Toaiseach intervenes in Brooks debacle.

raymon · 10-07-2014 11:11pm

I would guess and hope now that Enda and co will give this whole complicated mess a wide berth and disappear.

Politicians should not interfere in planning (or justice). Interfering in these matters should be left to the new crop of Fianna Fail.

John_C · 10-07-2014 11:37pm

Cantremember wrote: »

A dig out perhaps. Or he could hide in the cupboard.

He had a way of getting things through the planning process which a lot of people seem nostalgic for.

bonkey · 11-07-2014 11:54am

Godge wrote: »

Croke Park has been the national stadium of the GAA for nearly 100 years. Bar a few dozen residents still living in inherited family homes (who could have sold out if they wanted to) the rest of them knew what they were buying into. It is de facto the national stadium and always has been.

With you so far as long as we don't confuse "stadium" and "multi-purpose stadium".

It should be somewhere where there are 15-20 concerts per year as befits a national stadium.

But there never have been, and even if I agree with that view, it's most certainly not what the local residents knew they were buying into. In the past 20 years, there has been between 0 and 4 concerts (4 occurring once) a year. 15-20 ...or even 8...is well beyond what anyone could have been expected to know.

The GAA don't use it enough for the amount of taxpayer's money that went into it. Those are the considerations that Owen Keegan should have brought to his decision but didn't.

If there were to be provisos attached to the giving of tax-payers money, the time to do it was when the money was being sought / offered. It would be totally incorrect to retrospectively decide years later that this money carried new conditions.

Calina · 11-07-2014 2:19pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Just an aside, you have to wonder why he'd be objecting. The concerts would have no effect on him, living as he does about 4km from the stadium.

I live 4km from Croke Park although not in Cuffe's neighbourhood. You're incorrect to say that being 4km away means the concerts would have no effect. I hear the noise from every concert at Croke Park. I hear the cheers when Dublin scores. And by and large, I actually can live with that to some extent.

What's monumentally annoying is the traffic most of which comes in the M1 and via the M50. I just don't bother trying to leave the house unless I absolutely have to. Main routes into the city centre are generally borderline non moving, people ratrace and park in housing estates. Plus any bus that goes anywhere near the stadium is completely packed. For me, that's actually anything city-centrewards.

I think the DCC decision was fair enough under the circumstances because at least those concerts didn't impact rush hour traffic on the north side.

The two that were scheduled on the Monday and Tuesday would have caused mayhem and it would have impacted people living 4km away from the stadium.

I didn't object by the way. I probably would the next time since it appears necessary to convince people that there is an issue, even 4 km away from the stadium. I don't mind the football and hurling so much because in general, it's one day, occasionally 2, in a row and almost always at weekends. And it doesn't generate the same level of noise.

I'm sorry for people who had tickets. But it's obvious to me that many people who have tickets are just suggesting people who live in the area have no rights and should just suck it up.

Little CuChulainn · 11-07-2014 2:58pm

Calina wrote: »

I'm sorry for people who had tickets. But it's obvious to me that many people who have tickets are just suggesting people who live in the area have no rights and should just suck it up.

I don't have tickets and I think that. I mean, if you have an issue with traffic or crowds, don't live in a city center. If you have an issue with noise, don't live near a stadium.

SpaceTime · 11-07-2014 3:02pm

The big problem is that we didn't construct a major national event centre somewhere sensible.

I'd have picked somewhere in Kildare with major access into the M7 (multiple flyovers), a huge amount of parking, plenty of space to park coaches and its own railway station with a short branch off the Cork line and multiple platforms.

That way you'd be able to get loads of people in and out without clogging up a city centre location with inadequate road network even for normal traffic most of the time.

I suppose the main thing though was to ensure the GAA had its enormous HQ.

A major stadium that was being used regularly would create more jobs, be a real national asset and quite useful for hosting everything from major concerts to sporting events.

It also should be built for both concerts and sport. Not just adding concerts as an afterthought.

