid for major crowd-pulling international events that are at present simply beyond our reach. In that sense, I see Campus Stadium Ireland as a major revenue generating asset for sport in Ireland. The high level of interest already evident from the private sector in regard to the provision of facilities, accommodation and services at Abbotstown supports that view.

I am proud our major team sports organisations, the GAA, the IRFU and the FAI, are to be supportive partners in this project. As anchor tenants they will provide a core series of main attractions but, as I suggested earlier, I believe that in assessing the potential of this project we have to look further afield and further ahead. Parnell said that no man can set a boundary to the onward march of a nation and say thus far shalt thou go and no further. In that spirit I see Campus Stadium Ireland in the years ahead as a venue for international events that up to now we could not even contemplate.

I referred earlier to the opportunistic nature of this Fine Gael motion. Over the past few days the Fine Gael Leader, Deputy Noonan, has been wringing his hands and widely exaggerating the supposed cost of the project. He spoke of a cost ten times greater than that of stadia in Cardiff and Sydney. Does the Deputy know the cost of the stadium? The cost is £230 million. Deputy Noonan even went so far as to threaten an edict to halt the whole project if he became Taoiseach. Indeed, he somewhat presumptuously said he would carry out this threat whenever he became Taoiseach. God help sport in this country if that is the Fine Gael position under its current leader. Indeed, he, somewhat presumptuously, said he would carry out this threat when he became Taoiseach. God help sport in this country if that is the Fine Gael position under this leader.

Mr. Noonan

God help the Deputy's seat in Donegal.

Dr. McDaid

It is curious to say the least, that Deputy Noonan's concern about the national stadium project and sport in general found no expression whatsoever in his major address to the Fine Gael Ard Fheis as recently as 3 March last at Ballsbridge. One would think that if Fine Gael's concern was genuine it might have merited one small mention at the party's annual convention.

In many respects, this motion is unfortunately all too characteristic of the timidity and lack of vision that has marked Fine Gael's approach to major national undertakings down the years. Deputy Noonan, as a Limerick man, will not like to be reminded that a Fine Gael leader once forecast the doom of Shannon Airport and envisaged the day when Shannon would revert to the rabbits. They showed a similar lack of enthusiasm for Knock Airport, Government Buildings and Dublin Castle. But then they have always tended to play the critics' role and only very rarely have they tried to be creative. Perhaps, that is why Deputy Noonan has spent so many years in opposition. Today's prosperity was built on a positive entrepreneurial spirit over the past 12 years and Fianna Fáil has been in Government for almost ten of those years, seven of them with the Progressive Democrats and three with Labour.

It is not often that an individual project engenders as much debate, discussion and analysis as has Sports Campus Ireland since its announcement 16 months ago. Since the start of this year alone, when I assumed overall responsibility for the project, there have been more than 50 parliamentary questions on various related issues. It was the subject of a Private Members' motion in January – this is the second such motion this year – and countless column inches and air-time minutes have been devoted to it.

Mr. Noonan

Costs are still rising.

Dr. McDaid

Far from regretting or resenting the intense interest being shown in Sports Campus Ireland, I, and my colleagues in Government, welcome it. It would indeed be a sad day for democracy if the biggest single project undertaken by the State, and one which will benefit the lives of generations of Irish people, present and future, were to materialise without notice or remark. Furthermore, this scrutiny by the Oireachtas, the public and the media is but a reflection of the extensive and intensive examination to which the project has been and continues to be subjected by the Government, its Ministers and their Departments, not least my own.

Mrs. Owen

How were the costs calculated so wrongly?

Dr. McDaid

There seems to be an impression abroad that the stadium and sports campus Ireland projects are being planned without due regard for appropriate approval procedures. Deputy Noonan also pointed out that it was not a decision of Government. I would like to point out that the swimming pool was a decision of Government taken on 12 July 2000 and it is not true to say that the Special Olympics organisation did not want the pool. It was fully involved in the consultations on the pool.

Mr. Noonan

The Minister made the approach.

Dr. McDaid

I am glad to have this opportunity to dispel some of the myths which exist. It was the Government that decided to commission a feasibility study by PriceWaterhouseCoopers and to accept its recommendations on the provision of a national sports campus and stadium for Ireland. It was this Government that decided on the establishment of a dedicated development company – Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Ltd. or CSID – to oversee the development and construction of the campus and its facilities, and, with the support of this House, allocated Exchequer resources to the company for this task.

