Long Kesh Park takes another step forward

[his holiness nb]

We're clearly never going to agree on whether the GAA "vetoed" Belfast or not, so why don't we just leave it at that, then?

Allow me to translate....

"Its 100% clear that the GAA didnt veto Belfast and I know that, but I will never admit that"

[snatter]

The original Maze Stadium proposal, after the GAA had declined to consider any Belfast location, was for 28,000.

Ah, you almost sneaked that one by me.

You of course, know that the truth is that the GAA would have considered all options put to them.

As Danny Murphy has made clear, the GAA merely chose the Maze because it was the best economic option available.

It was closer to GAA heartlands, and it was reasonable to assume that it would attract more crowds on this basis.

He made it clear that
THE GAA HAD NOT REJECTED THE MAZE, RATHER IT HAD EXPRESSED A PREFERENCE FOR THE MAZE.

The Irish News article is printed in full somewhere in here.

We're clearly never going to agree on whether the GAA "vetoed" Belfast or not, so why don't we just leave it at that, then? In the meantime, perhaps you can address the question I put to you in Post #1061 (all seater etc)?

On my computer I replied to it in post 1064

[SammyG]

We're clearly never going to agree on whether the GAA "vetoed" Belfast or not, so why don't we just leave it at that, then?

Allow me to translate....

"Its 100% clear that the GAA didnt veto Belfast and I know that, but I will never admit that"

Close but the actual translation is

'The GAA vetoed Belfast, everybody knows it but it is largely irrelevant so it's easier to let snatter live in his little dream world.'

[snatter]

Oh, and the Robinson / McDonald spin doctors obviously haven't looked at google maps recently.
If they had, they would see that Casement is not a big enough site to accommodate a 40k stadium that, by your own admission, the GAA require.

Its hemmed in by housing on three sides, and a road on the other.

Have a gander if you like:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=owenvarragh+park&sll=54.573169,-5.984652&sspn=0.005834,0.014591&ie=UTF8&ll=54.573256,-5.983665&spn=0.002917,0.007296&t=h&z=17

If the Maze is binned and Robinson instead offers money to the three Associations to spend as they wish, it is hardly his fault, or the taxpayers, that both Ravenhill and Casement are hemmed in and so restricted in their development potential, or that Windsor is owned by a private club who are "sinking the arm in" over the IFA's attempts to redevelop. Indeed, if he were prescribing where/how the money should be spent, you'd no doubt be complaining about that, too.

In the end, it ought (imo) to be for each Association to decide how and where it spends its money. In which case the GAA could do up Casement to its maximum, and/or do up another stadium or stadia, or even sell Casement and use the proceeds to put with the Government allocation and build a new Stadium in West Belfast/Antrim/Wherever.

Otherwise, if the only way the GAA can achieve their "ideal" stadium is if it is with the pooled contributions of the two other sports's entitlement (i.e. the Maze proposal), then it looks like they are going to be disappointed, since the resulting stadium is going to be a lot less than ideal for them.

Which, in a sense, may be what Robinson is actually saying, albeit that his reasons for considering it less than ideal for two of the sports (proximity to Museum, Conflict Centre etc), plus straight economics, are different to soccer fans' reasons for considering it to be less than ideal (location, size and design).

So, are you saying that if
  the funding given to soccer is enough to give them 100% of their reasonable requirements, but
  the GAA's funding is only enough to give them say 50% of theirs,

then that's tough, that's just the way it is.  (Can I hear Bruce Hornsby in the background?)

Doesn't sound like an equitable distribution of funds to me.
Surely funds should be distributed equitably by need, not according to what sport you support.

A bit like seats on a bus perhaps?  
Surely they should be distributed fairly amongst all passengers, rather than having a disproportionate majority (at the front perhaps) allocated to a lucky few.

If there aren't enough seats at the back of the bus, then tough, Fenians that's just the way it is. You'll have to stand?
Is that what you meant?

