Article in today's Belfast Telegraph below. Your thoughts, please?
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/sto...sp?story=716410
How GAA escaped from moral Maze
The proposed multi-sports stadium at the site of the Maze prison is causing problems for the GAA. Terry McLaughlin examines the dilemmas it poses for the association....
27 November 2006
The GAA will not hold a province-wide vote of its membership on its decision to back the proposed new national sports stadium on the site of the former Maze Prison.
The decision means that those in the GAA membership opposed to the Maze development because of the deaths of ten republican prisoners while on hunger strike will not be allowed to scupper the project.
The GAA is prepared to take stock of all viewpoints before making a final recommendation to central council in Croke Park regarding the multi-sports stadium concept.
The gauging of opinion, however, will be confined to Ulster and will not involve any other section of the association.
But while that process has already started, sources within the GAA told the Belfast Telegraph that the only criteria for a final decision will be one "based on economic viability and the positive benefits for community progress".
The Northern Ireland Office (NIO) will be relieved to learn that while the GAA is committed to as comprehensive as possible an analysis of grassroots opinion, it will not allow those views to ultimately jeopardise the scheme.
NIO negotiators currently involved in the brokering of a deal to satisfy all of the participating sports bodies has given a commitment, backed at the highest levels of Government, that any newly-elected Stormont Assembly will not be able to dump the present Maze blueprint.
The Belfast Telegraph has learned that the Government, during the latest meeting held at Stormont within the past month, gave a firm commitment that it will not be deflected by business or political demands to accommodate an alternative development to the Maze.
"The only viable option on the table as far as the Government and Minister (David) Hansen is concerned is the Maze," GAA sources confirmed.
"That is our viewpoint from the start of this process."
The GAA is aware of the still high level of opposition by sections of the association to the usage of the former Long Kesh prison where ten IRA Hunger strikers died in 1981.
Last year, before stepping down from office, former Antrim chairman Joe O'Boyle declared that his county would never play at the former prison site.
New chairman John McSparran has adopted a much more conciliatory approach.
And while he has said that he can understand the argument of football supporters who want a Belfast venue, it is inconceivable that Antrim, provided they are given assurances regarding the continued status of Casement Park, would carry out their boycott threat.
The biggest concern, however, for Antrim is the future of Casement Park on the Andersonstown Road.
The Antrim board has genuine fears that despite the millions spent in recent years in the refurbishment of the 36,000 capacity venue it will become a white elephant if the Maze scheme goes ahead.
As part of any future deal to smooth the way forward for the Maze scheme the GAA is, it is understood, is prepared to provide assurances that Casement Park will be used for the hosting of major games.
"We want to concentrate on the positives," a spokesman said.
"Any new stadium should be seen as complimentary to, rather than a direct competitor for Casement Park.
"The rapid expansion of Gaelic games will require additional facilities in the years ahead."
The use of the ground for an Ulster final has not been ruled out.
The findings of a special Ulster council subcommittee on grassroots opinion will be forwarded to Croke Park.
But the Belfast Telegraph has learned that the GAA will not allow the issue to be treated as any form of referendum based around emotional rhetoric.
The Belfast Telegraph has learned that representatives of the Ulster council headed by the president Michael Greenan and secretary Danny Murphy will take the final decision on the Maze before their recommendations are forwarded to the GAA's Central Council.
The 42,000 capacity stadium concept has the full backing of both the British and Irish governments, as well the local political parties, as being able to provide the template for a working reality of a shared future for Northern Ireland through the medium of sport.
The GAA, as the single most important sports element in securing cross-community backing of the project, has also signalled its positive intent.
The message that the GAA is convinced is the correct one to get across is that the economic benefits of expanding the sporting horizons of Northern Ireland to just eight miles outside the city of Belfast has the potential to redraw mindsets as well as maps.
© 2006 Independent News and Media (NI)
P.S. I appreciate this subject has been touched on before in this Section, but it seems to have been some time ago, with events having moved on since
Quotethose in the GAA membership opposed to the Maze development because of the deaths of ten republican prisoners while on hunger strike
I didn't think this was really the problem with the maze stadium as far as GAA members in Ulster were concerned.
I think the main issue is that we don't need a new stadium in Ulster, and shouldn't be pressurised into agreeing to it. We have enough stadiums of our own! the stadium isn't viable unless all 3 sporting organisations are involved – and to be fair, if its to make enough cash to pay for itself and not be a white elephant, they need the high crowds that only the GAA can attract.
