Vol. 560 No. 2
2 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the position regarding the provision of a new national stadium; if a site has been chosen for the stadium; the way in which the failure to secure the Euro 2008 championships has affected policy on this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2226/03]
4 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he has received the report from the special review group which he established to examine proposals to build a national stadium from private consortia; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2229/03]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 4 together.
The Government decided last September that it was not in a position in current budgetary circumstances to provide Exchequer funding for the development of a national stadium. Accordingly, late last year it invited expressions of interest in the procurement of a privately-funded stadium at Abbotstown. The inter-agency group set up under the direction of my Department to evaluate the 23 expressions of interest recently completed its preliminary assessment of the responses received. I am currently reflecting on the issues raised in the group's report and it is my intention to discuss them with my Cabinet colleagues in the very near future.
Abbotstown remains my preferred option for the location of a stadium. Validation of Abbotstown as the most suitable location was provided by the results of a comprehensive survey of more than 20 potentially available sites carried out under the aegis of my Department in August 2002. This survey ranked the site at Abbotstown ahead of the others, many of which were located at centre-city locations, in terms of cost and general suitability.
The failure of the Scotland-Ireland bid to host the Euro 2008 Championships has had no material bearing on the development of a stadium. In the context of finalising the joint bid to UEFA by Scotland and Ireland, the Government agreed that in the event that the bid was successful it would seek the approval of the Oireachtas to provide financial support to help either upgrade capacity at Lansdowne Road or provide equivalent capacity at an alternative venue to be provided by the IRFU, which would not just comply with the international rugby requirements of the IRFU but meet with the standards of UEFA for hosting major events. As the bid was unsuccessful, that commitment no longer arises. Nevertheless, the requirement of both the IRFU and the FAI for a modern stadium capable of accommodating their prestige international fixtures which existed prior to the submission of the joint Scotland-Ireland bid for the 2008 UEFA finals, remains as pressing as ever and is central to my consideration of issues around the development of a stadium. I should also advise the Deputies that I am acutely aware of the needs of both the FAI and the IRFU for a modern stadium to play their international matches.
I thank the Minister for a comprehensive reply to this contentious question. Is there a difference of opinion within the Government in relation to the site at Abbotstown vis-à-vis the city centre? Newspaper reports suggest that the Progressive Democrats Party favours a site near the city centre, whereas Fianna Fáil favours the Abbotstown location. On the last occasion that the Minister was in the House for Question Time I asked him about Croke Park and he informed me that a proposal had been put to the GAA authorities. Has there been any response to the Taoiseach's initiative at the time about the use of Croke Park? Is it still the case that we must wait until the GAA holds its congress in April? The Minister stated previously that arrangements would be made if the bid to host the 2008 tournament was successful. Is that still an option, as it seems sensible to keep all alternatives in mind? If the public private partnership approach to Abbotstown is not pursued, will the Minister look for Oireachtas approval for the alternative approach of which he spoke when we were bidding to host the 2008 tournament?
The expert group which examined the possible sites for the proposed national stadium decided that Abbotstown was the preferred location for several reasons. It is also my personal preferred option. There have been no changes in relation to Croke Park – any proposal to change the association's rule 42 would have to be discussed at a congress of the GAA. It should be pointed out, however, that the GAA was asked by the Government for the use of Croke Park for four games during the 2008 European soccer championships in the event of the joint Ireland-Scotland bid being successful. The GAA can make its own decision in relation to Croke Park but a separate national stadium will have to be constructed in any event.
As a location, Croke Park presents certain difficulties in terms of planning, floodlighting, the objections of local residents and the overlapping of fixtures in the various sporting codes. Regardless of whether Croke Park is opened to other sports, there can be no doubt that Ireland requires an alternative stadium to host international soccer and rugby matches, in particular. I believe it will be possible to proceed with the national stadium, even if the proposed public private partnership does not go ahead. I am considering a number of other options and intend to bring proposals to Cabinet in the near future.
It is obvious that the impasse is continuing. The Minister has confused the matter further with his remarks in the House. Recent newspaper stories have reflected the spin being fed to various journalists. It has been suggested that the FAI and the IRFU have agreed, in principle, to co-fund a stadium with the State. Another report has indicated that the Abbotstown project is likely to be pursued in full. Does the Minister agree that it is time for the Government to make a clear decision? He has said he is looking at a number of options other than those examined by the review group. Is it not time to choose an option rather than dragging the matter on still further? I am sure the Minister realises that the IRFU and the FAI are getting impatient. I ask him to be more definite in his remarks. Does the fact that Abbotstown is his preferred location rule out the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road? Has the Government ruled out a city centre location? If the Minister made clear that Abbotstown is to be the location, we could start to debate the type of operation and who will construct it.
