Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 are cognate to amendment No. 1 and amendment No. 4 is related, therefore they shall be taken together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Irish Sports Council Bill, 1998: Report Stage.
Acting Chairman
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 3, line 16, after "physical" to insert "or mental".
These amendments seek to extend to other sports the stewardship of the Irish Sports Council. Competitive sport, as the Bill stands, means all forms of physical activity. We wish to amend that meaning to include mental activity. In the same definition we seek to amend the phrase "aimed at expressing or improving physical fitness" to "aimed at expressing or improving physical or mental fitness". In the definition of recreational sport we want to include mental as well as physical activity. The phrase that appears later in the definition, that the aim of recreational sport is expressing and improving physical fitness and mental well-being, would be changed to physical or mental fitness or well-being.
The rationale behind these amendments is that sports like chess or bridge would be included in the remit of the sports council and that the two terms "competitive sport" and "recreational sport" would be changed to provide for sports of the nature I have described.
These amendments were put down to deal specifically with the problems we all face in making decisions regarding sports like contract bridge and chess. I expressed the reservation previously that, under the current definition of sport, when the time comes for the sports council to make the decision regarding the recognition of contract bridge and other games like chess, its hands will be tied somewhat and it will be unable to recognise contract bridge as a recreational activity.
We have all made the case over the years for the recognition of contract bridge and I will not delay the House by repeating the arguments made on Committee Stage. The Minister indicated on Committee Stage that he would consider the matter and come back to us on Report Stage. At that time there was an expectation that he might make an announcement on funding for contract bridge before Report Stage. This issue is about funding of facilities and the association so that it can run its affairs in an efficient and effective manner. I expected an announcement from the Minister at this stage recognising contract bridge for funding purposes. Will he indicate the current state of play? Has he made a decision regarding funding and what are his thoughts on the mechanisms for recognising contract bridge as a sport? Will he agree that the sports council will find it difficult, if not impossible, to recognise contract bridge as a recreational activity if the Minister does not accept the amendments tabled by Deputy O'Shea?
The Deputies are aware of my determination to recognise bridge; I understand almost every Deputy and Senator has had representations on the issue of contract bridge. It is a matter of funding but, unfortunately, I have to draw the line between sport as a physical activity and sport as a mental activity. I know where the Deputies are coming from on this issue but it must be remembered that this has already been tried in the United States, New Zealand and a number of other areas. They had to draw back from using definitions of this nature in the United States.
I recognise the benefits of chess and bridge but if I use this type of definition I will open up a Pandora's box. I have nothing against tiddlywinks or other activities like that but we cannot have everybody looking for resources. Deputies can rest assured I will examine the area of bridge. When the sports council is set up I will ask it to examine this issue as a matter of priority to see what it can do in terms of its remit. If it is unable to recognise chess and bridge, I will bring the matter back to my own Department and recognise it under the recreational section which has been set up and which will require resources. One way or another I am determined to recognise bridge as a recreational activity.
It is not proposed to accept the amendments which aim to have competitive and recreational sport based on mental or physical activity. The definitions of recreational and competitive sport in the Bill are derived and extracted from the only official European definition set out in the Council of Europe Sports Charter. I cannot change that definition. It is widely recognised that there are difficulties in defining sport due to its dynamic and changing nature. Those difficulties are reflected by the variety and number of definitions of sport which exists internationally. The definitions in the Council of Europe sports charter, that used in the legislation establishing New Zealand's Hillary commission for sports, fitness and leisure, and those which have been proposed by eminent north American sports experts all share the fundamental principle that sport is based on some form of physical activity, physical prowess or the use of physical skills, hand-eye co-ordination, speed, agility, dexterity, grace, suppleness, strength, endurance, etc.
The definitions in the Bill are underpinned by this principle and I do not propose to change that position. The current definitions provide a clear framework for the council to carry out its functions in an effective and focused manner while providing enough flexibility to allow the council provide assistance and support across an ever-broadening and evolving sporting sector. The recognition of individual activities as sports will be a matter for the sports council in the context of the definitions. I will ask the council to examine this issue, which was included in my party's manifesto, as a priority. I have had representations from various bodies and my Department is determined to examine the question of bridge, in the first instance, but I cannot dilute the definition of sport. Physical activity can be measured but we cannot measure a mental activity and therefore I have to oppose the definition in the Deputy's amendment.
