Committee Reports > List of Committees > Joint > 2001 > Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation > Annual Report of the Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation, 1998-1999

TITHE AN OIREACHTAIS

TUARASCÁIL BHLIANTÚIL

ón

gComhchoiste um Thurasóireacht, Spórt agus Áineas

Obair an Chomhchoiste

ANNUAL REPORT

of the

Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation

Work of the Joint Committee

1999-2000

Table of Contents

1. Content and Format of Report

This report has been prepared pursuant to paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Standing Order 79A, Dáil Éireann and paragraphs 3, 5 and 6 of Standing Order 69, Seanad Éireann which provides for Joint Committee reports and work programmes as follows-

•review of its procedure and its role

•laying minutes of proceedings

•making an annual report

At its meeting on 14th December, 2000, the Committee agreed that all these items be included in its annual report. It further decided to append to this annual report the transcript of the meeting of the Joint Committee of 14 September 2000, as a method of publication. This can be found at Appendix 8.

2. Functions and Powers of the Joint Committee

The Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation was established by Order of Dáil Éireann of 20th November, 1997 and Order of Seanad Éireann of 26th November, 1997 as part of a programme of Oireachtas reform involving the refining of the Committee system to enable more detailed examination of Government Departments including–

•public affairs administered by each Department

•legislation and expenditure proposals of each Department

•certain matters relating to bodies under the aegis of each Department.

The Orders of Reference of the Joint Committee were modified by further Orders of Dáil Éireann of 28th April, 1998 (new subparagraph (2)(a)(iv) added) and Seanad Éireann of 30th April, 1998 (new subparagraph (1)(a)(iv) added) and the Orders of Reference of the Joint Committee, as so modified, are set out at Appendix 1.

In addition to existing functions and powers of the Committee, further powers were accorded to the Committee by a resolution of Dáil Éireann of 2 July 1999 to amend Standing Order 78A of Dáil Standing Orders, enabling the Committee to ‘consider and report to Dáil Éireann on such proposals for EU Legislation as may be referred to it from time to time by any Committee established by Dáil Éireann (whether acting jointly with the Seanad or otherwise) to consider such proposals and upon which has been conferred the power to refer such proposals to another Select Committee’. A corresponding provision was made by way of amendment to Standing Order 65 of Standing Orders of Seanad Éireann on 30 June 1999.

3. Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Convenors and Membership

Deputy Michael Ferris was elected as Chairman of the Joint Committee on 9 December, 1997 and served until his death on 20 March, 2000. Due to the untimely death of Deputy Ferris, Deputy Breeda Moynihan-Cronin was elected as Chairperson on 13 April 2000. Deputy Mary Coughlan was elected as Vice-Chairman of the Joint Committee on 9 December, 1997. The Chairperson of the Joint Committee is also Chairperson of the Dáil Select Committee.

Deputies Michael Joe Cosgrave and Matt Brennan are the Convenors of the Committee whose function it is to ensure the availability and attendance of Members or their substitutes for meetings of the Committee and, in particular, to ensure Members’ availability for divisions.

The Members of the Joint Committee are set out at Appendix 2.

4. Meetings, Attendance and Recording

Meetings of the Joint Committee took place in the Committee rooms in Kildare House. Meetings were in public unless otherwise ordered by the Joint Committee.

Televised coverage of public meetings of the Joint Committee was broadcast live within the Leister House complex and was available for subsequent public broadcasting by R.T.É.

Verbatim written reports of public meetings of the Select Committee in relation to Estimates for the Public Services, Vote 35, Tourism, Sport and Recreation were published and may be purchased from the Government Publications Sales Office, Molesworth Street, Dublin 2.

Copies of other reports published by the Joint Committee may be obtained from the Clerk to the Committee, Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation, Kildare House, Kildare Street, Dublin 2. A list of these reports is set out at Section 8.

5. Number and Duration of Meetings

The Joint Committee met on 13 occasions in the year under report. The number of hours discussion involved in these meetings was in excess of seventeen (17) hours. The date and subject matter of each meeting is set out at Appendix 3.

The Dáil Select Committee met on 2 occasions in the year under report and the number of hours discussion involved in these meetings was in excess of three (3) hours. The date and subject matter of each meeting is set out at Appendix 4.

Records of attendance by Members of the Joint Committee and their duly nominated substitutes at meetings of the Joint Committee are set out at Appendix 5.

Records of attendance by Members of the Dáil Select Committee and their duly nominated substitutes at meetings of the Dáil Select Committee are set out at Appendix 6.

Minutes of proceedings of the Joint Committee meeting in public session are attached at Appendix 7.

6. Work of the Committee

6.1 Joint Committee

On the 13 occasions the Committee met it dealt with the following matters:

•Regional imbalance in the spread of tourism

•Difficulties between the Olympic Council of Ireland and the Athletics Association of Ireland

•The viability of the National Sports Stadium

•The Revised Code of Ethics in Sport

•Regulation in the Tourism Industry

•Tourism Marketing - Marketing the island of Ireland as a whole

•Community development / regeneration

•The Role of Sport & Recreation as a Preventative Element in the Fight against Crime & Drugs amongst Young People

•Drugs in Sport

•Sustainable Tourism

•Hosting the Special Olympics in 2003

•Tourism Training and Tourism as a Career

•North/South Co-operation

6.2 Dáil Select Committee

On the 2 occasions the Committee met it dealt with the following matters:

•Revised Estimate 2000 - Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation

•Supplementary Estimate 2000 - Department of Tourism, Sport & Recreation

7. Groups and Individuals attending before Committee

In the year under report the Joint Committee met with the following:

•The Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation

•Town & Country Homes Association

•The Irish Sports Council

•Manor House Hotels/CMV

•Planet (Network of Area-based Partnerships)

•Special Olympics Ireland and Special Olympics World Summer Games 2003

•Campus & Stadium Ireland Development Ltd.

•Bord Fáilte

•CERT

•Northern Ireland Assembly Committee on Culture, Arts and Leisure

8. Committee Reports and Resolutions

8.1 Joint Committee

During the year under report the Joint Committee published the following reports:

•Annual Report, 1998/1999.

•Report of the Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation entitled ‘The Role of Sport & Recreation as a Preventative Element in the Fight against Crime & Drugs amongst Young People’.

•Report of the Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation entitled ‘Report on a Visit to Rio de Janeiro by a Delegation of the Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation’.

9. Work in Progress

The Joint Committee’s work programme for 2001 will be prepared and presented separately from this Report.

10. Travel by the Joint Committee

The Committee undertook the following travel in accordance with its orders of reference in connection with its work programme.

•Cyprus, 31 January 2000 to 4 February 2000

The Committee sent a delegation of five members to Cyprus at the invitation of the Cypriot Ambassador, on behalf of the Cypriot House of Representatives. The purpose of the visit was to discuss and investigate tourism matters of mutual interest to both countries.

The delegation met with the Deputy President of the House of Representatives, Mr. Nicos Anastassiades, with Mr. George Vassiliou, Head of the Negotiating Team for the accession of Cyprus to the European Union, with Mrs. Phryne Michael in the office of the Cyprus Tourism Organisation, with Mr. Demos Georgiades, Chairman of the Cyprus Sport Organisation and with the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Mr. Nicos Rolandis. The delegation also met with the Deputy Mayor of Nicosia and visited the Irish contingent of the United Nations Force in Cyprus.

•Rio de Janeiro, 14 to 17 May 2000

The Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation was invited to attend the World Tourism Organisation’s Third International Forum. The purpose of the Forum was to draw the attention of all public decision-makers (governments, parliaments and local authorities) to the economic importance of tourism, as well as to study the implications of the growing decentralisation of responsibilities for tourism development and promotion to cities and regions, and to foster international cooperation at all levels in the implementation of tourism policies.

11. Function and Powers

For the purpose of its consideration of current matters, the Committee is happy with its present procedures and role.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin, T.D.

Cathaoirleach of the Joint Committee

January, 2001

(Note: This annual report was agreed by the Joint Committee at its meeting on 11 January 2001)

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1

ORDERS OF REFERENCE

Dáil Éireann

Order of 20 November 1997:

(1) (a)That a Select Committee, which shall be called the Select Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation, consisting of 14 members of Dáil Éireann (of whom 4 shall constitute a quorum), be appointed to consider such-

(i)Bills the statute law in respect of which is dealt with by the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation, and

(ii)Estimates for Public Services within the aegis of that Department, as shall be referred to it by Dáil Éireann from time to time.

(b)For the purpose of its consideration of Bills under paragraph (1)(a)(i), the Select Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Order 78A(1), (2) and (3).

(c)For the avoidance of doubt, by virtue of his or her ex officio membership of the Select Committee in accordance with Standing Order 84(1), the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (or a Minister or Minister of State nominated in his or her stead) shall be entitled to vote.

(2)(a)The Select Committee shall be joined with a Select Committee to be appointed by Seanad Éireann to form the Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation to consider-

(i)such public affairs administered by the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation as it may select, including bodies under the aegis of that Department in respect of Government policy,

(ii)such matters of policy for which the Minister in charge of that Department is officially responsible as it may select,

(iii)the strategy statement laid before each House of the Oireachtas by the Minister in charge of that Department pursuant to section 5(2) of the Public Service Management Act, 1997, and shall be authorised for the purposes of section 10 of that Act, and

(iv)such other matters as may be jointly referred to it from time to time by both Houses of the Oireachtas, and shall report thereon to both Houses of the Oireachtas.

(b)The quorum of the Joint Committee shall be 5, of whom at least 1 shall be a member of Dáil Éireann and 1 a member of Seanad Éireann.

(c)The Joint Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Order 78A(1) to (9) inclusive.

(3)The Chairman of the Joint Committee, who shall be a member of Dáil Éireann, shall also be Chairman of the Select Committee.

Seanad Éireann

Order of 26 November, 1997:

(1) (a)That a Select Committee consisting of 5 members of Seanad Éireann shall be appointed to be joined with a Select Committee of Dáil Éireann to form the Joint Committee on Tourism, Sport and Recreation, to consider-

(i)such public affairs administered by the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation as it may select, including bodies under the aegis of that Department in respect of Government policy,

(ii)such matters of policy for which the Minister in charge of that Department is officially responsible as it may select,

(iii)the strategy statement laid before each House of the Oireachtas by the Minister in charge of that Department pursuant to section 5(2) of the Public Service Management Act, 1997, and shall be authorised for the purposes of section 10 of that Act, and

(iv)such other matters as may be jointly referred to it from time to time by both Houses of the Oireachtas, and shall report thereon to both Houses of the Oireachtas.

(b)The quorum of the Joint Committee shall be 5, of whom at least 1 shall be a member of Dáil Éireann and 1 a member of Seanad Éireann.

(c)The Joint Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Order 62(A) (1) to (9) inclusive.

(3)The Chairman of the Joint Committee shall be a member of Dáil Éireann.

—SéamusÓ Braonáin, Aire Stáit ag Roinn an Taoisigh.

Further Powers Accorded

In addition to existing functions and powers of the Committee, further powers were accorded to the Committee by a resolution of Dáil Éireann of 2 July 1999 to amend Standing Order 78A of Dáil Standing Orders, enabling the Committee to ‘consider and report to Dáil Éireann on such proposals for EU Legislation as may be referred to it from time to time by any Committee established by Dáil Éireann (whether acting jointly with the Seanad or otherwise) to consider such proposals and upon which has been conferred the power to refer such proposals to another Select Committee’. A corresponding provision was made by way of amendment to Standing Order 65 of Standing Orders of Seanad Éireann on 30 June 1999.

APPENDIX 2

List of Members

Note: Deputy Pat Rabbitte replaced by Deputy Breeda Moynihan-Cronin by order of the Dáil on 24th February, 1999.

Senator Paddy McGowan was a Member of this Committee until his death on 3 October, 1999.

Senator Donie Cassidy was appointed in place of Senator Paddy McGowan on 10 November, 1999.

Deputy Michael Ferris was Chairman of this Committee until his death on 20 March, 2000.

Deputy Sean Ryan was appointed in place of Deputy Michael Ferris on 11 April 2000.

Deputy Breeda Moynihan Cronin was appointed chairperson on 13 April 2000.

Deputy Michael Finucane was appointed in place of Deputy Denis Naughten on 29 June 2000.

Deputy John Perry was appointed in place of Deputy B illy Timmins on 29 June 2000.

Deputy Jimmy Deenihan was appointed in place of Deputy Michael Finucane on 7/11/2000

Deputy David Stanton was appointed in place of Deputy Gerry Reynolds on 7/11/2000

APPENDIX 3

Meetings of the Joint Committee

APPENDIX 4

Meetings of the Dáil Select Committee

APPENDIX 5

Attendance at Meetings of the Joint Committee

(* Indicates Member was represented by a substitute, and □ indicates Member did not attend because s/he was not a Member of the Joint Committee at that time.)

Attendance at Meetings of the Joint Committee – continued.

(* Indicates Member was represented by a substitute, and □ indicates Member did not attend because s/he was not a Member of the Joint Committee at that time.)

APPENDIX 6

Attendance at Meetings of the Dáil Select Committee

(* Indicates Member was represented by a substitute, and □ indicates Member did not attend because s/he was not a Member of the Joint Committee at that time.)

APPENDIX 7

Minutes of proceedings of the Joint Committee

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 2nd December, 1999

1.The Joint Committee met at 12.05p.m. in Room G2, Kildare House, on Thursday, 2nd December, 1999.

2.Attendance

Deputies Michael Ferris (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Liam Aylward, Matt Brennan, MJ Cosgrave, Mary Coughlan, Breeda Moynihan Cronin, Brendan Kenneally,Denis Naughten, and Billy Timmins, and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Donie Cassidy and Pat Moylan, Tony Kett and Willie Farrell.

3.Minutes

The minutes of the last meeting were agreed and signed by the Chairman.

4.Correspondence

(i)Bord Fáilte Marketing plan for 2000

Members expressed concern at the scheduling of the launch in Dublin of Bord Failte’s marketing plan on a Monday, which would effectively prevent most Members from attending. It was agreed to write to Bord Fáilte outlining the concerns of the Committee in this regard.

(ii)Report on regional structures

Deputy Timmins raised the ongoing consultants’ report being carried out by Bord Fáilte in relation to the regional tourism structures. It was agreed to write to Bord Fáilte seeking a copy of the Report.

5.Visit to World Travel Market in November, 1999

The Committee noted the Report by the Vice Chairperson on behalf of the delegation that visitted the World Travel Market in London.

6.Presentation by the Town and Country Homes Association

The Chairman welcomed the delegation from the Association. They made a presentation on the current issues facing their Association, in particular the speculation regarding the imposition of rates on their accomadation, and the presence of a large number of unapproved bed and breakfasts.

A question and answers session followed with members of the Committee

+the imbalance in the spread of tourism between the regions

+the possible duplication in regional tourism structures

+the differences between being registered, approved and listed

+the need for a level playing pitch between approved, listed accomadation and unapproved bed and breakfasts.

7.Reported difficulties between OCI and new athletics body

Deputy Allen raised serious concern in relation the reported public row between the Olympic Council of Ireland and the new athletics body, and the trouble this could cause for Irish athletes preparing for the 2000 Olympics. The Committee to write to the Minister expressing its serious concerns in relation to the matter and its possible implications.

8Future work items

The Committee discussed items for possible inclusion in the New Year. These included the ongoing drugs issue, developing links with counterpart bodies in the new NI Assembly and outside, and the hosting of the Special Olympics.

It was agreed to appoint rapporteurs in relation the drugs issue (Deputy Bernard Allen) and the consideration of mutual matters of concern with the NI Assembly and others (to be nominated).

9.Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 12.11pm, sine die.

Michael Ferris, TD

Committee Chairman

January, 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 27th January, 2000

1.The Joint Committee met at 11.15p.m. in Room G5, Kildare House. on Thursday, 27th January, 2000.

2.Attendance

Deputies Michael Ferris (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Matt Brennan, MJ Cosgrave, Mary Coughlan, Breeda Moynihan Cronin, John Moloney, Denis Naughten, Gerard Reynolds, and Billy Timmins, and Senators Emie Caffrey, Donie Cassidy, Fintan Coogan, Pat Moylan, and Tony Kett.

3.Minutes

The minutes of the last meeting were agreed and signed by the Chairman.

4.Correspondence

(i)Bord Failte Marketing Plan for 2000

An explanatory letter re the scheduling of the launch in Dublin of Bord Failte’s marketing plan on a Monday was received. The Chairman informed the Committee that he had attended the launch in his own region and Members of the Committee would be invited to attend the launches in their own regions. The Chairman also informed the Committee that Bord Failte had agreed to make a full presentation to the Committee - date to be arranged.

(ii)Irish Sports Council

A letter from the Sports Council stating that the Community Games may be facilitated in the National Sports Stadium was noted by the Committee.

(iii)Row between OCI and Athletics Association of Ireland

In response to serious concerns, the Committee wrote to the Minister expressing its concerns at the reported row between the OCI and the AAI and the letter has been noted by the Minister.

5.Appointment of new Minister of State at the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation

The Committee welcomed the appointment of Mr. Eoin Ryan T.D., as Minister of State at the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation. The Committee also thanked the outgoing Minister of State, Mr. Chris Flood T.D. for his co-operation with the Committee.

6.Visit to Cyprus

An explanatory note re visit to Cyprus setting out the reason for the visit, the link with the work programme, the cost per Member, various flights options and costs and the total cost of the trip was circulated to Members was agreed by the Committee.

7.Annual Report for 1998-1999

The draft annual report for 1998/99, which had been circulated to the Members, was agreed by the Committee for laying before the Houses.

8.Presentation by the Irish Sports Council

The Chairman welcomed Mr. John Treacy, Chief Executive of the Irish Sports Council. Mr. Treacy made a presentation on the developments since the statutory formation of the Council, and the introduction of a drug testing programme in Irish sport.

A question and answers session followed with members of the Committee including:

•the viability of the National Sports Stadium

•the way in which the drug testing programme will be handled

•the revised code of ethics.

The Committee requested that a copy of the revised code of ethics be forwarded when they are published.

9.Working Group of Committee Chairman

The Committee agreed that Deputy Denis Naughten would represent the Chairman at the Working Group of Committee Chairman at their meeting on Tuesday 1 February, 2000

10.Adiournment

The meeting was adjourned at 12.40pm, until 11 a.m. on Thursday 10 February 2000..

Michael Ferris, T.D.,

Chairman

February 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 10th February, 2000

1.The Joint Committee met at 11.02a.m. in Room G2, Kildare House, on Thursday, 10th February, 2000.

