Mick Clifford: Our spending needs to come under greater scrutiny

This week the public was given a glimpse under the bonnet of the Leinster House bike shed fiasco. (It’s officially a bike shelter, but shed at least infers something more solid was built). 

It turns out that the bike shed is only surpassed by the security hut that cost €1.4million. A terrifying thought arises: What if there is deemed to be a requirement for a bike shed to be attached to the “Gucci” hut? Would it need to be in keeping with the character and ambiance of the structure? Would the Leinster House bike shed fade into the background to be replaced by this year’s model? Should we put a chunk of the Apple billions into a contingency bike shed fund?

The shed and hut have correctly given rise to much anger about how public money is spent. There is copious evidence that those in charge of public money at the moment don’t exactly display good husbandry. 

RESULTS: GENERAL ELECTION 2024

Scroll for results in your area

Cork East

Cork North Central

Cork North West

Cork South Central

Cork South West

Kerry

Clare

Limerick City

Limerick County

Tipperary North

Tipperary South

Waterford

Dublin Bay North

Dublin Bay South

Dublin Central

Dublin Fingal East

Dublin Fingal West

Dublin Mid West

Dublin North West

Dublin Rathdown

Dublin South Central

Dublin South West

Dublin West

Dun Laoghaire

Carlow/Kilkenny

Kildare North

Kildare South

Laois

Longford/Westmeath

Louth

Meath East

Meath West

Offaly

Wexford

Wicklow

Wicklow/Wexford

Cavan/Monaghan

Donegal

Galway East

Galway West

Mayo

Roscommon/Galway

Sligo/Leitrim

And while this might be applicable to elements right across the permanent government, one other story this week illustrated a cavalier approach to public money from the elected government, and even the body politic. 

For if the hut and shed show how some public servants spend money in a way they never would their own, then the allocation of sports capital grants is an example of how politicians purport to give out money as if is their own.

Last Wednesday was the big day when the grants were announced. This is where politicians of all hue have something for everybody in the audience. They were all over social media, congratulating those lucky bunnies who are the subject of the munificence, but really just associating themselves with the money handed out. They posed for photographs with recipients just like Santa Claus used to do in Roches Stores on Patrick Street in yesteryear when handing out presents. In the election to come, when they knock on your door, they will slip into the conversation a reference to the local sports club and how well it’s doing on foot of the grant. 

They won’t mention their own central role in acquiring the grant but unless you arrived on earth direct from the last shower you will know that this is a reminder of where your bread is buttered and who is wielding the knife

On one level, it would be churlish to begrudge elected representatives this five minutes of fame in a line of business where they are increasingly accused of infamy. On the other hand, it’s our money they are playing game with.

And playing games is exactly what the distribution of the sports capital grants is about. Ostensibly the grants, which are sourced in the national lotto, are designed to enhance participation in sport and grow all kinds of sport to the benefit of society as a whole. In reality, much of the allocation is about politics.

This year €230m was handed out. The announcement on Wednesday was attended by Catherine Martin, the senior minister in the sports portfolio, Thomas Byrne the junior minister for sport and Paschal Donohoe, whose brief has nothing to do with sport, but was there to apply Fine Gael’s fingerprints to the great giveaway. The amount handed out was around double what was distributed on the last occasion, two years ago.

So what has changed? Participation in sport has risen incrementally, most of which is attributed to our emerging from the pandemic. What has really changed is the electoral cycle to the point where an election is now hovering into view. So any concept of value for money is shelved to be replaced with politicians donning their Santa Claus gear.

Then we have the recipients. Some 1,996 grants were approved covering forty different sports. From that, the GAA managed to get €96m from the total of €230m. According to Sport Ireland’s Irish Sports Monitor report for 2023, a total of 3% of the population plays Gaelic football. The cohort playing hurling or camogie is much smaller and doesn’t feature on the monitor. Yet the GAA receive 40% of the money doled out.

This is no criticism of the GAA. in fact, it is to the credit of an organisation that does Trojan work throughout the state and at all levels of society that it has the ability and influence to acquire so much state money 

The GAA has long been adept at looking after its interest in the political arena. That reality, that hold over politicians, ensures that the GAA’s interests are well looked after. On the basis of such a transactional relationship between the organization and the body politic the GAA is in clover when it comes to acquiring state money.

The contrast in the grants awarded to soccer is stark. In total, the sport received €41m, less than half of that acquired by the GAA, despite, according to the ISM, more people playing soccer (4%) than GAA. There was, for instance, no money for the fledgling League of Ireland academy which is designed to hugely enhance the game for young people. Again, much of this is down to politics. The FAI are not as adept as the GAA at lobbying and politics and has been through some serious corporate issues in recent years. However, that alone is no reason for the disparity in funding. Nominally, the allocation of grants is supposed to be about those on the ground who are participating in sport. A crucial element to the grants is the application, which requires a certain amount of nous.

This plays to the strengths of both savvy sports organisations and politicians who in our current system spent a fair amount of time in assisting citizens to get access to services to which they are entitled. So when the result are announced, the elected representatives are naturally delighted to be associated with anything that enhances a local community.

Sport is underfunded and does contribute hugely to physical and mental wellbeing. A system in which money collected through the lotto is distributed to sports clubs in highly progressive. But in a week when a cavalier attitude to public money was writ large in the public square it might be an idea to look again at whether there is genuine value for money in the system of allocation sports grants.