Long Kesh Park takes another step forward

[Evil Genius]

First line of my last post

The nature of devolved government is that a consensus must be reached when large sums of public money are involved....

And as the Irish News Editorial from two days ago pointed out, what concensus there was from the three codes over the Maze Stadium is ebbing away. That's the reality of the situation.

As Sammy kindly corrected me yesterday, the IN editiorial did nothing of the sort.
It merely claimed that support from GAA and rugby fans was apathetic at best.

So the opinions of the fans of GAA and rugby don't count, then? (Never mind those of soccer fans who are overwhelmingly "anti")

Well, just hours laterm the GAA emphatically re-endorsed the Maze:

http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-football/duffy-afraid--grant-row-could--provoke-rifts-1314984.html

Meanwhile, GAA president Nickey Brennan has said he is still very much behind the notion of building a stadium on the site of the old Maze prison.

"We made out position clear on it and we embraced the idea when it came first," he said. "But it's up to the politicians now."

Well, we'll have to agree to differ, but I personally was gratified by the lukewarm response by Brennan when informed the Maze might now be scrapped. Where was the outrage? The demands for the Politicians to stand their ground? It certainly doesn't read like a ringing endorsement to me! "Leave it to the Politicians", eh? Those would be the same politicians who now appear to be going cold on the Maze?

I haven't detected any decrease in support from rugby or soccer bodies either.

Michael Reid, Ulster Rugby CEO, was recently interviewed (5th February), giving the politicians a proverbial kick upo the arse, and telling them to get on with it:

http://www.ulsterrugby.ie/11_6448.php

Now that the Maze is the only option, there is no doubt that these are state-of-the-art facilities, and we got a lot of changes that we asked for. The design is a three tier design. We have got the capacity of the bottom bowl of the stadium reduced from 25000 to 18000; we got the Box levels that were up in Levels 2 & 3, brought down to Level 1, so with a crowd of 18000, we could have that self contained on one level for rugby, and we also got a lot of technical changes made that we wanted. We have also negotiated a substantial decrease in rent. Only a quarter of the crowd at Ravenhill sit and if you charge the same price for a seat here, to sit at the Maze, we could make £75-80k more per match, simply because everyone would be seated. Even with rent which would be about £30k per match, we would still be £40- 50k better off. That is at today's prices in about 4 years time, so there is no need for astronomical price increases.

Is that putting you in a difficult position to consider it? If something better came up in Belfast are you already committed to the Maze?

We are committed to the Maze, because it is the only thing that's there. The difficulty here for all of us is we are in a country where we had politicians who when they were effectively in opposition, threw stones. Now they are in power, they have to show some leadership here, and I believe it is unfair on Sport to be put in a position where we have to decide. There is one option for us, which is the Maze.

Reid is too cute to piss the Government off over something which, in reality, doesn't really matter to Ulster Rugby. Three games per season (max?). He's far more concerned with redeveloping Ravenhill - with a reduced capacity, btw - for which Government funding, planning permission etc is critical.

For me, the key phrase of that whole quotation is "We are committed to the Maze, because it is the only thing that's there" Note his unwillingness to assert that it is the best solution to rugby's needs. Note, also, that he left the door open to change his mind should another option arise.

As for soccer, you may not have detected it, but in his last Programme notes (NI v Bulgaria in February), Howard Wells for the first time ever alluded to the possiblility that the Maze might NOT be the only show in town, when he demanded that the politicians get on with it and build a new stadium "wherever it may be". Considering he is being paid by the Government and is angling for his next job with them (Sports Council? London 2012), this was a remarkable deviation from his usual role of Chief Cheerleader" for the Maze!

[Evil Genius]

Only problem ....how will you ever afford to buy a Belfast site big enough

I have already addressed this point in one of my previous posts. You know, the one where I was forced to point out (again) that the Maze site is not, in fact "free"? That is, the one where it might be possible to use one or more existing sports sites, of municipal or public land which could only get permission for leisure use, not development?

