Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 22 November 2017
33. Deputy Shane Cassells asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the deficiencies in Ireland's failed bid to host the 2023 Rugby World Cup which led to Ireland receiving eight votes during an organisation's (details supplied) ballot; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [49196/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraFirst, what was said in the Seanad last Thursday about the Irish bid was disgraceful and wrong. It was an insult and disrespectful to the efforts of Kevin Potts, Philip Orr, Dick Spring, Brian O'Driscoll, Philip Browne, Páraic Duffy, the Minister, Deputy Ross and others.
Rather than dismiss the decision last week by World Rugby as an opportunity lost, there is merit in discussing it given the Government spend of over €1 million of taxpayers' money. At the end of the day, this came down to pure old horse trading and a vote between lads and blazers - which are not my words but those of rugby men on the inside track, such as Jim Glennon. Last Sunday, he set out in writing how the votes went down in the background. He named those involved, such as Gareth Davies from Wales, and set out how in the two weeks prior to the vote it was all about canvassing.
I thank the Deputy for his question and remarks. Before I respond to the question, I congratulate France on its win. I wish it every success as it turns its attention to delivering an outstanding tournament in 2023. Wednesday's result was disappointing, particularly after the years of work put into the bid. However, in our disappointment, we should not lose sight of the fact that the technical report found that Ireland would be an excellent host country for a Rugby World Cup. Although we were not successful, it is important to highlight that fact. The chairman of World Rugby, Bill Beaumont, noted that there were three outstanding host candidates who raised the bar and overwhelmingly demonstrated that they were all capable of hosting an exceptional Rugby World Cup and stated that there was very little to choose between the candidates and this was reflected in the independently-audited evaluation report.
Ireland was up against two previous hosts and in the evaluation report we fell behind them based on the quality of their stadia, many of which are recently built as result of hosting Euro 2016 and the 2010 FIFA World Cup. We presented a different, more sustainable vision that involved investment in existing stadia to meet tournament standards. Unfortunately, the Rugby World Cup Limited evaluators did not agree. In any event, ultimately the voters did not support the recommendations. Ireland’s bid is one of which all involved can be extremely proud. I take this opportunity thank Fianna Fáil for ignoring the remarks in the Seanad and to thank that party, Sinn Féin and the Independents for their support for the bid. We had some very constructive debate on the Bill which I introduced in this House. We did have the support of the Opposition, which was critical.
I thank Deputy Cassells for the constructive remarks he makes today. Of course, we are not above criticism but it would be wrong not to acknowledge the fantastic and united support of this nation and virtually all parties behind the bid which was one of which we can all be proud. It should be remembered that according to the evaluation report all of the bidding countries could have produced a very good Rugby World Cup.
I thank the Minister for his reply. My question is in respect of the process. The Minister answered my question well in terms of his reference to Bill Beaumont, a rugby legend and member of the executive council, who defied the executive independent report because, as we know, the English backed Ireland.
I would like to speak about what those involved in rugby are saying, as opposed to what is stated in the report. Jim Glennon is a former Irish rugby forward and politician who knows the dark world of voting in both disciplines.
He noted last weekend that after all the millions of euro invested in the bid, all the travel and hard work, Ireland's prospects of hosting the World Cup had come down to this, namely, that the outcome was in the hands of our Six Nations allies, Scotland and Wales. It was time to pull out all the stops and ensure every connection with anybody involved in rugby was exploited to the full. That is what it ultimately seems to have boiled down to: good old horse trading. If that was indeed the case, what exactly was our canvassing strategy? Did the Minister meet his counterpart in the Scottish Assembly, for example, to try to organise a quid pro quo whereby Ireland would assist the Scots on the next occasion? Was there any engagement in this vein with the Welsh Assembly Minister for Culture, Tourism and Sport, Dafydd Elis-Thomas? The Minister, Deputy Ross, might think I am being facetious but I urge him to consider the words of Brian O'Driscoll in the aftermath of the vote, "What goes around comes around." The former Ireland rugby captain was not holding back in pointing out what he considered to be the ramifications of this decision.
The Deputy's comments probably are more controversial than mine will be. We did everything we possibly could to secure a successful bid. On the question of lobbying, the answer is that, yes, there was lobbying and plenty of it. We are not ashamed of the fact we lobbied and put our case. Politicians lobbied and the Irish Rugby Football Union lobbied. Members of the Opposition lobbied, and I thank them for it. It was a united effort.
I would give a certain amount of credit to some of what the Deputy has said this morning. One must acknowledge that despite the evaluation report, two thirds of the people voting did not take any notice of that information and sent their votes elsewhere. In other words, decisions were not made on the basis of the evaluation report itself.
I did get involved personally in the bid, from my first day as Minister. I met World Rugby on several occasions, I introduced legislation and I travelled at least twice to the United Kingdom to lobby my British counterpart.
The expert review group looked at the question of deficiencies, including in transport and, in particular, in terms of our stadium infrastructure. Having worked as a sports journalist for more than a decade and having visited many stadiums throughout the country, I am well aware of the deficiencies we have but also the very positive gains there have been in the past ten years or so. There is no question, however, that investment is needed in stadiums throughout the country. When the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Bruton, responded to questions from me on the investment issue in the House last week, he spoke about sports capital grants. That funding is for helping clubs to get on their feet. We need to address the deficiencies in our major infrastructure with a view to implementing the municipal stadium model. That is the model in favour across Europe and it allows for the hosting of multitudes of sports. In a small country like ours, we will need to pool our scarce resources into the municipal stadium model if we are to ensure any future pitch for a major tournament in any sport is credible. That will require having infrastructure worthy of the European stage.
A sum of €50 million has been allocated in the budget for large-scale projects, and stadium projects certainly could be considered eligible candidates for that funding. I do not know whether the Deputy is giving credit to the criticisms of our stadium infrastructure. Commitments were given in this regard and they were solid, bullet-proof and Government-sponsored. I remain of the view that it was utterly credible to give an undertaking that the infrastructure would be in place on time. However, World Rugby made a judgment that it was better to have a stadium in hand than one that is promised, and that is fair enough. All I can do now is wish good luck to the French and look forward to a very good Rugby World Cup. We are very proud of the work we did in bidding for the tournament.