[SammyG]

Oh, and the Robinson / McDonald spin doctors obviously haven't looked at google maps recently.
If they had, they would see that Casement is not a big enough site to accommodate a 40k stadium that, by your own admission, the GAA require.

Its hemmed in by housing on three sides, and a road on the other.

Have a gander if you like:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=owenvarragh+park&sll=54.573169,-5.984652&sspn=0.005834,0.014591&ie=UTF8&ll=54.573256,-5.983665&spn=0.002917,0.007296&t=h&z=17

If the Maze is binned and Robinson instead offers money to the three Associations to spend as they wish, it is hardly his fault, or the taxpayers, that both Ravenhill and Casement are hemmed in and so restricted in their development potential, or that Windsor is owned by a private club who are "sinking the arm in" over the IFA's attempts to redevelop. Indeed, if he were prescribing where/how the money should be spent, you'd no doubt be complaining about that, too.

In the end, it ought (imo) to be for each Association to decide how and where it spends its money. In which case the GAA could do up Casement to its maximum, and/or do up another stadium or stadia, or even sell Casement and use the proceeds to put with the Government allocation and build a new Stadium in West Belfast/Antrim/Wherever.

Otherwise, if the only way the GAA can achieve their "ideal" stadium is if it is with the pooled contributions of the two other sports's entitlement (i.e. the Maze proposal), then it looks like they are going to be disappointed, since the resulting stadium is going to be a lot less than ideal for them.

Which, in a sense, may be what Robinson is actually saying, albeit that his reasons for considering it less than ideal for two of the sports (proximity to Museum, Conflict Centre etc), plus straight economics, are different to soccer fans' reasons for considering it to be less than ideal (location, size and design).

So, are you saying that if
  the funding given to soccer is enough to give them 100% of their reasonable requirements, but
  the GAA's funding is only enough to give them say 50% of theirs,

then that's tough, that's just the way it is.  (Can I hear Bruce Hornsby in the background?)

Doesn't sound like an equitable distribution of funds to me.
Surely funds should be distributed equitably by need, not according to what sport you support.

A bit like seats on a bus perhaps?  
Surely they should be distributed fairly amongst all passengers, rather than having a disproportionate majority (at the front perhaps) allocated to a lucky few.

If there aren't enough seats at the back of the bus, then tough, Fenians that's just the way it is. You'll have to stand?
Is that what you meant?

MOPERY ALERT!!! MOPERY ALERT!!! Diive, dive, dive!!! 

[Evil Genius]

And Howard Wells IFA CEO prefers the Maze.
But some idiot somewhere will say that when he made that declaration that he was doing so in his capacity as volunteer firefighter with the Lisburn Fire Dept.
and not as CEO of the IFA

Everyone knows that in pushing the Maze so forcefully, Wells is speaking both in his professional capacity as an employee of the Government, not the IFA (Sports Council pays his wages) and in a personal capacity as someone who wants a shiny big stadium, any stadium, on his CV for his next job. And his next job might not be so far off, since his original fixed contract expired at the end of 2007 and has not been renewed, so that he is presently acting on a non-contract basis.

And I've no doubt Robinson, being the reasonably astute politician he is, recognises this, whether you do or not.

At least 32,000 seats and 10,000 standing might do for the GAA
But it wont be Casement.
£40m or £50m should bring St. Tiernach's Park up to modern standards.
There is plenty of room there and plenty of scope for improvement.
Armagh Gaelic grounds are being done up now and afair is restricted with housing right on the perimeter.
Healy Park looks neat as it is now.

I have no idea whether Robinson will have £40-50m to allocate to the GAA or not, but even if he does, I can assure you that it won't be spent on St.Tiernach's, that's for sure! If nothing else, it's likely to be a bit too close to Clontibret for Peter's liking 

Of course, there is probably nothing stopping the GAA from diverting some of their funds allocated to existing schemes in the Occupied Six across the border to Clones, to be replaced by Peter's largesse. I'm sure they have Accountants who would be up to the job.