And in any case, even if we are starting from the basis of a Maze site worth £126m, plus the likely saving on a £114m Bill for Transport/Infrastructure etc which wouldn't be needed for Belfast, we've actually got the best part of £200m to play with if we scrap the Maze and still save money. And as other comparable cities in the UK (Swansea, Hull, Milton Keynes etc) have demonstrated, less than £200m should be more than adequate.

EG,

by your rationale, no site could ever be regarded as free, becasue we could get planning permission to do whatever we like with it, and then flog it off for housing.
Its a nonsensical argument.

Current recreational zoning is no barrier to developing land.
It can be lifted at a stroke of a pen if its perceived as being for the greater good, as many south Belfast rugby clubs will happily tell you when they cashed in and moved elsewhere.
I believe many GAA units are currently considering selling up for supermarkets/housing and moving to cheaper sites as well.

Nonsense! GAA or Rugby Clubs are entirely different from public bodies, in that assuming it can get planning permission, there is little or no bar to them selling land, in return for a big fat profit with which to assuage their members.

By your logic, BCC could sell Belfast City Hall to be used as a luxury hotel, or any of the parks they control for housing etc and make an absolute fortune. But they don't, both because there is usually a statutory duty on them to maintain their property on behalf of the ratepayers, as well as an electorate to answer to.

And you haven't addressed the fact that there is nothing stopping e.g. Linfield or Glentoran, or Antrim GAA (Casement) from coming to an agreement with the Government to develop their property, thereby obviating the need to shell out on an expensive site.

Plus the fact of the infrastructure savings offered by Belfast over the Maze.

And have I mentioned the environmental costs of building a stadium in the country which will only be accessible for 90% of the users by private car?

[snatter]

First line of my last post

The nature of devolved government is that a consensus must be reached when large sums of public money are involved....

And as the Irish News Editorial from two days ago pointed out, what concensus there was from the three codes over the Maze Stadium is ebbing away. That's the reality of the situation.

As Sammy kindly corrected me yesterday, the IN editiorial did nothing of the sort.
It merely claimed that support from GAA and rugby fans was apathetic at best.

So the opinions of the fans of GAA and rugby don't count, then? (Never mind those of soccer fans who are overwhelmingly "anti")

Well, just hours laterm the GAA emphatically re-endorsed the Maze:

http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-football/duffy-afraid--grant-row-could--provoke-rifts-1314984.html

Meanwhile, GAA president Nickey Brennan has said he is still very much behind the notion of building a stadium on the site of the old Maze prison.

"We made out position clear on it and we embraced the idea when it came first," he said. "But it's up to the politicians now."

Well, we'll have to agree to differ, but I personally was gratified by the lukewarm response by Brennan when informed the Maze might now be scrapped. Where was the outrage? The demands for the Politicians to stand their ground? It certainly doesn't read like a ringing endorsement to me! "Leave it to the Politicians", eh? Those would be the same politicians who now appear to be going cold on the Maze?

I haven't detected any decrease in support from rugby or soccer bodies either.

Michael Reid, Ulster Rugby CEO, was recently interviewed (5th February), giving the politicians a proverbial kick upo the arse, and telling them to get on with it:

http://www.ulsterrugby.ie/11_6448.php

Now that the Maze is the only option, there is no doubt that these are state-of-the-art facilities, and we got a lot of changes that we asked for. The design is a three tier design. We have got the capacity of the bottom bowl of the stadium reduced from 25000 to 18000; we got the Box levels that were up in Levels 2 & 3, brought down to Level 1, so with a crowd of 18000, we could have that self contained on one level for rugby, and we also got a lot of technical changes made that we wanted. We have also negotiated a substantial decrease in rent. Only a quarter of the crowd at Ravenhill sit and if you charge the same price for a seat here, to sit at the Maze, we could make £75-80k more per match, simply because everyone would be seated. Even with rent which would be about £30k per match, we would still be £40- 50k better off. That is at today's prices in about 4 years time, so there is no need for astronomical price increases.