Again, it was the Government that, having accepted that the State-owned lands at Abbotstown represented the optimum site for the project – 21 sites were examined – decided to undertake the necessary development and upgrading of the State laboratories at a new location. It was the Government too that decided to set up a specialist high-level group to look at the public transport needs of the campus and Blanchardstown in full consultation with the local communities. Even if there were to be no campus, the investment in road, rail, Luas and metro infrastructure would still be required to meet the needs of an area large enough in population terms to qualify as one of Ireland's ten largest towns.

It was the Government that accepted the development company's recommendation in respect of the outcome of its first tendering competition to build the pool at Abbotstown, a competition, I should add, that was conducted in accordance with European public procurement provisions, and it was the Governement too that decided on the financial allocation for that project. Heads of Agreement for the aquatic and leisure centre have been signed and final draft terms of agreement are currently the subject of urgent negotiations in order to ensure that the swimming pool is operational in time for the Special Olympics World Summer Games in 2003.

It was the Government too that, to assist it in determining final Exchequer allocations for the stadium and sports campus Ireland, and the sensitivity of such allocations to variations in the scale of each element of the project, today agreed that I would commission independent consultants to undertake an overview of the stadium and Sports Campus Ireland, terms of which I have read into the Dáil record today during Question Time and which I will exclude at this time.

Mr. Rabbitte

Will the Minister give way and tell the House how he intends to select the consultants?

Dr. McDaid

It is an international group of consultants that will deal with it and I will come to that matter eventually.

As I speak, the best professional estimate of the total cost of the sports campus Ireland project is £550 million. This includes a figure of £230 million for the stadium alone, and Deputy Noonan gets confused with the cost of all the other stadia. They are all in and around the same price – £230 million. I might add that there is a £50 million contingency plan placed in that £230 million so they are all coming in at around the average cost of Deputy Noonan's stadium.

Mrs. Owen

A contingency plan. What does that imply?

Dr. McDaid

Also included is a figure of £320 million for the other facilities, many of which are required for the Special Olympics in 2003. This gives a total estimated cost of £550 million for the entire campus and stadium project, of which the projected Exchequer investment is £350 million, the balance being made up of a private donation of £50 million and projected private sector investment, conservative I might add, of £150 million – and this for a project that includes waterways, parkways, and sports facilities that will be a real family destination where thousands will visit every week.

Mrs. Owen

But one has to include the £100 million movement costs.

Dr. McDaid

Currently, six international consortia are preparing their bids for submission to CSID by 21 June 2001 in relation to the design, building, financing and operation of a range of facilities planned for the campus. When, and only when, the international tendering competition is completed will we have actual estimates of costing; what the private sector is prepared to invest and what Exchequer contribution will be required. It is not this £1 billion that Fine Gael picked off the top of their heads and roll out as a guesstimate day after day.

Mrs. Owen

It is all a bit of a guess. What about costs to the GAA?

Dr. McDaid

I anticipate by this time next month it will be actually £1.5 billion coming from the Opposition benches.

Mrs. Owen

What about the £250 million to Eircom?

Dr. McDaid

The fact that some of the biggest names in sports development in the world are taking part in the tender competition gives us, I believe, the best possible opportunity to limit Exchequer, and ultimately taxpayer, exposure. I find it very reassuring, as I am sure will all Members of the House, that such high calibre investors want to be part of this project. In the meantime, and pending completion of the overview, I can assure the House that the Government and I will continue to do everything in our power to ensure that stringent control is maintained over the costs of the project. It is the right of the Opposition to be concerned about risks but the only way to avoid all risks is to do nothing.

Mrs. Owen

The Deputy will be dragged kicking and screaming into carrying out an inquiry.

Dr. McDaid

As I said this, is not the entrepreneurial spirit that powered this economy over the past 12 years. Do nothing, that is the Fine GaeI attitude. I can assure this House that the Sports Campus Ireland project is not being provided at the expense of other – I have no hesitation in saying this – more worthy projects, such as hospitals, housing, schools, etc. It is the right of the Opposition to be concerned about risks but the only way to avoid all risks is to do nothing, and as I have said this is not the entrepreneurial spirit that powered this economy over the past 12 years.