Anyhow, however much it might be and however it's done, I'm pleased that unlike Snatter, you are not wedded to the idea that it's "The Maze or Nothing"!

[Evil Genius]

You're still not getting it.

There is no GAA policy and practice to either insist on, or prohibit standing areas.
There is no policy on it full stop.

My opinion is simply that

If your substantively public funded stadium
  is all seater
  is fully covered
  has uninterrupted views
  meets your capacity needs (25k)

Then our substantively public funded stadium should
  be all seater
  be fully covered
  have uninterrupted views
  meet our capacity needs (40k)

Then take it up with the GAA for agreeing to a 35k seated, 7k standing arrangement for the Maze.

In the meantime, even if the GAA has no policy vis a vis seating or standing, how can you say that it has "no practice either to insist on, or prohibit standing areas"? From what I' gather, they've spent the last quarter century or more ploughing millions into all sorts and sizes of stadia, the length and breadth of Ireland. Are these always excusively all-seater, where possible (e.g. green field site, sufficient funding, adequate capacity etc,  or are they sometimes a mix of the two?

Because assuming they are not, then that would indicate that the GAA is, in fact, amenable to a certain percentage of standing, rather than wedded to  100% seating in all possible cases. Which kinda tears the arse out of your howls of outrage over GAA fans being "forced to stand", whilst their bastard oppressor soccer counterparts get to sit.

The funding percentages whould be the same.
If your 25k costs 25M, then we should get a minimum of 40M for a 40k stadium.
In fact there's an argument that we should get more, because stadia costs increase logarithmically, not linearlly with capacity.

I suppose it is implicit in the above that a seat is better than standing.
I'd say most people would agree - after all, people are prepared to pay more to get a seat.
Its more comfortable, you can see more, and especially for children is much safer.
This is particularly important given that the GAA's fanbase is heavily family orientated.

I'd say that the GAA fans that would stand would do so because they can't get a seat - Casement's seated capacity is 2500 ffs.
Or some might want to avoid the higher costs.
After all there's not much fun being stuck behind some big heifer from Tyrone who refuses to move, or worse put down his umbrella.

The only argument in favour of standing would be that it can increase capacity.
But in a properly planned new stadium, substantively funded by local/central Govt, there would be no excuse for not building the required capacity to the higher standard.

Regarding the actual funding, more specifically how it might be divvied out, I daresay each sport can point to its own special circumstances as to why it needs/deserves more than the others. You have expounded why the GAA should get the lion's share. I can see counter reasons why soccer, even rugby, might be entitled to more for them than your somewhat simplistic formula would allow. Anyhow, I have no desire to go down that particular roiad with you, since I can foresee no prospect whatever that you will in any way acknowledge any argument I might put forward on behalf of soccer.

Besides, if this latest speculation that the Maze will be scrapped is correct, then I will be so elated that as Rhett Butler* once put it, "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn..." 


* - I wonder was he any relation to Paul Butler? 

[Main Street]

Everyone knows that in pushing the Maze so forcefully, Wells is speaking both in his professional capacity as an employee of the Government, not the IFA (Sports Council pays his wages) and in a personal capacity as someone who wants a shiny big stadium, any stadium, on his CV for his next job. And his next job might not be so far off, since his original fixed contract expired at the end of 2007 and has not been renewed, so that he is presently acting on a non-contract basis.

And I've no doubt Robinson, being the reasonably astute politician he is, recognises this, whether you do or not.

If everyone knows this and there is absolutely no doubt about it,  then there will be a reference to this in the IFA meetings, the  Assembly minutes or  DCAL minutes. Anylink anywhere which state that Well was not acting in his capacity as CEO of the IFA when in talks or making statements about the stadium plans?
Surely some little piece of definite source which states that Well was not representing the IFA.
Then of course there will be a statement from the IFA board which conflicts with Wells.
Any hint of an IFA board statement which says Wells is not representing the IFA?