Is that putting you in a difficult position to consider it? If something better came up in Belfast are you already committed to the Maze?

We are committed to the Maze, because it is the only thing that's there. The difficulty here for all of us is we are in a country where we had politicians who when they were effectively in opposition, threw stones. Now they are in power, they have to show some leadership here, and I believe it is unfair on Sport to be put in a position where we have to decide. There is one option for us, which is the Maze.

Reid is too cute to piss the Government off over something which, in reality, doesn't really matter to Ulster Rugby. Three games per season (max?). He's far more concerned with redeveloping Ravenhill - with a reduced capacity, btw - for which Government funding, planning permission etc is critical.

For me, the key phrase of that whole quotation is "We are committed to the Maze, because it is the only thing that's there" Note his unwillingness to assert that it is the best solution to rugby's needs. Note, also, that he left the door open to change his mind should another option arise.

As for soccer, you may not have detected it, but in his last Programme notes (NI v Bulgaria in February), Howard Wells for the first time ever alluded to the possiblility that the Maze might NOT be the only show in town, when he demanded that the politicians get on with it and build a new stadium "wherever it may be". Considering he is being paid by the Government and is angling for his next job with them (Sports Council? London 2012), this was a remarkable deviation from his usual role of Chief Cheerleader" for the Maze!

EG,

do you not get it - there is no alternative to the Maze.
That's your reality that you've failed to grasp.

Five years later, not one site has emerged in Belfast that is
a. available
b. cheap enough
c. has no planning issues
d. in an accepatable location to both communities

There's no point whinging about the Maze unless you can deliver the goods and develop an alternative.
After five years, you lot should be told to put up or shut up.

[snatter]

Only problem ....how will you ever afford to buy a Belfast site big enough

I have already addressed this point in one of my previous posts. You know, the one where I was forced to point out (again) that the Maze site is not, in fact "free"? That is, the one where it might be possible to use one or more existing sports sites, of municipal or public land which could only get permission for leisure use, not development?

And in any case, even if we are starting from the basis of a Maze site worth £126m, plus the likely saving on a £114m Bill for Transport/Infrastructure etc which wouldn't be needed for Belfast, we've actually got the best part of £200m to play with if we scrap the Maze and still save money. And as other comparable cities in the UK (Swansea, Hull, Milton Keynes etc) have demonstrated, less than £200m should be more than adequate.

EG,

by your rationale, no site could ever be regarded as free, becasue we could get planning permission to do whatever we like with it, and then flog it off for housing.
Its a nonsensical argument.

Current recreational zoning is no barrier to developing land.
It can be lifted at a stroke of a pen if its perceived as being for the greater good, as many south Belfast rugby clubs will happily tell you when they cashed in and moved elsewhere.
I believe many GAA units are currently considering selling up for supermarkets/housing and moving to cheaper sites as well.

Nonsense! GAA or Rugby Clubs are entirely different from public bodies, in that assuming it can get planning permission, there is little or no bar to them selling land, in return for a big fat profit with which to assuage their members.

By your logic, BCC could sell Belfast City Hall to be used as a luxury hotel, or any of the parks they control for housing etc and make an absolute fortune. But they don't, both because there is usually a statutory duty on them to maintain their property on behalf of the ratepayers, as well as an electorate to answer to.

And you haven't addressed the fact that there is nothing stopping e.g. Linfield or Glentoran, or Antrim GAA (Casement) from coming to an agreement with the Government to develop their property, thereby obviating the need to shell out on an expensive site.

Plus the fact of the infrastructure savings offered by Belfast over the Maze.

And have I mentioned the environmental costs of building a stadium in the country which will only be accessible for 90% of the users by private car?

sell Belfast City Hall to be used as a luxury hotel, or any of the parks they control for housing etc and make an absolute fortune. But they don't, both because there is usually a statutory duty on them to maintain their property

Again, simply not true.
There is no legal impediment to any local authority selling off any of its parks.
The only barrier would be
a. strength of public opposition
b. the requirement to show that the proceeds are being used judiciously, in line with the authority's needs.