I assure the House that the Sports Campus Ireland project is not being provided at the expense of other more worthy projects – I have no hesitation in saying this – such as hospitals, housing or schools. The investment required to bring our health, education, housing and other infrastructure up to the high standard demanded and deserved by the public is being made and billions of pounds have been set aside specifically for that purpose.

Mr. Coveney

They have been a failure.

Dr. McDaid

Funding for Sports Campus Ireland poses absolutely no threat to that expenditure. It is being provided out of budget surplus. For the first time in our history we have the chance to put an infrastructure in place which will make us part of the big picture in world sport. It is a once in a lifetime opportunity, one which, if we turn our backs on it, we are unlikely to see again.

I understand I have ten minutes left.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister agreed to share his time.

Mrs. Owen

Deputy Molloy has a right to say something on the matter.

Dr. McDaid

As I said before, the decision to build a national sports campus and stadium is a logical progression from, and complements, the contribution of the Government to the development of sport since it assumed office in 1997. The Opposition put a pittance into sport through the years. It put £3 million per annum into the swimming pool programme. We give that sum as a grant to each swimming pool. We put £83 million into sports facilities. We are building up a sporting infrastructure throughout the country which will give the next generation an opportunity to participate in sport. It will ultimately add to the health of the country and that will mean that we will not need to build hospitals as we are doing now.

Mrs. Owen

That is the argument now, is it?

Dr. McDaid

The nation's health is at stake and perhaps we will need fewer hospitals if we put money into this area.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy)

I think it is fair to say that all parties in this House are in favour of State support for the sporting sector. I had the privilege of serving as this country's first Minister for sport, appointed in 1969, and was responsible for paying out the very first grants to the sporting bodies in spring 1970. In the 1970s the pickings were very slim by modern standards. I think I had £100,000 and my vision was to see it rise to £1 million. Today, I am very proud to be a member of a Government which has not just delivered huge increases in the sports budget but has spread that money widely across different sporting organisations.

Recent progress notwithstanding, we are still a long way behind our European partners when it comes to sporting infrastructure and support for sporting activity at both national and local level. At national level, we have not been able to offer Irish sports followers the kind of modern stadium facilities which they take for granted when they travel to Britain or the Continent for soccer or rugby matches. Visits to Old Trafford and the Nou Camp, Twickenham and the Stade de France, serve to highlight for Irish people the enormous gap that exists between Ireland and the rest of Europe in terms of sporting infrastructure. The redevelopment of Croke Park will provide us with a modern sports stadium for the first time, but our other major grounds will still lag far behind. At local and community level the gap between ourselves and our European neighbours is even greater. Thanks to lottery funds and the huge voluntary effort of the main sporting organisations, there has been a significant improvement in recent years but our facilities still fall far short of what they should be.

We are now one of the wealthiest societies in the developed world but it is still commonplace to see youngsters togging out in ditches or teams using shipping containers as makeshift dressing rooms. We have to make improvements. We have to close the gap between ourselves and other countries, and that will take money. The Progressive Democrats recognises that and strongly supports the concept of extra money for sport at all levels.

The motion before the House this evening stems from the offer of £60 million to the GAA for the redevelopment of Croke Park. We have no difficulty with giving money to the GAA—

Mr. Rabbitte

It is just as well as the Minister's party has no say in the matter.

Mr. Molloy

—an organisation which has made an enormous contribution to the social, cultural and sporting life of this country. We have no difficulty with the concept of State aid for the ambitious plan to turn Croke Park into a state-of-the-art modern sports stadium, but we have a duty to the taxpayers to ensure that when the Government puts substantial public money into a project we get value for that money for the whole community.

Given the scale of assistance being offered to the GAA for Croke Park, I consider it only fair and reasonable that both parties approach this matter in a spirit of partnership. In other words, in return for substantial assistance from the tax payers, the GAA would be willing to remove the prohibition on opening Croke Park to the other major sporting codes. This is not, I believe, an unreasonable request. Nobody is trying to tell the GAA how to run its affairs. The recent congress showed that there is a clear majority within the GAA in favour of a more open approach.

