Liam Miller tribute: All taxpayers deserve to benefit after paying for Páirc Uí Chaoimh

Cork County Board does not get an exemption from EU or Irish law just because it is the Cork County Board, writes Tim O’Connor

IN the middle of austerity, the taxpayers gave €30m in State aid to the Cork County Board to rebuild Páirc Uí Chaoimh. EU law means that State aid to undertakings can only be justified under very strict conditions.

This includes sport and State support for rebuilding stadia. State aid for these kinds of rebuilds is a hot topic with the European Commission; Real Madrid and Barcelona have had to repay tens of millions of euro after investigations. The redevelopment of Ravenhill, which was heavily funded as part of a major investment in sport in Belfast as part of the peace dividend, was also cleared by the commission.

The matter has come to a head after it emerged that the Cork County Board refused to allow a fundraising match in memory of the late Ireland, Celtic, and Manchester United star Liam Miller to be played at Páirc Uí Chaoimh.

As the €30m grant was more than 10 times the 2015 turnover of the County Board, the Government, sensibly, sought clearance for the grant and after the commission sought more details, formally notified the EU in February 2016.

The commission asked the Government and the County Board were asked to set out what was involved.

The commission gave its decision on July 22, 2016, clearing the grant but under strict conditions. This decision is central: Páirc Uí Chaoimh (referred to as PUíC in the decision document), as it now stands, was built on the basis of this decision.

First, that decision makes it clear that the EU was told that the redeveloped Páirc would be available to other sports. In paragraph 20, it says, unequivocally: “Additionally, the PUíC stadium could be rented out to other field sports. According to Ireland, such requests have been extremely rare, but if required, such permissions could potentially be available for PUíC.”

It also notes that it formed part of the Rugby World Cup 2023 bid. At paragraph 23, it says: “The facilities of the PUíC stadium will also be made available to local communities for sports, cultural, and educational activities.”

So, from the outset, the board were making it clear that, as part of getting the funding, the new Páirc would not be exclusive.

Second, the money from the State was not no-strings but subject to clear conditions. These are set out in the commission’s decision at paragraphs 24 to 27.

24: “According to the Irish authorities, the PUíC facilities will be open to various users on a non-discriminatory and transparent basis. As stated above, the CCB [Cork County Board] will rent out the PUíC’s facilities to third parties to organise sporting and other commercial events... This requirement will be included in the letter of offer for the proposed aid.”

27: “The Irish authorities will monitor the use of the facility over a period of at least 15 years. If the terms of the grant are not complied with, and the facility is not used as intended, this could result in the clawback of aid.”

There is no ambiguity. A commercial rent not just can, but must, be charged where appropriate, but it was a term of the board getting the money at all that the new Páirc be open to other sports.

This was part of why it was cleared by the commission, which says at paragraph 51 that “the planned use of the facility ensures that different types of users will be given access to the facilities, including most notably local communities and (on a limited basis) commercial users”.

If those conditions are not met, the State can demand the money back. It may even be obliged to.

This may not even be the only State aid issue; if a local authority does not enforce planning contributions, this saving can be an indirect State aid. The ongoing dispute between the County Board and the council overpayments for lights could end up on this route, too. But there is no doubt the grant of €30m was made on the basis that the Páirc would be open to other sports, and was cleared by Europe on that basis.

The County Board agreed to this. These conditions were not forced on them; they agreed to them as conditions for getting money from the taxpayer. The Cork County Board does not get an exemption from EU or Irish law just because it is the Cork County Board.

It is hard to see how a blanket refusal to comply with these terms — and making no effort to comply with them two years after clearance on these terms — can be justified by the County Board. It is even harder to see a better example of a voluntary sporting event than a charity match to raise funds for the family of a late Cork sportsman.

The Cork County Board were given taxpayers’ money on the condition the Páirc be opened.

The people of Cork are entitled to ask that those conditions be complied with; and if they aren’t, to ask why not.

* Tim O’Connor BL is a practising barrister at the Irish Bar with a special interest in sport and the law