Several london authorities have done it.
I recall that Ards Borough Council were propsoing to flog a kiddies playground last year, before locals got wind of it and kicked up a fuss.

Interestingly, the key argument most often used by protesters is the loss of public open amenity spaces, ie exactly the same loss that would occur if you turn parkland into stadia.

[Evil Genius]

(and small enough to keep the GAA out, but that's an aside)

By vetoing the other two sports over any Belfast site, the GAA is doing a very good job of keeping itself  out. The GAA doesn't want a new stadium in Belfast. Fine. Since the other two do, why not just give the GAA their fair share of the money and let them spend it wherever they like? Or after years of cpomplaing about being denied Government funding, is the GAA actually now likely not to want it? 

This is a complete lie - there is no proof that GAA has veto'ed Belfast.
It merely preferred the Maze.

Here, I've helpfully posted the GAA's Ulster Secretary's comments below.

Comments that, I should add, went shamefully unreported in the BBC, Belfast Telegraph, Newsletter.
Maybe that's why you're hopelessly mis-informed.
Or maybe you just can't handle the truth.

Notice that the bbc.co.uk/ni website has not published any comments from the Ulster Council relating to their statement. Either an oversight on behalf of the bbc or poor pr work from the Ulster Council. In any case in todays paper we can read what the position of the Ulster Council is and it is in stark contrast to the information we heard yesterday:

Ulster did not say no to Belfast stadia plans 
GAA 
By Paddy Heaney 

Ulster Council secretary Danny Murphy has refuted claims that the GAA has refused to agree to a multi-sports stadium being built in Belfast.

Northern Ireland Sports Minister Edwin Poots was reported as telling a meeting of the Assembly's culture comittee that the GAA ruled out proposed stadia both on Belfast's north foreshore and in the Titanic Quarter.

Gaelic games, soccer and rugby would be played at any future venue and plans have been drawn up for a 35,000-capacity stadium at the Maze site, outside Lisburn.

However, Ulster secretary Murphy has strongly denied the suggestion that the northern GAA body had taken a stance against a stadium in Belfast.

He insisted that the Ulster Council had simply expressed its preference for the Maze site without ever taking a negative position on a city-based stadium. Murphy also noted that the Ulster Council had never been asked to consider the Titanic Quarter site.

Murphy said: "The Ulster GAA considered the two sites which were put forward to us, one on the northern foreshore, and the other one was the Maze/Long Kesh site.

"As far as we were concerned, the Titanic Quarter was eliminated by the time it got to the stage where we were involved.

"We chose the Maze/Long Kesh site because we believe it represented the best location.

"We did not take a decision against a Belfast site. We took a pro-active view on behalf of the Council's need for a stadium and its location.''

When asked to explain why the Ulster Council preferred the former prison site, Murphy cited finance and accessibility for the entire province as key reasons.

"When the matter was put to us, the economic argument had already reduced the field to two. The economic argument favoured the Maze/Long Kesh site as opposed to the northern foreshore," said Murphy.

"Our preference would be to take in the jurisdiction of the province of Ulster.

"We cover the nine counties of Ulster and teams from all across it. If the stadium was going to meet a useful purpose it had to be accessible for the all of the teams that play in our jurisdiction.

"When we looked at the two sites our preferred option was for the Maze,'' he added.

When asked if he was annoyed that the DUP politician had appeared to misrepresent the Ulster Council's position on the issue, Murphy said: "I don't have a transcript of what he was supposed to have said so I can't comment.

"All I can say is that we expressed our preference from the two sites which were put before us at the time.''

Poots made the comments yesterday during a meeting of the Assembly's culture committee, which was called during the summer recess in order to address the controversial issue.

During the meeting Poots stated that the Irish Football Association was open to various sites, but its chief executive, Howard Wells, had a personal preference for the Maze.

Poots told the committee that rugby's Ulster Branch favoured a Belfast site – but that the GAA was opposed to a stadium in the city.

