Thursday, December 13, 2007
“an abuse of the democratic process..”
The BBC are/were reporting this morning that members of the Assembly’s Culture, Arts and Leisure Committee were due to be shown plans for a sports stadium at the site of the former Maze prison by the Culture Minister, the DUP’s Edwin Poots - also here. And the report claimed, “the BBC understands both the business cases for the stadium and the entire Maze site should be with Finance Minister Peter Robinson by the end of this week.” However, according to another (later) report, all is not well..
Members claimed they had been left in the dark without sight of any business plan and accused the department of using them in a public relations exercise.
The meeting was adjourned for one hour, jeopardising the minister`s planned evidence session on the 37,000-seater venue. DUP committee member Nelson McCausland said: “Until the process is complete this is an absolute waste of time having any sort of presentation.
“It seems to me that this committee is being used this morning as a platform to justify a PR exercise outside this room and to use the committee this way is an abuse of the democratic process.”
Pete Baker @ 11:14 AM
Does someone actually think it’ll be cheaper to build in Belfast?
It would be much cheaper.
1. No need for a huge new motorway junction, nor a new motorway lane.
2. Private sector will pay for much of it as they can make money from it, unlike at an isolated location.
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 08:19 AMDisgraceful treatment of this story by the BBC on Evening Extra last night.
Since when was it the role of BBC staff to express opinions on the news? The female presenter kept talking of how it was a “farce” and had some “events” person on for an interview which was simply the two of them agreeing about how “farcical” it was, how embarrassing, and what a terrible waste of money it was to fly consultants over from London.
Why are BBC journalists more concerned about a superficial row and about two wasted air fares than they are about the substantial issue at the heart of this? Why are they not interested in the millions already spent on this project? On the secrecy that has surrounded it? On the fact that it took an 18-month effort by football supporters, using the FOI Act, to force the Government to release original site selection studies?
The same applies to David Dunseath on Talkback with his condescending opinions and refusal to engage seriously with the real arguments about this project.
And the Belfast Telegraph - why was David Gordon never unleashed on this project? Why do we get asinine and fawning editorials instead?
Do journalists in NI not understand that it is their job to do more than simply present Government PR?
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 08:47 AMmore on this story this morning: have to say McNarry is on the money. My sense is that the Media had been nicely teed up for this story by poots and the Executive Information Service (splitters!)and had trailed the story at lenghth, hence the need to cover their tracks with farce etc to spare their blushes at having been sucked into it and used. anyways McNarry’s statement:
Commenting on the continued fallout over the Maze Stadium plans this morning, UUP DCAL spokesman and DCAL Deputy Chairman David McNarry said in a statement,
“Much has been made about the architects for the site being snubbed after flying in from London. Before everybody weeps for them it should be remembered that they have currently been paid to date in the region of £3 Million for their plans. The Committee chose not to meet them yesterday because the process was, as some commentators have noted, a farce. We would be happy to welcome them again when we have all the information surrounding the project at our fingertips.
Here are the facts:
The Committee does not have the full picture, a business plan, the final costs or costed alternatives to the Maze stadium at present. This is like being asked to give an opinion on a car you are buying for someone without having seen anything other than how it looks.
The Committee felt it was being bounced. A News Conference was planned for the same time as the Committee meeting by the Minister and Architects, presumably designed to unduly influence the media and attempt to railroad the Committee into accepting a Maze or nothing outcome. This is no way to treat a Committee. Our role is to scrutinise and ensure that the public in Northern Ireland get value for Money. We are not a plaything to be used in a political game of chess by the Minister. Treating a Committee in this way is corrosive to the democratic process and makes a mockery of DUP claims of accountable Ministers.
The Committee is not in favour nor against a National Stadium at the Maze but we will not and can not make a final decision on this matter until we are properly armed with the facts, costings and a proper business plan. This is a common sense approach. We do not seek to be obstructive for obstruction’s sake but we do seek to be afforded basic courtesies and be given adequate information. The root causes of the difficulty surrounding the Maze project do not lie with the Committee. The Committee did not walk out, it was adjourned by consent and at the first opportunity apologised to the designers for circumstances which were beyond its control to which the designers replied with full understanding.”
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 10:18 AMBo - do you have a link for that story?
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 10:33 AMoneill:What’s all this nonsence about the figures.