[SammyG]

If everyone knows this and there is absolutely no doubt about it,  then there will be a reference to this in the IFA meetings, the  Assembly minutes or  DCAL minutes. Anylink anywhere which state that Well was not acting in his capacity as CEO of the IFA when in talks or making statements about the stadium plans?
Surely some little piece of definite source which states that Well was not representing the IFA.
Then of course there will be a statement from the IFA board which conflicts with Wells.
Any hint of an IFA board statement which says Wells is not representing the IFA?

Read the minutes (you've had the links several times) it clearly says that the IFA have no opinion eitrher way BUT Wells personally favours the Maze. Given that Wells is employed by the people pushing the Maze, this is hardly a surprising position.

[Main Street]

The return of the troll of the GAAboard, the OWCees finest most brightest star, SammyG.

- No there is nothing in the DCAL minutes
'Mr McCausland: The IFA has identified that it would prefer the Maze site. Apparently, it does not want a Belfast site. I find that interesting given the fact that most football supporters would prefer a Belfast site.'

SUPPLY A LINK  to Wells not representing the IFA in his capacity as CEO


and the same goes to that windbag EG who hides inadequacy behind volume,
---------------SUPPLY A LINK  to Wells not representing the  IFA in his capacity as CEO--------------


KEEP IT SIMPLE

[Evil Genius]

"Another step forward"? Or "Another Nail in the Coffin"?

Hardly the most reliable of sources, but encouraging for the Anti-Maze camp, nonetheless:


http://www.sundaylife.co.uk/news/article3674066.ece

Civil service rebellion against Maze stadium
£3.3m spent on project that may never be built

Sunday, May 04, 2008

The controversial Maze stadium plan now looks doomed — even though it has emerged that it has already cost taxpayers almost £3.5 million.

Sports Minister Edwin Poots has revealed that his department has spent £3,397,835 so far on the proposals to build a multi-sports stadium on the site of the former high security jail.

In answer to a written question from Lagan Valley MLA Paul Butler, the DUP minister said the majority of the money — £ 2,953,370 — has been incurred on stadium design.

Another £444,465 has been spent by the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure on business planning, management and other consultancy costs linked to the stadium project.

But Sunday Life can reveal that senior civil servants have refused to back plans for a 38,500 seater stadium.

It is understood that an assessment from the Department of Culture Arts and Leisure was submitted without the endorsement of the Permanent Secretary.

The absence of support from key civil servants in the departments principally involved in the project to build a national stadium on the former prison site is likely to put the final nail in its coffin.

Reports sent to Finance Minister Peter Robinson are understood to outline the long term financial risks to the taxpayer of building a 'national stadium' at the Maze, which will only utilise its planned 38,500 capacity once a year.

And critics have pointed out that building it would cost more than double the outlay on a 30,000 seater venue.

One senior civil servant said: "To spend at least double the revenue just to insert an extra 8,500 seats in the plan doesn't make financial sense. Even a 30,000 seater stadium raises the essential question of what it is going to be used for and how often it is going to be used.

"Ulster rugby has indicated plans to refurbish Ravenhill. Is it going to do that and then leave it unused to play at the Maze? The 38,500 seater stadium isn't economically viable and there are major financial questions about building a 30,000 stadium there."

Other 'added value' factors have also been dissected by civil servants and found to be less than compelling, informed sources say.

"Overall the Maze Stadium proposal doesn't stack up economically and without it the original business plan for the redevelopment of the site isn't viable either," the civil servant said.

On Friday, Peter Robinson said that the Maze site should be developed for another purpose and fully utilised if the decision was made not to proceed with the stadium proposal. He will make a recommendation to the Executive on the stadium plan before he takes up the reins of First Minister later this month.

The Office of First Minister and Deputy First Minister declined to comment.

[armaghniac]

from todays Belly Telly

my question is that if Windsor is getting substantial public funds instead of the new stadium, will the GAA and Rugby also be getting something to invest in their facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The prospects of a multi-sports stadium being built at the Maze appeared doomed today after a new deal between Sinn Fein and the DUP ruled it out for another four years, The Belfast Telegraph can reveal.

