A couple of weeks ago, The Irish Times argued editorially, in the course of a balanced appraisal of the pros and cons of Sports Campus Ireland, that "in recent decades, sport has suffered more deprivation than health in terms of government priorities. The present controversy should not result in a false choice between sports or hospital spending. Both contribute greatly to the well-being of society; both require major investment; both should be funded."

I agree with that, strongly. I also believe most people in Ireland agree with it. The recent poll in The Irish Times established that, despite all the controversy of recent times, a majority of the people want to see a value-for-money campus and stadium. I happen to agree with that too.

In a professional and independent opinion poll we commissioned earlier, a substantial majority also favoured the project. That poll also revealed that people want to see sports facilities developed around the country and they consistently underestimate the amount already being spent on that task.

In the sports pages of The Irish Times and other newspapers, there has been a great deal of analysis of the project - critical and supportive, for and against. For those of us involved on a day-to-day basis in the project, it has been very useful, and often salutary, to be confronted with arguments based on years of knowledge and involvement in sport and its facilities.

Many of the journalists involved have campaigned for better facilities for many years, and are familiar with the Cinderella status sport has enjoyed, if that's the word, in Ireland in the past. Whether I agree or disagree with the views they express, I know they have sport at heart.

That level of coverage, and critical analysis, is unfortunately in marked contrast with some of the other writing recently seen in The Irish Times.

For example, after a recent round of very constructive meetings with the major private companies bidding to be involved in the development of the campus and Stadium Ireland, we felt it was worth announcing the good news that five of the six pre-qualified bidders wanted to proceed with the competition, whose closing date is June 21st.

It's good news because a well-conducted competition between substantial companies is the best way to ensure the Government and the community get value for money and certainty about its investment from this project. The contract that will go to the winner of this competition involves the design, building, financing, operation and maintenance of the key sports facilities, including Stadium Ireland, planned for Abbotstown, Co Dublin. What really pleased us was that some of the best and most well-established companies in the world in this area wanted to be involved.

So perhaps you can imagine our surprise when The Irish Times decided to ignore this news for three days, and then on its front page to lead with the assertion that one of the six had decided not to go ahead, and to describe that as a major blow to the project.

The "glass half empty" approach of reporting exciting developments in relation to the project I can understand, even if I feel it doesn't reflect particularly well on the paper.

However, the anonymous Drapier chose the personal attack route last week, when he said the only reason I defend the project is because I am "no longer the objective civil servant, but a key player with a significant vested interest in the success of the project".

The innuendo behind that statement is that I have abandoned the traditions of a lifelong career in the public service in the interests of a quick buck. Not true - and not worthy of The Irish Times either, if I may say so, even if it is the sort of thing one might expect from an anonymous columnist.

I have argued before that we will look back in years to come at this project and be glad it was completed. Stadium Ireland will be a busy and highly productive national stadium, helping to attract great events to Ireland as well as showcasing the best of Irish sports talent. The mix of campus and public amenity around it will make Abbotstown a thriving, vibrant centre all year round. I am confident of that.

But I am also happy to accept that there should be things critics and supporters of the project should be able to agree about - some fundamental benchmarks that should underpin any public project, where the investment by the community must be matched by a return for the community.

I believe we all, in our own way, have a fundamental respect for sport and believe it can play a key role in the life of the nation. On that basis, can I suggest that all of us might be able to agree on the following benchmarks or something close to them:

Sports Campus Ireland must be built on a value-for-money basis. The community must be able to see what we are getting in return for any investment we are asked to make. Where it's fair, a portion of the cost of surrounding infrastructure should be added to the cost of the campus - especially if an independent view held that the infrastructure need arose directly from the campus. But when costs are being measured, it is fair to set out the benefits of all these improvements too.

It must attract and retain the support of sport as a whole. This must be an inclusive project, which will promote participation at every level as well as support for the elite athletes we need to develop.

It must be accessible to the whole community. The original vision behind this project included the notion that it might represent a visible manifestation of an island at peace with itself. It must be accessible to all on the island.

The campus must be part of an overall strategy for Irish sport. Investment must continue around the country, through the national governing bodies, and in people as well as bricks and mortar. We ought to aspire to the best national facilities - but side by side with that, we ought to set ourselves the goal of eliminating the "young lads changing in the ditch" syndrome. Our young people deserve better.

We have to recognise that even in a time of prosperity, there will always be demands and needs. Nobody is arguing sports policy should take precedence over social policy, and nobody should.

Both from the point of view of an enduring life and viability for the project, and because it is the right thing to do for the community, the campus must reflect the best - in terms of architectural practice, amenity value, and state-of-the-art facilities.

There should always be room for an independent overview of a great public project like this, and accountability must be a fundamental principle. These are the benchmarks we are going to apply. And it is the basis on which we will continue to welcome criticism and debate - and to fight our corner when it is necessary.

Paddy Teahon is chairman of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Ltd