Could one of our OWC posters perhaps let the guys over on OWC know the true position of the Ulster Council on this matter!!

Interesting that BBC NI have had no problems reporting Wells "clarification" of his position.

Even if the GAA has been typically poor on the PR front, surely somebody in the BBC NI sports section must read the IN?
Or maybe not, and thats the problem with their lobsided reporting.

The real story here should be that the two sports bodies chiefs have categorically denied the ministers claims. The bbc should be pressurising poots to explain the basis and motivation for his statement.

Very careful choice of words, there. "We did not veto Belfast, we merely preferred the Maze of the choices presented to us". Which is another way of saying "We did not have to veto Belfast" i.e. since the Government knows that we are the only one of the three bodies which is not beholden to them, and since they (HMG) have insisted on all three sports coming together on one site, the message is quite clear enough. (And before anyone jumps in, I don't blame the GAA for playing their hand so skilfully. In fact, I wish my own sport's administrators were so adroit)

Or, to put it another way, is there any site in any location in Belfast which would be acceptable to the GAA? My guess is that it would have to be West, (maybe South ?) Belfast - both of which would compromise Casement. And would the GAA really want a 42k capacity stadium in Belfast? Just as soccer fans do not want to travel to the Maze from their Eastern/Urban heartland, might it not be that GAA fans may not want to travel to Belfast from their Central/Rural heartlands (esp. Donegal, Monagan and Cavan fans)?

[snatter]

Looks like the Alliance Party are sticking to their guns about the Maze as well:

Lagan Valley Alliance MLA Trevor Lunn also threw down the gauntlet to the DUP saying Northern Ireland might never get a new stadium if the DUP runs scared from the Maze.

Mr Lunn said: "If this project does not proceed, it will be the biggest example of looking a gift horse in the mouth in the history of Northern Ireland. It will send a message round the world that we prefer to be seen as a sporting and cultural backwater.

"I say to the DUP, 'you have come a long way, don't trip over this hurdle'. You are sitting in Government with Sinn Fein, test their bona-fides again. Nobody needs to win or lose on this one. It's a penalty kick and it's too good to miss."

[T Fearon]

Lets face it its Long Kesh or the Long road to England or Scotland for the monocultural supporters of the North of Ireland soccer team

[snatter]

(and small enough to keep the GAA out, but that's an aside)

By vetoing the other two sports over any Belfast site, the GAA is doing a very good job of keeping itself  out. The GAA doesn't want a new stadium in Belfast. Fine. Since the other two do, why not just give the GAA their fair share of the money and let them spend it wherever they like? Or after years of cpomplaing about being denied Government funding, is the GAA actually now likely not to want it? 

This is a complete lie - there is no proof that GAA has veto'ed Belfast.
It merely preferred the Maze.

Here, I've helpfully posted the GAA's Ulster Secretary's comments below.

Comments that, I should add, went shamefully unreported in the BBC, Belfast Telegraph, Newsletter.
Maybe that's why you're hopelessly mis-informed.
Or maybe you just can't handle the truth.

Notice that the bbc.co.uk/ni website has not published any comments from the Ulster Council relating to their statement. Either an oversight on behalf of the bbc or poor pr work from the Ulster Council. In any case in todays paper we can read what the position of the Ulster Council is and it is in stark contrast to the information we heard yesterday:

Ulster did not say no to Belfast stadia plans 
GAA 
By Paddy Heaney 

Ulster Council secretary Danny Murphy has refuted claims that the GAA has refused to agree to a multi-sports stadium being built in Belfast.

Northern Ireland Sports Minister Edwin Poots was reported as telling a meeting of the Assembly's culture comittee that the GAA ruled out proposed stadia both on Belfast's north foreshore and in the Titanic Quarter.

Gaelic games, soccer and rugby would be played at any future venue and plans have been drawn up for a 35,000-capacity stadium at the Maze site, outside Lisburn.