The GAA as far as I know, were first to agree to this plan – it was good to see at the time as the media would love to have the storyline that "our new national stadium" cant be built because the GAA wont come in! and at the time, I didn't think it would ever be built.
Now it looks lie it might go ahead. But what GAA games would be held there? Surely we would have to pay up for use of the stadium? Why loose out financially when we have our own grounds in every county to hold games in.
If the government want to donate the cash to the GAA instead, I think we should take it and put it into promoting hurling in Ulster
As for the city stadium at the Ormeau Park proposal, its going to have a smaller capacity that casement??? Well then that's absolutely no use to the GAA so we should definitely not agree to that.
A 42000 seater stadium at the maze has to be one of the daftest ideas to be promoted in the North. The Belfast Tele seem to think that if Norn, Ireland dont play at windsor then all the GAA fans they see in Clones will suddenly start to support Norn ,Iron. I think the GAA took the view that since the GAA was puttin in no money let them waste money on it if they want. I cannot see it being anything other than an empty white elephant. Ulster rugby has said it will still play 90% of games at ravenhill, the IRFU are doing up Lansdowne so they dont need it. Casement park has the best playing surface in Ulster and still only gets one big game a year, if that. The only people who want it are Belefast tele Norn Iron supporters who seem to forget that an Irish cup final attracts about 8-1000 and Norn Iron struggle to fill windsors 14000 capacity for many games. The stadium will only host about six games a year and will be half full at best for most of them, a complete waste of public money.
Build a 25-30,000 at ormeau for rugby and football, make it to small for GAA and therefore cheaper. Then develop two GAA specific pitches one in South Belfast and one in West Belfast for club teams such as Bredagh, Pearses St Malachies etc. This should be compensation for the GAA in being kept out of the big stadium, it would be much more useful to the GAA in Antrim and Down in the long run.
Quote from: slow corner back on November 27, 2006, 09:53:18 PM
A 42000 seater stadium at the maze has to be one of the daftest ideas to be promoted in the North. The Belfast Tele seem to think that if Norn, Ireland dont play at windsor then all the GAA fans they see in Clones will suddenly start to support Norn ,Iron. I think the GAA took the view that since the GAA was puttin in no money let them waste money on it if they want. I cannot see it being anything other than an empty white elephant. Ulster rugby has said it will still play 90% of games at ravenhill, the IRFU are doing up Lansdowne so they dont need it. Casement park has the best playing surface in Ulster and still only gets one big game a year, if that. The only people who want it are Belefast tele Norn Iron supporters who seem to forget that an Irish cup final attracts about 8-1000 and Norn Iron struggle to fill windsors 14000 capacity for many games. The stadium will only host about six games a year and will be half full at best for most of them, a complete waste of public money.
Build a 25-30,000 at ormeau for rugby and football, make it to small for GAA and therefore cheaper. Then develop two GAA specific pitches one in South Belfast and one in West Belfast for club teams such as Bredagh, Pearses St Malachies etc. This should be compensation for the GAA in being kept out of the big stadium, it would be much more useful to the GAA in Antrim and Down in the long run.
so you think its a stupid white elephant of an idea but want compensation for saying no to playing there? ::)
If the British government is going to through millions at sport in the north then the GAA should get its share. The GAAs share would be better spent on some club grounds in Belfast than a white elephant in Lisburn.
Quote from: slow corner back on November 27, 2006, 10:19:32 PM
If the British government is going to through millions at sport in the north then the GAA should get its share. The GAAs share would be better spent on some club grounds in Belfast than a white elephant in Lisburn.
but you cant turn down free use of the white elephant and expect to be compensated for saying no!
I am suggesting that they can save a considerable amount of money on the white elephant by NOT incorporating GAA which needs a much larger playing surface and therefore increases the area of the stadium and associated costs. Put the money saved into something which will be used ie club pitches in belfast. This is not compensation this is appropriate use of public money and as a taxpayer in the north I am fully entitled to ask that my taxes are spent appropriately.
I don't understand this "we don't need a new stadium" stuff.
Try thinking the same thing the next time you're standing at Clones or Casement on a pissing wet day trying to get Neanderthals in front to put down their umbrellas.