All a bit late now though!

syklops · 11-07-2014 3:09pm

Is the thread title not a bit misleading?

The articles I have read suggest FF have done more for Brook than anyone.

For Reals · 11-07-2014 4:00pm

syklops wrote: »

Is the thread title not a bit misleading?

The articles I have read suggest FF have done more for Brook than anyone.

That may be true. While it is embarrassing for Fianna Fáil die hards, who get what they deserve, the Toaiseach getting involved is embarrassing for the entire country.

SpaceTime · 11-07-2014 4:04pm

There's actually very little the Taoiseach can do anyway.

We don't live in a dictatorship. The PM can't just suddenly declare the concert playable.

We have laws, rules, legal processes etc etc that have to be gone through.

All the Taoiseach can really do is try and negotiate a compromise within the existing framework of rules and regulations. That seems unlikely though.

raymon · 11-07-2014 4:27pm

syklops wrote: »

Is the thread title not a bit misleading?

The articles I have read suggest FF have done more for Brook than anyone.

I agree . Emergency bills to give politicians more p power in planning matters. No thanks Fianna Fail.

SpaceTime · 11-07-2014 4:33pm

raymon wrote: »

I agree . Emergency bills to give politicians more p power in planning matters. No thanks Fianna Fail.

I'd actually go further than that. If I see any emergency bills for the sake of a single concert that give politicians control of planning regulations, I will be voting against any party involved FF, FG or Labour.

Pure populism is what this is and it's the very thing that destroyed this country several times.

syklops · 11-07-2014 5:01pm

For Reals wrote: »

That may be true. While it is embarrassing for Fianna Fáil die hards, who get what they deserve, the Toaiseach getting involved is embarrassing for the entire country.

What has the taoiseach done though?

Permabear · 11-07-2014 5:12pm

This post has been deleted.

oppenheimer1 · 11-07-2014 6:20pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The proposed idea was utterly daft, and only designed to shift the political heat from DCC back to brooks camp, since they can now say they offered a "compromise".

Sand · 11-07-2014 8:14pm

On the bright side, I think the DCC have been fairly impressive in being firm but fair. They approved three concerts and have held firm since despite a frankly laughable hysteria being whipped up by the media and gombeen men. Good on them.

Garth Brooks, I don't know what to think about. I've no personal or even artistic dislike for the man, but he seems to have performed an interesting trick in that it was him who cancelled the concerts, not the DCC, yet he's not under any pressure apparently. I don't like that he seems to think he can issue ultimatums to Ireland or negotiate directly with our government. By "don't like" I mean he can **** right off.

He does have a valid point regarding promoters selling tickets for concerts that lack planning permission. From his perspective it must seem like DCC suddenly showed up late in the day - he's not seeing that it was actually the promoters and the GAA, with great big brass necks, thinking they could ignore the rules and bully their way through by not seeking approval until the last second. They hoped the DCC wouldn't have the stones to uphold the law. Like I said, good on the DCC. Maybe next time promoters will get the approval first, then sell the tickets.

As for Enda and his involvement in this laughable media circus - I gave up on him a long time ago. Enda is the Roy Hodgson of Ireland politics. 'Woy is only England manager because he is not 'Arry Redknapp. Enda is Taoiseach only because he is not Bertie. He otherwise possesses no qualifications or personal attributes that would entitle him to rise beyond the station of the office errand boy. He is just a dull gombeen man. The Irish media are also shown up for what they are - not truth seekers, just noise makers. You'd get better quality of reporting of newsworthy Irish issues and events from the BBC.

Ash.J.Williams · 11-07-2014 8:48pm

There is only one solution.... Let the 5 gigs go ahead and penalize Aiken/gaa. ..or else just forget it ever happened.... The politicians need to stop coming up with embarrassing ideas asap.

Permabear · 11-07-2014 9:56pm

This post has been deleted.

dubrov · 11-07-2014 11:01pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Sure, Garth Brooks had no one to turn to who could fill him in.
He then graciously agreed to talk to the political leader of a nation.