However, Ulster secretary Murphy has strongly denied the suggestion that the northern GAA body had taken a stance against a stadium in Belfast.

He insisted that the Ulster Council had simply expressed its preference for the Maze site without ever taking a negative position on a city-based stadium. Murphy also noted that the Ulster Council had never been asked to consider the Titanic Quarter site.

Murphy said: "The Ulster GAA considered the two sites which were put forward to us, one on the northern foreshore, and the other one was the Maze/Long Kesh site.

"As far as we were concerned, the Titanic Quarter was eliminated by the time it got to the stage where we were involved.

"We chose the Maze/Long Kesh site because we believe it represented the best location.

"We did not take a decision against a Belfast site. We took a pro-active view on behalf of the Council's need for a stadium and its location.''

When asked to explain why the Ulster Council preferred the former prison site, Murphy cited finance and accessibility for the entire province as key reasons.

"When the matter was put to us, the economic argument had already reduced the field to two. The economic argument favoured the Maze/Long Kesh site as opposed to the northern foreshore," said Murphy.

"Our preference would be to take in the jurisdiction of the province of Ulster.

"We cover the nine counties of Ulster and teams from all across it. If the stadium was going to meet a useful purpose it had to be accessible for the all of the teams that play in our jurisdiction.

"When we looked at the two sites our preferred option was for the Maze,'' he added.

When asked if he was annoyed that the DUP politician had appeared to misrepresent the Ulster Council's position on the issue, Murphy said: "I don't have a transcript of what he was supposed to have said so I can't comment.

"All I can say is that we expressed our preference from the two sites which were put before us at the time.''

Poots made the comments yesterday during a meeting of the Assembly's culture committee, which was called during the summer recess in order to address the controversial issue.

During the meeting Poots stated that the Irish Football Association was open to various sites, but its chief executive, Howard Wells, had a personal preference for the Maze.

Poots told the committee that rugby's Ulster Branch favoured a Belfast site – but that the GAA was opposed to a stadium in the city.

Could one of our OWC posters perhaps let the guys over on OWC know the true position of the Ulster Council on this matter!!

Interesting that BBC NI have had no problems reporting Wells "clarification" of his position.

Even if the GAA has been typically poor on the PR front, surely somebody in the BBC NI sports section must read the IN?
Or maybe not, and thats the problem with their lobsided reporting.

The real story here should be that the two sports bodies chiefs have categorically denied the ministers claims. The bbc should be pressurising poots to explain the basis and motivation for his statement.

Very careful choice of words, there. "We did not veto Belfast, we merely preferred the Maze of the choices presented to us". Which is another way of saying "We did not have to veto Belfast" i.e. since the Government knows that we are the only one of the three bodies which is not beholden to them, and since they (HMG) have insisted on all three sports coming together on one site, the message is quite clear enough. (And before anyone jumps in, I don't blame the GAA for playing their hand so skilfully. In fact, I wish my own sport's administrators were so adroit)

Or, to put it another way, is there any site in any location in Belfast which would be acceptable to the GAA? My guess is that it would have to be West, (maybe South ?) Belfast - both of which would compromise Casement. And would the GAA really want a 42k capacity stadium in Belfast? Just as soccer fans do not want to travel to the Maze from their Eastern/Urban heartland, might it not be that GAA fans may not want to travel to Belfast from their Central/Rural heartlands (esp. Donegal, Monagan and Cavan fans)?

Or alternatively, there actually is no conspiracy.
Maybe the GAA actually mean what the say,
ie of the two sites put to them , they preferred the Maze to the North Foreshore (THE ONLY OTHER BELFAST OPTION PUT TO THEM).

You don't have to be a brain surgeon or professor of spatial planning to realise that the Maze is clsoer to GAA heartlands and would reasonably be expected to attract more GAA fans than the more cumbersome journey into and through Belfast.
That was their reasoning.

You can either accept it, or go on to peddle your own unsubstaniated theories.