It has been long established that the GAA intends to build/enhance one venue in Ulster to accommodate 40k plus.
The GAA has said that the new stadium would have to be at least two thirds seated and covered.The plans have been independently vetted and approved as being prudent and sensible.
The options are to
1. rebuild Clones or Casement. Neither are ideally located and neither have sufficient space.
2. build a brand new stadium. Requires expensive site purchase, planning, design and financial risk.
Before you all jump at these two options, consider the cost. It would be tens upon tens of millions of GAA money. Grant aid would not be a significant proportion. That's real money the GAA should be spending to rectify its pretty appalling record in getting people to play in the large towns and cities in the North, develop new clubs, coaching, etc
The other option:
3. Get a fully covered, almost all seater, purpose built stadium, with no development risk.
All at a huge subsidy to the cost of developing it ourselves. Forget all the other crap about who we're sharing it with, etc.
The whole thing is a no brainer.
Second best gaelic games stadium in Ireland for next to nothing? Think about that the next time you're standing on a cold concrete bank in a so called stadium.
The Maze location suits most GAA fans as well - easily accessible by the M1, and safer than bringing your kids into Belfast for a day out.
We'd have no problem filling it. Even the smaller matches might test its capacity, as it should have a big novelty factor for a year or two.
Quote from: slow corner back on November 27, 2006, 09:53:18 PM
The only people who want it are Belefast tele Norn Iron supporters who seem to forget that an Irish cup final attracts about 8-1000 and Norn Iron struggle to fill windsors 14000 capacity for many games. The stadium will only host about six games a year and will be half full at best for most of them, a complete waste of public money.
Absolutely not, SCB. Don't be fooled by the totally uncritical stance on this stadium taken by the B.Telegraph - they've clearly been "got at" by the NIO, with their huge Government spending power for Public Announcements & Notices etc. >:(
Similarly, the IFA is totally potless, but in dire need of a new stadium (FIFA regulations are getting higher all the time, so that Windsor could soon be declared unsuitable for internationals); consequently, they are blindly accepting whatever the NIO offers them.
Whereas, the NI fans are overwhlemingly against this White Elephant, for a wide variety of reasons. It's hard to gauge the exact figures, but when the Amalgamation of NI Supporters' Clubs asked its members, in conjunction with a poll carried out at Windsor before a match (nearly 3,000 replies), the No to the Maze/Build it in Belfast vote was almost 90%. Interestingly, the IFA carried out its own poll, but has so far refused point-blank to publish the results!
Anyhow, I must say I am a little surprised that GAA fans in Ulster don't appear to be that exercised by the whole issue. Seeing as how they have committed to be the "Main Tenant" (in terms of events held and rent paid), I don't understand how they could commit to playing in someone elses stadium, when they are spending so much money upgrading their own stadiums like Casement, a contradiction exacerbated further in the case of Clones, where ticket sales are VAT-free, unlike the Maze, which will charge 17.5%.
The other surprising aspect (to me, at least) is that the GAA prides itself on being a democratic organisation. However, in this case, it would appear that the Ulster Council is not prepared to consult its membership, nor to allow wider participation in the debate from the other three Provinces. Is this normal for important decisions such as this?
(Btw, I'm not trying to score any points over this; rather, I'm genuinely curious to know what GAA fans think)
I'm never sure about the VAT issue. I would have assumed that the GAA, and/or its relevant bodies (provincial councils, etc.) would be registered for VAT, North and South. In that case, VAT is not an issue. In fact it's a cash flow positive, since you can hold on to the money for a while. But we continue to hear about Clones being VAT-free, but Casement not.
Can any of our accountants (North and South) clarify?
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 27, 2006, 08:16:08 PM
The Northern Ireland Office (NIO) will be relieved to learn that while the GAA is committed to as comprehensive as possible an analysis of grassroots opinion, it will not allow those views to ultimately jeopardise the scheme.
Bit rich coming from the NIO who have shown their contempt for public opinion in NI with issues like the Water bills and the new Rates.
Evil Genius,
I imagine gaelic games fans aren't that exercised because they are content in getting a top class, purpose built gaelic games stadium for next to nowt in comparison with having to stump up say a minimum of £50M GBP to build one ourselves.