Some people say that sport and politics do not mix. It is a pity the debate triggered by the Croke Park controversy should have brought us back in some unfortunate instances to the kind of emotive and sectarian language which we thought we had left behind. We hear talk of 'castle Catholics' and 'garrison games'. The implication seems to be that followers of certain sports are somehow less Irish than the followers of others. That is very backward thinking and I reject it outright. It also ignores the ecumenical reality of Irish sport. The vast majority of Irish people are avid followers of several codes. They are just as at home in Croke Park as in Lansdowne Road. They see sport as a unifying influence in Irish life, not a divisive one.

It is well known that the proposed development of Stadium and Sports Campus Ireland at Abbotstown has given rise to concern within my party. The Abbotstown project is large and ambitious by any standards. With the construction industry working at full capacity there is a risk that building costs could soar out of control and we have to guard against that. We must also be conscious of the changed economic circumstances. Our economy is still growing strongly, thanks to the Government's excellent stewardship and the proven success of its policies, but the pace of growth has slackened. The slowdown in the United States and the foot and mouth crisis here have applied the brakes to the Irish economy. We will still grow at more than twice the EU average this year but the need for fiscal prudence is now greater than ever.

Ministers have recently been asked to scale back spending plans in a number of areas. We have been asked to trim capital investment proposals against a background of rising tender prices. As a result we are looking at our priorities to determine where capital investment is needed most, what projects are of immediate importance and what ones can be deferred for a year or two. It is in this context that we have to look at Stadium and Sports Campus Ireland.

This is one of the single biggest capital projects on the drawing board. It is one of the biggest capital projects ever contemplated in the history of the State. It will tie up considerable resources in the construction industry for years. Given the tightness in that industry, Abbotstown can only proceed by displacing other projects. It is vital, therefore, that we get a clear picture of what is involved before proceeding further.

The Progressive Democrats has called for a comprehensive overview of the whole project. Such an overview was agreed between the two Government parties this morning. The terms of reference for that overview have been agreed and work on appointing the consultants will get under way with immediate effect. We want to see the full picture and to know exactly for what the Government is being asked to sign up. Specifically we want to know the full cost of relocating the State laboratories from the lands at Abbotstown, of providing all the necessary infrastructural links to the site, especially road and rail, the construction cost of Stadium Ireland, the main component of the campus and each of the other component projects—

Mr. Stagg

The party is a bit late now.

Mr. Molloy

—the exact level of private sector finance that will be forthcoming by way of public-private partnership arrangements, the total capital cost to the Exchequer of the entire project—

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has less than one minute remaining.

Mr. Rabbitte

Do not stop him. It is great stuff.

Mr. Molloy

—and the ongoing running costs, if any, to be borne by the Exchequer once the stadium and the other facilities have been completed.

Much of this information will flow from the competitive tendering process which is currently under way and due for completion next month. Once we have a full picture of the costs involved we will be able to make a decision. No further legally binding agreements will be entered into until the overview is completed. This is a sensible, reasonable way to proceed and manage the development of a major and complex capital project, the scale of which has never been attempted here. The Progressive Democrats believe this approach represents the best way of protecting the interests of the taxpayer.

There have been several cases in the past where public capital projects have seriously overrun their budgets. Quite rightly, we then have investigations, examinations and inquiries by Oireachtas committees to find out what went wrong – we try to be wise after the event. The Progressive Democrats believe that with this project it is better to be wise before the event and we should make a more accurate and rigorous estimate of the total costs involved before we commit the taxpayers to funding the development.

Mr. O'Shea

Amendment No. 2 tabled by Members of the Labour Party states:

To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann:" and substitute the following:

–"believes a second 80,000 seater stadium in Dublin is neither justified nor viable bearing in mind the ongoing development of Croke Park;

–is gravely concerned at the escalating costs of Campus Stadium Ireland particularly in view of the under-funding of basic social services and an inadequate sports infrastructure nationwide;

–notes that the Government has belatedly conceded the need for an independent cost analysis of the Stadium Ireland project;

–resolves that the Comptroller and Auditor General be asked to conduct this ‘value for money audit' on the Abbotstown project;

–specifically requests the Comptroller and Auditor General to do a cost benefit analysis on a 50,000 seater stadium as well as the existing proposals;

–resolves that the Comptroller's report be debated in the Dáil prior to its adoption by Government;

–directs that no contracts or commitments should be entered into prior to agreement by the Oireachtas of the Campus Stadium Ireland Bill; and directs the Government to bring forward a strategic plan for the provision of sporting facilities at regional and local level throughout the State."