2.Attendance

Deputies Michael Ferris (in the Chair), Liam Aylward, Matt Brennan, MJ Cosgrave, Mary Coughlan, Breeda Moynihan Cronin, Brendan Kenneally and Gerry Reynolds, and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Pat Moylan and Tony Kett.

3.Minutes

The minutes of the last meeting were agreed and signed by the Chairman. It was agreed to hold the rest of the meeting in private session.

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 11.35am, sine die.

Michael Ferris, TD

Committee Chairman

March 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 9 March 2000

1.The Joint Committee met at 11.20 a.m. in Room G5, Kildare House, on Thursday, 9th March, 2000, in private session.

2.Attendance

Deputies Michael Ferris (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Liam Aylward, Matt Brennan, M J Cosgrave, Mary Coughlan, Billy Kelleher, Breeda Moynihan-Cronin, Denis Naughten, Gerry Reynolds, Billy Timmins and Senators Fintan Coogan, Pat Moylan and Rory Kiely (in substitution for Donie Cassidy).

The meeting went into public session at 11.30 a.m.

4.Presentation by Manor House Hotels / CMV

There followed a presentation by Mr. Brian Britton of Manor House Hotels in which he outlined the development of the group, their main activities and objectives. In his presentation he:-

•stressed the importance of self-regulation in the effort to attain and sustain high standards;

•pointed out the necessity to market the island of Ireland as a whole;

•welcomed the commitment of the Minister and the Government to providing overseas marketing assistance;

•spoke of the intention to target and develop niche markets, e.g. golf, angling, walking, surfing, gourmet food etc.

•outlined the investment the group were making in technology and

•expressed his belief that cross-border co-operation of tourism bodies is the way forward.

A question and answer session followed in which the following issues were addressed:-

▸self-regulation;

▸tourist “gateways”

▸niche marketing;

▸the fall-off in tourist numbers from Britain and Europe;

▸access to the regions;

▸infrastructure problems;

▸staff shortages in the industry;

▸the seasonality of the industry;

▸leisure complexes in hotels;

▸the suggestion that Local Authorities should be involved in regulation.

5.Any Other Business

The Committee agreed in principle to accept the responsibility of investigating the proposals for a National Stadium. The Clerk was requested to prepare a document outlining the support available to the Committee vis-à-vis an investigation.

The Committee went into private session at 12.52 p.m.

Adjournment

The Joint Committee adjourned at 12.54p.m. sine die.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin, T.D.,

Chairperson.

October, 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 13 April 2000

1.The Joint Committee met at 11.07 a.m. in Room G24, Kildare House, on Thursday, 13th April, 2000.

2.Attendance

Deputies Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Liam Aylward, Matt Brennan, Michael Joe Cosgrave, Mary Coughlan, Sean Ryan, Billy Kelleher, Brendan Kenneally, John Moloney, Denis Naughten, Gerry Reynolds and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Fintan Coogan, Pat Moylan and Donie Cassidy.

3.Election of the Chairperson.

At the commencement of the meeting the Clerk to the Committee took the Chair and invited nominations for the position of Chairperson. Breeda Moynihan-Cronin was nominated by Brendan Kenneally. There being no further nominations the question that Deputy Breeda Moynihan-Cronin be elected Chairperson was put. The question was agreed. The Clerk then invited the Chairperson to take the Chair.

The Chairperson thanked the Members for their support and she welcomed Deputy Sean Ryan who had been appointed to the Committee.

4.Expressions of Sympathy

The Chairperson led the expressions of Sympathy to the family of the former Chairman, Mr. Michael Ferris. There followed expressions of sympathy from each of the Members present. It was agreed that the Clerk should send a letter of sympathy to Mrs. Ellen Ferris.

Following the expressions of sympathy the Joint Committee agreed to adjourn to 20 April 2000 as a mark of respect.

5.Adjournment

The Joint Committee adjourned at 11.29a.m.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin, T.D.,

Chairperson.

April, 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 20 April 2000

1.The Joint Committee met at 11.53 a.m. in Room G2, Kildare House, on Thursday, 20th April, 2000.

2.Attendance

Deputies Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Liam Aylward, Michael Joe Cosgrave, Brendan Kenneally, Denis Naughten, Michael O’Kennedy, Gerry Reynolds, Billy Timmins and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Fintan Coogan, Tony Kett and Pat Moylan.

Apologies were received from Matt Brennan and John Moloney.

3.Presentation by Planet. - Presentation by Planet (the Network of Area-based Partnerships)

Ms Hilary Curley (Co-ordinator), Mr Tom O Donnell (Chairperson of the Paul Partnership in Limerick), Mr Willy Gleeson (Chairperson of County Wexford Partnership) and Pat Leogue, (Chairman of PLANET) attended before the Committee to make a presentation on their involvement in the three social inclusion measures: Community development; Services to unemployed; youth services.

In addition to this the presentations addressed the interim funding of the partnerships and the preparation of the partnerships’ strategic plans.

A question and answer session followed with Members which included

▸the role of Government Departments and in particular the Department of Justice Equality and Law Reform in the provision of youth services.

▸the difficulty in tackling rural decline and poverty due to the wider geographic spread involved

▸the plans to provide assistance to small holders who need to diversify to remain on the land

▸the particular difficulties associated with urban areas, including limited action on unemployment in blackspots; early school leaving; cycle of unemployment; substance abuse.

▸the need to co-ordinate and streamline proposals with other initiatives such as LEADER, county enterprise.

Following the questions and answer session the Chairperson thanked Ms. Curley, Mr O’Donnell, Mr. Gleeson and Mr. Leogue for their contribution and wished them well for the coming year.

4.Any other business.

1.Work programme.

The Chairperson proposed that the Clerk should write to each Member of the Committee seeking proposals for topics for discussion for future meetings. The proposal was agreed. In addition to this the Chairperson proposed that the Committee should meet with the representatives of Hillwalkers; the organising body of the Special Olympics and the representative body of anglers. This proposal was also agreed.

(the meeting went into private session)

5.Adjournment

The Joint Committee adjourned at 12.46 p.m.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin, T.D.,

Chairperson.

May 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 11 May 2000

1.The Joint Committee met at 11.35 a.m. in Room G2, Kildare House, on Thursday, 11th May, 2000.

2.Attendance

Deputies Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Liam Aylward, Matt Brennan, Mary Coughlan, John Moloney, Michael O’Kennedy, Sean Ryan, Billy Timmins and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Fintan Coogan, Tony Kett and Pat Moylan.

3.Work Programme for the Joint Committee.

The Chairperson advised that the Clerk to the Committee had circulated a letter to Members of the Joint Committee seeking proposals for future meetings. She asked if Members could respond as soon as possible so that a comprehensive work programme could be prepared.

Several proposals were made from the floor, including - Regional tourism (including agri-tourism); the Tourism role or function of the North South bodies; the role of Local Government in Tourism; funding for tourism initiatives; co-ordination of tourist bodies; sustainable tourism.

The question of the National Sports Stadium was already before the Committee. The Clerk circulated a report outlining his advice on the way in which the Committee should deal with this matter. The brief set out the restrictions placed on this Committee by virtue of the fact that it does not have the power in it’s Orders of Reference to call for persons, papers or records and accordingly does not have the powers specified by the THE COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS (COMPELLABILITY, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF WITNESSES) ACT, 1997, specifically to compel the attendance and cooperation of witnesses and the furnishing of documents.

It was agreed to defer further consideration of this question until Members had the chance to consider the report fully.

4.Rapporteur proposals

The Chairperson advised that the Committee had a budget of £8,500 from which it could support rapporteur projects. She advised that an amount of £5,000 was already committed to Deputy Allen in respect of his project on Crime and Drugs in Sport which had been agreed earlier in the year.

It was agreed that £3,000 be allocated to Senator Coogan to undertake a review of Sustainable Tourism.

5.Any Other Business

In relation to the ongoing dispute between the Olympic Council of Ireland and the Athletic Association of Ireland the Committee agreed a motion calling on the parties to resolve the dispute and supporting the Minister’s efforts in bringing about a resolution. (the text of the motion is a appendix 1.). It was also agreed that the motion should be sent to each of the parties and to the Minister.

6.Adjournment

The Joint Committee adjourned at 12.15 p.m. until 11 am on Thursday 1 June 2000.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin, T.D.,

Chairperson.

June 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 29 June 2000

1.The Joint Committee met at 11.10 a.m. in Room G5, Kildare House, on Thursday, 29th June, 2000

2.Attendance

Deputies Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Liam Aylward, Matt Brennan, Michael Joe Cosgrave, Mary Coughlan, Billy Kelleher, Brendan Kenneally, Billy Timmins, Gerry Reynolds and Senators Fintan Coogan and Pat Moylan.

Apologies were received from Deputy John Moloney.

3.Report on the visit to Rio de Janeiro

The Committee adopted the Report and it was agreed to lay it before the Houses.

The Chairperson proposed, arising from a meeting, while in Rio de Janeiro, with Dr. D.J. de Villiers, Deputy Secretary-General of the World Tourism Organisation, that the Committee should send a letter to the Minister suggesting he pursue Irish membership. This was agreed.

(the meeting went into private session - suspended at 11.19 a.m. and resumed, in Public session at 12.16 p.m.)

▸Report on The Role of Sport & Recreation as a Preventative Element in the Fight against Crime and Drugs amongst Young People’ presented by Deputy Bernard Allen, rapporteur.

Deputy Allen made a presentation of the report which was then adopted by the Committee. It was agreed to lay the report before the Houses.

▸Proposals for a National Stadium

At an earlier meeting of the Joint Committee it had been agreed that the Committee should investigate the proposals to establish a National Sports Stadium. It was agreed that consideration of an enquiry should be postponed until the Committee had the opportunity to further pursue the matter with the Minister. Deputy Allen referred to the promise made by the Minister at the meeting of the Select Committee, on 15 June 2000, to return to the Committee to discuss the issue of the Drugs Testing Programme. He proposed that the Minister should be invited to attend a meeting to discuss both issues. It was further proposed that the Office of Public Works and the Co-ordinating Group in the Department of An Taoiseach with responsibility for the National Stadium should also be invited.

The Chairperson informed the Committee that Special Olympics Ireland had been invited to attend the meeting of 13/7/2000 and proposed that an invitation should issue to the Office of Public Works to attend on that day also. The proposal was agreed. In addition to this the Chairperson proposed that an invitation should issue to the Co-ordinating Group in the Department of An Taoiseach and to the Minister to attend the meeting of 14/9/2000. This proposal was also agreed.

▸Correspondence.

The Committee noted receipt of letters from the Athletics Association of Ireland and the Office of the Minister in response to their letter of 25 May 2000.

The Committee noted with satisfaction the resolution of the dispute between the Athletics Association of Ireland and the Olympic Council of Ireland and expressed their good wishes to all of the Irish athletes who will be taking part in the Sydney Olympics.

The Joint Committee adjourned at 12.50 p.m. until 12 noon on Thursday 13 July 2000.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin, T.D.,

Chairperson.

July 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 13 July 2000

1.The Joint Committee met at 12.06 p.m. in Room G2, Kildare House, on Thursday, 13th July, 2000.

2.Attendance

Deputies Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (in the Chair), Theresa Ahearn *, Liam Aylward, Matt Brennan, Mary Coughlan, Brendan Kenneally, Martin Brady *, Michael Finucane, Michael O’Kennedy, Gerry Reynolds, Seán Ryan and Senators Paddy Burke *, Ernie Caffrey, Jarlath McDonagh * and Pat Moylan.

3.Minutes of previous meeting

The minutes of the meeting of 29th June 2000 were agreed by the Committee and signed by the Cathaoirleach.

4.Presentation by Special Olympics Ireland.

Presentation by Special Olympics Ireland and Special Olympics World Summer Games 2003 (the committee responsible for organising the hosting of the Special Olympics in Ireland in 2003).

Mr. Pat Costello, (National Director, Special Olympics Ireland) and Ms. Mary Davis, (Chief Operating Officer, Special Olympics World Summer Games 2003) attended before the Committee to make a presentation on their involvement in the hosting of the Special Olympics in Ireland in 2003.

The presentation addressed the history and background of the Special Olympics movement; the ethos of the movement; funding; the structure of the organisation and upcoming sporting events. In outlining the detailed plans for hosting the Special Olympics World Summer Games in 2003 the following points were highlighted, recruitment of volunteers; an information programme in schools; accomodation; sports venues and funding.

A question and answer session followed with Members which included

▸the necessity to ensure that the Special Olympics is of interest to everybody, not just those taking part with their families and friends;

▸the possible problems arising from language barriers, particularly in relation to host families;

▸a suggestion that Local Authorities might consider including a contribution to the World Summer Games in their estimates;

▸regional involvement;

▸the role of the Special Olympics global messengers.

Following the questions and answer session the Cathaoirleach thanked Ms. Davis and Mr. Costello for their contribution, assured them of the support of the Joint Committee, and wished them well in their endeavours.

5.Proposals for the development of a National Sports Stadium

It was proposed by the Cathaoirleach and agreed by the committee that invitations should issue to Mr Donagh Morgan of the Department of an Taoiseach, who was the principal on the Stadium Steering Committee and Mr Paddy Teahon, the executive chairperson of the board of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Ltd.

6.The Regional Tourism Authorities report

As the report had only been received the previous day, discussion of the report was postponed until the members had had an opportunity to read it.

(the meeting went into private session at 1.05 p.m.)

9.Adjournment

The Joint Committee adjourned at 1.15 p.m.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin, T.D.,

Cathaoirleach.

September 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 14 September 2000

The minutes of the meeting of 13 July 2000 were agreed and signed by the Cathaoirleach.

Attendance

Deputies Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Cecelia Keaveney*, Matt Brennan, Michael J Cosgrave, Mary Coughlan, John Ellis*, Brendan Kenneally, John Moloney, Michael Finucane, Michael O’Kennedy, John Perry, Gerry Reynolds, Seán Ryan and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Fintan Coogan, Paul Coughlan*, Willie Farrell*, and Pat Moylan.

Deputies Cecilia Keaveney and John Ellis were substituting for Deputies Liam Aylward and Billy Kelleher. Senators Paul Coughlan and Willie Farrell were substituting for Senators Fintan Coogan and Tony Kett.

Order of Business

Following a request received from the Minister’s office that the Minister and his officials should be present for the duration of the committee meeting, it was agreed that the Minister would make an introductory statement on the National Stadium issue and then introduce Mr Paddy Teahon of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Ltd. and Mr Donagh Morgan of the Department of the Taoiseach. Subsequently the Minister would make a statement on the anti-doping issue and then introduce Mr. John Treacy, of the Irish Sports Council. The Minister would make himself available for comment for the duration of the meeting.

Presentation on the National Sports Stadium.

Following an opening statement by the Minister, Mr Paddy Teahon of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Ltd. made a presentation on the National Sports Stadium. This was followed by a question and answer session in which the following issues were addressed:- the development of Eircom Park; the viability of the national stadium (including support for the Stadium from the FAI, the GAA and the IRFU); additional costs, (including infrastructural costs, the relocation of the National Laboratory, whether VAT was included in the estimated cost, marketing costs, operational costs and whether a Cost Benefit Analysis had been completed); the inclusion of a running track at the stadium; the question of where the responsibility for the stadium rests; the Snow Report; the tendering process for the component parts of the Campus; the feasability study; facilities for the local community; regional investment requirements; using part of the Abbotstown site for commercial purposes; whether the aquatic and leisure centre will be ready in time for the Special Olympics.

Presentation on the Anti-doping issue

Following an opening statement by the Minister, Mr John Treacy of the National Sports Council made a presentation on the anti-doping issue.

This was followed by a question and answer session in which the following issues were addressed:- the national drug testing programme; sampling and the analysis of the samples; the concerns of sports federations in relation to their responsibility for imposing sanctions; the issue of indemnification by the Irish Sports Council; reports of food supplements being taken in schools; the introduction of blood testing.

Adjournment

The Joint Committee adjourned at 4.15 p.m. sine die.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin T.D.,

Cathaoirleach

October 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 5 October 2000

1.Attendance

Deputies Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Liam Aylward, Matt Brennan, Michael J Cosgrave, Mary Coughlan, Billy Kelleher, Brendan Kenneally, John Perry and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Fintan Coogan and Pat Moylan.

2.Minutes

The minutes of the meetings of 14 September 2000 and 9 March 2000 were agreed and were signed by the Cathaoirleach.

Arising from the Minutes of 14 September 2000, Deputy Allen enquired if any correspondence had been received from Mr. Paddy Teahon of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Ltd. relating to questions raised at that meeting. The Cathaoirleach had received no correspondence and it was agreed that the Clerk would write to Mr Teahon, outlining the questions to which answers were outstanding.

3.Regional Tourism Authorities Report

It was agreed that consideration of the report would be postponed until the next meeting and that Mr. Dulley of Bórd Fáilte would be invited to attend the meeting to discuss the Report.

4.Correspondence

Receipt of the following items of correspondence was noted:

1.Letter from Bórd Fáilte re changing management structure.

2.Letter from the Northern Ireland Assembly Committee Clerk.

3.Letter from the Minister with reference to Irish membership of the WTO

5.Expressions of Sympathy

The Cathaoirleach led the expressions of Sympathy to the family of the late Deputy Theresa Ahearn.

6.Any Other Business

Killarney

The Cathaoirleach noted that the visit to Killarney by a delegation of the committee had been cancelled due to the death of Deputy Ahearn and expressed the opinion that reorganisation of the visit would have to be postponed until the next recess.

Olympic Games

Congratulations were expressed in particular to Sonia O’sullivan and to all the other Irish athletes who participated in the Olympic Games in Sydney. The Committee expressed its disapproval of remarks made regarding “second class athletes” and a discussion ensued in which the following points were raised: the need for solidarity among sporting organisations preparing athletes for major events (including the need for one voice speaking for the athletes preparing for Athens 2004); national vs. local facilities (including the need to encourage local talent and to nurture the community aspect of sport); the need for a review of how available resources are spent; the feasibility of using a mentor system; the importance of participation vs. winning; the provision of training facilities; the different management styles of the OCI and Special Olympics Ireland.

It was suggested that the Committee should invite all of the sporting organisations involved in preparing for the games in Sydney to meet the Committee, along with some of the athletes, in order to discuss what happened. An alternative suggestion was to appoint a rapporteur. It was finally decided that an informal group of Committee Members would discuss the best way to approach the investigation and would return to the Joint Committee with proposals.

7.Paralympics

The Cathaoirleach expressed the good wishes of the Committee to all of the Irish athletes who will be taking part in the Paralympics in Sydney.