Even after HQ's pathetic giveaway deal on Croker, the membership would still tend to trust that the GAA will negotiate a good deal and would only ever enter into agreement on a sound economic basis. When it comes to money, we like to think of ourselves as cute hoors. The VAT issue is a red herring.
I'm happy to be treated equably with soccer and rugby, but would be pissed off to the highest degree if a soccer and rugby only stadium were built with direct or indirect public funding.
Belfast City Council had better watch themselves on this one - unless they hand over another city centre park to the gaa to build our own stadium, I'd bet they'd get cleaned by the courts on equality legislation grounds. We haven't forgotten that in the early eighties, the british govt gave the IFA/Linfield a brand new stand, and then refused the same deal to the GAA even though our crowds were three times bigger.
We'll not stand for it this time, in the new era of equality.
On the GAA side, the only gripes would be from the more reactionary elements opposed to sharing with NI soccer, opposed to the location because its not in nationalist area, opposed because its sponsored by the british govt, etc.These elements are very much in the minority and would not be representative. After the casement fiasco, any hijacking of gaa policy by those who put their narrow sectional interests ahead of the gaa's best interests should be resisted.
I still don't fully understand the hostility of NI soccer fans on this one. Some say its the location, others say its the capacity, and others say their fans would be too far from the pitch.
On location, how would you persuade GAA fans that their kids are safe in Belfast?
Regarding capacity, its a bit rich saying that just because you can't fill it, nobody else should be able to. I know it might surprise a few NI fans, but the reality is that they do share this corner with GAA fans, who make up larger attendances and who have an equal right to be accommodated in any new civic stadium. There's a touch of "domination, or non-participation" on the ni fans side.
And as for pitch size and distance from the action, many of the stadiums in the Japanese world cup had bigger distances. If its good enough for the World Cup, it should be good enough for NI.
Maybe these so-called reasons are only a smokescreen for not wanting a taig about the place?
Quote from: bennydorano on November 29, 2006, 11:52:44 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 27, 2006, 08:16:08 PM
The Northern Ireland Office (NIO) will be relieved to learn that while the GAA is committed to as comprehensive as possible an analysis of grassroots opinion, it will not allow those views to ultimately jeopardise the scheme.
Bit rich coming from the NIO who have shown their contempt for public opinion in NI with issues like the Water bills and the new Rates.
The question of water bills comes from an EU directive, its not (directly) the fault of the NIO.
Quote from: bennydorano on November 29, 2006, 11:52:44 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 27, 2006, 08:16:08 PM
The Northern Ireland Office (NIO) will be relieved to learn that while the GAA is committed to as comprehensive as possible an analysis of grassroots opinion, it will not allow those views to ultimately jeopardise the scheme.
Bit rich coming from the NIO who have shown their contempt for public opinion in NI with issues like the Water bills and the new Rates.
Indeed, especially when read in conjunction with the next paragraph in the B.Tele report:
"NIO negotiators currently involved in the brokering of a deal to satisfy all of the participating sports bodies has given a commitment, backed at the highest levels of Government, that any newly-elected Stormont Assembly will not be able to dump the present Maze blueprint"This scheme involves a minimum spend of taxpayers' money of £55 million on the Stadium alone (latest NIO figure), plus whatever they spend on making the site suitable, transportation upgrades etc.
There is absolutely no good reason why the NIO couldn't just divide up half that amount between the three sports pro rata:
Soccer could spend its share buying itself out of its long lease at Windsor and go and play in the new City of Belfast Stadium;
Rugby could use its share to upgrade Ravenhill (plus play 2 or 3 big matches per year in the CoB);
And I'm sure GAA could find a use for its share.
The remaining half could then be frittered away by the Government on luxuries like water, health, education etc.
Why aren't people up in arms about such an unwelcome, unnecessary and unaccountable waste of public money? >:(
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on November 29, 2006, 12:28:44 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 29, 2006, 11:52:44 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 27, 2006, 08:16:08 PM
The Northern Ireland Office (NIO) will be relieved to learn that while the GAA is committed to as comprehensive as possible an analysis of grassroots opinion, it will not allow those views to ultimately jeopardise the scheme.
Bit rich coming from the NIO who have shown their contempt for public opinion in NI with issues like the Water bills and the new Rates.
The question of water bills comes from an EU directive, its not (directly) the fault of the NIO.
