Tuesday 24 June 2025 13:16
OFFICIALS from the Irish Football Association had little answer for local reps last week when they were asked how they could rebuild trust with local ratepayers, after Antrim was dramatically dropped as a potential location for a national training centre.
As revealed in the Antrim Guardian last year, the complex had been initially earmarked for the long-disused Birch Hill Road site in the town, formerly home to St Malachy’s High School and Ardnaveigh High School.
Antrim and Newtownabbey Bough Council had agreed to the request from the Department for Communities to act as the sponsor body for the land transaction between the Education Authority and the IFA for the development of a National Football Training Centre.
But there was shock after months of work by council officers, when it was announced that the facility was going to a private site in Ballymena instead.
Patrick Nelson, IFA Chief Executive and Graham Fitzgerald, Chief Operating Officer, had been summoned to the Operations Committee to explain the IFA’s withdrawal of interest in the proposed site.
The Committee learned in January, the Irish Football Association’s interest in the development of a national football training centre at the 60-acre site in Antrim had been ‘officially withdrawn’ and ‘an alternative preferred site was in development with a private owner’.
Mr Nelson and Mr Fitzgerald reiterated the IFA’s ‘sincere appreciation’ to council directors, Chief Executive Richard Baker; Director of Economic Development and Planning, Majella McAlister and Director of Parks and Leisure Operations Matt McDowell, for their ‘collaboration and assistance’.
Mr Fitzgerald said that the first meeting with council officials took place on April 11 to discuss a site at Birch Hill Road and in June, the council agreed to act as a sponsorship body for land transfer between the Education Authority and IFA.
He said that there would be ‘no financial implication’ for the council - however committee chair, Alderman John Smyth of the DUP reminded both speakers that ‘a lot of work went in’ by council officers.
Mr Fitzgerald said: “On 14 November, we wrote to the council to withdraw our interest in Birch Hill Road. We are grateful for the support and assistance provided by the council during that six-month period.
“We can understand the inevitable disappointment of Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council that the project will not proceed in this borough but we wish to reassure that we were as clear and transparent as possible in all interactions with council.”
He maintained that any misunderstandings were ‘unintentional’.
Mr Fitzgerald claimed that the centre would be ‘ultimately developed in a location that is in reasonably close proximity to this borough’ and that it would be ‘accessible to all’.
However Ulster Unionist rep Robert Foster, one of the most outspoken councillors against the IFA’s decision, refuted that the site was easy to access ‘given where it is’, saying: “If you try to get to Galgorm on a bus, you would be doing well or try to walk to it. Birch Hill would have led to a different outcome.”
Councillor Foster had already launched an astonishing broadside at the IFA over the decision at a previous committee meeting and Mr Nelson and Mr Fitzgerald acknowledged they had already had a ‘robust discussion’ with the rep.
Councillor Foster said that the Birch Hill site would have delivered ‘so much community benefit for the whole of Northern Ireland’, saying that the project was ‘vitally important’.
He asked why officers were not told about the change of heart until November.
“Time for our officers is ratepayers’ money,” he fumed.
“So much effort had been put in over many weeks to get to that point,” he added.
He raged that the IFA had ‘walked us up a blind hill’ and that everyone in council believed that ‘we were the only show in town’.
Mr McDowell confirmed that after being described as a ‘preferred bidder’, council was not aware of any other locations being considered.
Councillor Foster noted that the Department for Communities had also expressed that the outcome was ‘regrettable’.
Mr Fitzgerald said: “From April to November, during that period, for large parts of that, Birch Hill Road was our preferred site. It was our intention to move forward as quickly as we possible could.
“During those six months, the picture did change for us when another opportunity came to our attention.
“There was absolutely no lack of genuine engagement for us. We think we were as transparent as we could have been throughout the whole process.”
He claimed that Birch Hill was ‘never confirmed as the only site’ and said that other options were not disclosed ‘for commercial reasons’.
He added: “It is not an unusual situation to try to keep many avenues open to us for as long as possible.”
Ulster Unionist Councillor Stewart Wilson said that ratepayers of this borough had ‘every right to some sort of compensation’
Alderman Smyth concurred, adding:“ We also have a responsibility to the rate-payers of this borough.”
He claimed that ratepayers would feel that the IFA had acted ‘in bad faith’.
However Mr Nelson said he ‘did not agree’.
“We are talking about a situation where we have responsibility to develop football in Northern Ireland in all its locations.
“We have looked at a number of sites, some in the public sector and some in the private sector. It is the very nature of doing business, people have to speculate occasionally to try to bring a project to fruition.”
He said that if ratepayers expected compensation for every project that failed to reach fruition, then the IFA would ‘struggle to engage’ with local authorities.
Mr Nelson said that he IFA had to deliver value for money and that there was a ‘significant cost of land’ associated with public sector sites.
He said that the cost savings could be spent on the physical infrastructure on the site and added that DfC was satisfied that the Galgorm site represented value for money.
Councillor Wilson asked that if compensation was not an option, how the IFA would help restore trust between themselves, the council and the ratepayers, however Mr Nelson repeated that people could not expect reparations every time a proposed plan was not followed to completion.
Councillor Paul Dunlop, who is not on the committee but was present at the meeting, asked if public money was to be spent on the scheme.
He was told the ‘majority’ of funding would be provided by the IFA, which has apparently been saving money for the scheme for decades, but the body would be seeking support from DfC.
It was also hinted that the spend could be around ‘four times’ bigger than that of the National Football Stadium Project from 2014-2016.
Councillor Foster asked if it would not be prudent to have ‘two or more sites’ but said that after dropping Birch Hill as a ‘Plan B’, it was his understanding that another agency had expressed interest in part of the site, which comprises two plots of land and was now potentially lost to the IFA for good.
An application has now been made to Mid and East Antrim Borough Council regarding the proposed new national football centre by the IFA at a 50-acre site at Fenaghy Road.
The proposed development, which has been described by the IFA, as ‘multi-million pound, state-of-the-art’ will comprise of five outdoor pitches, one indoor pitch, stands, training building and car parking.
The IFA has said it is expected to feature ‘world-class pitches and cutting-edge training facilities supporting both elite and grassroots players’.
The IFA says it has a ‘long-standing strategic priority to create a facility that will nurture elite talent, support youth development and bolster team performance’.
It is also designed to ‘serve Northern Ireland’s international squads whilst aiming to support the charitable and community activities of the Irish FA Foundation and marks a bold investment in the future of the game’.
It was stated the facility would ‘complement the national football stadium at Windsor Park, in Belfast, creating a dual campus set-up to strengthen Northern Ireland’s football infrastructure’.