Bridge is a well recognised activity with 35,000 members. It is a well structured organisation which takes part in provincial and international events, but I cannot allow the definition of sport to be diluted. I will examine the issue when the sports council is formally established following the enactment of this legislation.
I compliment the Minister for seriously addressing the issue. I am not unsympathetic to the view that if we extend definitions we might open up a Pandora's box. If I understood the Minister correctly he said he would ask the sports council, when it is set up, to address the issue of funding for contract bridge in the context of interpreting the legislation and, failing that, he will recognise bridge under the recreational provisions of his Department and funding can be made available through that channel. If the basic needs of the sport can be met either through legislation or the process the Minister has outlined, I would not have a problem with it. In the circumstances, I will not press the amendments. I accept the undertaking given by the Minister.
I am concerned at the developing attitude to sport in the Department. I detect an over-emphasis on elite sport. Funding for some national organisations is being cut, as a line is being drawn between high-performance, competitive sport and recreational activities.
Deputy McDaid is Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation. Prior to the election Fianna Fáil made promises about the recognition of contract bridge. Those promises should only have been given after consideration of all the implications. Thousands of people who pursue contract bridge as a sport or recreational activity will be extremely disappointed that promises made to them are not being fulfilled. On Committee Stage the Minster gave a commitment to look at funding but this has not been done. He has a responsibility to recognise that contract bridge is recreational and, as such, should be funded.
Are there applications for funding towards the development of facilities for contract bridge under the capital grants scheme? Will the Minister consider those applications as his Department has responsibility for sport and recreation? I am concerned that the Minister and the sports council are drawing a line between elite sport, competitive sport and recreational activities. That is wrong because the life blood of sport involves participation and voluntary effort. It is not solely about elite sportspeople.
Deputy O'Shea must be aware that it has been a priority to try to get the Bill to this stage. It takes time and manpower to do so and we have been concentrating on getting the Bill through.
We have already done some work and had a number of meetings about contract bridge and we know the pitfalls from the experience in other countries. This will be a priority with the sports council under the current definition. If it is unable to work with that I will bring the issue back to the Department and use the manpower available to try to deal with bridge at that time. Recreation comes within my portfolio and that is the section in which I want to include bridge. I assure the Deputy that the issue of bridge will be looked at by the Department.
Another amendment deals with Deputy Allen's comments about the emphasis on elite sportspeople. His comments are untrue. We have dealt with the issue of elite sportspeople and provided them with funding. They know how much they are due and it is untrue to suggest there is an emphasis on the high performance area as opposed to other areas of sport or recreational activities.
I am not sure about capital grants. The Department is processing 1,880 applications received for capital grants this session. I cannot say whether there is an application for contract bridge. However, such an application would be considered if it was for a capital grant.
Is the Minister saying that such an application will not be disqualified?
As Minister of State in the Department of Health, I introduced environmental regulations about smoking. Bridge sessions were one of the locations at which I banned smoking. I received a letter from a lady with severe respiratory problems thanking me as, for the first time in many years, she had been able to enjoy a night out. There can be physical health aspects to these activities. However, I accept the sincerity of the Minister's commitment in terms of meeting the needs of contract bridge. I will not press these amendments.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 2 to 5, inclusive, not moved.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 14 and 15 are related to amendment No. 6 and may be taken together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 5, between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following:
"(a) to exercise the functions of the Minister in relation to the disbursement of National Lottery funds,".
The disbursement of national lottery funds has been a vexed question and there is no perfect way of handling this issue. There would be a greater perception of impartiality and fairness if funds were disbursed by the new Irish Sports Council as distinct from the political route. However, I present one caveat in the context of the arts brief which I also hold. I am precluded from asking questions about the activities of the Arts Council. If the Minister accepts this amendment there must also be a measure of real accountability to the House for whatever happens as a result. There are varying views on how these moneys should be disbursed. This amendment provides the best route in terms of fairness and the perception of fairness. It gives an important new function to the statutory Irish Sports Council when established.
There has never been a greater need for young people, particularly those from disadvantaged areas, to be involved in organised sporting activities. Young people gain much discipline and a level of achievement from such activities. Their achievements do not have to be high performance but the perception that one is doing well can raise self-esteem. Much anti-social activity results from the fact that young people have no self-esteem. This funding is particularly important. There should always be discrimination in favour of the less well off in society in order to bring them into the mainstream. This can be done through a vehicle which in the first instance provides discipline but, more importantly, self-respect.