Not what I was getting at; the NIO were recently hauled through the courts because they didn't consult the public correctly regarding Water, they had to consult the public for 13 weeks, but they arbitrarily reduced the consultation period to 10 weeks to avoid more shit from the public.
Quote from: snatter on November 29, 2006, 12:24:38 PM
Evil Genius,
I imagine gaelic games fans aren't that exercised because they are content in getting a top class, purpose built gaelic games stadium for next to nowt in comparison with having to stump up say a minimum of £50M GBP to build one ourselves.
Aside from the fact that this will compete directly with the GAA's own stadia at Casement and Clones, are you really happy for taxpayers money to be spent on a stadium which the GAA won't actually own. Wouldn't you much prefer if GAA's share was given to them to spend as they wish?
Even after HQ's pathetic giveaway deal on Croker, the membership would still tend to trust that the GAA will negotiate a good deal and would only ever enter into agreement on a sound economic basis. When it comes to money, we like to think of ourselves as cute hoors. The VAT issue is a red herring.
I've no doubt that the GAA will negotiate a good deal, financially, but is that the only criterion to be considered? Also, if it's correct that VAT will be payable on ticket sales in NI, but not for the same game in Clones, how is that a "red herring"? It effectively means that the revenue from 42,000 fans at Clones will only equal 34.650 in the Maze.
I'm happy to be treated equably with soccer and rugby, but would be pissed off to the highest degree if a soccer and rugby only stadium were built with direct or indirect public funding.
It was never proposed to fund rugby and soccer only (nor should it be). Personally, I'd love it if the three sports were treated equally. However, when HMG declared that all sports must agree, or it simply would not get built, not every sport was in an equal position to negotiate. The IFA has little money, and is tied into an 80 year lease to play at Windsor (at the Governments insistence, I might add). Windsor is increasingly unfit for purpose and so the IFA has no choice.
The URFU doesn't actually care; so long as it gets its planning permission and modest Government funding to refurbish Ravenhill, it will still stage 95% of Ulster games as before, with only one or two rugby games per year at The Maze.
Whereas, GAA was in a strong position to negotiate. Consequently, when presented with 4 possible sites - 3 in Belfast, plus the Maze - it insisted that all 3 Belfast sites were unacceptable to it, thus leaving football and rugby obliged to accept the Maze. Not only that, but they also vetoed the original plan for 28,000 seats, insisting on a minimum of 42,000. Now I don't blame the GAA one iota for playing their hand cleverly; however, as Dealer, the Government should have known that the other two sports had been dealt a couple of cards short.
Belfast City Council had better watch themselves on this one - unless they hand over another city centre park to the gaa to build our own stadium, I'd bet they'd get cleaned by the courts on equality legislation grounds. We haven't forgotten that in the early eighties, the british govt gave the IFA/Linfield a brand new stand, and then refused the same deal to the GAA even though our crowds were three times bigger.
We'll not stand for it this time, in the new era of equality.
I'm quite certain BCC has taken careful advice on this; interestingly, neither SDLP nor SF Councillors have cried "foul" over this. In fact, in return for donating a small, little used section of Ormeau Park, the Council will receive free a brand new Leisure Centre, for use by all the Community. The sports stadium will be developed privately and so will not cost anyone in Belfast (or elsewhere) a penny, unlike the Maze, which will cost up to £100 million of everybody's taxes.
As for your earlier complaint about the GAA being discriminated against, if that was the case, then that was unfair, but BCC's present proposals are nothing like that. (In fact, in return for funding one new Stand at Windsor, the Government of the day insisted on the IFA being given a 100 year lease by Linfield, to stop Linfield accepting the money then later turfing the IFA out. Which is all very well, except they forgot a clause which would allow the IFA to back out. Consequently, whether the IFA moves to the Maze or elsewhere, they've still got to compensate Linfield for almost 80 years remaining on the Lease. The figures haven't been disclosed, but this almost certainly runs into millions of pounds)
On the GAA side, the only gripes would be from the more reactionary elements opposed to sharing with NI soccer, opposed to the location because its not in nationalist area, opposed because its sponsored by the british govt, etc.These elements are very much in the minority and would not be representative. After the casement fiasco, any hijacking of gaa policy by those who put their narrow sectional interests ahead of the gaa's best interests should be resisted.
Understood.
I still don't fully understand the hostility of NI soccer fans on this one. Some say its the location, others say its the capacity, and others say their fans would be too far from the pitch.