The inter-agency panel had to consider all the expressions of interest and it is fair to say the process took longer than I anticipated. There were complexities in relation to the expressions of interest, as certain parties asked about tax breaks, additional land and tax reliefs. We will have to decide what we are going to do soon. I do not accept that the process has been dragged out or that there has been an attempt to delay it, as the truth is that expressions of interest had to be examined.
Certain problems would be encountered if Lansdowne Road was to be refurbished. The stadium would have to be turned at a 90º angle which may cause local residents in the Lansdowne Road area to object to the planning proposals. In short, it may not be possible to construct a large new stadium at the IRFU's Lansdowne Road site.
Matters are becoming more urgent – Lansdowne Road can hold 49,000, of whom 24,000 are seated on permanent seats. In 2004, however, UEFA and FIFA will insist that all spectators are accommodated on permanent seating at international matches under their aegis. It has been possible until now to place 11,000 temporary seats at Lansdowne Road, giving the stadium a capacity of 35,000 for all-seater international soccer matches. When the new rule comes into force in 2004, it will not be permissible to place temporary seating on the terraces, thereby reducing the capacity to 24,000 for FAI games. I do not believe such a low capacity would be economically viable. It has to be said that while Lansdowne Road is rich in tradition, the stadium is dilapidated and the pitch worsening. The IRFU faces financial difficulties as a result of the introduction of the professional rugby union. If a stadium with a capacity of 65,000 was made available to the IRFU, the union's financial position would be considerably strengthened and its pressures eased.
The case made by the FAI and the IRFU is irrefutable – there is a clear need for a new stadium. The Government needs to recognise that need and examine how the issues faced by the sports organisations can be resolved. I intend to finalise proposals in relation to a new facility soon. They will have to be brought to Government for its views and then the House for its assessment of the issues involved.
3 Mr. Gregory asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism his plans for a docklands site for the national sports centre; the funding sources available; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2221/03]
There are no plans under consideration to site a new national stadium in any location on the docklands, or in any place other than at the State owned site at Abbotstown. The Deputy will recall that when expressions of interest in a privately funded national stadium were invited late last year, it was clearly stipulated that the stadium would be located at Abbotstown. A working group under the direction of my Department had previously undertaken an assessment of all potential locations for the national stadium, including a number of dockland sites. The site at Abbotstown was placed well ahead of the other sites considered in terms of general suitability, including availability and cost considerations.
As I have already told the House today, the interagency group set up to evaluate the expressions of interest in developing a privately funded stadium has recently completed its preliminary assessment of the responses received. I am currently reflecting on the issues involved and intend to discuss them with my Cabinet colleagues shortly. I do not intend making a statement in this regard until my Government colleagues have had an opportunity to consider and approve a strategy to meet our stadium requirements in the most advantageous and cost-efficient way. The question of finance will be dealt with in this context.
I am sure that the Minister's colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, will be very disappointed to hear that. I was not recommending a docklands site, merely looking for information because of various media reports. It does appear that Abbotstown is the chosen site, but if there are alternative sites to be considered, will the Minister ensure that the concerns of communities and residents in the areas are taken into consideration? I can speak with experience on this because I live in the shadow of Croke Park. Residents in an ever-increasing area around the stadium are prisoners in their own homes on major match days. The Minister referred earlier to the possible expansion of activities at Croke Park. Would he agree that the concerns of residents must be taken into account by the authorities there and by him in making any decision on the location of a stadium? Will the Minister indicate which private developers made approaches in relation to funding for the national stadium?
The views of residents must certainly be taken into account during the development of any new stadium. I am aware of the difficulties experienced by residents around Croke Park on occasion. There is no question of the stadium's proceeding at a city centre location without negotiations with local residents. However, as I have already stated, the expert group that looked at all of the relevant sites came to the conclusion that Abbotstown was the most suitable site for several reasons, some of which I have outlined.
The Deputy inquired about developers who expressed an interest in the project. The evaluation of all of these has now been completed and it is possible that the list will be published in due course.
Will the Minister confirm that Treasury Holdings was one of the developers which expressed an interest in funding the stadium? It certainly appears to be on friendly terms with the Fianna Fáil branch of the Government. It could probably pay for the entire project out of a small proportion of its huge profits.
Deputy Gregory has his own views, which I am not likely to change by anything I say. There were many valid expressions of interest. Irrespective of how we proceed, there will be no question, for example, of the State transferring land at Abbotstown or anywhere else at a cost to the taxpayer, whose interests will be borne in mind at all times.