I look forward to hearing the Minister's views on this amendment. If the allocation of lottery funds for sport and recreation grants is removed from the political arena, the negative views which are sometimes expressed about the allocation of these funds will no longer be heard. Ultimately, everybody would wish that these funds, which like all funds are limited, would not only be allocated in the fairest possible way but also would be seen to be allocated in that manner.
I wish to discuss my amendments. There is a public perception that these decisions are made on the basis of political influence rather than need or the strength of individual applications. That perception is damaging to lottery funding of sport. I was aware of this during my term as Minister of State.
When the national strategy was being formulated I asked that the issue of both capital and revenue funding be examined. When it was published in February 1997, the strategy made certain recommendations, the most important of which was the establishment of a statutory sports council, which is the objective of this Bill. There was also an assumption that the funding of organisations, both capital and revenue, should be the responsibility of the new sports council.
The Minister initiated a review of the capital fund scheme. He promised that I would receive a report on the review but I did not. I put down a number of parliamentary questions on this matter but they were sidestepped. When I asked if the review of the capital scheme would be published, the answer I received effectively said nothing. I am still waiting for a copy of the review.
The Minister is due to make decisions in the next two months on the capital scheme for 1999. I understood that these decisions would be frozen until the review report was published and debated in the Dáil but obviously that will not happen. I ask the Minister to publish the review and to allow a debate in the House. It is an important report, particularly in view of the vast amounts of money allocated to clubs under the scheme.
A strong case has been made for positive discrimination in favour of clubs in disadvantaged areas and clubs which promote less well known or less well organised sports. Clubs for the stronger sports can make a professional case on their own behalf; they know what pressure points to press to get the maximum results. Less well organised sports can sometimes lose out.
It is important that Members see the report of the review group and that they have an opportunity to discuss it before major decisions are made. I am extremely disappointed that despite being Opposition spokesperson on this issue, I have been denied an opportunity to see it.
When an independent sports council is being established, it should have powers to finance organisations through annual grants and to fund capital projects. According to the Minister, there are almost 1,900 projects awaiting funding. They could probably consume about £600 million but there is only approximately £10 million available. One would have to be Solomon in all his glory to keep everybody happy. The legislation for the establishment of the sports council is seriously flawed if the council will not have the power to allocate both capital and annual funding. If the Minister insists on retaining the power to allocate capital grants, the powers and status of the sports council will be substantially weakened. As a result, the legislation is seriously flawed. It does not reflect the sentiments of the Treacy report of February 1997.
Successive Ministers have tried to operate the scheme as fairly as possible. There are huge pressures on any Minister when making decisions about funding. The decision of the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands to give power to the Arts Council to allocate funding was the correct one. Deputy O'Shea raised the valid point that questions cannot be asked in the House about those grants. However, if an executive and chairman are appointed to a council, it means we believe they will behave in a fair manner and if we delegate responsibilities we should allow them to exercise them.
I ask the Minister to consider accepting the amendments. They are vital if the sports council is to have the necessary status and adequate power to administer sport. I am concerned that the plan should set out parameters for the spending of capital grants. There should be emphasis on facilities at national, regional and local level.
I put down a parliamentary question last week about the funding that would be required to bring our swimming pools up to date. The figures quoted in the reply were horrific. A key decision of principle must be made by the Minister and the sports council about the spending of capital funds. Should funding be committed to upgrading community pools which are in need of refurbishment and upgrading or should it all be put in one basket to build the super 50-metre pool? Can the Minister do both?
The lifeblood of sport is at community and local level. If facilities are not adequate at local level, sport will not develop and prosper. I know what I would do in this situation but I anxious to hear the Minister's view on the priority of the refurbishment and upgrading of local swimming pools as against the development of a 50-metre pool.
I wonder if Deputies' words will come back to haunt them in the future. This is enabling legislation. I have made no definitive decision with regard to whether the sports council will take over responsibility for the sports capital programme. This is enabling legislation. If I were to accept the Deputies' amendments, effectively, I would tie the hands of a future Government. The legislation provides for the Minister of the day to make the allocation. If Deputy O'Shea or Deputy Allen were to hold my position at some time in the future, the legislation would allow them to make that decision, but I have not made a decision on this matter.