8.Adjournment

The Joint Committee adjourned at 12.45 p.m. until Thursday 19 October 2000.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin T.D.,

Cathaoirleach

October 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 16 November 2000

The meeting commenced at 11.14 a.m.

1.Attendance

Deputies Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Liam Aylward, Michael J Cosgrave, Brendan Kenneally, John Perry, David Stanton and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Fintan Coogan and Tony Kett.

2.Minutes

The minutes of the meetings of 5 October 2000 were agreed and were signed by the Cathaoirleach.

3.Correspondence

Receipt of the following items of correspondence was noted:

1.Letters from the Committee Clerk of the Northern Ireland Assembly re meeting on 14 December 2000. It was agreed that the Committee would meet with the NIA Committee on Culture Arts and Leisure on that day and that the Cathaoirleach would host a lunch for the Joint Committee and the NIA Committee delegation.

2.Letter from Campus & Stadium Ireland Development Ltd. in response to questions posed. There was some discussion of the answers given in the letter and Members expressed their dissatisfaction with them. Deputy Allen in particular said that some of his major concerns about the stadium had not been answered.

3.Letter from Olympic Council of Ireland, declining an invitation to attend a meeting. Members expressed their complete dissatisfaction with the response to their invitation and it was agreed that a letter should issue to Mr. Pat Hickey of the Olympic Council, apprising him of their opinion and strongly urging on him the necessity to attend a meeting.

4.Letter form the Car Rental Council of Ireland re warning device for tourist drivers. Noted.

5.Letter from CERT confirming attendance at the meeting of 30 November 2000. Noted. However, it was agreed that CERT should be asked, if possible, to defer their attendance (with apologies for any inconvenience caused) until 14 December, 2000 as the Committeee had been requested by the Minister’s office, to schedule a Select Committee meeting on 30 November 2000 to consider Supplementary Estimates.

6.Letter from Deputy Jim Mitchell, Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, dated 14 November, requesting that other Committees would cancel meetings on the week commencing 27th November as the PAC Sub Committee wished to meet that week. Noted. However, with reference to the decision made to schedule a Select Committee meeting on 30 November 2000 it was agreed that a letter should issue to Deputy Mitchell explaining the necessity of dealing with the Estimates and regretfully refusing his request.

4.Regional Tourism Authorities Report

Discussions with Mr. John Dulley, Chief Executive, Bord Fáilte.

Mr John Dulley, Chief Executive; Mr Niall Reddy and Mr Donal Guilfoyle attended before the Committee to make a presentation on the Regional Tourism Authorities Report.

The presentation first addressed the background, including the formation of the RTAs, Regional Boundaries, County Tourism Committees and funding. It then went on to address the Review of the RTAs by Fitzpatrick Associates, including the Commissioning of the Review, the Terms of Reference, the key areas to be addressed, and the findings. Lastly, Mr Dulley addressed the process followed by Bord Fáilte upon completion of the Review.

There followed a question and answer session with the Members.

The meeting went into private session at 1.14 p.m.

The Joint Committee adjourned at 1.17 p.m. sine die.

Mary Coughlan T.D.,

Leas-Chathaoirleach

December 2000

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM SPORT AND RECREATION

Minutes of meeting of 14 December 2000

The meeting commenced at 10.08 a.m.

Attendance

Deputies Mary Coughlan (in the Chair), Bernard Allen, Matt Brennan, Michael J Cosgrave, Jimmy Deenihan, Billy Kelleher, Brendan Kenneally, John Moloney, John Perry, David Stanton and Senators Ernie Caffrey, Fintan Coogan and Pat Moylan.

The meeting went into private session at 10.09 a.m. and then into Public Session again at 10.38 a.m.

CERT -Discussions with Mr. Eamonn McKeon, Chairman, CERT.

Mr Eamonn McKeon, Mr Shaun Quinn, Chief Executive; Mr Tony Lenehan and Ms Anna Carroll attended before the Committee to make a presentation on CERT.

Copies of the Annual Report and the Strategy Statement of CERT, and a study on best practise in hospitality were made available to the Committee in advance of the meeting.

Mr McKeon made an opening statement and there then followed a question and answer session with the Members. Among the issues addressed were, an initiative on re-training of the long-term unemployed and women returning to the workforce; language and communication skills, in particular in relation to foreign nationals in the workforce; hotel management as a career and any links between CERT and the Irish Hotels Federation; training of international staff; links between CERT and the Dept of Justice in relation to the status of staff; the importance of giving something in return to foreign staff and the necessity to be vigilant to ensure that there is no exploitation of foreign employees; staff turnover; training facilities; career guidance; liaison with Bord Fáilte; the viability of price as a strategy; accommodation; food safety and hygiene.

The meeting suspended at 11.41 a.m. and resumed in Public Session at 11.50 a.m.

Exchange of views with the Northern Ireland Assembly Committee on Culture, Art and Leisure.

A delegation of the NIA Committee attended the meeting for an exchange of views on issues of mutual interest. The delegation comprised Mr Eamon O’Neill, MLA, (SDLP), Chairman; Mr Jim Wilson, MLA, (Chief Whip UUP); Mr Ian Adamson, MLA, (UUP); Mr Ivan Davis, MLA, (UUP); Mr Kieran McCarthy, MLA, (Alliance); Mr Eugene McMenamin, MLA, (SDLP) and Mr Barry McElduff, MLA, (SF).

The Leas-Chathaoirleach welcomed the delegation and made some introductory remarks on the work of the Joint Committee. She then invited Mr O’Neill to make some remarks. There followed a discussion among the members of both committees. Some of the issues raised were, Inland Fisheries and Angling; Water quality; the Odyssey stadium in Belfast; North-South cooperation and the fact that this is not a new departure but has been going on in the background, especially in the area of sports, even during the “Troubles” drugs in sport and among the youth; the promotion of international sporting events; the use of sport as a key in community regeneration.

The meeting suspended at 12.45 p.m. to allow Members to attend a vote in Dáil Éireann, and resumed at 1.01 p.m.

An invitation was extended by the Chairman of the NIA Committee for the Joint Committee to visit Stormont in 2001, and it was agreed that the exchange of views had been most useful to both Committees.

Adjournment

The Joint Committee adjourned at 1.15 p.m. sine die.

Breeda Moynihan-Cronin T.D.,

Cathaoirleach

January 2001

APPENDIX 8

Transcript of the Meeting of the Joint Committee, 14 September 2000.

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT AND RECREATION

Déardaoin, 14 Mean Fómhair 2000

Thursday, 14 September 2000

The Joint Committee met at 12.08 p.m.

Members Present:

Deputy B. Moynihan-Cronin in the chair

Presentation on National Stadium and Anti-doping Programme

Chairman: The Minister appeared before the Committee on 15 June concerning the Estimates. A number of issues arose at that meeting which could not be dealt with because three votes were called. The Minister said he would return to deal with those issues. I propose that the Minister makes an introductory statement on the national stadium. I will then introduce Paddy Teahon of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Limited and Donagh Morgan of the Department of the Taoiseach. The Minister is willing to answer questions from members. The Minister will then make a statement on anti-doping for which we will also be joined by John Treacy.

I welcome the Minister, Deputy McDaid. I also welcome Paddy Teahon of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Limited, Donagh Morgan, Department of the Taoiseach, John Treacy, Irish Sports Council and Conor Haugh, assistant secretary, Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation. I call on the Minister to make an opening statement on the national stadium.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I will make a short statement, chairman. I thank the chairman and members of the Joint Committee for their invitation to return and address some issues I was unable to deal with last June due to time constraints on the debate on the Department’s Estimates for 2000. I welcome the opportunity to address any further issues which the Committee may have on the anti-doping programme and the national stadium.

As the members of the Committee are aware, I made the combating of drug taking in sport a priority on my appointment as Minister. It is anathema to me and to all right thinking people that sport, which is such a valuable and valued aspect of all our lives, can be infiltrated and taken over by those who see sporting competition in terms of a contest between those who manufacture performance enhancing drugs and those who test for them.

Deputy Allen: I understood the agreed procedure for this meeting was that the Minister would make an opening statement on the national stadium followed by questions and discussion on that topic and that the issue of drug taking in sport would then be discussed.

Chairman: Yes, they are two separate issues.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Rather than make two statements, this very short statement can address both together.

Deputy Allen: That is not the procedure agreed.

Deputy Kenneally: What difference does it make?

Chairman: We will deal with the national stadium issue separately.

Deputy Allen: We agreed on a procedure two minutes ago. We agreed we would deal with opening statements on the national stadium, then have questions and answers and subsequently hear a further statement from the Minister on drug testing followed by questions and answers on that question. These are two separate issues and they should not overlap or be confused. That is what we agreed.

Chairman: That was agreed before we came in.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Parallel with my determination that Irish sportsmen and sportswomen should be facilitated in performing to the best of their ability without the intervention of performance enhancing drugs is the Government’s commitment to Ireland having a world class facility providing the highest quality of services to the best international level for a wide variety of sports. At present, facilities in which we host our international sporting events are poor in comparison with those of our European neighbours and neither reflect nor project Ireland’s desired image of excellence.

With the decision to go ahead with Stadium and Sports Campus Ireland we are poised to have a state of the art stadium comparable with the best elsewhere and capable of accommodating a wide range of sporting and spectator events for the whole island. There is no doubt in my mind that a great stadium will contribute much to the national prestige and our sense of national pride and that the existence of a world class stadium will provide a basis for building on our national love of sport and our ability to compete with the best in the world. Members are aware that at a press conference on Monday last the Taoiseach gave a progress report on Sports Campus Ireland which outlined the great strides taken so that Stadium Ireland, which is much needed, can become a reality.

Also in attendance today are Mr. Paddy Teahon, chairman of the development company for the stadium, and Mr. Donagh Morgan from the Department of the Taoiseach, who are ready to update the Committee on the national stadium, to answer any questions Deputy Allen or other members of the Committee may wish to raise. I leave it to the chairman to decide how the discussion should proceed.

Chairman: We will deal with the national stadium issue first.

Deputy Coughlan: I suggest we get guidance. We may not have time to discuss the second issue. Could a time limit be placed on the first issue to be discussed?

Deputy Allen: I see no reference to time constraints in the agenda which was circulated. This project could cost up to £1 billion of taxpayers’ money. We should take as much time as we require to explore all the facts, which have not come to light.

Deputy M. Brennan: Where did Deputy Allen get the figure of £1 billion?

Chairman: Do members wish to put a time limit on our discussion of this matter? We will proceed with this discussion and if it appears that it will take two or three hours we will consider placing a time limit.

Deputy Allen: I regret the fact that the Taoiseach called a press conference last Monday just before the decision was taken by Dublin South County Council on the planning application for Eircom Park. The press conference was designed to undermine the deliberations of the local authority and of this Committee which had signalled its intention to examine the feasibility of the national stadium. The Taoiseach and the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation have failed to explain how a national stadium, originally announced at a cost of £280 million will now cost anything between £500 million and £700 million, and even more. I hope the major questions which have been submitted to the Minister as a result of our last meeting will be answered today.

It is incredible that the Department of Defence has decided to continue its opposition to the development of Eircom Park. This is regrettable because the resulting delays will escalate the construction costs of that stadium and threaten its viability. The appeal to An Bord Pleanála by the Department of Defence will be seen as another attempt by the Government to kill off the project, thereby making the construction of the national stadium more acceptable.

The Government is using the so-called contents of the Snow report, which it has refused to publish and regarding which requests made under the Freedom of Information Act have not been responded to, to block the Eircom project. The Snow report is a consultant’s report carried out on Baldonnel aerodrome which has been in the possession of the Government since early 1999 at the latest, and it has effectively been suppressed by the Government despite numerous requests in the Dáil and through freedom of information procedures. In the interest of transparency and openness the report should be published. Later I will ask who saw the report within Departments and outside and I ask for the publication of that report.

It is wrong for any Minister, Taoiseach or Department to attempt to interfere with an independent sport organisation which proposes to build a stadium without public funds. The FAI has been the subject of a concerted effort by the Government to undermine this project through leaks to the press and interviews with certain correspondents. What is being done to an independent sporting organisation is appalling. The FAI is being told that the Government knows what is best for it. This is being done because without the presence of the FAI the national stadium will be a white elephant. It will not have the involvement of the FAI or the GAA. Anyone who believes the GAA will use the national stadium for major events is living in cloud cuckoo land. The GAA is dependent on commercial interests who have invested in Croke Park. People who have invested in hospitality suites in Croke Park will expect all major events to be held there. The national stadium will not attract major events. The IRFU may or may not be persuaded to become involved. The other 70 federations, between them, could not fill the national stadium. What is the purpose of the national stadium? I think I know. If there is a secondary agenda, let it be out in the open and let us have a debate on it. I believe a group of individuals saw the prospect of a pan-European football league in which Ireland might participate or of which a participating club might see Dublin as a logical home. When these people examined the possibility of building their stadium to suit this possibility they saw it was too expensive. Therefore they sought to involve the Government in the project and use taxpayers’ money to build it. The stadium would become a white elephant and would become available at a reasonable cost for European football. I question the presence of people who are involved with Glasgow Celtic Football Club, like Mr. Walsh, on the feasibility group. I question the involvement of Mr. Desmond. If there is a secondary agenda, let us have it out in the open.

The codswallop of the last 12 months and the soft presentation of the project in the media is doing sport in Ireland a disservice and the taxpayer an even bigger disservice. Many words have been written about this matter in recent months, much of them uninformed. There is little media presence at this meeting, where questions must be answered and facts must emerge. I submitted a series of questions to the Committee last June. At the Minister’s request, I subsequently submitted them to him. Those questions, at least, must be answered.

The use of the Department of Defence to torpedo this project is sinister. If there is a report it should be debated openly. I have documentation which shows that the FAI asked all the relevant questions of the Department of Defence in June of this year. Prior to that the FAI asked the Department of Defence and the Air Corps to discuss matters which might be at issue. There is no evidence of any real co-operation from the Department. It is regrettable that an unpublished report is being used to delay and possibly kill a project, thereby conveniently making the national stadium project a very different proposal.

I wish to ask the Minister, Mr. Teahon and Mr. Morgan a series of questions.

Deputy S. Ryan:Will the Minister and his officials give members an up-to-date report on the national stadium proposals? I agree with my colleague, Deputy Rabbitte, in questioning the holding of the Taoiseach’s press conference on the day when the South Dublin County Council was to take a decision regarding a planning issue.

On a number of occasions I have stated that I am in favour or Eircom Park. The Taoiseach has given the impression that he has no difficulty with the FAI proceeding with its own project, but that he would prefer to see the association supporting the national stadium project. That also appears to be the Minister’s view. A national organisation representing clubs throughout the country has an aspiration to build a stadium of its own. In that context, we must examine the viability of the national stadium proposed by the Minister and the Taoiseach. That is why many questions must be posed regarding cost because questions are also being posed with regard to Eircom Park. What will become of the national stadium if the Eircom Park project goes ahead?

Representatives of the GAA can be brought into events to indicate that the GAA is in support of the national stadium. What confirmation has the Minister been given by the GAA that All Ireland football and hurling finals will be held in the national stadium, when the new Croke Park will hold 79,000 spectators. I do not object to the national stadium, which will provide a wide range of facilities, so long as it is viable and will not become a burden on the taxpayers and the FAI is allowed to process its application.

I am afraid there is another agenda. It appears to the ordinary soccer supporter that the friends of the Taoiseach within the FAI are endeavouring to undermine the Eircom Park project. This matter is inter-linked with the planning process. Representatives of the Department of Defence should be here this afternoon to answer questions which the FAI has been asking. Clarification has been sought as to how the issues which are of concern to the Department can be dealt with. Planning issues should be discussed openly, particularly when a Department is involved. The planning Department of Dublin South County Council has examined this proposal, has sought additional information and has decided to grant planning permission. It would be in no one’s interest to prolong the decision making process for another six or seven months, adding huge costs to the project. Let us make the decision. Let the FAI proceed with its project and, in that context, let us examine the viability of the national stadium project. In the context of this, I will have questions for the Minister when we receive an up to date report on the current status of the stadium.

Chairman: We will now take specific questions to the Minister.

Deputy S. Ryan: Can we get the updated report?

Chairman: The Minister may respond to that.

Deputy Finucane: Are we allowed to make a few points?

Chairman: I propose to take opening statements from one member of each party and then specific questions from any member.

Deputy Finucane: To be able to ask specific questions, one has to give a brief overview of one’s standpoint. I have recently been appointed spokesman on defence for my party. I am interested in the defence implications of this project, but I would like to expand on what I say. I will not take very long.

When this project was announced by the Taoiseach, there was widespread enthusiasm for it, and it was considered that Ireland was a mature enough country to attempt a project of this size. Regarding what Deputy Allen said earlier, the indications are now that the cost of it could run to between £500 million and £700 million. We all know that the costs of projects of this nature tend to escalate. Perhaps when he said originally that it would cost about £1 billion, he may not have been far off the mark. I would like people to consider what is happening in the UK with their massive millennium project, the Dome, which is draining exchequer and lottery funding in the UK and is turning out to be a white elephant. In the context of Eircom park and what is developing there, we should examine this project and ask whether it will turn out to be a white elephant. That is a very important consideration for us at this stage.

Although the money was in place, over a period there was a deliberate attempt to sabotage the FAI venture which would cost £65 million. Now the project has advanced and I compliment South Dublin Council on giving planning permission for the venture. However, there was a specific planning condition in it which has implications for the Department of Defence. Another aviation report must be produced on the concerns regarding Casement Aerodrome, which is four kilometres from the location of this project. Something else to be considered is the Dublin mountains which are not lit up. If the Taoiseach pilots a project of this nature, it is understandable that all his Ministers will support it and sing from the same hymn sheet, but is the Department of Defence aching in its own interests regarding the training flight paths of various recruits in Casement Aerodrome? It is significant that most of the events in Eircom park will probably be held at night and will not be an interference. Those involved in Eircom park have been shabbily treated. Everyone talks at ministerial level about openness, transparency and accountability. On 30 September 1999, Eircom officials met the Minister for Defence and a senior official from his Department. At that meeting, it was indicated that if Eircom would defer its proposal for two weeks at least, the Department would return with information to it. The FAI had to write to the Department nine months later because it had not been contacted. That was not an example of openness, accountability and transparency, it was just a delay, an obstructionist tactic used deliberately against those involved in Eircom park.