All of the above apply, and then some more. Nobody builds out of town stadia anymore, anywhere in the world. Public transport is non-existent and with one access route (the M1), access and egress for thousands of cars arriving and departing at the same time, on e.g. a wet Wednesday evening in November, will be a total nightmare. (Remember the chaos caused recently by that road accident on the M1?). With the stadium far too big for most soccer crowds, the atmosphere will suffer hugely. There simply won't be enough events to support any range of entertainment facilities (bars, restaurants etc), other than the usual fast-food outlets, so only the die-hard fans will turn up, watch the game, then go straight home. Whereas, the more casual fans, who go for a day out, simply won't bother. Lisburn has one hotel, some miles from the Stadium. Away fans will all be dependent on non-existent public transport to get them in and out of Belfast, where they will be staying. And GAA pitches are so much bigger than soccer pitches (even more so rugby), that binoculars will be needed to see the action from the back of the stands.
On location, how would you persuade GAA fans that they're kids are safe in Belfast?
Seems to work OK for Casement. I'm all for giving GAA's share to them directly, to spend as they wish. If they prefer to upgrade thier Provincial stadia instead, good for them!
Regarding capacity, its a bit rich saying that just because you can't fill it, nobody else should be able to. I know it might surprise a few NI fans, but the reality is that they do share this corner with GAA fans, who make up larger attendances and who have an equal right to be accommodated in any new civic stadium. There's a touch of "domination, or non-participation" on the ni fans side.
It is not a case of being anti-GAA on this one. Exactly the same would apply if we were talking Baseball or Cricket. Neither of those sports share their stadia in the USA or Australia with American Football, soccer or rugby (though they do with Aussie Rules, since they also need huge pitches). In the end, GAA, soccer and rugby should all be funded fairly, so that each is able to develop stadia suitable for their own particular needs. Under the present plans, GAA doesn't have to compromise over pitch size or capacity, only soccer and rugby. Indeed, when the plans were amended, so that only 35,000 seats would be installed for soccer, with some capable of being removed to allow 42,000 for GAA, this means that GAA fans get a choice of sitting (comfort) or standing (cheaper), a choice which is denied to soccer and rugby fans.
And as for pitch size and distance from the action, many of the stadiums in the Japanese world cup had bigger distances. If its good enough for the World Cup, it should be good enough for NI.
Not so. Besides, the World Cup was a one-off, with stadia capable of being altered after the tournament. Whereas the Maze will be a permanent arrangement for the next 50 years. (Besides, the Japanese stadia were much bigger capacity than the Maze)
Maybe these so-called reasons are only a smokescreen for not wanting a taig about the place?
Your last comment is unworthy and incapable of being supported by any evidence whatever. Football in NI enjoys mixed participation at all levels, from playing, officiating, administering and spectating.
For some random recent examples of this, see:
http://www.irishfa.com/grassroots/football-for-all/football-for-all-campaign/
http://ourweecountry.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16096
http://www.irishfa.com/grassroots/football-for-all/
http://ourweecountry.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16045
http://www.irishfa.com/grassroots/football-for-all/football-for-all-corner/
However, I sincerely don't wish this to become a squabbling match between the two codes. Rather, having outlined some of the reasons why the soccer community is deeply unhappy about this stadium being foisted upon us, without any consultation whatever, but at the cost to us of millions of our taxes, I merely wish to know whether fans of Ulster GAA see it the same way or not.
Quote from: Hardy on November 29, 2006, 11:02:38 AM
I'm never sure about the VAT issue. I would have assumed that the GAA, and/or its relevant bodies (provincial councils, etc.) would be registered for VAT, North and South. In that case, VAT is not an issue. In fact it's a cash flow positive, since you can hold on to the money for a while. But we continue to hear about Clones being VAT-free, but Casement not.
Can any of our accountants (North and South) clarify?
Hardy, I can confirm that as the Ulster Council is VAT registered in Northern Ireland (UK) it does not have to pay output VAT on gate receipts in ROI, whereas it does when the games ar eheld in Northern Ireland.