I have the greatest respect for Deputies who have been elected as public representatives. Most Deputies, Senators and other public representatives are involved at some level in committees that consider the sports, community centres and other issues and, therefore, they are the better judges of what is needed in a particular area. A future Government can decide to hand over such power to the new sports council. Legislation was not required for similar power to be handed over to the Arts Council. The Minister of the day made an order to that effect. A future Minister can make an order to do that in this case, but I have not made any decision on the new sports council taking over responsibility for this area. Many Deputies and Senators have better knowledge of what is needed in their communities as they were elected on these issues. They know about these needs because they care about what is happening in their communities and are members of various committees. I am reluctant to hand over responsibility for this area to the new sports council particularly at this stage, but the legislation enables a future Minister to do so.
Deputy Allen has raised the issue of disadvantaged areas. This year I refused to give funding to the GAA, the IRFU and the FAI, unless provision for disadvantaged areas was included in their strategy documents.
The Minister gave £20 million pounds last year.
That was a separate matter.
A total of £20 million was allocated.
Bertie gave the GAA £20 million.
I agreed with my ministerial colleague, Deputy McCreevy, when he did that. It was a fantastic way for the GAA to proceed. It will have a state of the art stadium for those who participate in our national games. A total of 800,000 people are part of that organisation.
The Minister should not have said he did not give any money this year when £20 million was allocated to the GAA.
Those organisations, including the IRFU and the FAI, were told that they would not receive any funding unless they included plans for making progress in disadvantaged areas in their strategy documents. All of them put forward excellent plans for including areas of disadvantage in their plans.
A total of 1,880 applications for lottery funding amounting to £214 million were submitted. We were able to allocate between £8 million and £10 million this year.
I fully understand the position regarding swimming pools. Some of them are in an appalling condition and the one in Roscommon was perhaps in the worst condition. I told Deputy Naughten we would look after it and we have done so.
No money have yet been allocated for it.
I have secured permission for the contract for this work to go to tender and I intend to keep my word on this. I have also had discussions with my ministerial colleague, Deputy McCreevy, on the issue of swimming pools. I hope to take this matter in hand in the not too distant future. Deputy Allen will be aware that up until now responsibility for this area lay with the Department of the Environment and Local Government. It was allocated only a very small budget for this work and on the basis of that funding we would not have been able to meet the needs in this area. My Department has responsibility for this area now and we are looking into this.
This is enabling legislation and any future Government can decide to pass power for this area to the sports council, in the way power was passed over to the Arts Council. Deputies and Senators have all been involved in one way or another in different community projects and sports. I cannot accept the amendment because it would tie the hands of any future Government.
I accept this is enabling legislation and that the Minister of the day will have the power to hand over the function of the allocation of lottery funding to the new sports council. That goes a fair way towards meeting the objective of my amendment. If that function were handed over to the new sports council, I take it that would not preclude Deputies and Senators from vouching for organisations or providing additional information or other factors by way of representation that would strengthen the case of the organisation? I understand that avenue of representation would not be closed to Members of the Oireachtas. I understand the Arts Council welcomes representations. I accept the Minister's argument. Given that the powers my amendment seeks to ensure are included in the Bill, are contained it, I am willing to withdraw my amendment.
A decision has not been made on this yet. As successive Governments continue to invest more money in sport, I have not decided against the idea that a certain percentage of the national lottery funding should be given initially to the new sports council to ensure that a certain percentage of funding should be allocated for strategic projects. I have toyed with that idea in the past. We could give a percentage of such funding to the new sports council for allocation and see how it is managed. This is in its infancy at this stage.
I promised to make the sports capital review report available. It will be available in approximately two weeks' time.
In two weeks' time? I could have that under the Freedom of Information Act, if I wanted it.
Even if we were pursuing that report today, I would still not be able to accept these amendments. I intend to pass a copy of this report to the Deputies when it is available to enable them to consider its contents. I passed the report to the Select Committee. This area should be discussed at the Select Committee. Many of the views expressed by the Deputies may not be the views expressed by other members of their parties. When the report is published, I will arrange for it to be given to the Deputies to enable them discuss it at the select committee.
I am amazed the Minister said the report will be published in two weeks' time. The review group's report was presented here last November or December. A question was tabled on it, but it was ignored. I was told at a committee meeting held two weeks' ago that it would be sent to me. If I exerted my rights as a citizen under the Freedom of Information Act, I am sure I could have obtained a copy of it by now. What is in it that is so secret?
It is with the printer. I agreed on Committee Stage to publish the report.