Two independent aviation reports have already been produced by the FAI in support of this project. They indicate that there will not be a problem for Casement Aerodrome regarding Eircom park. On foot of a condition inserted by South Dublin County Council the councillors unanimously approved this project. Some of the executives of the council might be a little afraid of the Taoiseach’s wrath, but fortunately the council had the maturity to approve this project. I now understand that the FAI is again submitting 15 names of further aviation consultants for the Department of Defence to pick one. I hope the Department of Defence will now get off the fence and will recognise that this project will go ahead. It is regrettable that it is using an appeal to An Bord Pleanála to delay this project further. It is time the Department of Defence made up its mind, recognised with maturity that this project should go ahead and let us forget about the hidden agenda to scuttle this project in order to ensure that Stadium Ireland goes ahead.

If it goes ahead, we should remember what happened with the Dome in England. There is an inherent fear that if Eircom park goes ahead, the Stadium Ireland project will not be viable and it will be a millstone around the tax payer’s neck. Inevitably, in a few years time, it will be hired out to some private investors to make it a laudable project. Perhaps we will have our Wimbledon team in Ireland at that stage.

What is happening is a little shabby and the FAI have been treated very shabbily in this whole project. Thank God it has the maturity to go ahead and have its own stadium, and why not? If Croke Park is expanded to cater for 75,000 people, why should soccer in Ireland not have a similar facility? We were all very proud of Ireland’s recent draw abroad against Holland. We should recognise that soccer exists and the Department should stop this messing.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): The Deputies have more or less suggested that the Government is trying to obstruct the proposals of the FAI. Neither the Taoiseach or I have at any time tried to obstruct the FAI and we have always shown our support for the FAI. I have made clear on several occasions why I feel in the interests of both business and sporting interests, it would be better for the FAI to join us in the national stadium, Stadium Ireland.

The business part of the proposal, worked out at a conservative estimate, is that it would be worth approximately £40 million to the FAI if it was to come on board with the Stadium Ireland project. Second, from a sporting point of view, as this country lacks basic sporting infrastructure both at schoolboy, junior and senior level, it would be in its interests also to be able to invest that amount of capital in building a national sporting infrastructure. At the same time it could have the best of both worlds - a magnificent stadium for our national team and a good stadium for our premier league, first division, junior and schoolboy sides. That has been my only argument, of which I remain convinced. In the interest of the FAI, that would be the best way to pursue its aims.

Although they are my views, at no stage have I been obstructionist. We have wished the FAI well in all of its endeavours with Eircom park. We accept that the FAI desires an emotional home for itself and we have no reason to try to obstruct it. If it wants to go ahead and has the financial clout it is welcome to go ahead with it, but the national stadium will go ahead.

I want to clarify a number of points raised. Deputy Allen started by accusing us of being obstructionist by holding our press conference when we did. I want to clarify that. Last July, we made our views known that as soon as possible, we would have to make progress on the aquatic centre. It is vitally important for the Special Olympics. It was one of the stumbling blocks we had in our negotiations and it is vital that we acquire an aquatic centre by 2003. There are time constraints on it as it is, but we are quite confident that if we get started with the aquatic centre, it will be ready in time for the Special Olympics. On 2 August, in Galway, there was an announcement regarding sponsorship for the Special Olympics. We said that at the first opportunity when the cabinet returned we would make this announcement. The Taoiseach was in the UN the previous week. That date was fixed for the Monday, a long way in advance. The Taoiseach’s diary cannot be drawn up on the basis of a council’s diary. It was planned well in advance.

As regards the Department of Defence, it signalled at an early stage that it had serious problems with Eircom Park and not only that, but with any major development in that area. These concerns are being expressed by aviation experts and they may differ.

Deputy Allen: Will the Minister publish those reports?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): That is not a matter for the ..

Chairman: The Deputy will have time to ask questions. He should allow the Minister to answer.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): At no time has the Department of the Taoiseach or my Department had any correspondence with the Department of Defence regarding this project. As I have pointed out, that Department has serious concerns not only with this project, but with others in that area.

Deputy Finucane: The information is completely different and at variance with all other information.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): These are matters of safety and that alone. I wonder where Deputies would be if anything happened -

Deputy Allen: Publish the report. This is scaremongering.

Deputy Finuncane: Is South Dublin County Council wrong?

Chairman: Please allow the Minister to reply. All members will have an opportunity to ask questions.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I do not have experience of this and I leave it to the aviation experts. However, I would point out that these are matters of safety. For 55 per cent of the time Baldonnel airport is used for training; it is not just a matter of take offs and landings. Deputies raised the issue of costs. The chairman, Mr. Teahon, will deal with that. I commend the Committee and the community in Abbotstown on what has happened to date. They realise the potential that exists to develop that area. They are the people we involved first of all and are our priority in this issue. That matter is moving forward satisfactorily.

As regards Eircom Park and the accusations that have been bandied about, we have given it full support at all times. I remind Deputies that we will meet the Dutch and Portuguese in the World Cup next year. I assure Deputies there will be 60,000 or 70,000 people looking for tickets for that match in 2001. None of us knows where sport is going in the future. At the beginning of the last century land became available at Jones’s Road which it was suggested the GAA should seek to develop. It did not do so, but fortunately one member of its committee bought and held that land. When it eventually dawned on the GAA it took over Croke Park and we know the magnificent structure that exists there today. A little foresight on the part of Deputies would do no harm.

Sport is going from strength to strength and more and more people are participating in it. There is a huge interest in sport. We spent £200 million in ten years updating our golfing infrastructure. It is now worth over £200 million per year to our economy. Because we have the infrastructure, 200,000 people are coming to this country to play golf. We will hold the Ryder Cup in 2005. Without the infrastructure, that would not be possible and I do not believe that is what the people want.

I have answered questions regarding costs on a number of occasions in the Dáil. As Mr. Teahon is present I will ask him to deal with that issue. If there are any other questions I will answer them.

Deputy Allen: On the question of costs, I was accused of exaggerating when I said anything up to £1 billion -

Deputy S. Ryan: Give the statement first.

Deputy Allen: There is no point in answering before the questions about costs are raised because we will be given selective answers. I have a number of questions which I raised in June and which were not answered. I resubmitted them to the Minister three weeks ago. I wish to put them on record for the sake of accuracy.

Chairman: The Deputy will have an opportunity to ask questions. He requested a reply to his statements and the Minister has given that. What I propose to do is take members’ questions and I ask the Minister and those replying to reply to each member. I am giving everyone ample opportunity to raise questions and I implore them to be concise and not to be repetitive. There is a great deal of interest in this issue. Senator Coogan indicated that he wished to ask a question and I ask other members to do likewise.

Senator Coogan: What is the most recent date that an estimate of the total cost of the project was made and how much was it for?

Mr. Teahon: I had prepared some remarks and I am happy for the Clerk to circulate them.

Deputy S. Ryan: That is fine.

Mr. Teahon: The answer is contained in those remarks.

Deputy Allen: Can they be circulated?

Chairman: Does Mr. Teahon have copies?

Mr. Teahon: Yes. While a great deal of attention has been paid to the stadium component of the campus what we will put in place on foot of Government decisions is a campus which will have a stadium as a key part of it. In appreciating the potential that will exist as a result of what we are trying to do, it will be seen the campus is a very important part of the exercise. As regards costs, we have prepared in Campus and Stadium Ireland Development a cost figure for the total development of £550 million.

Deputy Allen: Double.

Mr. Teahon: I will give the breakdown so that people will understand it.

Deputy Allen: On a point of order, could the members put their questions before we get the answers? I have a whole series of questions that I feel should be put before Mr. Teahon answers.

Chairman: Deputy Allen, I would ask you to respect the chair. Senator Coogan asked a question and this is the reply. You will have an opportunity ..

Deputy Allen: I have waited three months to ask these questions and we are now being told that ..

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): If the Deputy could wait until he comes back ..

Deputy Allen: Surely I am entitled to ask my questions.

Chairman: I will abandon this meeting if I do not get a bit of co-operation. I said that every Deputy and Senator in this Chamber will have an opportunity to ask their questions. Senator Coogan has asked a question and this is the reply. Deputy Allen will have ample opportunity to ask his questions.

Mr. Teahon: If I can give the breakdown of the £550 million, to address Deputy Allen’s specific concern.

Deputy Allen: I did not put my concern yet.

Mr. Teahon: I read the questions that Deputy Allen asked at the last meeting of this Committee and I am attempting to respond to them.

Deputy Allen: I want to put them on the record.

Deputy Coughlan: Chairman, this is totally unfair to you, to the Minister and to the people who have come here. It is absolutely ridiculous. The Deputy is harping on looking for answers. Mr. Teahon is going to give him the answers because he went to the bother of finding out the questions.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Could I clarify the matter for the members of the Committee. I have received 17 questions from Deputy Allen and I am quite prepared to read each and every answer out here this morning if he wishes.

Chairman: Deputy Allen has not been given the opportunity to ask his question yet. Mr. Teahon is replying to a member who has asked a question and ..

Senator Coogan: Two questions.

Chairman: Yes, two questions. Everybody will then have an opportunity to ask their questions.

Mr. Teahon: Perhaps I could give the breakdown. In regard to the stadium, the cost remains at £281 million, less a private contribution of £50 million. We then have costed a series of general sports use facilities including the aquatic and leisure centre; an indoor arena; multi-purpose indoor and outdoor training halls and pitches; a sports science and medicine centre; headquarters for sports organisations including in particular the Community Games, which is on the public record; and a visitor information centre. There are a number of specific use facilities for individual sports which we will finally decide on, on the advice of the Sports Council. The cost of the infrastructure on the Abbotstown site and the operating costs of Campus and Stadium Ireland, where the executive services team came on board from 1st of this month, will be 1.8 per cent of the development cost.

To respond to the question about the most recent date, these figures are prepared on the basis of a number of consultancy studies undertaken by Pricewaterhouse Coopers, with specialist support. The original Pricewaterhouse feasibility study was for the stadium, which is the basis for the figure of £281 million less the £50 million. We have had a number of further studies done on an aquatic and leisure centre and an indoor arena, the sports science and medicine centre, the multi-purpose training halls, the outdoor pitches and a tennis centre which form the backdrop to the figures I am giving.

In regard to the way we decided to proceed with the development, based on getting consultancy advice on sports facilities around the world, it is critical in terms of a good sports facility and value for money that the operator, the person or company that will operate the company, comes in from the word go and also that the proper financing deal is obtained. We intend to put out all the other projects like the aquatic and leisure centre, which we are currently embarked on, on a design, build, finance, operate and maintain basis. That means that the people who are tendering will have to make their decisions from a financial point of view, critically on two things. First, what they believe they can deliver as a capital cost for the project that will be described in the tender and, second, the return they believe they can obtain over 30 years; the norm is to give them a 30 year operating contract. These figures will then come back for the different facilities and, in effect, it will be a market answer. We have short-listed five consortia for the aquatic and leisure centre and last Friday we asked each of the five to give an outline bid for the aquatic and leisure centre by 9 October. Each of these five consortia will come back to us with a statement which will consist of the effective design for what we have given them in terms of the tender and the financial make-up in terms of capital cost and the return they believe they can get from that.

In terms of the cost, I would like to underline two points. The £550 million is a cost for the total development. We are talking about the total development on the basis of the breakdown I have given, and in terms of the most recent dates they are based on the Pricewaterhouse Coopers figures. The update will come when we see how the tenders for the aquatic and leisure centre square with the numbers - and obviously they are commercially sensitive because it is a tender situation - that we have for an aquatic and leisure centre based on the Pricewaterhouse Coopers figures.

Senator Coogan: When did Mr. Teahon say he expects all those back?

Mr. Teahon: We will have an outline bid by 9 October. The process we are following, which is under EU public procurement law, is a three stage process. The first stage was that the consortia, on a design, build, finance, operate and maintain basis, were invited to show that they had the technical and financial capability to undertake the aquatic and leisure centre. The second stage, which is the one we are now in, is that they will produce an outline bid and the third stage is that we will enter a detailed negotiation with a minimum of three consortia to negotiate to heads of agreement stage, planning permission and eventual construction.

Senator Coogan: So basically the figures we have now could change dramatically on 9 October.

Mr. Teahon: The figures are the best information that is available to us. They cross-check with the most recent facilities that have been put in place. We have looked at the Manchester facility for the Commonwealth Games, which is the most recent one, and we have looked at the Helsinki facility which was the one used for the recent European swimming championships. We have seen what is there in the most recent versions in which these things have been produced.

Deputy Allen: First of all I would like to apologise to you, chairman. I am not trying to make your life difficult, but it is frustrating when one is waiting since June to get answers to valid questions. I felt people thought I was talking through my hat earlier when I spoke about this project going up to £1 billion. Now this morning we are being told it has now gone from £280 million to an estimated £550 million.

Deputy Coughlan: No, he did not say that.

Deputy Allen: It now includes an aquatic centre and I do not know if I was hearing right ..

Senator Coogan: You were.

Deputy Allen: .. but he mentioned a minimum of £550 million. I have questions to put on this issue. Whatever way one wants to call it, it is £550 million for the Abbotstown project.

Deputy M. Brennan: That is just the campus.

Deputy Allen: It is taxpayers’ money, no matter what one says.

Chairman: Deputy Allen, please put your questions.

Deputy Allen: I will. We have been accused of being begrudging and questioning and so on, but we have a responsibility to question. As my colleague, Deputy Finucane said, this could end up like the dome in England. The thinking in the Department about this project is warped in that it is thought that if the FAI terminates its project it can invest in infrastructure throughout the country. The question we should be asking is what could we achieve in terms of investing £600 million in our national sporting infrastructure. The hard choices should be put to us. Should we embark on this pie in the sky project or invest in facilities to ensure children will no longer have to undress on the side of the road or in train wagons that do not have sanitary facilities or lighting? That is the real sporting Ireland. We are building “Taj Mahals” to people’s egos, as in the Eastern Europe of old.

Does this project include the investment in infrastructure that will be required to service it? The report refers to a proposed M50 interchange, but the extent of such an interchange has not been defined. There is talk of approximately £3 million being allocated for such work. I am advised a three tiered level type of interchange, which would cost £15 million, would be required. A new road would have to be built on the south-side of the M50, a road linking the stadium to Dunsink car park, which I am told would cost approximately £8 million, but in the report it is estimated it will cost £3 million.

It is estimated in paragraph 3.47 of the report that the cost of providing a train station at Navan Road would be £2 million. Is that figure included in the cost? In paragraph 4.4 it is stated that 12,000 passengers would have to be moved by shuttle bus and scheduled buses to the stadium. It states that existing scheduled services operate at full capacity, therefore 150 extra buses would be required to service the stadium. Is that cost included in the figure? I reckon it would cost £25 million to upgrade the provision of such a service. Is the cost of the relocation of the veterinary research laboratories and the Marine Institute included in the estimate? In a reply to a parliamentary question in February, we were told that the estimated cost of relocating such bodies would be approximately 90 million. The veterinary research laboratories and the Marine Institute will have to be relocated as the stadium has been earmarked for Abottstown. Is the £90 million cost of relocating such bodies included in the estimate?

The report states that the stadium will be designed in such a way as to facilitate its conversion to athletics at a minimum cost. We were told that if a running track was installed in Croke Park it would cost approximately £80 million. Is the plan to build a running track in the stadium going ahead and, if so, is the cost of that estimated, given that the report states the estimated cost of providing a running track is £80 million?

As of today, the cost escalations between 1999 and 2003 are estimated to be £280 million. Allowing for ten per cent inflation in construction costs over the next few years, that figure would quickly increase from £281 million to £410 million. What would be the escalation cost of a project running at £550 million?

VAT is not included in the cost. VAT must be paid by a trust and it will be 21 per cent. VAT of 21 per cent on £550 million would bring the cost up to £660 million. Is VAT included or has it been accounted for in the estimate?

The Minister, Deputy McDaid, announced that a sum of £2.5 million would be set aside for attracting events to the stadium. Will that be an annual expense or a once off figure? The operational costs of running the stadium are not included in the financial estimates. Appendix 8.2 on page 7 highlights that in regard to the 15 stadia surveyed, the average budget overshoot was about 73 per cent. If we take such a budget overshoot as par for the course, taking account of the original figure of £280 million and including VAT and the cost of relocating the bodies I mentioned, the cost of the project is nearly £1 billion at this stage. Has a cost benefit analysis of the project being carried out?

With regard to the 17 questions I asked in June, has a cost analysis of the national stadium being carried out? Mr. Teahon effectively answered my question on whether a truer cost of the project would be a figure between £500 million and £1 billion. Was the Taoiseach misleading us when he indicated the project would cost £281 million, which is poppycock at this stage?

A second feasibility study by Pricewaterhouse Coopers was mentioned. Can we have a copy of that report? What deficiencies were highlighted in the first Pricewaterhouse Coopers report?

Were any of the appointments to the National Stadium Committee advertised? Are we open to challenges such as those made by Denis Riordan? What other jobs have been filled and what positions did those who filled them hold prior to their being appointed to the group dealing with the national stadium?

People are being hired by the day to work on this project. Have those positions been advertised? I read recently that a lady who worked in the Temple Bar area was appointed? What is her involvement in the project?

How did the project suddenly appear on the Government manifesto when it was not included in the Fianna Fáil manifesto? Where did it come from? Did it come from a group who explored the possibility of building it but did not want to take all the risks and are now getting the Government and taxpayers to build a project from which they will eventually get their share of the action?

What other world stadia have been visited in search of an ideal model? What were the two gentlemen opposite doing in Amsterdam two weeks ago looking at the Arnhem Stadium? What was the purpose of their visit there?

What Department is responsible for the budgets of the national stadium? Is it correct that the Department of the Taoiseach is concerned about having any financial responsibility? Why are questions tabled in the Dáil ping-ponged from one Minister to the Taoiseach, depending on the question? Who is responsible for this project? Who is driving this?

The question on the aquatic centre has been answered. It may or may not be ready for the special Olympics.

With regard to the Snow report, what communication has there been between the Department of Defence and the Department Tourism, Sport and Recreation or the Department of Defence and some of the people involved in the stadium project? Was there any contact between any individual involved with the project and the Department of Defence around March on the FAI’s planning application? Has the Snow report on Baldonnel been seen by any individual or group outside the Department of Defence and, if it has been released to other groups or Departments, could we get information on the other Departments that have seen it? Has there been any briefing sessions for individual members of the FAI board of management? Has there been any clarification in relation to the VAT repayments due to the FAI from the Revenue Commissioners? What about the current cost of relocating the agriculture and marine bodies from Abbotstown? What will be the cost of purchasing a new farm in Kildare?

Can details be made available to the Committee on the advice that was given to the Departments of Tourism, Sport and Recreation and of the Taoiseach on the national stadium? What is the cost of contracts for Executive Services for the national stadium and what have the costs been so far? With regard to the jobs that have been established in relation to the development of the project, have they been advertised? Have people been able to make any input into this decision making?