I have no reason to disbelieve what the GAA say, so I'll believe the above statement until someone can prove that they're lying.
I'll certainly give no credence to your unsubstinated conspiracy theory until you can at least back it up.
Again maybe you just can't handle the truth.

And just for the record, the GAA don't have a veto on Belfast - they play several major games in Casement.
Indeed Casement is much closer to many fans in Down, Armagh, Tyrone, Derry than Clones is.
You sometimes hear fans in those counties complaining about having to go to Clones.
Conversely, it would be natural for fans in Cavan/Monaghan/South Donegal to complain about Casement being far away.

This is due to what I would term "geography", not an anti-Belfast veto on the part of the GAA.

In an ideal world, we'd have one top class stadium somewhere central, eg dungannon.
Then nobody would complain.
But, hey, the Maze is only a short hop up the M1 from Dungannon, so its certainly more centrally located than either Casement or Clones.

[Evil Genius]

EG,

do you not get it - there is no alternative to the Maze.
That's your reality that you've failed to grasp.

Interesting that you have gone from arguing that the Maze is the best option etc, to falling back on the Hobson's Choice argument!

Let me restate what it is I do "get". Whilst the NIO was in charge of these things, the projected cost of the Maze was still reasonably low and no-one actually had to produce a Business Case for it, you're right: there was no alternativbe to the Maze. Note my use of "was".

Since it was first proposed, we have had working devolution restored to NI, with locally accountable politicians taking many of the decision formerly taken by the NIO including, it seems this one.

Second, the price has rocketed fro  the original 28k seater, £85m suggested cost. (That's right, three times the cost!  )

Third, the backers of the Maze have now had to come clean over their Business Plan - and let's face it, it has made a less than overwhelming case.

Five years later, not one site has emerged in Belfast that is
a. available
b. cheap enough
c. has no planning issues
d. in an accepatable location to both communities

There's no point whinging about the Maze unless you can deliver the goods and develop an alternative.
After five years, you lot should be told to put up or shut up.

No site in Belfast has yet emerged since no one with sufficient clout/resources etc was actually looking for one. All those who might have been in such a position were swallowing the "Maze or Nothing" line from the Government.

Much more pertinent to me is the fact that five years after it was first proposed, not one brick has been laid on what is an empty site for a stadium, to which all three users are said to be signed up, with the Govenment's money ready and waiting.

To borrow an airline term, the Maze Stadium is not so much the only "show", as a "no-show"!  

[Evil Genius]

Looks like the Alliance Party are sticking to their guns about the Maze as well:

What? Both of them? Or just Mr. Lunn? 

[snatter]

EG,

do you not get it - there is no alternative to the Maze.
That's your reality that you've failed to grasp.

Interesting that you have gone from arguing that the Maze is the best option etc, to falling back on the Hobson's Choice argument!

Let me restate what it is I do "get". Whilst the NIO was in charge of these things, the projected cost of the Maze was still reasonably low and no-one actually had to produce a Business Case for it, you're right: there was no alternativbe to the Maze. Note my use of "was".

Since it was first proposed, we have had working devolution restored to NI, with locally accountable politicians taking many of the decision formerly taken by the NIO including, it seems this one.

Second, the price has rocketed fro  the original 28k seater, £85m suggested cost. (That's right, three times the cost!  )

Third, the backers of the Maze have now had to come clean over their Business Plan - and let's face it, it has made a less than overwhelming case.

Five years later, not one site has emerged in Belfast that is
a. available
b. cheap enough
c. has no planning issues
d. in an accepatable location to both communities

There's no point whinging about the Maze unless you can deliver the goods and develop an alternative.
After five years, you lot should be told to put up or shut up.

No site in Belfast has yet emerged since no one with sufficient clout/resources etc was actually looking for one. All those who might have been in such a position were swallowing the "Maze or Nothing" line from the Government.

Much more pertinent to me is the fact that five years after it was first proposed, not one brick has been laid on what is an empty site for a stadium, to which all three users are said to be signed up, with the Govenment's money ready and waiting.