The Minister said then that he was surprised he had not made it available and that it would be supplied to us. I thought we would have it the following day. The record will show that the Minister gave us that assurance. I do not want to make a big deal out of it now. When we get it in two weeks' time, I hope we will be able to have a debate on it.
The Minister did not answer my question on his priorities in regard to swimming pools. Will he opt for a 50-metre pool or are there sufficient finances to build a 50-metre pool and to fund the refurbishment of pools throughout the country? I am sure that is referred to in the report. If we had it, at least we could have addressed that issue today. The Minister did not respond to that point. Expensive projects give the Minister a high profile, but spending £10 million or £20 million on high profile projects when some clubs do not even have running water with which players can wash themselves after a match is scandalous. The sooner a list of priorities for allocating capital is drawn up the better. I ask that that be addressed in the review.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Carlow-Kilkenny): Amendment No. 8 is an alternative to amendment No. 7. Amendment No. 9 is related. Amendment No. 10 is an alternative to amendment No. 9 and amendment No. 11 is related. Is it agreed to take amendments Nos. 7 to 11, inclusive, together? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 5, line 16, to delete "competitive sport" and substitute "either or both competitive sport and recreational sport".
I am pleased to answer some of the concerns expressed on Second and Committee Stages. Amendments Nos. 7, 9 and 11 aim to address any perception that the council will focus unduly on competitive sport with recreational sport being seen as the poor relation. I assure the House that my aim is to present a balanced Bill which will enable the council to carry out its role fully across all sport, taking account of participation and organisational levels.
While I consider that the council's function as outlined in section 6(1)(b) provides the necessary scope to enable the council to promulgate guidelines and codes of practice, amendment No. 7 makes this more explicit by extending the council's function as outlined in section 6(1)(c) to include recreational sport in order to underline again the importance of high standards throughout all sport. The current definitions of competitive and recreational sport are all-encompassing and implicitly include children's sport.
Amendment No. 9 relates to section 6(1)(e) and gives equal weight to competitive and recreational sport in relation to initiating and encouraging research. The aim is to ensure that the council retains the power to decide what research is most appropriate in the context of the dynamic environment in which sport now takes place, having regard to its own resources, strategic plan and national policy priorities. I consider that the proposed wording of the amendment will have this effect.
Amendment No. 11 arises as a consequence of the parliamentary draftsman's advice regarding amendments Nos. 7 and 9 and in order to maintain consistency throughout this critical section.
I made the case on Second Stage and again on Committee Stage in relation to these. I welcome the Minister's acceptance of the principles and fully accept the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 8 not moved.
I move amendment No. 9:
In page 5, to delete lines 19 to 21 and substitute the following:
"(e)where the Council considers it appropriate to do so, to initiate and encourage research concerning either or both competitive sport and recreational sport,".
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 not moved.
I move amendment No. 11:
In page 5, to delete lines 22 to 24 and substitute the following:
"(f) where the Council considers it appropriate to do so, to facilitate research and disseminate information concerning either or both competitive sport and recreational sport, and".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 12:
In page 5, between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following:
"(h)to develop strategies to ensure that housing developments provide adequate sport and recreational facilities.".
I discussed this with the Minister on Committee Stage. It is something about which I feel very strongly. There is an amount of housing development going on throughout the country but provision of adequate facilities for young people is totally neglected. In my electoral area, where I will be canvassing in respect of the local elections next June, 1,000 houses have been built. The county council sold off lots to private developers and developed local authority houses, but there is not even a soccer pitch in that locality. It is morally wrong that the county council can sell half acre sites at £100,000 but is not willing to put some of that money into developing facilities in the area. If a dispute arises in that locality of Monksland in south Roscommon, I cannot hold a meeting in my own county because there is no facility. I have to go to County Westmeath. If we decide in the morning to develop a soccer pitch in the locality, we could not hold a meeting within County Roscommon to discuss it because there are no facilities.
Throughout the country substantial areas of land are being developed. With the increase in housing density, developers are developing every piece of spare ground without providing for the needs of young people when they get to six, seven, and eight years of age. This has led to vandalism, even in some very well established areas because young people have nothing to do.
It is crucially important to make provision for this in the planning process. The sports council has a role to play in ensuring that this is done. If proper provision is not made, there will be problems in the future. I see problems in my own area, a rapidly growing area within a rural county, similar to those in many areas throughout the country. There has been an increase in housing density which the Minister for the Environment and Local Government envisages will exacerbate the problem. It is crucially important that we look logically at this and ensure that developers put money back into the areas they are developing. They are not doing that at the moment. They are bleeding the people dry who are buying the houses and then doing a runner.