I wish to share time with Deputies Rabbitte and Stagg.

To say that stadium and campus Ireland as a project has been handled in a disastrous fashion in a political and public relations context does not overstate the position. The issues which have most concerned people are the escalating cost of the project together with the machinations and manoeuvring which have taken place off stage. The Government ruthlessly and successfully undermined the Eircom Park project. The FAI was eventually made an offer which could not be refused. This was done using taxpayers' money. We still do not have the full details of the agreement in principle reached between the Government and the FAI. Neither do we have the full details of the agreement in principle with the GAA and the IRFU regarding use of the national stadium.

The Campus Stadium Ireland Bill, which is to provide for the establishment of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Limited, the development company for the construction of Sports Campus Ireland at Abbotstown, make provisions relating to the company and provide for connected matters, has yet to have the heads approved by Government, even though the Government's legislative programme of spring 2001, published on 25 January, indicated that publication of the Bill was due in mid-year. The Government's legislative programme for the summer session 2001, published on 26 April, indicates that the heads are being prepared in the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation and that publication is expected in late 2001.

Tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money are being flung in all directions by the Taoiseach in a scattered attempt to pull the various elements together. The timing of the announcement of the agreement in principle with the GAA was not an accident. It contributed to a public relations disaster for the GAA which exposed the Taoiseach as meddling in the internal affairs of an independent, democratic organisation. It exposed him as going on a solo run with huge amounts of taxpayers' money and not keeping his partners in Government up to speed. His actions have destabilised the Government and have brought into sharp focus the many matters in relation to basic social services and inadequate sports infrastructure nationwide which are seriously underfunded. The image of the Taoiseach, fixated on what he calls his vision, stumbling and tripping in bringing it to fruition and recklessly using taxpayers' money to bring the project past the next hurdle, was finally too much even for the Progressive Democrats, and a halt was brought to his gallop.

There is another issue of major concern regarding the agreement in principle between the Taoiseach and the GAA. It must be acknowledged that the GAA is a 32 county, independent, democratic body which the Government cannot direct to change its rules. The agreement in principle that the GAA play up to five matches per year in the national stadium, with an overall attendance of 200,000, raises rule 21 of the association. That rule bans members of the RUC and the British Army from membership of the GAA. This has implications regarding the development of a cross-community police force for Northern Ireland. There are contingent implications for the peace process and the Belfast Agreement. It appears the national stadium, involving many millions of pounds of taxpayers' money, will not be accessible to all citizens resident on the island of Ireland because they cannot play for GAA teams on the basis of their type of employment, namely, membership of the RUC. In fairness to the Taoiseach, I doubt this was his intention but it is an issue which must be urgently addressed.

The basic issues regarding campus and stadium Ireland which must be addressed are contained in the Labour Party amendment to the Fine Gael motion. How can an 80,000 seater stadium be justified or viable bearing in mind the ongoing development of Croke Park? There is also major public concern regarding the escalating cost of the project. This has been belatedly addressed by the Government which has conceded the need for an independent cost-benefit analysis. The Labour Party is seeking that this value for money audit be carried out by the Comptroller and Auditor General, and that the Dáil officially requests him to carry out a further cost benefit analysis on a 50,000 seater stadium. I note the Minister said tonight that the intention is that international consultants will be involved in the independent audit, but I do not see why the Comptroller and Auditor General cannot take the place of the steering committee mentioned in reply to a parliamentary question that I tabled today.

In the interests of democracy, the Dáil should further resolve that the Comptroller and Auditor General's report be debated in the Dáil prior to its adoption by Government. Given the position of the Oireachtas in terms of the mishandling by the Government of the Campus and Stadium Ireland project, it should direct that no contracts or commitments be entered into prior to the agreement by the Oireachtas on the Campus and Stadium Ireland Bill.