The figure of £560 million is an increase from £280 million, but that is only small money compared to the potential cost of the final project.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Obviously, the Deputy is trying to formulate tomorrow’s headlines by stating that the stadium has gone from £281 million to £550 million. That would be totally untrue if it were reported in such a fashion. The Deputy is trying to use the sound-bite on this issue. He obviously did not listen to what Mr. Teahon explained.

Deputy Allen: That is the campus.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): The stadium was costing £281 million. I will accept that in the immediate aftermath we had the problem with regard to the aquatic centre for the Special Olympics. That was taken on board afterwards and a special feasibility study was commissioned. That added to the costs of Sports Campus Ireland.

Mr. Teahon has clearly pointed out all the areas for Sports Campus Ireland which will be sent out to tender before the end of the year. They include the sports facilities, the aquatic and leisure centre, the indoor arena, the multi purpose indoor and outdoor training halls, pitches, sports science and sports medicine centre and the tennis centre. All these will go out to public private tender as well. The tenderers will put in the private part of that capital investment and, naturally, the contract for the 30 years will be drawn up as is normal in these cases. It is unfair to claim, as the Deputy is attempting to do at this meeting, that the costs have escalated. That is untrue. Anybody who is reporting on this will have to take on board what the Deputy is trying to do.

The Deputy made the point that this money would be better spent on local facilities. I agree that we need facilities and at last we are beginning to get them. In 1999, I allocated £20 million to 450 different projects and in 2000, I allocated £36 million to 650 projects. That is approximately 1,100 projects in two years. The figure for 1999 alone exceeds the entire amount the Deputy gave out during his term of office.

Deputy Allen: The Minister is a good boy.

Deputy M. Brennan: You gave it all to Cork.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): There are now 1,400 projects throughout the country waiting to be completed. Unfortunately, many of them were unable to get under way in the past due to lack of funding, but now, many of them are unable to get under way because developers are too busy making fortunes elsewhere. However, more money has gone into the development of local projects and we will continue to do that.

A question was asked about a running track. It is not proposed at this stage that there should be a running track. Members will be aware that a few weeks ago I announced £4.1 million for the facilities, both indoor and outdoor, provided at Morton Stadium. That is a magnificent stadium and the £4.1 million has been allocated for its running track.

The Deputy asked a number of questions and I have the answers with me. With regard to whether the jobs were advertised, of course they were. I will hand over to Mr. Teahon to deal with further specifics and I will come back to the Deputy if any questions have been left unanswered.

Mr. Teahon: I wish to spell out one further reason why Deputy Allen’s remarks about the £550 million are not correct. The Deputy said it will be the taxpayers’ contribution. Our estimates are that of the total cost of the campus and stadium of £550 million, the return related or the commercial input from the private sector under the way in which we are tendering it will come to £150 million and there is a private sector donation of £50 million. In terms of the Exchequer based contribution, which we will be attempting to minimise further, the figure is £350 million.

As the Minister said, for all the executive services team we followed public sector tendering procedures, whether that was EU public sector tendering or the public sector tendering procedure laid down by the Department of Finance. We followed those in all cases. With regard to two earlier remarks, it would be remiss of me not to give the Committee two further items of information. A number of people referred to the possibility of some European soccer team coming on board. In the steering committee for the feasibility study, Bernard O’Byrne raised that question one day. He was assured in front of the other members by Michael Walsh that there was no such agenda. In a follow up discussion which I had with the FAI, I made it clear that if in coming on board the national stadium project it wanted to make it conditional on no other such soccer team becoming available, we were perfectly ready to do that. It chose for its own reasons not to follow through on that.

With regard to the IRFU, the GAA and, indeed, the FAI, the IRFU and the GAA have indicated in the past week to me, as chairperson of Campus and Stadium Ireland, that they are prepared to sit down over the next number of weeks to agree the basis and the conditions on which they will be part of Campus and Stadium Ireland. That is not just the stadium. I am sorry to keep referring back to this, but it is most important. It is not just the stadium. The organisations see the campus as a hugely important part in the development of their games and having the facilities to do that. Any agreement that ..

Deputy Allen: What other parts of the stadium could they use aside from the medical centre? Are they going to take up swimming or tennis?

Mr. Teahon: They will be able to use the multi purpose training halls and the outdoor pitches. The sports science and sports medicine facility is very important in their terms.

Deputy Allen: And the stadium?

Mr. Teahon: Yes. You pointed out that I should give the Committee the facts of the situation such as they are at present. The position that is in the feasibility study was the position the FAI gave us at the time, that is, that they were perfectly prepared in going ahead with Eircom park to put in games which were bigger than the capacity of Eircom park - champions league games were mentioned, in particular, but also other games. That is the position in the feasibility study. That is from where we will be proceeding in terms of implementing the Government decision.

The Deputy raised a series of issues about the infrastructure cost. A number of the costs to which the Deputy referred are costs which are in the national development plan pre-Campus and Stadium Ireland. In other words, one of the big costs is the cost of the interchange which is something which Fingal County Council and the National Roads Authority have to undertake anyway because of the transport situation in terms of the N2, the N3 and M50 and the volumes of traffic at the moment. The cost that I gave is the cost of the Campus and Stadium Ireland ..

Deputy M. Brennan: Could we suspend the meeting for lunch and come back at 2 p.m.?

Chairman: I think we may keep going for another while.

Deputy M. Brennan: There are lots of speakers here today. We should suspend the meeting until 2 p.m. for lunch and then come back.

Deputy Allen: We only started at 12 O’clock.

Deputy M. Brennan: Yes, but we want lunch.

Deputy Allen: You can go out and get lunch if you want.

Deputy M. Brennan: I would like to stay at the meeting. I am convenor and would like to stay.

Chairman: I think we should continue for another while and if it goes very late, I suggest we suspend for a half an hour, if needs be.

Deputy S. Ryan: We will reconvene in Sydney.

Senator Farrell: Chairman, in fairness to Deputy Brennan, many people here travelled 150 miles to be here, so it is a long time since they had their breakfast.

Chairman: I understand.

Senator Farrell: Although the meeting only started at 12 O’clock, they left early this morning. If we are serious about this, we must debate it fully.

Chairman: It will be debated.

Senator Farrell: If we break later on, there will be no lunch to get.

Deputy M. Brennan: It is a long agenda.

Deputy Finucane: I propose we break at 2 p.m. and resume at 2.30 p.m., if necessary.

Chairman: Is it agreeable to the other members that we break at 1.45 p.m. until 2.15 p.m. ?

Deputy Finucane: Two O’clock.

Chairman: We will compromise - maybe 1.45 p.m. until 2.15 p.m. Deputy Allen.

Deputy Allen: I had asked questions, but I did not get answers to them.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Let us put it on the record that I answered the questions.

Deputy Allen: On a point of information, I asked questions relating to infrastructure development. All that Mr. Teahon answered, was the proposed M50 interchange. He said it was in the national development plan. It is in the report at £3 million, but the conservative estimate is a minimum £15 million. There was a question about a proposed rail station, bus requirements to transport people from the city, relocation of the veterinary research laboratories and the Marine Institution. Is that in the figure of £550 million? I asked about cost escalations, VAT costs and marketing costs? Those questions were not responded to.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): As has already been pointed out by Mr. Teahon, quite a large percentage of the national development plan has been earmarked for that specific area. The most important people involved in all of this is the community in that area. There have been ongoing discussions with the community there and it has been fully appraised of the situation. According to my information, matters are being carried out very satisfactorily in regard to the concerns of the community in that area. In regard to the infrastructure costs as stated, a large part of the national development plan has already been earmarked in that area.

The Deputy asked me to outline to the Committee whether all the advice I have received from my Department is in favour of the national stadium. The answer to that question is yes. The Deputy asked why Pricewaterhouse Coopers had been engaged to carry out a further feasibility study. As pointed out, Pricewaterhouse Coopers had carried out one study for the stadium and in addition, the CSID commissioned a number of other smaller studies for the aquatic and leisure centre, Arena Ireland, sports, science and medical centre, multipurpose halls and outdoor pitches and a tennis centre. The CSID will use these different studies as inputs to the design, build, finance, operation and development of the stadium and all of these are to go out to tender before the end of the year.

The Deputy asked if I could explain why the national stadium never appeared in Fianna Fáil’s sports strategy document. The sports campus Ireland project did not appear in our document, or in the programme for Government, because the possibility of the project arose because of the dramatic improvement in our Government finances and the very generous offer by a private citizen. If we do not do it now, we will never do it. He asked me to explain why it was not in the Government’s mid-term review even though the project was announced at the time. Given the nature of the mid-term review of the programme for Government and given that it was not in the original programme, it was decided not to include it, but to treat it as a separate and distinct matter, and that is what we have done. I point out again that unless we do it now, we will never do it.

The Deputy asked if this indicated that I was against it being included in my section of the mid-term review. I have been wholly supportive of this project from the word go. It is an important and farsighted concept and I am giving my full support to its completion. The Deputy said that up to recently I had claimed the stadium was the Taoiseach’s project and that I was happy for him to drive it. I continue to say that. Sports campus Ireland project is being driven by a development company. Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Limited, which has been established by the Government under the chairmanship of Paddy Teahon who was previously secretary general in the Department of the Taoiseach.

I answered questions on this matter in the Dáil in co-operation with the Department of the Taoiseach. The Taoiseach has also answered questions on it. We have been at one on this project at all times. My Department is fully behind the development of the sports campus. I would like to advise the Deputies that this is a Government project where responsible Ministers play their part in ensuring that the project becomes a reality in the shortest possible time-frame. I have said I am happy the matter is being driven by the Taoiseach’s Department.

A number of Departments have been involved in this. If we find it is possible to bring it over to the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation, I will be willing to take it over. That may well be the case. The Deputy asked that if my Department is forced to be in charge of this project, why does it only have one representative on the board when the Taoiseach has several? I just explained that point. I do not mind who is on the board as long as it is driven forward and as long as this country gets its stadium which we are determined it will have. The board of the development company was appointed by the Government and it is representative of major sports and business people. If the Deputy examines the board, he will find that out.

The Deputy asked why the trust for the stadium has not been established. We are currently putting the procedures in place to establish the board of trustees and an announcement will be made on this in the very near future. He asked why none of the national stadium jobs were advertised? I answered that already. All the jobs were advertised.

He asked me to confirm that pro rata assistance will be made available for Eircom park. We have answered this. The Taoiseach stated in the Dáil that pro rata assistance would be available to the FAI and he stands over any commitment he has made. The FAI has not made any application for assistance for the development of Eircom park. When the association was launching its plans for Eircom park, it made it quite clear - it was very proud of the fact - that its project was fully funded and that it did not require any Government assistance. I was at that meeting and it made that quite clear. No question of pro rata assistance arises at this time.

Deputy Finucane: The Minister should be helping out at this stage.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): As I said, there has been no request for any assistance from Eircom Park. They have stated that they are fully funded.

Deputy Finucane: Would the Minister like to see Eircom Park go ahead?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Yes, I would.

Deputy Finucane: As a separate entity?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I would have no objection to Eircom Park going ahead as a separate entity. Partnership has been the main way in which this country has developed over the past ten years. Partnership in sport is another way in which we can develop further.

Would I confirm that the decision has now been taken in principle that the aquatic centre in the national stadium would be ready for the Special Olympics? Yes. That is the reason we proceeded recently with the announcement.

Have I offered any further incentives to the FAI to get it to abandon its project? We are not offering any incentives to the FAI to abandon its project. I have already stated that from the point of view of business, sport and partnership we could develop together and be quite a major force if we were able to pull together on this issue.

The issue of offering further incentives to the FAI does not arise. We fully respect the decision of the FAI to proceed with its plans to develop its own stadium. However we have made it clear to the FAI in our meetings with it that the most sensible business and sports case is to participate in the national stadium project.

Let me explain once again the reasons for this view. The FAI would be in a position now to receive the revenue from the sale of those seats and boxes in the national stadium, guaranteeing an immediate income stream without any risk on the part of the FAI. The FAI would be free to transfer any contractual arrangements it had entered into for Eircom Park in respect of the sale of corporate boxes and seats. They would be facilitated in Stadium Ireland; they would be transferable. A conservative estimate of this revenue to the FAI would be in the region of £40 million.

In addition, the FAI would not be faced with any capital repayments or infrastructural costs. This would allow it to invest some of that £40 million to meet its stated aim of developing the game of soccer at local and community level while having a state of the art facility for international games. In addition, the FAI would have available to it the funds which the Government is prepared to make available in line with our commitment to the development of sport in this country.

Services have already been dealt with. On the final question of the Deputy, Question No. 17, asking had any official of my Department been in touch with South Dublin County Council regarding the FAI planning situation, the answer is an emphatic “no”.

Deputy Allen: Our most crucial questions were those related to the cost escalation based on the £560 million of which we heard this morning. I also asked about the VAT.

Deputy M. Brennan: That was explained numerous times.

Deputy Allen: It was not explained, not to me anyway. Maybe the Deputy heard it. I did not hear it.

Deputy M. Brennan: I certainly heard it.

Deputy Allen: Could I hear the ..

Deputy M. Brennan: On a point of order, Deputy Allen is hogging this meeting. This is not the first time he has done so. He has been at this for some time.

Chairman: I chair the Committee. Everybody will get ample opportunity to ask their questions. Deputy Allen and other members will ask their questions. The Minister said in June that he would be prepared to answer all these questions. Therefore, to be fair to everybody, if anybody wants to ask questions, I will provide for that if we must stay here until tomorrow.

Deputy Allen: I want to ask again about the cost of the relocation of the veterinary research laboratory and the Marine Institute, the cost escalation between 1999 and 2003, and the VAT. Is the trust entitled to a VAT rebate or does VAT need to be taken into account?

Mr. Teahon: On what I said, I made the point about the M50, just as an example, but the figures I gave regarding infrastructure are simply the infrastructural costs on the site. It does not include anything outside the site, nor does it include the cost of relocating the laboratories.

On escalating costs, there is a contingency figure built into it. It would not be anything like as high as the 75 per cent. In fact, in terms of the ones which we have seen elsewhere in recent times, they did come in at or, in the case of Helsinki, actually below the figure. Therefore there is no international experience to suggest that sports facilities come in above cost.

On VAT, I do not know the answer, but I will find out and respond, through the Committee, to the Deputy.

Deputy Allen: Does Mr. Teahon mean that on a project involving £550 million of taxpayers’ money, we cannot be told whether the project is liable to VAT at 21 per cent, which would be another £110 million? I find it astounding that somebody could say that to us here today. They do not know whether they have a tax liability of £110 million.

Mr. Teahon: In fairness, I made clear that the figure for taxpayers is £350 million. It is not fair of Deputy Allen to keep saying it is £550 million when I have said that it is £350 million and it might actually be lower than £350 million.

Deputy Allen: If it is 21 per cent on £440 million, the figure on which we agreed, then that will be £80 million.

Chairman: Deputy Allen, Mr. Teahon said that he will reply to the Committee on the matter. We will accept that.

Deputy Allen: There are no figures built in for cost escalation and VAT liabilities. There is no figure for infrastructural development. There is no figure for relocation of £90 million. You can see now where we are going, chairman, and the ill-prepared nature of this proposal. It is damning that a senior man could come in here and tell us that he does not know whether they are liable for VAT on a project of this nature.

Mr. Teahon: I came here today attempting to help the Committee in a genuine way. I am prepared to answer any questions and be held accountable for it, but I do not think in that context that it is fair for people to attempt to misrepresent what I said. I came here honestly and attempted to give the figures.

Deputy Allen: Mr. Teahon is building a stadium worth almost £500 million and he does not know whether he is liable for VAT. What poppycock? He knows well that he is liable for VAT under the present laws relating to trusts.

Mr. Teahon: The issue is whether the figures which Pricewaterhouse Coopers have produced include VAT or not. They may well not cover VAT, which still leaves one with the issue of how VAT would apply. It is for that reason that I said I will come back to the Committee. That is quite an honest way of attempting to answer the question.

Deputy Allen: I am not an expert and I can tell Mr. Teahon that VAT charged to a trust is not reclaimable. That is the advice I have on it. I went to the trouble of getting advice on VAT. Surely the principal of a national stadium should have got advice regarding VAT liabilities. To come in here and state that he does not know whether Pricewaterhouse Coopers included it in its overall prices is ridiculous. Surely he read the Pricewaterhouse Coopers report at least.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Mr. Teahon has come in to assist the Committee as we all did. I might point out that we will come back to the Committee shortly on whether Pricewaterhouse Coopers included the VAT or not. It is a spurious argument when we all know that VAT goes directly back into the Exchequer. We will come back and help the Committee on this specific point.

Chairman: I will move on. There are four others who want to ask questions.

Deputy S. Ryan: I just want to be specific in differentiating between the stadium and the campus. What about the operation of the stadium? Will that be under design, construction and operation or will it stand on its own? Who is operating that and the finances of it?

Second, in the evaluation of the viability of the stadium, we are told that discussions are pending with two of the major sporting organisations, the IRFU and the GAA. As matters stand, the FAI is proceeding on its own, apart from, as the Minister said, the occasional match with an anticipated attendance of over 45,000. How has the Minister evaluated the viability of the stadium without including the information relating to those three organisations?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Regarding the operating cost, as I have already pointed out, the different sections will go out to ..

Deputy S. Ryan: I want to know about the stadium in particular.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): The operating costs will be put out into the public-private sector.

Deputy S. Ryan: Who will operate the stadium?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): As I pointed out, the six or seven sections of the stadium will go out to the private sector. Whoever wins the tender for the stadium will have the operating costs included in their contract.

Deputy S. Ryan: I am talking about the main stadium.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): It will be whoever wins the contract.

Deputy S. Ryan: How can the Minister look for tenders when he does not know about the participation of the IRFU, the GAA - we have heard there will be discussions on that down the line - and the FAI? If the FAI gets the support of the Department of Defence, it will proceed with its own complex. On that basis, how can we put the stadium out for tender? No one will run the stadium if they cannot make a profit.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): We will have talks with the IRFU and the GAA about how they will use the stadium. That is not a possibility. They have told us they will co-operate with the Government on Sports Campus Ireland.

Deputy Allen: Will it be hosting the Railway Cup?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): That matter will be discussed. Regarding the Deputy’s other point, the same question could be asked about the aquatic centre which we have put out to tender. As we informed the Committee, five groups are now on the short-list. We were satisfied with the tendering process for the aquatic centre. People can see the potential. We will put it out to tender and then see the response. There are people out there who are willing to take on this project.

