By Ryan Sands
The council has confirmed that it is “unable to reopen or reconsider” an application for funding support for a Crossgar community hall.
The local authority was responding to criticism on the matter contained in a recent statement issued by Crossgar War Memorial Community Hall Committee. The statement said that an application seeking renewal of a grant of £3,000 per year for four years, submitted in January 2023, was turned down by the council, after which the matter was brought before the Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman (NIPSO).
While the ombudsman acknowledged that the council’s grant application form lacked clarity in parts, it concluded that this did not amount to a level of maladministration.
“We were very disappointed when the council rejected our request in 2023 for a mere £250 per month to help towards the upkeep of the only community hall in Crossgar, despite us receiving this grant for many years, and many other halls elsewhere in the district continuing to receive funding,” stated Ann Patterson, chairperson of the committee.
“This extra support was a quarter of the annual income needed to keep the doors open. We were baffled by the reasons the council gave for rejecting our funding, and we became particularly frustrated by the constant moving of the goalposts by the council when these reasons were challenged.
“They firstly stated there was a lack of evidence that our public hall was available for public hire, despite a full accounts sheet labelled ‘hall hire income’ being provided. They then said we did not provide the ‘grant expenditure’ amount when the question only asked for ‘grant requested’ amount, with blank guidance notes on the question.
“They also argued we are not the only community hall in Crossgar, because there are other church and Orange halls, and yet when these halls seek funding they are repeatedly told they do not meet the community hall definition to be eligible for funding. They have an excuse for everything.”
She added that she believed that the verdict of the “incredibly protracted”, two-year NIPSO process – while not finding maladministration – “ultimately agreed with the central tenet of our complaint, namely parts of the application form could be viewed as ‘confusing’ and ‘vague’”.
Mrs Patterson highlighted that the committee has since gone back to the council to ask that it “reconsider our funding decision in light of NIPSO’s remarks”; however, they have been informed that this will not be happening.
“To interpret NIPSO’s outcome as a clean bill of health demonstrates a wider problem within this council in accepting criticism and areas for improvement,” she added. “We were denied funding because the application form was in parts unclear, a claim that even the ombudsman has agreed with, and yet our council will still not accept there is anything wrong with their application process and will still not overturn their decision, nor even meet us halfway.
“We are at a loss as to why the council can’t simply do the right thing and give this community hall the grant it needs and clearly meets the standard for.”
The chairperson stressed that the committee is “a small and aging group of volunteers who break our backs keeping a busy community facility available to the public in the absence of any council facility in a village with 2,000-plus residents”.
“This whole ordeal has really made us question why we bother at times,” she concluded. “When we think about the hundreds of thousands of pounds our volunteers have saved the council since our opening in 1952, and yet our own council can’t contribute £57 a week of ratepayers’ money towards the sole community hall in Crossgar.
“Why should residents in Crossgar have to pay more to hire their local village hall, while their rates go towards subsidising village halls elsewhere?”
Rowallane DUP councillor Callum Bowsie said that he was “exasperated by the council’s intransigence”. “Crossgar War Memorial Hall has been a lifeline to the village for over seven decades,” he added.
“The hall is now busier than ever and is clearly deserving of this service level agreement (SLA) grant, which is funding specifically set aside to support community run halls in the absence of council facilities. The hall committee has demonstrated incredible patience in seeking to resolve this matter amicably.
“However, the council’s refusal to accept that its application form needs to be clearer, despite an ombudsman’s remarks, is a cause of deep concern.”
The local representative also stated that his DEA “repeatedly receives the least community grants out of all seven DEAs through the council’s Financial Assistance Programme”, before pointing that, “in this particular tranche of funding for community halls, Rowallane DEA received no grants for the four-year period, while every other DEA received an average of six grants for community halls”.
When contacted for comment, a spokesperson for the council said that it “delivers a range of grant and financial assistance programmes to support community groups and to recognise the vital contribution these groups make across the district”, as well as providing “guidance materials and support to all applicants”.
“During 2024-25, the council awarded £1.9m in funding to 391 successful capital and revenue applications,” she added. “This was followed by £1.97m awarded during 2025-26.
“Since 2015, the council has distributed a total of £14.27m through its financial assistance scheme. To ensure fairness and consistency for all applicants, the council is unable to reopen or reconsider the original SLA application submitted by the Crossgar War Memorial Hall Committee.
“NIPSO’s recent written confirmation to the council also reaffirmed that there was no evidence of maladministration and that no further action is required.
“The SLA application submitted by the Crossgar War Memorial Hall Committee was assessed in full against the approved criteria, with the outcome determined on the overall merits of the application within the established funding process.”
The spokesperson stated that the local authority “remains committed to supporting community organisations through its funding programmes and application support mechanisms” and wished the Crossgar War Memorial Community Hall Committee “every success in their future endeavours”.