The campus of sporting excellence aspect of the campus and stadium Ireland project has much to recommend it. The 50 metre swimming pool is necessary for the Special Olympics in 2003. The Labour Party supports the provision of appropriate state of the art sporting facilities at national level and is demanding that the Government brings forward a strategic plan for the provision of sporting facilities at regional and local level. The Government must get real and maintain a sense of proportion at a time when the Exchequer is awash with money. Campus and stadium Ireland must not be to a scale that prevents the provision of a full and proper quality of life for all our citizens.

Mr. Rabbitte

In the short time available to Deputy O'Shea and myself, and other Deputies, it is difficult to do justice to what the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, has called the largest capital project in the history of the State. The project is out of control, the Taoiseach is out of touch and the Tánaiste is out of the loop. The Tánaiste may well huff and puff, but she will not blow down the "Bertie Bowl". She knows there is growing outrage as more people learn what precisely is involved. She is trying to position herself to empathise with that mood while all the time having given her assent to what she implies will be a white elephant – her words, not mine. Meanwhile the Taoiseach has reverted to his old habit of signing blank cheques with the taxpayers' cheque book. Huge cheques can be signed to the FAI to kill off Eircom Park, to the GAA to keep Croke Park closed both to other games and for most of the year, to clear the park and relocate the services to Kildare and Galway. All these huge taxpayers' cheques are in addition to the £550 million committed to the record several times by the Minister, Deputy McDaid. None of this puts a value on the 500 acres of land within the footprint of the greater Dublin area. For example, my colleague, Deputy O'Shea, assures me it is true the Government's figure of £160 million to clear the park has now risen to £188 million.

What is the rationale for this mother of all public sector projects, or joint venture projects if one believes private partners will emerge? Do we need a second 80,000 seater stadium? If we do, what would be a reasonable cost for it, and what would be the ideal location? In the case of the stadia with major soccer clubs as anchor tenants, a minimum of about 25 fixtures per annum is guaranteed. Since we are not participants in any league similar to the premiership, it is not possible to envisage other than a few exceptional events that might attract 80,000 people. In so far as Croke Park finals or semi-finals may be included in those exceptional events, they will certainly be played at Croke Park. Last Sunday, the league final between Mayo and Galway attracted fewer than 23,000 paying fans. Despite the Taoiseach's best efforts, Croke Park is inexorably moving towards hosting the occasional rugby and soccer event, and it is only the very exceptional such occasion that will require capacity for 80,000 fans. We may, depending on the plans for Lansdowne Road, need a modest, no-frills, 45,000 seater stadium such as was planned for Eircom Park. For example, Manchester City is planning to complete a 48,000 seater stadium for the summer of 2002 at a cost of IR£113 million.

As in so many other things, international experience has taught us that, in respect of stadia, location is also important. How does a capacity attendance manage access and egress? Are there hotels, pubs, restaurants within walking distance and so on? It makes sense to complete the splendid stadium at Croke Park, although I deplore the manner in which the Taoiseach's intervention stymied an historic decision by the GAA Congress. An additional stadium, such as Eircom Park, would complete the jigsaw in an inevitably more ecumenical sporting environment in the future.

I fail to see how the monument envisaged for Abbotstown can be justified in the context of young people togging out in cold containers up and down the country and where sports endeavour is predominantly dependent on voluntary effort and non-stop fund-raising. If Abbotstown proceeds, it will be the graveyard of the Progressive Democrats' much trumpeted reason for existence, to stop the profligate waste of public money. Clearly the four independent Deputies have more clout now in this Government than does the Progressive Democrats Party, which is reduced to the status of merely a guest in Government. Tonight, in the terms of reference announced by the Minister, it is clear that they are calculated to get us as far as the general election, and after that we will see what happens.

On the BBC website tonight, one can see that the Wembley project has collapsed and I quote:

The £475m scheme has been beset by problems over the past two years and is now in crisis after being unable to secure adequate funding from the City of London. "We cannot act as the sole sponsor of the scheme," said an FA spokesman. . . "Neither sports governing bodies, nor banks will take the risks associated with such a project."

The Culture Secretary Chris Smith stated: "It is clear that escalating costs – which have risen from £334m to £660m – have played a key role". In other words, what has happened in Wembley is that the costs went from £334 million to £660 million, which is as close to double as one can get. What happened in regard to Croke Park is that the cost doubled. What happened in respect of Eircom Park – and apart from—

Dr. McDaid

The Deputy is talking about a stadium. What we are talking about is a campus, a whole area. The Deputy is missing the point.