I think Enda Kenny made a big mistake getting involved and trying to influence the planning process

Permabear · 11-07-2014 11:37pm

This post has been deleted.

dubrov · 12-07-2014 12:04am

I think all politicians should stay out of it (opposition aside, who have little to lose and much to gain).
If the planning laws are unfair, change them. The ship has already sailed on this issue

Garth is still trying to ratchet up the pressure though:

"“Our guys are still en route and if there is any chance that the five planned concerts can be salvaged and nobody is being let down then we can proceed as planned until the refunds begin."

I can see a late turnaround from Garth where he agrees to do the 3 concerts "for the fans".

raymon · 12-07-2014 12:41am

dubrov wrote: »

I think Enda Kenny made a big mistake getting involved and trying to influence the planning process

I dont believe he did anything of the sort .... did he?

What did he do?

That_Girl_ Is_ A_Cowboy · 12-07-2014 3:25am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Can I add something.

The cancellations would be huge. I believe 28 million was spent on tickets. The ticketholders would need refunding. Garth Brooks would more than likely still get payed and the sum due to him was 10 million. That could very well sink Aiken down. If you have a look at the aiken promotions site, they are promoting many, many acts so there could be a domino effect yet.

That_Girl_ Is_ A_Cowboy · 12-07-2014 3:41am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I think the 5 concerts over 3 days would have breached one of the conditions as one of the conditions attached to the licence was no music before 6pm.

flatty · 12-07-2014 4:46am

Godge wrote: »

That is an easy one. The wider public interest for economic development, environmental protection, public infrastructure and social amenities beyond the narrow interests of those directly affected by the proposal.

This public interest is too frequently ignored in Ireland.

No, the pylon project should go ahead. Ludicrously, many of those objecting do so on the basis that the pylons will pass too near their houses but also the pylons are detrimental to the visual amenity for tourism purposes!!! The answer is either

(1) They are talking rubbish
(2) Their houses are also detrimental to the visual amenity (unless they are centuries old cottages) and should therefore be demolished.

Again, people claim detrimental environmental effects from the windfarms - noise, visual etc. yet the continuing detrimental effects from burning coal are far higher.

Yes

Just because you think an airport in the midlands is a good idea doesn't mean anyone else does.

There are already too many airports in Ireland. The only possible expansions that make any economic sense are

(1) another runway at Dublin Airport to make full use of the new overly expensive terminal
(2) Baldonnel as a second airport for Dublin

International law comes into play unfortunately, otherwise you would have a point.

Again, the UK is a sovereign nation, nothing we can do, except through EU environmental law (which we have tried) and ineffectual lobbying (which we have also tried)

We do tell them whether or not they can land in Shannon. We give them full permission. What is your issue on this?

If it worked the way you wanted it to, nothing would ever get done or built.

Good post, but I think you entirely missed his point.

foggy_lad · 12-07-2014 4:53am

What a poxy hole of a country Ireland really is!

Not only have we will been raped over a barrel for the next several hundred years by gombeen men developers who gambled and abused planning laws all over the shop but now we are letting international singing sensations dictate planning laws and overturn legitimate planning decisions of state agencies!

Sorry if the above seems harsh but the reality is those shows should never have been advertised nor tickets sold without planning permission. Promoters of such events are doing the same wheeler dealing as the developers and other crooks did before the boom and selling what is not in their possession and which might never happen.

Permabear · 12-07-2014 8:56am

This post has been deleted.

Tabnabs · 12-07-2014 9:21am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No, but it's not just some bloke who turns up with his band and off he goes. He has a management team & promoters (Major Bob Music) who deal with the paperwork and handle the details. Brooks is the product, finely crafted and very well polished. Brooks team and Aiken have been putting out a very high level of spin to make them the victim in this process. Aiken has told a number of lies in radio interviews to slant the argument in his favour. Brooks press conference with its dramatic pauses, soul searching sighs and heart felt pleas, all very carefully crafted to deflect any criticism away from them for pulling the rug on the entire showcase.