Deputy S. Ryan: Regarding the other facilities on the campus other than the stadium, some are attractive and I am sure many organisations will be involved. However, there is a question mark over the stadium, which is the main project.

Chairman: We agreed to break at 1.45 p.m. so I will suspend the meeting until 2.15 p.m.

Chairman: Deputy Ryan was in possession when we broke for lunch.

Deputy S. Ryan: I have one further question about the stadium before we go on to the campus. From the figures and analysis of the situation, how many major events per annum are required to make the stadium a viable proposition and what organisations are in mind for utilising those dates?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): My original was six. It was estimated that six major events would make the situation viable.

Deputy S. Ryan: It seems to me that in the context of where we are now, the stadium itself is a worthy project in relation to the country. Without soccer, or the FAI, it is difficult to see how it will be viable. If there is no soccer involved and given that it is unlikely that the GAA would transfer the All-Ireland finals from the hallowed ground of Croke Park to the stadium, how does the Minister envisage getting six events per annum?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I appreciate the Deputy’s arguments and he is asking genuine questions. This is a marvellous state of the art stadium for the future. Regarding doubts as to its viability and who will use it, I have stated previously that we are at a certain level of sport at present, but nobody knows where sport will go in the future. Regarding its viability, swimming is the most expensive sport in the country from the perspective of operating costs and viability, but we are more than satisfied with the tendering process for the aquatic centre and we are now down to five. I am sure there are people who will feel they can operate this and make it viable. The answer to the Deputy’s question will come when we are able to put this out to tender and when I can inform the Dáil that we have a certain number of tenders, as I am quite sure we have. Mr. Teahon and the committee have travelled widely to ensure we have the expertise involved in all major sporting facilities that have been built so that we can avoid the mistakes that have been made and concentrate on the positives. We are putting all those together and gathering expertise, research and information and putting it all together. At the end of the day, regarding the question of viability and the response of the private sector, I have no doubt the private sector will respond.

Deputy S. Ryan: What consultation, if any, has taken place? At what stage does the pre-planning or planning consultation kick in? We are told here that the winning framework plan suggests access and transport solutions to the site. We are obviously told none of the costs from outside the confines of the stadium and campus are incorporated into the cost of £500,000 we were told of this morning. What consultation has there been, if any, or who will undertake these consultations with the local authorities in relation to solving transport problems, costings and so on?

My last question relates to the probability of this going ahead. There is a lot of land around there as part of this development; does Mr. Teahon envisage any facilities for the major growth area of Dublin 15 there? There is a shortage of playing pitches and facilities there. I know this is a national stadium, but will there be any facilities surrounding the complex for the sporting organisations at junior level which are experiencing a shortage of pitches?

Mr. Teahon: In relation to the local authority, this week we had a detailed meeting because we have had the executive services team on board since 1 September with the different sides of the local authority - the manager, assistant manager, those responsible for transport and planning and the county architect. We have agreed a way of taking it forward in discussions. There will be two parts to this. The first part, because of the time constraints of the Special Olympics in 2003, is that we would expect to be in a position where the winning tender would apply for planning permission for the aquatic centre early next year and that at the latest, they would be on-site on 1 August. Clearly we are going to try to improve on those particular dates, but that is where we are now. The manager raised the issue - which we wanted to do anyway - of us making a detailed presentation to the councillors at a date he will arrange.

In relation to Dublin 15, we had three meetings with the Dublin 15 community council; one general meeting and meetings with its planning committee - they have quite a good structure - and they have raised their concerns, such as transport and access, which are major issues for them. We have taken on board one of the matters I mentioned in my remarks, which is that in the next few days we will have an architectural and environmental competition in the European Journal which will look at the layout of the entire site. In that process we are taking on board the transport concern in particular - how it works for major events and on a day-to-day basis, when we hope it will be very active. Obviously, the plans Fingal County Council already have will be very important in this regard. We have also directed participants in the architectural and environmental competition to the idea of a major parkland development, which has been done successfully in a number of locations. There are part of the Abbotstown site, due to the fall of the ground, which are particularly suited to this - the parts that come down towards the river.

We have agreed that in terms of our plans for the training halls and pitches - and general use of the facilities - that we will work out arrangements with the local community for use of facilities.

Deputy S. Ryan: To maximise the use.

Mr. Teahon: Precisely.

Deputy S. Ryan: Fair enough.

Senator Caffrey: I do not intend to dwell on the nuts and bolts of the project as it is on its way for better or worse, and many think it is for the worse. It has been referred to as Ireland’s equivalent of the Millennium Dome, which may or may not become a reality - we do not know at this juncture.

I wish to refer to the principle of the project. I was almost impressed by the Minister’s efforts to justify this project in his statement. His vision for it is laudable in terms of Ireland having a national stadium worthy of its position in international sport. This project and investment could be justified if all things were equal and the regions had equal levels of prosperity and infrastructural development. However, I and many others in my constituency in Mayo believe that in this climate investment of this magnitude borders on the criminal viewed against the backdrop of deficiencies in our area. Ballina, from where I come, was waiting seven years for £250,000 for a sports complex. That money eventually came.

There has been a major discovery of gas in the Corrib field, off Mayo and indications are that the people of Mayo will derive no benefit from this gas pipeline because we are lacking a few million pounds of Government aid to construct the spurs necessary to bring the gas to towns in the county. The sum involved is only about £10 million or £20 million which is small when compared with the investment in the national stadium. I admire the Minister’s vision for sport in Ireland in the future which could well be justified. However, that investment cannot be justified in the present context and against the backdrop of deficiencies in our region. We in Mayo believe, and we will shout it from the hilltops and the valleys, that this mammoth investment of almost £1 billion - we have heard conflicting evidence today of what the final sum will be, but it will be between £500 million and £1 billion - is a massive amount of money, some of which we need.

I am deviating slightly from the nuts and bolts of the project, but when will the Government realise the regions also need substantial investment in infrastructure and social development to bring the country to a par with other regions? There are deficiencies which must be rectified before there is massive investment in this kind of project. That is my firm conviction.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I thank the Senator for raising those points. His last point was on infrastructure in general. As regards regional infrastructure, it is my responsibility to provide a sporting infrastructure, with the help of others. The Government recently announced a £40 billion national development plan which I hope will benefit all regions, particularly the west of Ireland which needs it more. There are unequal developments. What I and the Government are trying to do for sport involves 0.5 per cent of that figure yet some begrudge the fact that the Government should be allowed to invest that money in sporting infrastructure. This figure is not a lot to ask for sport when one considers that most other Departments receive in excess of £4 billion each.

As regards clubs and organisations, we are trying to assist them as best we can. We have put more money into sport and there is a political will to help sport since it was brought to the Cabinet table. We have invested £56 million in different sports projects and I will continue to assist clubs and organisations over two more allocations which I hope to make.

There was a problem in the past which I have turned round. Small communities, clubs and organisations did not have the resources or population base to garner the required matching funding. Instead of giving them small amounts of money such as £5,000, £10,000 or £20,000 I have been giving them larger percentages of the grants they have been seeking. Thankfully many of these projects are getting off the ground and we are developing a sporting infrastructure. We will continue to do so and much more needs to be done. However, the two entities are separate. While there are £56 million of grant aided projects, unfortunately I had to introduce a sunset clause whereby projects would fall unless organisations were capable of starting work within one year of receiving the grant. This gets the projects up and running because there are not enough developers available.

Unfortunately £8 million of the money allocated to clubs the year before last was not taken up. I cannot do anything about that as it is up to the communities themselves. We will continue to assist them. As regards the overall principle, I accept the Senator’s genuine concerns that this money should go to smaller communities. I assure him that we will continue to assist such communities through the national lottery. This project will also go ahead and I would hope the two will go hand in hand.

I have given money to certain clubs, including two which received £50,000 and £80,000. These clubs received £7,000 and £9,000 from their national organisations. My business argument is that if we are able to go ahead with the national stadium and the FAI has £40 million to spend, the Government and the FAI could together expedite those small football clubs which the Senator and I wish to help.

Deputy Perry: From a business rather than a political point of view no one begrudges the investment in this major development. The Minister said that no one can envisage where sport is going. It is important that we know where it is going from the point of view of such an ambitious plan. Is it fair to say that the viability of the national stadium would be considerably assisted if Eircom Park did not proceed? The FAI is talking about spending £65 million on its stadium. There is a massive difference between that stadium and a campus costing up to £560 million. The difference is in regard to viability.

With regard to the lease document, the golden rule in business is to be void of sentiment. Profitability is the bottom line. If I were submitting a tender document I would read the fine print because if I were putting “x” into a private/public partnership development, I would want to know what I would get out of it. Has a cash flow projection been done on this project for the next five years? Also, what numbers would be expected in a break even position?

The Minister has indicated that the IRFU and the GAA are interested in the project, but is that just a token gesture? It must be remembered that the IRFU and the GAA are void of sentiment when it comes to their own property and receipts at gates. The GAA will not forfeit the revenue from 60,000 people attending an event in Croke Park by allowing them go to the Minister’s stadium without getting something back in return. In the world of business none of those major federations would allow that. While they would support the concept in principle, pat the Minister on the back and say it is a fantastic project, in reality they will not want 60,000 members of the paying public attend events in the national stadium. If I were a business person I would find that difficult to account. That is my observation as someone who is on the outside.

The operation of the management team is important as well. The Minister is offering a 30 year lease. I know that matter is confidential, but he has indicated that five or six people have expressed an interest in the documents and he has only now appointed an architect to run a competition; that advertisement has been issued. It is clear, therefore, that the final edition of this 500 acre park is not yet on paper. Being in the building trade I know it is difficult to put an exact cost on 500 acres, which is a massive development. Are apartments included in that? Is it envisaged that there will be apartments for accommodation? They are the questions that people submitting tender documents will want answered.

Reference was made to the private/public partnership and Deputy Allen brought up the issue of value added tax. The Minister clearly indicated that the VAT goes back into the coffers, but it is an added cost on to the project if the VAT is not reclaimable. We are talking about £70 million if the figure is based on £350 million, as the State investment cost. I concur with Deputy Allen that VAT would have to be charged and the tender documents will be based on the cost that VAT will be included and will not be reclaimable to the investor.

This is a risk investment. I know that the Minister said clearly that Eircom is quite independent and that it can go ahead entirely on its own development at £65 million, but the jewel in the crown is the 45,000 seats and people paying to get in. I cannot see all of these institutions being profitable if Eircom and the GAA go ahead, and the GAA has a massive investment. That is the bottom line.

On the point about breaking even, will the tender documents indicate a break even on year 15, year 12 or whatever in terms of a return on the investment? I would like clarification on that point. Reference was made to 500 acres, but the Minister is not comparing like with like. We are talking about a massive campus incorporating a whole different arena than what Eircom is proposing to do by building its stadium exclusively to house soccer. It is unfair to indicate to the FAI that it can in turn reinvest in what Senator Caffrey has correctly alluded to as the massive investment that is needed in the regions. I am not knocking the project, but I want to ask these questions. We are talking about a national stadium and investing in sport in the regions, but it is unfair to infer that if the FAI concedes, in turn it will get a payback. It is like offering a correct to the FAI that it can reinvest in turn in its own affiliated stadia throughout the country. That is really what the Minister is saying. It is a matter for clarification.

We are talking about the profitability of a 500 acre park. In all honesty this project has gone from a stadium to a campus. It could nearly be called EuroDisney because of the size of it and the amount of projects that have been added on. In respect of the £550 million that has been discussed here, what is the projected running cost of this project per year? What will it take to keep this stadium humming, as they say in business? In other words, what will it take to keep the lights switched on? Will it cost £1 million or £2 million per week to keep it viable? How many people will have to sit on seats to make it viable?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I would say to the Deputy at the outset that prosperity does not visit a country very often and we are now in a position where we can put a little money back into sporting infrastructure for generations to come. It is unlikely that Deputy Perry and myself will benefit from it but future generations will certainly benefit from the stadium.

I want to make an important point about where sport is heading. If the Deputy goes down to the Library and reads an edition of The Irish Times from the turn of the century - I am not sure of the date - he will see that the All-Ireland football final of that year received four lines. Today, the visual, audio and print coverage of sport is phenomenal and it continues to grow. The interest in sport is massive and more and more people are participating in it.

I want to make another point clear to the Deputy because he seems to misunderstand it. Whole sections of the stadium are being put out to tender and it is to design, build, finance, maintain and operate the stadium. All operational costs will be taken on board by the person who gets the contract. It will not be an operational cost on the Government. The costs will be met by the people who tender successfully for the different sections of the project.

The Deputy talked about viability. The questions should not be about viability, but about what the FAI could do with £40 million without having any capital costs or a ball and chain around its neck. The tender procedure is to design, build, finance, maintain and operate.

I take the point about VAT. If the Deputy builds a house, for example, he pays VAT on it. It is a cost to the Deputy. If the Government builds it, it may well be - and the Deputy can take this whatever way he wants - the VAT is returned to the Exchequer.

On the point about the IRFU and the GAA, they have given their full support to this project. They are in discussion with the committee on how they can assist with the stadium. The IRFU is very committed to the project. It thinks it is a wonderful idea and a vision for the future and it is very committed to the entire project. The GAA has also given it its full support. It is a matter of outlining what exactly it will be. Even as we speak, the GAA is undergoing massive changes. The holding of extra matches in hurling have only taken place in the past two or three years. Those matches require provision for large crowds. I believe the All-Ireland football series will be changed. The scene is changing year by year as more and more matches are being held. The Deputy asked relevant questions, but perhaps he did not understand the relevance of some of what is happening. As I pointed out to him previously, we ask that a half of one per cent of the revenue that will accrue from what we will do over the next seven years to be put into all forms of sport.

Deputy Perry:I expect the contents of the tender documents will be concealed in that those documents will not be brought into the public domain. I envisage very few people will invest millions of pounds in it. It will be cushioned for losses for a considerable period. That is my business opinion.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I meant to ask Mr. Teahon to respond to the specific point the Deputy made about the operation of it.

Mr. Teahon: The viability in terms of profitability of these sporting facilities is not hugely sensitive to the number of matches. It is not the case that if an extra match is scheduled, the stadium will suddenly make significant profits. In many instances the spin off from events is considerable. I understand the financial side of the FAI proposal is more dependent on the number of concerts that it can have in Eircom Park and that is perfectly valid, as such a facility is suitable for concerts. Such a facility is more sensitive to issues such as the holding of concerts and the provision of catering than to the issue of whether six or eight matches should be held.

The feasibility study raised the using of some of the Abbotstown site for purposes other than sport or a campus purpose and the Government decided not to do that. There is no intention to release part of the land for commercial gain, to cross-subsidise or anything like that. That is clearly indicated in the advertisement we will place for the architectural and environmental competition to which I referred.

Deputy Perry:Will it not be difficult to furnish tender documents if there is not a clear clarification from the other agencies of their financial commitment to the operation of the stadium once the tender document is given to those who tender for the work?

Mr. Teahon: The Deputy is correct, but I would add the proviso that the commerciality of such facilities is not hugely sensitive to the number of matches that take place. When we are involved in the final negotiations on the stadium we will have to have signed up specific agreements with the IRFU, the GAA, the FAI and others, if they so wish. At present, the IRFU has said it is on board to hold four matches there each year and the GAA has said it is on board to hold two major matches there each year. That is what is outlined in the feasibility study in terms of its basic viability, but the commercial viability of it from the point of view of someone from the private sector tendering for the work is not hugely sensitive on whether six or eight matches will take place each year.

Deputy Perry: That supports my point that the stadium will be very well cushioned. The State is backing this project, it is practically providing guarantees by encouraging private investors to invest in the smaller end of the scale of the project. While such investors are taking a risk they are investing for the long term.

Mr. Teahon: Yes. This project can be compared to similar projects around the world, most recently in the case of the facilities for the Olympics in Sydney. Different facilities have different levels of commerciality. The fact that this project will have a campus is a major plus in terms of investors’ commercial view of it. Our approach to this project is underpinned by two objectives. One is to get the best value for money from its overall development and the other is to ensure we do what others, particularly the Australians, recommend, have the operator in from the word go, as that is greatly significant in the way in which these facilities are designed and interact with each other.

Deputy Perry: Is there any risk this project could end up like a toll road, that once one hits the place one would have to pay money everywhere one goes?

Deputy Finucane: I am glad the Minister clarified that he more or less wishes Eircom well and has no problems with Eircom Park, the FAI project being a stand-alone project and his project proceeding. When he considered the viability of this stadium initially, did he believe the FAI would be on board and, if so, how did that affect the plans for it then and how does it affect them now? I doubt if the Minister read the two independent aviation reports produced by the FAI in support of its project. He emphasised the importance of safety aspect of the project with which we all agree. The FAI commissioned two independent aviation reports, copies of which I have with me, neither of which expresses concern about the safety aspect of Eircom Park. One of the firms carried out the technical aeronautical assessment of Casement Aerodrome for its possible development as Dublin city’s south airport. That firm was engaged by the Department of Defence through Aer Rianta. Another expert from England produced the other report. Those consultants are satisfied that is no concern about the safety aspect of the project.

The Minister said that under no circumstances did he try to obstruct the FAI in the development of Eircom Park. I am concerned the Department of Defence is causing a certain amount of obstruction to the development of Eircom Park to probably get the FAI on board. It is time people accepted the reality of the situation. If the FAI is satisfied with that £65 million project, is able to finance it without seeking any grants from the State and wants to proceed in that direction, there is no point in offering further inducements or talking about getting £40 million through dedicated seats. The Minister talked about the buoyancy of the economy and looking forward to the provision of facilities for future generations. I am sure he has followed closely what has been happening in the dome in London, how is has drained lottery funding and that despite the intervention of various consortiums that project, which started off as a laudable one, is not progressing.

The treatment of the FAI by the Department of Defence is interesting. Material changes to the rules were made within a few days in relation to an industry that was to set up in Tallaght. I wish the industry, American Home Projects, well. The Department of Defence agreed to it when the Tánaiste approached it. Yet there seems to have been obfuscation and deliberate procrastination by the Department of Defence in agreeing to a project, which is supported by reports produced by two independent aviation consultants.

I deplore a situation where a Minister promises to return to somebody on a matter within two weeks, but has not done so nine months down the road. Deputy Coughlan referred to this matter. The Department of Defence stated to the FAI at a meeting on 20 July 1999 that it would revert to it by 15 August 1999 on its proposal. The FAI reports: “when nothing happened by 15 August, we asked to see the Minister. At that meeting on 30 September 1999 with the Minister and the Minister for Defence, we were asked to delay putting in our planning application as the Minister said he would revert to us within two weeks on our proposal. Nine months later we are still waiting for the appropriate letter”.