In the planning and development Bill which is before the House, we are trying to combat developers who do a runner without putting in basic facilities like public lighting, walls and so on. It is crucially important to ensure that they provide for green areas, play areas and basic facilities so that communities can prosper and develop in the years to come. Currently there are two applications before the Minister for lottery funding for facilities which should have been provided a long time ago. One is from Roscommon County Council and the other is from a soccer club. Young people are abusing aerosols, young people of ten, 11 and 12 who have serious alcohol problems are falling around drunk at 9 p.m. or 10 p.m. and congregating in alleyways because they have nothing else to do.
There are youth organisations which are eager to develop projects and facilities for those young people, but they have no place to locate and no funding. This type of situation has occurred under the jurisdiction of Roscommon County Council and it is happening throughout the country under other county councils which may not have the same direct control. It is crucially important for the sports council to have a co-ordinating role in this regard. I ask the Minister to accept the amendment.
Last Monday night I attended a community association meeting in an inner city area of Cork. We received the usual demands for open space and facilities for young people for all the social reasons we hear about so often. It was quite impossible to meet those demands because there simply is no open space available. The local authority in Cork has allowed every available space to be built upon and as a result young people have nowhere to go.
As I have said often in the past, sport and recreation are the greatest preventative elements in the fight against crime and drugs. If young people are given an opportunity to become involved in sport and other recreational pursuits it will be far easier to protect them from crime and drugs. Money spent on sport and recreation saves millions of pounds annually in the prison and health services.
The recent Bacon report proposing increased housing density on available land is anti-sport and anti-recreation. At some stage it may help house purchasers, although I doubt that because I believe profits from higher density housing will go into the pockets of speculators and developers. The consumer will lose out again. There is also a danger that sporting organisations and young people will lose out because every available space will be built upon. Builders will pursue the principle of maximum housing density per acre.
During my time as Minister of State, some local authorities had the audacity to demand funding from organisations for land that was available. Clubs in the constituency of the Acting Chair man, Deputy Browne, Carlow-Kilkenny, sought funding and received it. However, the local authority then demanded moneys for available land, which was scandalous. Local authorities have a responsibility to mix housing and industrial developments with recreational facilities. Apart from a number of notable exceptions in Dublin and Cork, they are not living up to their responsibilities.
The Minister should ensure that the spirit of this amendment is met so that the sports council will co-ordinate different local statutory bodies and Departments in providing as much land as possible for recreational purposes. The usual token half acre in a vast housing estate of 300 or 400 houses is no longer sufficient. Without great investment, that token half acre is usually unusable because it may be on a slope.
Unless it is given over.
That is why it is put aside. They meet the token principle of providing a bit of open space but often that space is the focus for anti-social behaviour. Therefore, there is a need for a co-ordinated and organised approach to this matter. The Local Government Development Bill should be the vehicle for implementing this principle. At the same time, however, this amendment is important as regards getting the whole principle off the ground.
I support the amendment. The initial words in the amendment, "develop strategies", provide the key to what we are discussing. These issues need to be addressed, even in relation to playground areas already provided by local authorities, adjoining council estates. Insurance has become a huge problem concerning the operation of these areas. If accidents occur on moving facilities, such as swings and roundabouts, insurance premia rise. I am not quite sure how to address that problem but if, for instance, the facilities provided do not involve movement per se, then imagination can achieve a great deal.
There has been no period during my lifetime when sport and recreation have been more important than now. The idea of developing strategies, as is proposed here, involves a number of Departments. If the sports council takes a leading role and comes up with an overall plan, and even if that plan indicates what Departments other than the parent Department need to do to bring this concept to fruition, then let it be done. In this context, the concept is one of bringing sport and recreation to everybody.
Deputy Allen and I served on the task force on drug abuse. We devoted much time and discussion to methods of rehabilitation, which is going to one extreme. However, many children can be diverted away from anti-social behaviour of all kinds if there is a structure there for them. Sport and recreational facilities must be provided and in many cases responsibility for that will rest with the local authority. It is very important to take care of such facilities and see that they are used in an equitable and useful way.
The concept is a good one and concerns the quality of life and proper planning. I accept the thrust of the amendment in that the new sports council can play a valuable role in focusing on this problem by introducing strategies that will over time make worthwhile provision for such facilities on a countrywide basis.