Mr. Rabbitte

I am not missing the point. Let us talk about a stadium. We are talking about £350 million. We are talking about £150 million supposedly—

Dr. McDaid

The Deputy is talking about the stadium.

Mr. Rabbitte

Let us talk about the campus and the elements of it. It will be £350 million for the stadium, as of now.

Dr. McDaid

For the campus.

Mr. Rabbitte

It is anticipated that £150 million will be pledged by the private sector. We do not know whether that will materialise. There will be £50 million from J. P. McManus. A sum of £188 million will be required in order to relocate the State laboratories.

Dr. McDaid

That was required anyway.

Mr. Rabbitte

No value has been put on the land which is of the order of £200 million. As Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, said tonight, there is no price for the infrastructure, roads and so on leading to it.

Dr. McDaid

That is not true.

Mr. Rabbitte

The Minister can add all that up – it is on the record and in his own commitment – and we will take it from there.

Mr. Stagg

It is wonderful that we have so much wealth that we can contemplate spending in excess of £1,000 million on a monument to our great leader, the Taoiseach. We have this excess wealth despite giving massive tax breaks to the wealthiest sections of our society and operating a wealth and corporate tax regime that is the envy of every right-wing regime in the world. The Fianna Fáil/Progressive Democrats Government, therefore, with the full support from the so-called four Independents, decided on the priority for this now wealthy nation. It decided not to spend the money on a modern public transport system, despite the fact that every town and city is grinding to a halt. There are all sorts of plans in this area, but there has been precious little action from the Minister for Public Enterprise, Deputy O'Rourke. It decided not to reorganise and fund the health services, even in the face of cancer patients being refused vital treatment.

Dr. McDaid

Kildare County Council is holding everything back.

Mr. Stagg

The Minister for Health and Children, the great white hope of this Government, reacts like a rabbit caught in headlight beams, expressing his anger but totally unable to do anything to provide the life-saving services needed. It decided not to tackle the housing crisis that is preventing young workers, gardaí, nurses, teachers, civil servants from taking up employment in Dublin city, and it has decided to ignore the growing list of homeless young people on our streets.

Dr. McDaid

That is the Deputy's argument for everything.

Mr. Stagg

The Government had another priority. It was not transport, health, education or housing. Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats with the so-called spineless Independents, decided their priority was to be a sports stadium on a grand scale such as we had never dreamed of and at a price we can hardly comprehend, £1,000 million. If there is £1,000 million available for sport, let us have a debate on how best to use this public money.

Recently we discussed law and order in this House, and several Members referred to the reality of large numbers of young people congregating in housing estates in a menacing way in middle-class and working-class areas. We should ask what other options we have provided for them. The answer is, in most areas, very little or nothing.

Dr. McDaid

Down through the years.

Mr. Stagg

We have pubs and late night discos with pubs.

Dr. McDaid

I could not agree more.

Mr. Stagg

What else do we offer them? For the younger ones, there is the off-licence, a sort of training ground for the pub culture. Now we have an opportunity, and we have the money to enable us to grasp that opportunity. If the £1,000 million that is to be spent on the "Bertie Bowl" were to be applied to the needs of young people throughout the country, it would be possible to spend £24 million on sporting facilities in each of the 42 constituencies in this republic. That would provide first-class swimming pools and ancillary facilities in every town in my constituency, in Naas, Celbridge, Leixlip, Maynooth, Kilcock and Clane. A total of 60,000 people in north Kildare do not have a swimming pool. It would also provide the existing sports club with the capital to upgrade its facilities and attract young people to it. A bottom up approach such as this would have real benefit for the tens of thousands of youths in every town and village. However, the Government seems determined to go for the elite option, the prestige option, the one that makes provision for a handful of athletes just to satisfy the pride of one individual, the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern. It is the public's money with which the Minister is playing. It belongs to the parents of the young people he is condemning, by his actions, to a pub culture and all that flows from it. I urge him, even at this late stage, to think again and to adopt a bottom up approach to sports provision that can serve many rather than a top down approach which can only serve an elite few.

Debate adjourned.