Casement Park motion fails as MLAs reject clawback on profit from non-GAA events

By Claudia Savage, Press Association

MLAs have voted against Stormont claiming a “proportion of revenue” from non-GAA events at Casement Park.

TUV MLA Timothy Gaston tabled a motion claiming it is “unjustifiable for public money to underwrite the scale of funding” for the stadium and called for a legally enforceable clawback mechanism to recover some profits.

Some demolition work began at Casement Park last month where plans for a 34,000-capacity stadium at the site have been delayed because of a major funding shortfall.

Sinn Féin NI Finance Minister John O’Dowd pledged more than £100 million (€114 million) for the redevelopment in his draft budget that is currently out for consultation but has not been agreed by other Executive parties.

Mr Gaston expressed opposition to the building of Casement and his “profound issues with the GAA” but said the debate on Tuesday was about whether “the taxpayer of Northern Ireland is to be treated as an unlimited underwriter of a major commercial venue with no share in return”.

“The proposition is simple,” he told the assembly.

“If public money underwrites the stadium, if public money fills the gap, if non-GAA concerts and fixtures generate substantial commercial profit, then it’s totally unacceptable and unjustifiable for the public to carry the cost while private bodies retain the reward.”

In a later intervention, the MLA for North Antrim clarified he has no issue that “any future investment that goes into Windsor (Park), any future investment that goes into Ravenhill, once the line in the sand is drawn, clawback should be enacted.”

People Before Profit MLA Gerry Carroll tabled an amendment that would introduce a clawback mechanism for “any stadia currently in construction or to be constructed in future”.

He said the principle of non-sporting events contributing to “the public purse” when they’ve received public funding is “a worthwhile principle and an agreeable one”.

“My concern though with the original motion, and hence the amendment, is that it singles out the GAA exclusively,” he said.

“My amendment means that the same should apply to all stadiums that receive public funding.

“For example, if there’s a large music concert or event in Windsor or Ravenhill and it’s lucrative, profitable, surely the same clawback model should exist that is being proposed here for Casement Park?

“And if not, that does seem to be just an attempt to stick the boot in the GAA for the sake of it.”

The West Belfast member also claimed Casement Park is “lying empty because of the disaster that surrounded it and the politics that dominate this place.”

He added: “It is telling that a key pillar of Sinn Féin strategy for the North has been Casement Park, and they’ve been unable to lay a brick despite holding the post of Finance Minister, Economy Minister, First Minister, Junior Minister as well.”

Sinn Féin MLA and Junior Minister Aisling Reilly said the motion is “an attempt to try to other Gaels” and “a blatant attack on the GAA”.

“Casement Park represents a significant opportunity, an opportunity for economic growth, an opportunity for regeneration, an opportunity to create jobs, attract visitors and drive footfall into local businesses,” she said.

“When major games and events come to our city, whether they’re sport or they’re cultural they will fill hotel rooms. They support hospitality. They place a positive spotlight on this place that we call home, and Casement Park will be no different.”

NI Communities Minister Gordon Lyons said public money is “given because there is an expectation that market failure has taken place and there is no other option open to them to get to where they need to be”.

“However, if we see an organisation that is particularly commercially successful, making significant sums of money from commercial venues, I think most people would see that it is only right that there is such a return then to the public purse,” he said.

“So I, for those reasons, believe that the motion and the amendment are entirely reasonable.”

Mr Gaston’s motion was not ratified as 31 members voted in favour and 46 members against.