Though I was also told that this does not influence the decision in whether to hold games in the North or South ;)
Thanks Joe. The fact that the Ulster Council is UK registered helps my understanding. But I'm still a bit (a lot) confused. Is it:
1. The Irish government doesn't charge VAT on gate receipts?
2. The Ulster Council, as a 'foreign' company not registered for VAT here doesn't (can't) charge VAT?
3. The Ulster Council collects the VAT but doesn't pay it over, since it's not registered here? (That would be illegal, I suppose)
Unless it's number 3, I can't see an advantage or disadvantage either way for the Ulster Council vis-à-vis Clones vs. Casement. They either charge the VAT and pay it on, or don't charge the VAT and there's nothing to pay. The only difference I can see is for the customer – in theory, games at Clones should be cheaper at the turnstile than games at Casement and games organised by the Ulster Council in Clones cheaper than those organised by, say, Central Council. Unless they're screwing the customer and charging the same at each venue, but not having to pay on VAT from Clones.
Wait a minute ... it's dawning ...
They wouldn't treat their own members and patrons like that, would they?
Quote from: Hardy on November 29, 2006, 02:36:56 PM
Thanks Joe. The fact that the Ulster Council is UK registered helps my understanding. But I'm still a bit (a lot) confused. Is it:
1. The Irish government doesn't charge VAT on gate receipts?
2. The Ulster Council, as a 'foreign' company not registered for VAT here doesn't (can't) charge VAT?
3. The Ulster Council collects the VAT but doesn't pay it over, since it's not registered here? (That would be illegal, I suppose)
Unless it's number 3, I can't see an advantage or disadvantage either way for the Ulster Council vis-à-vis Clones vs. Casement. They either charge the VAT and pay it on, or don't charge the VAT and there's nothing to pay. The only difference I can see is for the customer – in theory, games at Clones should be cheaper at the turnstile than games at Casement and games organised by the Ulster Council in Clones cheaper than those organised by, say, Central Council. Unless they're screwing the customer and charging the same at each venue, but not having to pay on VAT from Clones.
Wait a minute ... it's dawning ...
They wouldn't treat their own members and patrons like that, would they?
Hardy, you hit the nail on the head at the end.
Say Armagh play Fermanagh in Clones (as they did twice this year), and the ticket price is £20.
If the games is held in the North £17.02 is shown as income and £2.98 is teh VAT which is payable to HMRC.
As the game is held in Clones the Ulster Council will still charge £20 (or €30) but they get to keep the £20 as income.
The above is the current situation with the Ulster Council.
However, on closer examination, I'm not sure this is correct, as VAT Notice "The Single Market" states:
"2.2 How is VAT charged and accounted for on supplies of goods to customers who are not VAT
registered in another Member State or to private individuals?
For unregistered customers, or private individuals, VAT is normally charged in the Member State from which
the goods were despatched. However there are some exceptions which are explained in paragraph 2.3.
2.3 What are the exceptions to the general principles in paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2?
The exception to the general principles are:
the supply of goods to be installed or assembled in another Member State - see section 8;
the supply of new means of transport. You can find further information in Notice 728 Motor vehicles,
boats, aircraft: intra – EC movements by persons not registrable for VAT.
the supply of excise goods for private purposes - see section 10.
supplies to diplomats, international organisations, NATO forces and other entitled persons and bodies
in other Member States which may in certain circumstances be relieved from VAT. You can find
further information in paragraph 10.16 and Notice 703 Exports and removals of goods from the United
Kingdom.
Therefore I don't see how the UC can get away without charging VAT as they are not supplying VAT registered people / businesses.
Shamrock Shore is likely to know the score on this one - I'd have thought that maybe sporting events might be VAT exempted or VAT neutral in Mexicoland.
Quote from: Billys Boots on November 29, 2006, 03:18:04 PM
Shamrock Shore is likely to know the score on this one - I'd have thought that maybe sporting events might be VAT exempted or VAT neutral in Mexicoland.
I'd have thought that the fact that VAT is chargeable on NI ticket receipts means that as a result of this sentence "For unregistered customers, or private individuals, VAT is normally charged in the Member State from which the goods were despatched" VAT would have to be charged as if the supply took place in NI when the goods are being supplied by a NI VAT registered organisation regardless of the VAT rules in Mexico.
What if the Ulster Council is also VAT registered in Mexicoland?
Quote from: Billys Boots on November 29, 2006, 03:38:03 PM
What if the Ulster Council is also VAT registered in Mexicoland?
That is certainly possible.
It would appear that it would seem well worth their while registering in both NI and ROI.