Brooks may not need Ireland, but he will miss the revenue on 400,000 tickets, merchandise and album sales.

Permabear · 12-07-2014 9:44am

This post has been deleted.

Calina · 12-07-2014 9:59am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

So he disappointed them all instead.

Permabear · 12-07-2014 12:26pm

This post has been deleted.

Sierra Oscar · 12-07-2014 1:59pm

raymon wrote: »

I agree . Emergency bills to give politicians more p power in planning matters. No thanks Fianna Fail.

Read the legislation. It merely introduces an appeals process - which can benefit the applicant and complainants alike. It is one of the few areas that has no appeals process whatsoever. Its more so about ensuring that we don't get into this ridiculous position again where there is a complete vacuum to bring about a compromise when you have both sides of the divide saying that they actually want to compromise.

Thoie · 12-07-2014 2:21pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Read the legislation. It merely introduces an appeals process - which can benefit the applicant and complainants alike. It is one of the few areas that has no appeals process whatsoever. Its more so about ensuring that we don't get into this ridiculous position again where there is a complete vacuum to bring about a compromise when you have both sides of the divide saying that they actually want to compromise.

But what good is an appeals process unless something fundamental has changed about the application? An appeal in this particular case is really just "Daddy said no, go ask Mammy".

If DCC has said the concerts can't go ahead because of reasons x,y,z, then appealing that is the equivalent of saying "OK, so we're not meeting the legal criteria, but sure go on and let us do what we want anyway".

The correct process, which is already in place, is altering your plans and resubmitting, which then allows time for people to review and raise objections. Anything else is doing away with people's rights to raise objections. This is the crucial point - people need to have the opportunity to object. Their objections may be invalid, and not impact the decision, but they have to have that chance.

If Aiken had submitted the original request in a timely manner, the first rejection could have happened in April, allowing time to draft and submit alternative plans. He was trying to pull a fast one, and it backfired, badly.

Happyman42 · 12-07-2014 2:51pm

Thoie wrote: »

But what good is an appeals process unless something fundamental has changed about the application? An appeal in this particular case is really just "Daddy said no, go ask Mammy".

If DCC has said the concerts can't go ahead because of reasons x,y,z, then appealing that is the equivalent of saying "OK, so we're not meeting the legal criteria, but sure go on and let us do what we want anyway".

The correct process, which is already in place, is altering your plans and resubmitting, which then allows time for people to review and raise objections. Anything else is doing away with people's rights to raise objections. This is the crucial point - people need to have the opportunity to object. Their objections may be invalid, and not impact the decision, but they have to have that chance.

If Aiken had submitted the original request in a timely manner, the first rejection could have happened in April, allowing time draft and submit alternative plans. He was trying to pull a fast one, and it backfired, badly.

Excellent post.
The system, with it's built in consultative process, is designed to remove the necessity of an appeals process.
Somebody in this process, was either not saying the right things or not listening to the right things.
I have my suspicions that it was Aiken/Croke Park/ Brooks management who were 'not listening' and that is what will come out in the wash.

raymon · 12-07-2014 3:40pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Read the legislation. It merely introduces an appeals process - which can benefit the applicant and complainants alike. It is one of the few areas that has no appeals process whatsoever. Its more so about ensuring that we don't get into this ridiculous position again where there is a complete vacuum to bring about a compromise when you have both sides of the divide saying that they actually want to compromise.

Are you seriously defending that bill that would allow for political interference in planning. Of course I have read the bill . It looks Timmy Dooley wrote it alright - it is complete rubbish that has all the hallmarks of being written in a excited frenzy by a starstruck and desperate Garth Brooks fan. Not a TD !!

Have you read it ? It looks like you have not......"the Minister may, if he deems it appropriate and believes the event is of national and cultural importance, review the decision of the Local Authority and may grant a licence or remove conditions imposed by the Local Authority"

Have you people in Fianna Fail learned nothing ? Seriously ?