The Deputies have made a very good case and I could not agree more with their sentiments. I accept what they are saying but if the proposed amendment is beyond the scope of the Bill I will have to ask the Acting Chairman for a ruling. The Deputy is asking me to involve a small body like the sports council in practically every local authority's plans for housing estates. I know what the Deputy is trying to do but I cannot accept the amendment on that basis because it would mean that the sports council would become involved in planning.
That is the principle.
The key words are "develop strategies".
We would all agree with what the Deputy is saying but surely the place for this is in the new Planning Act. The amendment ought to be tabled at that stage. A more appropriate mechanism for addressing the Deputy's concerns is through the Planning Acts. As the Deputy mentioned, the Department of the Environment and Local Government is currently preparing a Bill, which it is intended to publish in the middle of this year, to revise and consolidate the Planning Acts. As part of that process the Department is examining the provision of community facilities, including sport and recreational facilities, as part of the planning process.
The Irish Sports Council Bill already gives the sports council the power to co-operate with, advise and provide assistance to any person or body, including a public authority, in respect of any matter related to the performance of the sports council's functions. Sections 6(b) states that the functions of the Council shall be–
. . . to develop strategies for increasing participation in recreational sport and to co-ordinate their implementation by all bodies (including public authorities and publicly funded bodies) involved in promoting recreational sport and providing recreational facilities,
Section 7(2)(a) states:
. . . to co-operate with, advise and, subject to the criteria, terms and conditions established under section 8, provide assistance (including financial assistance) to any person or body (including a public authority) in respect of any matter related to performance of the Council's functions as it thinks desirable.
I ask the Deputy to reconsider this amendment. I know what he is trying to do, but this is not necessarily the function of the Sports Council and would be unduly burdensome for that body. It would be an excellent amendment for the new Planning Act to be debated later this year.
If I table this amendment for the new Planning Act, I will be told by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government that this is not his role and that it is a matter for the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation.
The Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation has an opportunity, now to accept this amendment. We are talking about developing strategies not about the sports council looking through every planning application. People will not have to send their planning applications to that body for its opinion, and it will not be extremely burdensome for the council. We are talking about developing strategies and someone must have a co-ordinating role in relation to the various bodies involved in the planning process. Who would be better than the sports council? That is the body with an interest in this matter. The Minister cited sections 6 and 7, but the former section relates to participation, not to a co-ordinating role in the planning area. Section 7 has no connection with this amendment. It is crucially important that the sports council should have a role in this matter, as it has the expertise to implement guidelines that should have been implemented years ago.
Deputy O'Shea mentioned insurance liability. Many local authorities are not developing facilities because of insurance liability, yet there has been an onus on the same bodies to develop facilities over the years, and now they are neglecting young people. In years to come the sports council and the Minister's Department will have a greater role to play in combating drug abuse because this amendment will not be accepted.
This is a way to combat a huge and growing problem at local level and I urge the Minister to accept this amendment. Local authorities are finding it hard to leave green areas alone because of the pressure from the Department of the Environment and Local Government to build houses. The Minister now intends to ask that Department to consider green areas for sports facilities. It is in contrast with the policy of that Department and the place to amend that policy is here.
I had to ask for a ruling as to whether this proposed amendment is within the scope of the Bill.
Acting Chairman
The fact that it is accepted means it is. The wording was refused, but the Minister could issue recommendations.
For the reasons I have already stated I cannot accept the amendment, although I empathise with the Deputy. We are setting up a fledgling statutory body in this sports council, and I cannot add more cumbersome regulations to it, particularly as the Planning Act will soon be debated. The Deputy's amendment should be incorporated in that Act, but I cannot accept it.
I accept the Minister's position, but the problem is that the Department of the Environment is seeking to have houses built all over the country because of the pressure for housing. That is its main priority. It will not provide the green areas that will be needed if we are to combat the growing drugs problem. That problem does not exist just in Dublin, Cork and Galway; it is a problem in counties like Roscommon, where there is already a severe drugs problem. This problem will continue to grow unless the Sports Council gets a co-ordinating role. I ask the Minister to reconsider his position and to accept the amendment.
Amendment put.
