Brendan Ryan (Labour)

With that invitation, let me say that the FAI must be the definition of incompetence in running a sporting organisation. We have had the mystery of how stadia appear and disappear. How many headquarters has soccer had in Cork? At one stage what is now the second GAA pitch was the headquarters of the most prestigious team. It then moved to Turners Cross. Afterwards it moved to what is now the dog track and then it moved back again. I am horrified at the number of chief executives the organisation has had. I believe it is seven.

I am worried about the stewardship of the national stadium with that apparent level of inability to do anything in a coherent fashion. A native of the city in which I live, when he finally broke the silence, pointed out that on international duty the players travelled in economy class and the important people travelled in business class. It is not so much a question of who travelled in which class. However, the idea that a sporting organisation could believe that was a reasonable way to do business suggests a lack of connection with reality and with proper management. In that context I am concerned about the management of the proposed new facility at Lansdowne Road.

The contrast between that and the extraordinary foresight of the GAA is stark. The GAA decided to proceed with the development of Croke Park before it had a guarantee of a cent of public money. It proceeded because it knew it faced only two routes - backwards or forwards. Instead of spending years agonising, it decided to have faith in the future and proceed. The development of Croke Park was an extraordinarily high-risk project which the GAA took on with great courage and for which it deserves to be commended unequivocally. Let us not have a rider saying, "But now it should..." I believe it is in the GAA's own commercial interest to rent Croke Park to other organisations on a commercial basis.

However, I can fully understand the reasons some in the GAA have reservations about doing so. We need to consider the historical role of the three biggest football-playing organisations in the State, from where they come and their previous associations. I grew up in a home with clear perceptions about each of the organisations and who played different games. While I am thankful that is now history, a clear perception and feeling existed about the matter.

In many ways I would be defined as the ultimate urban liberal. Urban liberals should lay off the GAA, which represents a soft target for people living in south Dublin in particular. I remember a prominent rugby player who lived in north Dublin. He stated in a radio interview that he travelled from where he lived in Malahide or Babbriggan to a certain well-known rugby-playing school in the centre of Dublin. Until he was almost 30 years of age he did not even know of the existence of Croke Park, much less what games were played there. There is an element in our society, which from that level of lack of knowledge — I will avoid using more pejorative terms — has decided that it must pronounce on the GAA.

I mentioned this matter on the Order of Business this morning and will repeat it at greater length now. We got to the ludicrous position last week where, first, an eminent academic lawyer, who is entitled to whatever opinion he wishes, suggested that the GAA might be in breach of EU and Irish competition law. He was followed by a senior official of the Competition Authority who offered similar views. This is getting into the realm of the ludicrous. The only thing that could follow would be an insistence that the Roman Catholic Church would be obliged to allow any other religion to use one of its churches for fear of abusing a dominant position. It is ludicrous to try to say that an amateur sporting organisation, run on an entirely voluntary basis at local level with players and referees who are unpaid, is somehow the subject of competition law that is meant to deal with the machinations of ruthless multinationals.

I believe the GAA acts in its own interest. I also believe that if stupid urban liberals have the wit not to make pronouncements we will not be short of a venue if Lansdowne Road is not available for major internationals. Many sensible people in the GAA are interested and do not want to see any national team having to play home games outside the country. However, it is counterproductive and wrong to suggest the GAA is under some moral or legal obligation to have others decide who it should allow use its stadium.

There are logical inconsistencies in the approach taken by the GAA. Why international boxing should be acceptable and not soccer, and why a game played under a compromise set of international rules should be acceptable and something else not is entirely open to intellectual debate. While it may be entertaining to discuss over a pint, it is not the issue. The issue is the sovereign right of a sporting organisation to decide how its stadium is used and understanding that it will not accept Government funding with explicit or implicit conditions attached.

In his speech the Minister correctly expanded beyond the question of large stadia in Dublin to sporting facilities nationally. He spoke at length about the Ryder Cup which is to be held in Ireland in two years time. Like everyone else, I am delighted it will take place here. However, in terms of investment in sporting facilities for use by the Irish people, I have reservations about the scale of proliferation of golf courses — they seem to have a capacity for reproduction that only rabbits can exceed. Golf courses by their nature are usually in areas of considerable amenity value. The Old Head of Kinsale Golf Club, one of the most prestigious judging by its charges, has prevented traditional public access to one of the most scenic seaside areas in County Cork. It is a matter of friction that the company that developed it was granted planning permission on condition that public access continued. The company then went to the High Court and, ultimately, to the Supreme Court. Having previously accepted the planning conditions, it contended that some of them were impossible and, sadly, the courts agreed with it. The right of the public to cross the course to go to the amenity area that was always open to them — although there was no right of way — has been taken away. It is extraordinary that we develop sporting facilities that are elitist and in the process remove recreational opportunity from people, barring them from quasi-sporting facilities they would have had otherwise.

Fundamentally, we still do not spend enough money on sports facilities. If I swim in a public swimming pool for an hour three times a week, I will spend more in a year than I would pay in membership for a private swimming pool that I could use all the time. That issue must be addressed by those who believe in public access to good quality sporting facilities. The costs are prohibitive in public facilities and the private facilities are beyond people's reach because of the initial sum involved. If we are to deal with the issues of restless youth and under age drinking, part of the solution is old fashioned: very few young people who are actively involved in sport get themselves into serious trouble during those dangerous years between 13 and 20. For that reason alone, it is worthwhile investing far more in sports facilities.