Deputy Coughlan: What has that got to do with it?

Deputy Finucane: That is a shocking indictment by somebody who is seeking to go ahead with a bona fide project ..

Deputy Coughlan: On a point of order.

Deputy Finucane: .. without any subvention from the State. The sooner people accept this reality and stop this deliberate delay, the better.

Deputy Coughlan: Chairperson, this Committee is rambling on and showing terribly bad manners, particularly to Mr. Treacy who has been sitting and listening even though we are waiting to hear from him about something else. I am seeking direction from the chair. All remarks being made by two members of the Opposition refer only to the FAI. The questions have been typed out by the FAI for these members to ask the Minister and his officials. If the FAI has a problem it should look after it itself and not expect this Committee to do the running on its behalf. I take umbrage at that. We are elected and entitled to ask our own questions. We are here to hear what has to be said, but Deputy Allen and Deputy Finucane are reading out FAI questions and obviously they are not happy with the answers.

Deputy Allen: That is outrageous.

Deputy Coughlan: It is not. I can see you. It is a fact and I am not lying.

Deputy Finucane: With all due respect, I am reading a letter that was sent to me ..

Chairman: There must be order.

Deputy Coughlan: The Minister for Defence is not here. The Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation is here.

Chairman: Deputies, there must be order.

Deputy Finucane: I wish to clarify that. Nobody prepared any questions for me and nobody advised me in relation to questions I should ask. I am reading a letter that was sent to the assistant secretary of the Department of Defence to which the Minister for Defence did not have the good manners to respond. He made a commitment in the letter ..

Chairman: Deputies, I said earlier that everybody would have ample opportunity to ask questions. It is not up to me to ask a Deputy where he or she got their questions. A number of questions were submitted prior to this meeting and were answered and the Deputy had no difficulty with that. We will proceed. Deputy Finucane was asking his questions.

Deputy Allen: Just for the record, chairperson, Deputy Coughlan referred to our lack of manners toward Mr. Treacy.

Deputy Coughlan: Yes. It is terrible.

Deputy Allen: If Deputy Coughlan reads the agenda for today, she will see there was no indication that Mr. Treacy was attending. The agenda I received referred to, first, minutes of the last meeting; second, national sports stadium - discussions with Mr. Paddy Teahon and Mr. Donagh Morgan; third, national sports stadium - discussions with the Minister, Deputy McDaid; fourth, correspondence received and, fifth, any other business. I and my colleagues had no indication of Mr. Treacy’s attendance and we indicated earlier that we needed to separate this issue, which is important, from the other important issue of drug testing in sport. There is no discourtesy. We came here to do our business.

Finally, I deeply resent the suggestion that our questions are being prepared by anybody. We do our own research and get information from as many sources as possible. The questions are being put solely to establish whether this project is viable or whether it will be a huge liability on the taxpayer like the Millennium Dome.

Chairman: Deputy, I do not want any statements. I am sure Mr. Treacy will bear with us for another while. I ask Deputy Finucane to finish his questions.

Deputy Finucane: I will conclude, but I wish to react to Deputy Coughlan’s remarks and clarify matters. The FAI has had no discussions with me about its project. The information I have with me is information which was kindly shown to me this morning by Deputy Allen ..

Deputy Coughlan: What discussions did you have with the Air Corps?

Chairman: The Deputy should address her remarks through the chair.

Deputy Finucane: Deputy Coughlan, I can give you two consultants reports.

Chairman: The Deputy should address his remarks through the chair.

Deputy Finucane: Deputy Coughlan keeps interjecting although she will have an opportunity to speak.

Deputy M. Brennan: No wonder she is objecting. You are talking bull.

Deputy Finucane: Now that Deputy Brennan has returned, I am sure the chair will also give him an opportunity to speak.

Chairman: I will give everybody ample opportunity. If I do not get co-operation, I will abandon the meeting. I need the co-operation of the members. Everybody has something to say and I am trying to be fair. I ask Deputy Finucane to address his remarks through the chair.

Deputy Finucane: I will. The FAI has not discussed this matter with me. I have been following this matter in the media over a period of time and all I can see is a deliberate attempt to undermine the FAI because it has opted for a stand alone project. If the Minister wishes to proceed with the national stadium project, he should recognise the reality and let FAI proceed with Eircom Park if it wishes to proceed with it. Dublin County Council has decided it is a meritorious project.

The viability of the national stadium project was perhaps considered on the basis of having the different sporting organisations on board, including the FAI.

Mr. Teahon: The feasibility study for the stadium specifically operated on the basis that Eircom Park would go ahead. It assumes that Eircom Park will go ahead.

Deputy Finucane: I am pleased to hear that. There will, therefore, be no further obstruction or innuendos or £40 million inducements.

Deputy M. Brennan: Who is obstructing?

Deputy Coughlan: Deputy Allen is the main man obstructing it.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): At no stage have the Taoiseach or myself tried to obstruct Eircom Park. We have encouraged them to go ahead with their project. I pointed out the reasons that we would welcome soccer into the fold because I believe a national stadium is best served by having all sports represented. I simply pointed out why it would be in the interests of the FAI. Eircom Park is not a matter for me or the Government. It is entirely a matter for the FAI and we support it. I believe Deputy Coughlan was pointing out that Deputy Allen was reading from FAI headed notepaper.

Deputy Allen: Deputy Allen was not.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): The Deputy can confirm it or not. The point which must be made clear ..

Deputy Allen: For the record ..

Chairman: Let the Minister finish.

Deputy Allen: I was not reading from FAI notepaper.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Many Deputies in the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and other parties have expressed their full support for this development. I wonder if this is a personal Bernard Allen view of it because many of his party members have expressed full support for it.

Deputy Allen: Cast a smear.

Deputy G. Reynolds: In principle, I am in favour of the national stadium. It is a good idea, but a number of issues should be resolved before we expend the vast amounts of public funding which will be required to provide such a facility. The IRFU needs a new stadium so it will obviously come on board. The FAI wants to do its own thing with Eircom Park. If I were in Government, I would go out of my way to encourage the FAI to get involved with the national stadium because the FAI will be needed for its viability. If it wishes to go ahead with its own development that is fine, but a Government should look seriously at the non-provision of public finances towards that development.

The GAA is developing its own state of the art stadium so we can forget about it with regard to Stadium Ireland. I find it difficult to accept that there is no athletic track in the stadium. It would be remiss of a national stadium not to have that facility, particularly given the professionalism of athletics. It would be possible to bring, at least once or twice each year, major track and field events to the national stadium. That should be considered in the context of the planning process.

I understand that separate tenders will be invited for the contract to build the arena. How long will the tendering process last? The aquatic and leisure centre has to be in place in time for the special Olympics and I assume, one a tender is received, that project will be up and running. With regard to the remainder of the facilities - Arena Ireland, the sports science and medical centre, the multi-purpose halls and outdoor pitches and the tennis centre - will there be an ongoing tendering process? Will it take two years or ten years to complete these projects?

What is the position vis-á-vis public transport to and from the stadium? If we construct a stadium and do not provide public transport facilities in respect of it, our money will be badly spent. This matter must be dealt with in the context of the overall project.

People in this country have a fundamental difficulty when it comes to sharing. The IRFU, the FAI and the GAA all want their own stadia. However, the large Italian soccer clubs all share their stadia with each other. Every small parish in this country has a GAA pitch and local clubs are finding it extremely difficulty to survive.

The concept of a national stadium is good, in principle. However, we must put in place all the pieces of the jigsaw in order to ensure that it is viable and that those for whose use it is intended actually use it. We must also ensure that, when it is constructed, the stadium is state of the art which will allow us to hold any form of sporting event there. Is it envisaged that the stadium will have a sliding roof, similar to the one it is proposed to have at Eircom Park, in order to make it an all-weather facility or has a decision in that regard been made yet?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I appreciate the Deputy’s comments and I agree with him this Government and the previous Administration worked well in partnership with other interests. Partnership has led to success. I want to give the FAI every encouragement to come on board with us and the invitation for that organisation to become involved with Campus Ireland will always be there. However, as already stated, I have no objection if the FAI wants to proceed to build, as they said themselves, their “own emotional home”. I certainly feel that we would benefit from this.

In light of our current prosperity, we should proceed to build the national stadium now because if we do not do so it will never be constructed. If we were to abandon our plans and if the FAI, for some reason or other, was not able to proceed with its plans, the country would be completely bereft of a sporting facility capable of facilitating major international events in the future.

Deputy Reynolds referred to athletics. I have already pointed out that we have invested over £4 million into Morton Stadium, an arena graced by Billy Morton for so many years. A major fund-raising effort was made in the mid 1960s in respect of that stadium and it houses a fine outdoor facility. It is our goal to provide a similar indoor facility at Morton Stadium.

I would like to see more people participating in athletics. There is huge interest in athletics abroad and, in my opinion, it attracts the most interest during the Olympic Games. However, there are a number of sports - soccer, Gaelic football hurling, rugby and, to a lesser extent, horse racing - which attract the interest of large numbers of people. Unfortunately, athletics has been unable to attract such numbers to date. People will sit up all night watching Sonia O’sullivan if she reaches the Olympic final. As a nation we are interested in sports in which our country’s sportsmen and sportswomen are participating. However, athletics does not have the capacity to attract huge numbers of people to attend events held at large stadia.

I agree that if the proper infrastructure was put in place we would be able to attract major international events to the national stadium. However, given that Morton Stadium houses a fine outdoor track and we are now putting in place an indoor track and other facilities there - at a cost of £4.8 million - there is no need to add to the cost of the national stadium. The capacity of Morton Stadium is 20,000 and I would love to see the day when we fill it.

Mr. Teahon: I wish to answer three specific questions. On tenders, we would see ourselves having three further either specific or separate or rounds of tenders between now and the end of the year. The first of these will be for the stadium, because the feasibility study has been completed; the second will be for the other campus facilities, probably together, but allowing people to tender for them individually if they so wish; and the third will be a call for other commercial developments that people see a need for on the Abbotstown site. So there will be three further rounds of tenders.

On public transport, I completely agree with what the Deputy said. One of the executive services team we have employed has specific responsibility as an expert on public transport and, as is evident from the feasibility study, has developed some options which we are now discussing with Fingal County Council, in the first instance, and with the other relevant public agencies. Public transport is essential, not just for the campus and the stadium, but for members of the community who live in the area.

The somewhat vexed question of a roof was considered in the feasibility study and the judgment reached was that a sliding roof should not be provided. The reality is that technology is changing quite significantly, but in terms of the feasibility study, the judgment was clearly that a roof should not be provided.

Deputy G. Reynolds: Has work commenced on the Morton Stadium project? In my humble opinion, if work has not commenced I believe the Minister should reconsider the wisdom of proceeding. In principle, I believe that all facilities should be put in place in the national stadium. For a small country, it is fine to have a decent athletics track. However, if we have to spend £4.5 million improving existing facilities and work has not yet commenced, it would be more sensible to spend this money on providing an athletics track at the national stadium.

My other point relates to the sliding roof. The GAA has built a state of the art stadium, but you would think we were in Sydney and not Dublin, where it rains most of the time. It would be practical to provide the national stadium with a sliding roof in order to cover the playing surface. If we were blessed with ample sunshine it would be wonderful, but that is not the case.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): The athletics track is already in place at Morton Stadium, I am referring to the provision of an indoor facility.

Deputy G. Reynolds: I know that.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I accept what the Deputy is saying, but I am referring to the construction of an indoor facility at Santry. As already stated, Morton Stadium already has a capacity of 20,000.

With regard to the sliding roof, I have been in a number of stadia which have such roofs. As Mr. Teahon pointed out, technology in this area is changing all the time. For example, I attended the rugby world cup final in Cardiff and the pitch was a disaster because the authorities there have failed to put in place the proper surface. Manchester United Football Club has problems with its pitch at Old Trafford because, even though it does not have a sliding roof, the stands at the ground are so high that the sun does not reach the playing surface. It is our intention to use our natural facilities and I am sure we will have a perfect surface.

Deputy Coughlan: Much of the emphasis in this discussion has been male-orientated, relating to rugby, football and GAA, of which I am as big a supporter as others. I agree with Deputy Reynolds that the provision of a national stadium for all other federations and sporting organisations is a moral obligation on this State. Just because one does not play football does not mean one cannot have proper.. [mike off for 20 seconds]. It is incumbent on this State to provide those facilities. We have the opportunity and there is another debate apart from the one concerning the FAI, where many people are complaining about all this money being provided and local facilities not being provided. Both can work together in tandem. I fully support the concept. We should have started work on it 25 years ago. However, it is a fabulous vision and an opportunity for everyone.

I compliment Mr. Teahon and his colleagues on the work they have done in the past few years in pulling this project together and taking a great deal of flak about it. I want to clarify the community element in Abbotstown, which is important. Everyone here is concerned about value for money and I am sure that will be uppermost in the minds of the group overlooking this project. However, I agree about the public transport issue and all types of access. One cannot still get the train at the built-in airport in London. There are concerts on the docks, but one cannot get the bus. When the opportunity is there, regardless of how much it costs, we must do it right so there will be no problems as a consequence. Anyone coming here can take a bus, use Luas, drive and park. The opportunity is there with the land that is available.

I hope, and everybody is anticipating that, there will be no delays in the provision of facilities for the Special Olympics. Mr. Teahon has more or less indicated that will be the case. A hobby horse of mine, which I am sure is in legislation, although the practicalities are not always there, is facilities for the disabled so this project will be available to everyone with any type of disability - including vision and hearing. This project should be accessible for everybody in the country. I compliment the work that has been done and I wish those involved well. There is a narrow-mindedness in this country which means we have not had the opportunity to have these facilities in the past number of years. As someone who is younger than other members, but not that young any more, I would like sport for all. The women and younger people of this country should also have access to national facilities.

Regarding Eircom Park, it is abundantly clear that the FAI, as an institution, can do what they want and that they have not been encompassed in this project. However, people are being pragmatic and are indicating they are welcome to participate. I anticipate that in the next number of years, all of these organisations will work together. This will have to start at the top. I am from a large parish with three football pitches for soccer, two GAA pitches and four community centres. If we put all the money we have gathered in the past 20 years, we would have an Eircom Park. I am sure this is the case everywhere in the country. The GAA, the soccer clubs and the IRFU are all to blame. If we had all worked together 30 years ago, every parish would have fabulous facilities.

Regardless of people’s emotional ties to wherever they come from, this project should go ahead as quickly as possible. I agree with Deputy Allen that we are entitled to ask questions and ensure there is value for money because if there is not, everybody is accountable. The tit-for-tat which is happening at the moment should stop. We should be progressive and professional about the matter. I wish the project well and hopefully this Committee will be at its official opening in the near future.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I thank the Deputy for her remarks. She is right that this is not just about the FAI. There are 70 national sporting organisations in the country, all of whom are looking for a national home. We hope to be able to facilitate a large number of them. All of them, including the FAI, have welcomed the Government’s proposal to go ahead with the national stadium. Our economy is growing at three times the rate of any other country in Europe and we are the only country in Europe which does not have a national sporting stadium. We have a national library, national museum, national gallery and national concert hall, as do other countries. However, we are the only country in Europe without a national sporting stadium. I appreciate the points made by Deputy Coughlan and I hope the support continues. There is support across this House and the country for the concept. Deputy Coughlan made some points about infrastructure with which Mr. Teahon will deal.

Mr. Teahon: We are operating at two local levels. We are operating in relation to the local authority and as I said earlier, we hope to make a detailed presentation in the near future. We are working with the manager and the local authority. We have also had a number of meetings with the Dublin 15 Community Council. We asked them if they were comfortable with it, to give us a submission which would be put out with the architectural and environmental competition which will be advertised and they have done so. When that goes out, there will be an appendix which will set down the community concerns. We are obliging people who wish to compete in that to consult with the local community as well as other relevant people.

I agree with Deputy Coughlan on the Special Olympics and people with disabilities. We are looking forward to getting the aquatic and leisure centre ready in time and to having the Special Olympics there. The issue of access for people with disabilities was specifically covered in the feasibility study. We will be putting that into operation in implementing the project.

Senator Farrell: I endorse everything Deputy Coughlan said and congratulate the Minister for his hands-on approach. He has put money into every town, village and parish - no Minister has put in more. He cannot be accused of not distributing money and not supporting sport. He has had a hands-on approach all the way. I am disappointed there is so much opposition to this because for years we heard nothing, but “we need a national stadium”. Now we have it. I am disappointed at Deputy Allen who was Minister with responsibility for sport when I brought the amputee international golf here. I thank him because he was very supportive and helpful, as was Deputy Fahey who was Minister when I brought the One-armed Golfing Association here. This is an opportunity to thank both of them because I never got an opportunity to do so publicly. We are now providing a stadium to enable us to bring the Special Olympics here and they seem to be opposing it. I cannot understand the reason for that. The other reason I do not understand why he is so opposed to it is because his colleague, Deputy Gay Mitchell, when he was Lord Mayor of Dublin, advocated bringing the Olympics to Ireland. This is the first step of his dream. It was ridiculed by many, but I congratulated him on his foresight. This is the first step in realising that dream and I am amazed Fine Gael is so opposed to what some of its members advocated.

I see a funny thing happening today and one could say history is repeating itself. When a certain development in the west was promoted by a Fianna Fáil Government, people in this House said it was a foggy, boggy plateau and that it would be a white elephant. They referred to Knock Airport which is a huge success story. I would say that many of those people would like to blot out the records of this House because they probably regret what they said at the time. I appeal to those members making statements today to be careful because they will not be glad when they cannot erase them when this stadium will be a success story. It will bring honour and glory to Ireland. We are marching with the best nations in the world. We are on top in electronics and in sport, given our size. We will not just have a national stadium, but also a national complex and campus which will cater for all types of international sport. I wish the Minister well and I hope and pray that he will be Minister when the foundation sod is cut and that he will be present for the official opening in 2002. I hope to get a ticket to be present to welcome the Special Olympics as a person who has a serious interest in disabilities.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I thank Senator Farrell for his remarks. He pointed out a number of areas, one of which is that we look to the future. Who would have thought that 27 per cent of inward investment from the United States would be coming to this country? We have achieved a great deal and we should utilise that prosperity. I see it impacting not just on sport, but also on the environment and health. Sport is educational and has impact across the board. The Senator has a futuristic attitude.

Deputy M. Brennan: I support this project, as I always have. I have attended nearly every meeting of this Committee. In about half the meetings in the past two years Deputy Allen has raised the issue of our national stadium. I am in favour of progress. We do not have a large national stadium and we need one. There was a great deal of discussion some years ago about rugby matches and major soccer matches being played in Croke Park. Here we have an opportunity for all games to be played in our national stadium.