However, the two parties have agreed that a Conflict Resolution Centre will be built on the former prison site near Lisburn.

According to senior Stormont sources, the deal surrounding the Maze blueprint will rule out a stadium for at least another four years, casting serious doubt over whether it will ever be built. Instead, early in the New Year, Sports Minister Gregory Campbell will confirm that a major refurbishment of Windsor Park will go ahead.

The business plan for the stadium will include the building of a new 4,000 seat capacity stand.

There will be a commitment from the minister to re-visit the issue of a national stadium once the overall world and local economic situation improves.

But there will be significant additions to the overall infrastructure of the Maze site to help with the projection of a united political front between the DUP and Sinn Fein.

However, DUP Junior Minister Jeffrey Donaldson today denied that a final agreement about the development at the former Maze Prison had been reached.

"The current situation is that discussions are ongoing between departments about the development of the Maze site and while some progress has been made, no decisions have been made yet in terms of either the Conflict Transformation Centre or the Stadium," he said.

But the Telegraph has learned that final touches to the redrawn Maze master plan were discussed during the visit to the United States earlier this month by Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness.

The changes were central to talks held with potential investors.

According to the government source, part of the package will include a reappraisal of the needs of the three main sports. It will include individual deals being struck or a link up between two of the sports. The most likely option is that a smaller stadium to cope with the requirements of soccer and rugby will be developed.

As the strongest supporter of the Maze stadium the GAA continues to refuse to speculate publicly on its alternative option choice.

The funding of the controversial Conflict Resolution Centre will come from various sources including the European Community. The prospect of additional funding from the United States is also on the cards.

The agreement between the two main political blocs in relation to the Conflict Resolution Centre was a necessary marriage of convenience in order to break the long running Executive logjam and the funding from outside sources will help protect the DUP's against allegations being directly involved with a "shrine to terrorism."

Despite comments from Junior Minister Gerry Kelly that there would be no political deal unless the Maze Stadium went ahead at the original site, the Telegraph understands that from a Sinn Fein perspective the "building of a sports stadium was always secondary to the Conflict Resolution Centre being a pivotal part of the redevelopment programme".

Mr Campbell will address the Department of Culture, Art and Leisure committee tomorrow morning. His agenda will be the issue of Sports Stadia Safety legislation and its implementation across the province. However, the legislation will be tied-in with a decision to go ahead with the scheme at Windsor Park. The pressing need for spectator safety at the home of international football will be used as justification for the project going ahead.

[orangeman]

EU body withdraws Maze Prison peace centre money


A European Union funding programme has withdrawn its offer of financial support for the peace centre at the former Maze Prison.

The Special European Programmes Body said it had done so after consulting with the lead partner -the Office of the First and Deputy First Minister.

They said after the talks they have decided the centre was no longer viable.

The peace money will now be reallocated to other projects.

During the summer, First Minister Peter Robinson halted plans to build the peace centre as part of the development of the site of the former Maze prison, a decision that caused tension between his party, the DUP, and Sinn Féin.

On Monday, Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness said there could be no development of the wider Maze site unless it was on the basis of previous agreements about the building of a peace centre.

In its statement on Friday, the Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB) said: "The SEUPB has been in discussions with the Lead Partner in relation to the viability of the Peace Building and Conflict Resolution Centre.

"It has been agreed that the project is no longer viable at this time and the SEUPB has therefore rescinded the letter of offer. The SEUPB will now consider the re-allocation of funding to suitable projects."

[Sandino]

First the A5 road, then the bridge at narrow water, the Police College and the redevelopment of the Maze site. Do these politicians just not want to create jobs? Another missed opportunity.

[ziggysego]

First the A5 road, then the bridge at narrow water, the Police College and the redevelopment of the Maze site. Do these politicians just not want to create jobs? Another missed opportunity.

Up to 1000 potential jobs lost in all these projects, due to political squabbling apparently.

Pathetic really.