Fianna Fail : Please stop trying to meddle in justice and planning matters.

Thoie · 12-07-2014 4:19pm

raymon wrote: »

Are you seriously defending that bill that would allow for political interference in planning. Of course I have read the bill . It looks Timmy Dooley wrote it alright - it is complete rubbish that has all the hallmarks of being written in a excited frenzy by a starstruck and desperate Garth Brooks fan. Not a TD !!

Have you read it ? It looks like you have not......"the Minister may, if he deems it appropriate and believes the event is of national and cultural importance, review the decision of the Local Authority and may grant a licence or remove conditions imposed by the Local Authority"

Have you people in Fianna Fail learned nothing ? Seriously ?

Fianna Fail : Please stop trying to meddle in justice and planning matters.

Precisely. What if an application was rejected on the grounds of crowd management? The decision maker, using her experience, and consulting with experts, says "We can't fit 100,000 people on O'Connell Bridge at the same time. The maximum it can hold is 5,000 people, so I'm rejecting this application." Some minister comes along and says "Ah but lads, think of the money those 100,000 people will spend" and lets it go ahead. Rocks fall, everyone dies. Do you really trust a politician to decide what's appropriate? In the past our politicians thought backhanders, brown envelopes, jobs for the boys and using the government jet for non-ministerial duties were appropriate.

Mr.Micro · 12-07-2014 4:24pm

raymon wrote: »

Are you seriously defending that bill that would allow for political interference in planning. Of course I have read the bill . It looks Timmy Dooley wrote it alright - it is complete rubbish that has all the hallmarks of being written in a excited frenzy by a starstruck and desperate Garth Brooks fan. Not a TD !!

Have you read it ? It looks like you have not......"the Minister may, if he deems it appropriate and believes the event is of national and cultural importance, review the decision of the Local Authority and may grant a licence or remove conditions imposed by the Local Authority"

Have you people in Fianna Fail learned nothing ? Seriously ?

Fianna Fail : Please stop trying to meddle in justice and planning matters.

It's just an attempt by Martin to appear popular. FF were not too keen on democracy in the recent past. Decisions made in the dead of the night etc, IMF , etc. Martin just makes a fool of himself each time he opens his mouth.

raymon · 12-07-2014 5:06pm

Mr.Micro wrote: »

It's just an attempt by Martin to appear popular. FF were not too keen on democracy in the recent past. Decisions made in the dead of the night etc, IMF , etc. Martin just makes a fool of himself each time he opens his mouth.

I doubt if this "emergency political interference bill" was even read by Martin before he promoted it. Seems like it was written by a twelve year old.

syklops · 12-07-2014 5:30pm

raymon wrote: »

I dont believe he did anything of the sort .... did he?

What did he do?

What exactly did he do? All I heard was a soundbite.

Enda Kenny makes a comment on the Garth Brooks shenanigans seems a more appropriate thread title.

BeerSteakBirds · 12-07-2014 5:32pm

considering the toleration of this nonsense its no wonder you have retarded TDs and counsellors trying to interfere with the deliverance of justice by judges in serious court cases

raymon · 12-07-2014 6:17pm

BeerSteakBirds wrote: »

considering the toleration of this nonsense its no wonder you have retarded TDs and counsellors trying to interfere with the deliverance of justice by judges in serious court cases

I dont think using the word retarded in relation to Fianna Fail helps the debate.

There are thousands of other words you could jave chosen.

Little CuChulainn · 12-07-2014 6:28pm

Thoie wrote: »

If DCC has said the concerts can't go ahead because of reasons x,y,z, then appealing that is the equivalent of saying "OK, so we're not meeting the legal criteria, but sure go on and let us do what we want anyway".

The problem being that their reasons were effectively made bull**** when thy offered the five gigs in three days, a situation which would have been worse all things considered.