I sincerely hope this proceeds as soon as possible and sooner rather than later. We need it now. We have a growing population in this country for the first time. Approximately 2,000 people and 1,500 refugees come into this country every month. We have refugees in the town of Tobercurry at present and one of them, from Chechnya, plays soccer with the local soccer club. He thought he might play with Sligo Rovers, but I do not believe he is good enough. However, he plays soccer with an amateur soccer club in Tobercurry. With the influx of people and refugees into the country, this will be a changed country in 20 or 30 years time. We need a sports complex and all the sporting facilities of which we can avail. I do not like to see people trying to knock their provision. Once we have the money to provide these facilities, we should provide them.

We should have a swimming pool in every small town within a 20 or 30 mile radius of each other. We have one swimming pool in Sligo town and that is a 25 metre pool. We need such a pool in most small towns in this country for our younger people. There are quite a number of people who cannot afford to go on holidays or to take a bus or car to Sligo town. We need all the facilities we can get.

I thank the Minister, Deputy McDaid, for the amount of money he has given to Sligo Rovers. In the past two years he has given it £200,000 to try to upgrade its facilities in Sligo. We have dropped to the first division, but I hope we will be back in the premier division soon.

I laughed when Senator Farrell mentioned Knock Airport. We are all familiar with the debates which took place in this House on the money spent on Knock Airport. Very little was spent on it as far as I am concerned, but it is a great facility.

I listened to Senator Caffrey earlier. I read in yesterday’s paper about the massive benefits the gas field find off the west coast of Mayo will bring to Belmullet. Some 1,000 jobs will be created in construction and a few hundred permanent jobs will be created after that. That is a great benefit. They will soon be seeking better sports facilities.

I welcome all the money which has been made available. I would like that more money would be made available to small golf clubs throughout the country, that is, where people, not multinationals, have set up golf clubs. These are people who have taken the initiative to buy land and raise money through £100 ticket lotteries or draws. Money should be made available, if possible, to try to facilitate these people in small towns with nine hole golf courses.

The Minister should proceed with the national stadium. As regards the Eircom Park stadium, perhaps one of the Minister’s officials could tell me what will be the capacity of that stadium and of the national stadium. If Eircom Park will only be in the region of 50,000 or 60,000, it will be too small.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I thank the Deputy for those remarks. The answer to his final question is that the national stadium will have a capacity of 80,000 and I understand that the capacity of Eircom Park will be 45,000.

I appreciate the points made by the Deputy regarding swimming and aquatic facilities. I have already pointed out that swimming is the most expensive sport to furnish. However, outside walking, it is the most popular sporting or recreational pastime we have. Accordingly, the Government will invest £45 million in swimming facilities because of their importance. Many inland counties do not have swimming facilities. It is a sport for kids of a very young age up to people of advanced years and is very healthy. I recently met the local authorities and announced that we were increasing the grant aid for swimming pools from the original figure of £2 million to £3 million. That is now available and, from that point of view, there is a huge investment in swimming. It is something we want to cater for in future because, outside walking, it is the most popular sport.

Senator Moylan: I urge the Minister and all concerned to proceed with the national stadium as quickly as possible. We are not just looking at three, four or five years - we are talking about young children starting primary school now; when they reach third level or become active in sport there will be a stadium there for them to enjoy. I hope Eircom Park, with a capacity of approximately 40,000, moves ahead in case it is needed from a soccer perspective. The GAA stadium is also needed; given the way it is moving with open draws in hurling and football one national stadium will not be adequate. Matches will be broadcast all over the world and will promote Ireland. We look forward to the national stadium hosting international soccer matches; perhaps a European final could be played here. That is what we must look at; we must look at the bigger picture and at the situation ten to 15 years down the road. I compliment everyone involved, but the one problem I see is that a running track should be included. It should be possible to include it in the facility at a later date if needed. I appreciate the money and development invested in Morton Stadium, but we must ensure there are facilities for the maximum number of Irish people to enjoy world class athletic competition. I compliment the Minister on his contribution to sport all over the country. He has looked after all sports with lottery funds; he and his officials have given a lot of help to many sports. We must continue to help people develop their abilities in all sports. I wish the Minister well.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I take on board the point Senator Moylan made. One could have the facility there for European Cup finals or whatever in future. That is true. UEFA currently states that a stadium must have a minimum capacity of 64,000 - I am open to correction - in order to host a UEFA cup final. UEFA locates these finals around Europe depending on the facilities available. I see no reason why this country should not have those facilities.

Regarding soccer in Ireland, we want to help the FAI in every way to develop soccer in conjunction with them. While we may have a difference of opinion on the stadium, I thank the President of the FAI for his generous remarks regarding the money we have invested in soccer facilities. The FAI has also come to me with proposals for an under 21 league and we should also look at this proposal. We have very good schoolboy and senior structures, but we tend to lose players at 17 or 18 and if we had an under 21 facility this would not happen. That would be very beneficial to players and I am very supportive of the idea.

Chairman: It was agreed on 15 June that we would have John Treacy attend to talk about anti-doping measures. It was also agreed to deal with this at 12 noon, but I regret it was not on. It was always intended to have John Treacy on today. I intend to finish the discussion at 3.50 p.m. so I am giving Deputy Allen one supplementary. In deference to everyone, whoever is speaking at 3.45 will be cut, so keep your questions brief, as I will introduce John Treacy at 3.50. He has had great patience today.

Senator Moylan: No wonder he was world champion.

Chairman: He has probably learnt a lot, like the rest of us.

Deputy Allen: The chairman has been very patient. Words are being put in our mouths. Nobody opposes a national stadium, but we have a responsibility to question the costing and the feasibility of it. If we are satisfied that the costings and figures add up and that the development of a national stadium will not be a millstone around the neck of sport for the foreseeable future we will give it our consent. However, today’s evidence suggests otherwise.

Also, the strategy for sport published in 1997 was published because up to 1994 there was no complete plan for sport in this country and as a result, sport, without a business plan, was not enjoying the resources it should have got from the Department of Finance. In 1997 a strategy plan outlined the need for a senior Ministry and the need for a clear strategy in the development of facilities. I compliment the Minister on following the recommendations of that strategy plan by setting up a statutory sports council and he has carried out many of the plan’s proposals. However, I must put on record my concern that the estimated capital cost of this project will now be in the area of approximately £1 billion and I fear this will be a serious millstone around the neck of sport in the foreseeable future.

Mr. Teahon told us that six events would make the stadium viable. At some stage I would like that answer to be fleshed out - perhaps not today - while he also said that other activities on the campus would contribute to the viability of the overall project and the stadium itself. He mentioned activities in his opening statement such as an aquatic centre, tennis courts and so on; I did a number of feasibility studies on this and those are all guaranteed loss makers. Most of the projects that came in which were demanding support from the Exchequer. There were plenty of proposals, but most of them demanded Exchequer support. I do not understand how the figure of six major events guaranteeing viability was arrived at. What six events would guarantee maximum attendance in the stadium?

I again call for publication of the Snow report. The Department of Defence is now the last line of defence for the Government in its opposition to Eircom Park. The Government is speaking out of both sides of its mouth at the same time. It is giving lip service to Eircom Park, but I am convinced that every effort is being made to ensure it fails. I regret having to say so.

Regarding the expansion of GAA activities, I cannot understand where the proposal to use the national stadium leaves places like Thurles, Limerick, Killarney, Páirc Uí Chaoimh, the Seapoint development and Dr. Hyde Park. Those are major centres that could take capacities from 40,000 to 60,000. I do not know what this adds up. The Snow report should be published and should not be suppressed any longer. I was supplied with the correspondence between the FAI and Mr. Michael O’Donoghue, assistant secretary of the Department of Defence. The FAI has nailed its colours to the mast regarding expert reports on Baldonnel and in all fairness the Government, in these times of openness and transparency, should let us see the Snow report.

Chairman: The time is up. I thank the Minister, Mr. Teahon and Mr. Morgan for coming in. There is great interest in the national stadium and today’s discussion was most welcome. I understand members may feel there should be more discussion, but I have endeavoured to be as fair as possible and to give each member an opportunity. This was a very useful discussion.

We will now move on to the issue of anti-doping. I express regret to Mr. John Treacy for the delay, but there is much interest in the national stadium. I call on the Minister to make a brief statement on anti-doping. A number of questions were left unanswered on 15 June which were to be answered today.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): I thank the chairman and members of the Joint Committee for their invitation to address some of the issues we did not manage to deal with on the last occasion. Members are aware that I made the combating of drug taking in sport a priority on my appointment as Minister for sport. It is anathema to me and all right thinking people that sport, which is such a valuable and valued aspect of all our lives, can be infiltrated and taken over by those who see sporting competition in terms of a contest between those who manufacture performance enhancing drugs and those who test for them. The establishment of a national anti-doping in sport programme sprang from a recognition of the need to protect sport as we know it from being overtaken by those who seek to undermine and undersell the principles of fair play and sportsmanship by cheating.

I am delighted this programme, which is under the direction of the Irish Sports Council, is truly a reality with almost 350 tests carried out to date. I am proud that Ireland, a nation with a proud sporting tradition, is one of only 40 countries worldwide which now has its own anti-doping in sport programme. When one considers that 200 countries will compete in the forthcoming Olympic Games in Sydney our establishment of an anti-doping programme is a major achievement. John Treacy, chief executive officer of the Irish Sports Council, is with me and will assist me in any further information members require on this programme to date.

Deputy Allen: I support the Minister in his condemnation of the cheats in a wide range of sports. I hope the international Olympic movement will be successful in tracking down and rooting out the cheats who are taking the glory from honest athletes who suffer as a result of those cheats.

I referred to the strategy for sport published in 1997 which set out the proposals for a national drug testing programme. I welcome the advent of that programme, but I would ask Mr. Treacy to flesh out some of its details. I am concerned and have received expressions of concern from a number of federations regarding the mechanics of the programme. Organisations are concerned that when a sample is taken from an athlete it is sealed and sent to an International Olympic Council accredited drug testing centre abroad. The result of the analysis is sent to the Irish Sports Council and then to the federation of which the subject is a member. It is then up to the federation to have a system of sanctions in place and to impose those sanctions on the athlete. That is my interpretation of the procedure which I presume is correct.

Mr. Treacy: Yes.

Deputy Allen:It has been communicated to me, and I agree, that this system imposes unfair pressure on federations. A federation has to impose a sanction, but if it is contested by the individual the federation has to defend and withstand any subsequent litigation arising from the sanction. This exposes a federation to potentially significant legal costs and, perhaps, the payment of damages if the athlete’s action is successful.

The federations have pointed out that this risk reduces their capacity and determination to impose sanctions. These concerns were not communicated to me by the Irish Amateur Boxing Association, but in the recent case of the test carried out on one of its members I presume the procedure I set out was followed. Does Mr. Treacy or the Minister consider that the concerns of other federations were a factor in this case? Would the Minister or Mr. Treacy agree that this issue should be looked at as an organisation could be ruined if this type of action was taken by an athlete? Should the Minister and the Department not consider protecting federations if they suffer because of their implementation of the national drug testing programme set up by the Government?

Mr. Treacy: I thank the Deputy who correctly detailed the procedure. What we are doing in Ireland is no different to what is happening in the UK and most other countries in Europe. Since the inception of this programme in November, the sports council has been very proactive with the national governing bodies in terms of putting the programme together. We sat down with the national governing bodies which are now part of the programme and worked through a model or policy for their constitutions. We provided this advice in a hands-on manner working with the associations in getting them to implement this programme.

Everyone should bear in mind what the programme is about. It is about protecting sport and the integrity of sport. Through the Minister, we are ensuring that we have an anti-doping programme in which we have joined 40 other countries. It is vital that we do so.

The sports council has taken responsibility for and is the guardian of the anti-doping programme. We have contracted IDTM to carry out the sampling of athletes. We have also contracted a hospital in London to analyse the samples. The sports council takes responsibility for a large part of this process in terms of the sampling, the laboratory and the whole analysis.

In the case of a positive test, the sports council ensures that all the procedures are followed. We have to be satisfied that all the procedures are airtight before we pass the positive test on to a national governing body. We have to be satisfied and we take responsibility for those procedures. If we are satisfied we pass the result on to the national governing body. I know of nowhere in Europe where governments impose sanctions on athletes. It is the responsibility of the national governing bodies and of international federations to impose those sanctions. It is part of the rules and regulations of governing bodies and they do so to protect their sports. That is their responsibility. The Irish Sports Council is helping the national governing bodies and the international federations to impose their rules.

I note what was said about the IABA and about leaving itself open to legal challenges. Every governing body must stand up for its sport. The issue of indemnification by the Irish Sports Council has arisen. The sports council is not in the business of indemnifying national governing bodies. Governing bodies can be challenged on many issues and anti-doping is one of them. A number of national governing bodies have no difficulty with the insurance issue and the issue is essentially one of insurance. The governing bodies with which I have been in contact within the last week have comprehensive liability insurance which they have extended to cover anti-doping. One of the governing bodies, the IGB, told me that because it was not taking the sampling itself it was not necessary to be insured. It was covered by its normal insurance policy. That is how governing bodies are proceeding and how they should proceed. They must protect themselves and that is what they are doing. The Irish Sports Council provides a huge level of support to governing bodies for their administration. They can claim for insurance costs within their administration budgets. Insurance is part of their overall administration grants.

We take huge responsibility for this programme. We work with the governing bodies, but they cannot renege on their responsibilities. We must ensure that athletes will not be discouraged from taking part in a sport because it involves drug taking. Governing bodies have a moral obligation to stand up for their sport.

Deputy Coughlan: I compliment the Minister and the Irish Sports Council. We are one of an elite group of countries which provide their own national programmes. The Irish anti-doping programme provides a support for the sporting fraternity.

This afternoon a radio programme broadcast a discussion on drugs in sport. Some former athletes explained why athletes use drugs and discussed detection methods. Is the use of drugs a sporadic activity or is the culture of drug taking creeping into sport, even at local and county level in Ireland? Will the national anti-doping strategy act as a deterrent to the use of drugs in sport?

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): The advent of commercialism means that the difference between winning and losing can mean the difference between huge financial gain and obscurity. For that reason there will always be a demand for performance enhancing drugs. A study done in the United States found that more than 60 per cent of women involved in a particular sport said that even though they knew drugs were detrimental to their future health they were prepared to use them in order to reach the winner’s podium. Some people have a will to win at all costs.

We would be very foolish to think performance enhancing drugs are not being taken in this country. I am concerned that enough research is not being done on food supplements such as creatine which produce increased muscle mass. There are reports of these supplements being taken in schools and by keep fit enthusiasts. Drug testing began in Grenoble in 1968, but abuse has existed for a very long time. We are always playing catch up, but we are catching up rapidly. I admire the Australians for introducing blood testing, something I advocated more than two years ago. A blood test is now being carried out to detect EPO. This drug was first used in 1989 where it was administered to kidney patients whose haemoglobin counts dropped dramatically. It is a marvellous drug which is capable of increasing haemoglobin and the oxygen carrying power of blood. Drugs which are used in sport usually begin by being very useful in medicine. Unfortunately, in the same year between 15 and 20 cyclists and between eight and ten Scandinavian orienteers who had been using EPO died. The drug thickens the blood stream and places the end organs at risk. The drug is difficult to detect because it leaves the system within 24 hours, but it takes two to three weeks for its effect to build up. The blood test has been introduced in Australia in a way that will detect the effect of the drug rather than the drug itself. It has been found in renal units through the use of the electron microscope that the haematic rate of people who are taking EPO is different from that of people in whom the substance occurs naturally. The soluble transfer is another solution which is changed in people who are taking the drug. The test being used in Australia will detect previous use of EPO. This is why so many countries are withdrawing athletes from the Olympic Games in order to avoid the embarrassment of failing a test. I admire the Australians for introducing this test. Not enough research has been done in the use of food supplements. People who are using them should be warned of their possible dangers. The Sydney Olympic Games will not be gauged on their success or failure, the expenses incurred or the massive investment in the stadium. It will be gauged on the world records that will be broken. The Sydney Games will be gauged on their integrity and on how they deal with drugs. That is what the world is looking to. Some ominous signs are coming from the Games’s major sporting companies. For example, IBM has indicted that it is no longer interested in being involved in the next Olympic Games. That is a major blow to the Olympic movement. If they do not do something about the drugs issue we could be witnessing the demise of the Games, although I hope that will not be the case.

Deputy Allen: I thank the Minister for his contribution. We are sorry for detaining John Treacy so long, but I wish the Minister and Mr. Treacy every success at the Games. I am delighted that Mr. Treacy got his accreditation. I regret that Mr. Hickey was not elected to the standing committee of the international council today. It would have been an honour to have somebody from this country nominated, but he came third out of seven. I wish both our representatives well and I am sure they will enjoy the Games also.

Chairman: I want to thank the Minister and Mr. Treacy. Does Mr. Treacy want to reply on anything?

Mr. Treacy: I found it harder to qualify for these Games than the previous four. I thank the Committee members for their time. I was pleased to come here and talk about anti-doping measures. Deputy Coughlan hit the nail on the head with regard to the whole anti-doping programme. It is about instilling the right culture in Irish sport and we will be doing that through the anti-doping programme, the education side and through our code of ethics and good conduct which we hope will be launched in the next month. We are talking about bringing fun and enjoyment back into sport, starting with children. That is where we stand.

Deputy Allen: Would Mr. Treacy say “relaunched”?

Mr. Treacy: Free launched.

Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Treacy. I thank the Minister for spending the day with us. He is very generous with his time and we really appreciate it. I thank John Treacy and compliment him on the work he is doing. He is an athlete and he knows what it is all about. I too wish him and the Minister well on their visit to the Olympic Games. On behalf of the members of the Committee, I wish the Irish team well and I ask the Minister to convey our good wishes to them when they arrive in Sydney.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): If we do get heated about certain aspects, it is all about our passion for sport. We will get in touch with the Committee regarding some aspects. I want to thank all the people who assisted us today and hopefully we will get some of the questions answered.

The Joint Committee adjourned at 4.15 p.m.

* Deputies Theresa Ahearn and Martin Brady were substituting for Deputies Bernard Allen and John Moloney. Senators Paddy Burke and Jarlath McDonagh were substituting for Senators Ernie Caffrey and Fintan Coogan.

** In the absence of Senator F. Coogan for part of the meeting

* In the absence of Deputies B. Kelleher and L. Aylward and Senator T. Kett respectively