To borrow an airline term, the Maze Stadium is not so much the only "show", as a "no-show"!  

Christ, I've heard it all now.
So the reason nobody has found an alternative to the Maze is that they were'nt looking hard enough!!

You've had FIVE YEARS to try.

Maybe you were all spending too much time on GAA chat boards when you should have been out looking.
Hey have you tried google maps recently? Its not a bad place to start.

If it takes you FIVE YEARS   to START looking properly, have you idea of when you might finish?

[SammyG]

do you not get it - there is no alternative to the Maze.
That's your reality that you've failed to grasp.

Even if that was true (which it clearly isn't), it still wouldn't be a reason to favour the Maze, as the MAze still doesn't add up. It would be a reason for doing nothing

Five years later, not one site has emerged in Belfast that is
a. available
b. cheap enough
c. has no planning issues
d. in an accepatable location to both communities

For the 3rd time, no other sites have been assesed so none have been ruled in or out.

There's no point whinging about the Maze unless you can deliver the goods and develop an alternative.
After five years, you lot should be told to put up or shut up.

Or to put it another way, after more than 5 years, no business case, transport infrastructure, planning request etc had been submitted for the Maze, despite millioons of pounds already having been spent. And now that the business case has been published it holds as much water as a very leaky sieve and has been rejected.

[Jim_Murphy_74]

Or alternatively, there actually is no conspiracy.
Maybe the GAA actually mean what the say,
ie of the two sites put to them , they preferred the Maze to the North Foreshore (THE ONLY OTHER BELFAST OPTION PUT TO THEM).

You don't have to be a brain surgeon or professor of spatial planning to realise that the Maze is clsoer to GAA heartlands and would reasonably be expected to attract more GAA fans than the more cumbersome journey into and through Belfast.
That was their reasoning.

You can either accept it, or go on to peddle your own unsubstaniated theories.

I have no reason to disbelieve what the GAA say, so I'll believe the above statement until someone can prove that they're lying.
I'll certainly give no credence to your unsubstinated conspiracy theory until you can at least back it up.
Again maybe you just can't handle the truth.

Fow a vast swathe of OWC'ers (although I'd think that EG isn't one of them) there has to be a conspiracy when it comes to the GAA.  Remember a number of contributors postulated that the GAA got on board this project purely because the saw an opportunity to mess other sports around.  The reality is that the GAA have a stadium in Belfast already and that in Ulster context the Maze site would be more central/accessible.  As anyone would do in a negotiation they went for the option that best suits their needs.  Of course any negotiating gambit can change if circumstances do.

It's not sinister, it's business.

/Jim.

[Donagh]

When it comes to it, we are talking about £240m+ of public money being spent on a venue that the GAA will use for a maximum of eight days per year.

After years of contesting elections, SF have developed a very acute ability to count, so I personally would be surprised if they will allow the stadium to take priority over their voters' concerns during the remaining 357 days of the year. After all, the most important statemant on this whole issue came from Wee Marty, when he said "No ICTC/Museum = No Stadium". That's a hell of a way short of saying their MUST be a stadium.

In fact, the Stadium might just provide a very convenient "figleaf" for Peter Robinson, when he has to explain why he isn't blocking SF'd plans for the H Blocks etc: "OK, they've got their Memorial and ICTC etc, but at least I prevented them from getting 'their' Stadium out there, as well"

Politics, eh? Don't Ya Just Love it...

You really don't have any understanding of how this issue is playing out over here. Perhaps you are spending to much time in Ealing and relying on OWC for your information. If I were you I'd be getting prepared for the surprise because you ain't getting a stadium anywhere else other than Long Kesh.

[SammyG]

You really don't have any understanding of how this issue is playing out over here. Perhaps you are spending to much time in Ealing and relying on OWC for your information. If I were you I'd be getting prepared for the surprise because you ain't getting a stadium anywhere else other than Long Kesh.

When all else fails go back to personal abuse and blackmail, brilliant Donagh although I'm surprised it took this llong for the mask to slip.