Tá
|
Ahearn, Theresa.Allen, Bernard.Barnes, Monica.Barrett, Seán.Bell, Michael.Belton, Louis.Boylan, Andrew.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Burke, Ulick.Carey, Donal.Clune, Deirdre.Connaughton, Paul.Cosgrave, Michael.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael. |
Currie, Austin.D'Arcy, Michael.De Rossa, Proinsias.Deasy, Austin.Deenihan, Jimmy.Durkan, Bernard.Farrelly, John.Ferris, Michael.Finucane, Michael.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Hayes, Brian.Higgins, Jim.Higgins, Michael.Hogan, Philip.Howlin, Brendan.Kenny, Enda. McCormack, Pádraic. |
Tá–continued
|
McDowell, Derek.McGahon, Brendan.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Paul.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Olivia.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Owen, Nora.Penrose, William. |
Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Shatter, Alan.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Wall, Jack.Yates, Ivan. |
Níl
|
Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cullen, Martin.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Gildea, Thomas.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy. |
Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael.Kitt, Tom.Lawlor, Liam.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McGennis, Marian.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Malley, Desmond.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Dan.Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Barrett and Stagg; Níl, Deputies S. Brennan and Power.
Amendment declared lost.
I move amendment No. 13:
In page 5, between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following:
"(h) to provide equality of sporting opportunity for everyone, regardless of gender, age or ability.".
I tabled this amendment to give us an opportunity to discuss the challenges that face individuals involved in sport. I refer specifically to the role of women in sport. I am still unhappy about the impediments that face women who wish to become involved at a participatory, management or administrative level. Many organisations, especially those that involve women, have contacted me over the years about these impediments.
Many years ago I set up the review group to examine the role of women in sport. I expected it to have submitted a report setting out how it believes we could tackle the problems facing women before now. The group comprises many leading sportswomen, administrators, managers and athletes and dealt with issues such as the conflict in terms of the role of the woman in the home, the problems women face with crèches, the bias in many sports towards the involvement of women and, of course, the old and thorny issue of the role and status of women in golf clubs. Will the Minister give us a detailed update on the status of the review group and the recommendations it has made?
I refer again to my concern about the overemphasis on high level performance in sport. Earlier the Minister denied there is a differentiation between high performance, competitive and participation sport. I would like him to rethink what he said because there is evidence to show grants are being given out under the headings of high level performance, competitive and participation sport. Will the Minister reconsider his denial before he goes any further? If we overemphasise top sportsmen and women and neglect sport at grassroots level, we will cut off the real lifeblood of sport.
I hope no efforts will be made to dilute the involvement of local authorities and vocational education committees in the sports-for-all programme or to terminate the grant scheme funnelled through to organisations by vocational education committees and local authorities. Last year it was almost eight months before the grants were sent out, and many clubs suffered grievously. A sum of £100 may not be much to the Minister or myself in relation to the moneys given out in the overall budget, but it is a lot of money to a small club in a deprived urban or rural area. There was serious doubt about the continued existence of that scheme. Will the Minister say whether it will continue, because it is vital?
I support Deputy Allen's amendment. In sport, as in any other area of activity, there should be universal equality of access. I would like to emphasise the importance of age. Men or women can play a sport such as pitch and put, for instance. Children can take up the sport relatively cheaply at an early stage and people can continue to play that game into their senior years. It would be reprehensible if there was a gender bar on access to sport. I may be wrong but I was surprised that disability and access for persons with disability was not covered in the Bill. Perhaps the Minister will address that question. The Labour Party and other Deputies would strongly favour a regime which gives every possible assistance to disabled people in terms of access to sport.
Before I deal with the amendment, I congratulate the GAA and Joe McDonagh for taking the initiative to break down some of the equality barriers in that organisation. It was not successful, but we need to support this initiative and I hope this discrimination will be eliminated in the near future. There is much psychological discrimination within sporting organisations. An example I gave on Second Stage related to soccer in an area not too far from me where there is still much discrimination against such sports.
To come back to the amendment, we are trying to look out for the Minister because the last thing I want to happen to him when he leaves office is for him to be called, "the high performance minister" because of his emphasis on high performance sport. It is crucially important to provide funds for basic facilities. The Minister knows my position on swimming. Fifty metre pools are pie in the sky to young people who want to learn how to swim.
The Deputy does not want a 50 metre pool.
Our priority should be to provide basic facilities. The Minister said the pool in Roscommon is the worst in the country, and there are many others like it. There is no point building 50 metre pools unless young people learn to swim and can compete.
Debate adjourned.
Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.