Happyman42 · 12-07-2014 7:03pm

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The problem being that their reasons were effectively made bull**** when thy offered the five gigs in three days, a situation which would have been worse all things considered.

They didn't offer anything...Aiken offered it and it will only be approved on receipt of a satisfactory updated Event Management Plan.

hatrickpatrick · 12-07-2014 9:49pm

Thoie wrote: »

If DCC has said the concerts can't go ahead because of reasons x,y,z, then appealing that is the equivalent of saying "OK, so we're not meeting the legal criteria, but sure go on and let us do what we want anyway".

Actually it's not, it would be "we think the council are wrong and we want a second opinion". The same appeals process could also be used in the opposite direction, btw. I'd imagine such a process could have massively benefitted Dun Laoghaire when Keegan was manager here - a look at the new library illustrates that perfectly. County managers have far, far too much power.

No Pants · 12-07-2014 10:07pm

As long as we don't end up with a tribunal over this in five years time.

Happyman42 · 12-07-2014 11:48pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Actually it's not, it would be "we think the council are wrong and we want a second opinion". The same appeals process could also be used in the opposite direction, btw. I'd imagine such a process could have massively benefitted Dun Laoghaire when Keegan was manager here - a look at the new library illustrates that perfectly. County managers have far, far too much power.

The sensible thing to do is analyse what happened here from a legislation point of view. What went wrong (if anything) and why.
If it turn out that Aiken was trying to pressure the system, why change something that ha worked well for everybody up to now.
Kneejerk legislation is just plain crazy.

Thoie · 13-07-2014 12:09am

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Actually it's not, it would be "we think the council are wrong and we want a second opinion". The same appeals process could also be used in the opposite direction, btw. I'd imagine such a process could have massively benefitted Dun Laoghaire when Keegan was manager here - a look at the new library illustrates that perfectly. County managers have far, far too much power.

I can't see that the council were wrong in this instance.

Their job was to determine whether health and safety aspects were addressed, what the impact on the surrounding area was, and how the plans fitted in with other things in the area. They did their job, and determined that 5 days in a row was too great an impact. They took into account the "3 events per year", and tried to compromise by allowing the weekend concerts to go ahead, and disallowing the weekday concerts, which would impact people/businesses a lot more.

On what grounds would have an appeal requesting the extra two days have been submitted (if that was possible) other than "a bunch of people are sad" or "there's more money to be made"? Unless they were going to soundproof the sports stadium and teleport concert-goers in and out, all the elements that were initially rejected were still there.

The only real grounds for appeal would be if the council had ignored something that was in the initial submission. For example, if the council rejected something based on the fact that they thought there were no first aiders planned, but it turns out they'd missed a page in the submission that outlined how many first aiders would be there. That would be a reasonable appeal. "We really really really really don't want to have to refund 160,000 people" is not a good reason for appeal.

Sierra Oscar · 13-07-2014 12:25pm

Irish Examiner reporting that Minister Kelly is trying to negotiate a satisfactory outcome to allow the concerts to take place. Would be great if he is successful.

New Minister Alan Kelly negotiating Brooks concerts

Cerco · 13-07-2014 1:09pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Irish Examiner reporting that Minister Kelly is trying to negotiate a satisfactory outcome to allow the concerts to take place. Would be great if he is successful.

New Minister Alan Kelly negotiating Brooks concerts

I suppose Labour will have to show some gain out of the reshuffle even if it is only the saving of a concert schedule. Pathetic, to see our politicians involving themselves in a pantomime.

Calina · 13-07-2014 1:10pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Irish Examiner reporting that Minister Kelly is trying to negotiate a satisfactory outcome to allow the concerts to take place. Would be great if he is successful.

New Minister Alan Kelly negotiating Brooks concerts

I'm really not sure I see it as "great if he is successful". I see it as "proof we've learned nothing".

Permabear · 13-07-2014 2:45pm

This post has been deleted.

Toaiseach intervenes in Brooks debacle.

Comments