I’m not sure if that was a genuine or rhetorical question. <<
It was a genuine question. If the stadium had to have a viable business case then it would never be built, at the Maze or in Belfast. It will only be built with a hugh injection of public money.
This is a red herring. The politicians are only pretending that they are being thorough by asking for a business case.
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 10:42 AMgram,
Robinson didn’t state that there would be a new stadium, merely that all the figures would have to be looked at before a decision was made.That decision could be to dump both the Maze and Belfast options and possibly instead to update the present facilities.
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 10:59 AMoneill>>gram,
Robinson didn’t state that there would be a new stadium, merely that all the figures would have to be looked at before a decision was made.That decision could be to dump both the Maze and Belfast options and possibly instead to update the present facilities.<<
So were will Norn Iron play their matches when Windsor falls down? They need a new stadium and they’ll only get one if it can be shared with all sports.
This is all just grandstanding by our wonderful politicians.
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 12:03 PMThey need a new stadium and they’ll only get one if it can be shared with all sports.
Not true: the upgrading of existing stadia has been mooted as an option.
This is all just grandstanding by our wonderful politicians.
And the biggest grandstanders are Poots and the other pro-Mazers.
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 12:31 PM“So were will Norn Iron play their matches when Windsor falls down? They need a new stadium and they’ll only get one if it can be shared with all sports.”
Oh my, dont tell me nothing came of the suggestion for the GAA to offer us Croke Park in the meantime?
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 07:27 PM‘Oh my, dont tell me nothing came of the suggestion for the GAA to offer us Croke Park in the meantime?’
I doubt if the sectarian chants of ‘no surrender’ would very welcome at any ground.
Posted by on Dec 14, 2007 @ 08:14 PMP&J;"Also, there is no reason to have a stadium which includes the GAA given their different requirements in terms of pitch size”
Another classic! So, this stadium will be financed by taxpayers money. I’m not a GAA member or supporter myself but are you claiming that the GAA and it’s members don’t pay taxes?
So, you think that the govt should pay millions to build a new stadium but tell the GAA (or if you say what you really mean - Catholics) that they can’t use it. Somehow, I think that govt are neither as prejudiced or as stupid as you so I really can’t see this happening.
The real truth is that the GAA could easily double the amount of fans that NI soccer can bring - a fact that many Unionists don’t like to be publicised.
It must be terrible for you that we don’t live in a pre 1968 world and we taigs will no longer sit at the back of the bus.
If this stadium is built (irrespective of location), the GAA (i.e. Catholics) will have as much right to use it as anyone else.
If you don’t like it, tough shit!
Posted by on Dec 15, 2007 @ 06:22 PMBilly Liar
1. The possessive “its” doesn’t take an apostrophe. That’s schoolboy stuff.
2. A stadium in Belfast wouldn’t neccessarily need to be financed by taxpayers’ money.
3. If it were, and it were not to include the GAA (who are scared to play in Belfast), the GAA could be given the equivalent money in the form of grant to develop its own stadia.
Posted by on Dec 17, 2007 @ 10:46 AMSo Willowfield,
so you’re advocating that the the UK treasury pay for two stadiums?
Say one 25k capacity stadium for IFA/IRFU, and another 40k capacity stadium for the GAA?On a scale of one to ten, how likely do you think it is that the UK govt will happily duplicate resources just because NI soccer fans don’t want to share with the GAA?
Posted by on Dec 17, 2007 @ 01:05 PMso you’re advocating that the the UK treasury pay for two stadiums?
No.
I’m advocating the building of one stadium in Belfast, primarily funded by the private sector. If the GAA were to opt not to be part of it, then they should be compensated by the granting of an equivalent amount of any money being put forward by the Government to subsidise the private development in Belfast.
This would (a) save the Treasury millions; and (b) satisfy all three sports.
Say one 25k capacity stadium for IFA/IRFU, and another 40k capacity stadium for the GAA?
No.
On a scale of one to ten, how likely do you think it is that the UK govt will happily duplicate resources just because NI soccer fans don’t want to share with the GAA?
In the scenario above it would be the GAA not wanting to share with football and rugby. But I’m not advocating “duplicating resources” anyway so the question is irrelevant.
Posted by on Dec 17, 2007 @ 02:08 PM
