nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Toaiseach intervenes in Brooks debacle.

Happyman42

Interested in views on this, has Enda set a massive precedent here?

I think it is a fairly sinister development.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Yes we want them listening to Joe soap. But we don't want them interfering in local government in issues which are none of their concern. Planning law is set in stone. The decision has been made. There is no appeals process and it would take a minimum of ten weeks to get a licence for a new event. Enda cannot change this except with emergency legislation. Which I am sure you would agree with be a total debacle at this stage.

For once the council do there job to the letter of the law and immediately there is back lash and high level politicians getting involved. Does it not strike you as strangely similar to how planning law worked (or didn't work) under Bertie Ahern. We should be deeply suspicious of any TDs getting involved in planning debates. It is not their concern.

HeidiHeidi

Reekwind wrote: »

Ugh, there's some crushing condescension in this thread. Whatever your opinion on Brooks' music (or music in general) there's no question that this is a major (the major) cultural event of the summer. It's a major news story because it directly affects some 400,000 people.

In a small country, I'm not really surprised that something like this draws political attention. Nor am I particularly dismayed at this. Don't we want elected officials paying attention to petitioning from ordinary people? It's that a pretty key component of a democratic system?

I'm very distrustful of the idea that politicians should lock themselves away in dark rooms and only confer with men in suits about WEIGHTY ISSUES.

But a legitimate planning decision was made. Independently.

As a result it that, a performer threw his toys out of the pram and refuses to play at all, despite being granted a licence for three gigs.

Why should any politician, never mind the bloody Taoiseach, be getting in any way involved in this independent process?

shruikan2553

Out of everything to get involved in even after Tuam this is what glorious leader decides to get involved with.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Fanglebert

It just gets worse and worse. Enda Kenny, you should know better and interfering like this is a bloody disgrace. I will never vote for you again, you have showed yourself to be just as bad as the last shower.

Godge

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

I am now officially, totally and completely mortified by all of this.

If we were a laughing stock for not granting licences in the first place, the world must have keeled over with a heart attack laughing at us now.

For the first time in living memory a planning decision was made seemingly without fear, favour, malice or ill-will - and we go into international and diplomatic meltdown over it.

I really want to just give up sometimes.

ETA - and would someone PLEASE gag Christy Burke

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

But a legitimate planning decision was made. Independently.

As a result it that, a performer threw his toys out of the pram and refuses to play at all, despite being granted a licence for three gigs.

Why should any politician, never mind the bloody Taoiseach, be getting in any way involved in this independent process?

The planning decision wasn't made independently. It was made because of the pressure from a very small minority of Dublin residents. They were the only ones putting pressure on and they got their decision, threatening injunctions, protests etc.

The rest of the public woke up to what was going on after the decision was made. This was one of the clearest examples of how incompetent public officials and local politicians bow down to local pressure groups without any consideration of the wider interest.

Marhay70

"TAOISEACH TO INTERVENE IN GARTH BROOKS DISPUTE"

Has somebody dug up Charlie Haughey while I was asleep?
Really, if the world thought we were a laughing stock by refusing permission for the concerts then they must really be convinced now.
Here's a thought, maybe as a compromise all those hoteliers, publicans, b&b owners etc. who hiked up their prices to coincide with the concerts and who are now bemoaning the loss to the "country"

, of the cancellation, would contribute 50% of their profits to fund the a restoration fund for the Ballybough area, notably around Croke Villas, which has been shelved by Dublin City Council for lack of money. That way every gets a piece.

Tabnabs

Godge wrote: »

The planning decision wasn't made independently. It was made because of the pressure from a very small minority of Dublin residents. They were the only ones putting pressure on and they got their decision, threatening injunctions, protests etc.

The rest of the public woke up to what was going on after the decision was made. This was one of the clearest examples of how incompetent public officials and local politicians bow down to local pressure groups without any consideration of the wider interest.

The planning decision refers to the original conditions applied to the granting of planning permission for the current upgrade of CP and pre-dates this debacle by years. At least try to be fully informed before you sling mud at the local people whose rights are being trampled on here.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

The planning decision wasn't made independently. It was made because of the pressure from a very small minority of Dublin residents. They were the only ones putting pressure on and they got their decision, threatening injunctions, protests etc.

The rest of the public woke up to what was going on after the decision was made. This was one of the clearest examples of how incompetent public officials and local politicians bow down to local pressure groups without any consideration of the wider interest.

The planning decision was made after looking at all the submissions and issues arising. That is how it should work.
Not good enough for some though when notional sums of money are involved or they don't get to bop about in stetsons. Exactly the kind of administration that got us into the mess we are in now.

It beggars belief that anybody cannot see that. Solving this issue (and there is no doubt that the process needs clarification) on the basis of one gig is kneejerk and reactionary. Have we learned nothing?

HeidiHeidi

Godge wrote: »

The planning decision wasn't made independently. It was made because of the pressure from a very small minority of Dublin residents. They were the only ones putting pressure on and they got their decision, threatening injunctions, protests etc.

The rest of the public woke up to what was going on after the decision was made. This was one of the clearest examples of how incompetent public officials and local politicians bow down to local pressure groups without any consideration of the wider interest.

I beg to disagree.

Licences for the concerts were applied for, in accordance with the planning permission granted following the redevelopment of Croke Park.

Objections and observations were legitimately submitted by residents' groups - parties who were going to be directly affected by the concerts. I have no doubt that if the residents/traders/workers/Christy Burke/Enda Kenny/Barrack bloody Obama had desired, they too could have submitted encouraging submissions in favour of the gigs, and they too would have been considered.

The submissions which WERE entered were considered by DCC, and a decision was reached.

No pressure was applied that I know of. I did not hear any mention of injunctions until the decision to grant 3 licences had been announced.

3 concerts were given permission to happen. Garth Brooks decided against holding those concerts - not the residents, not the council, not Owen Keegan.

Explain to me again why the Taoiseach should be getting involved in trying to overturn this independent process?

raymon

Enda shouldnt have got involved in a planning matter.

The trap was sprung by Fianna Fail sleeveens and he fell right into it.

Rightwing

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Out of everything to get involved in even after Tuam this is what glorious leader decides to get involved with.

Tuam was known about years ago. Not too many cared if the truth be told.

wrt40

[SmugMayoAccent]I'd like to Boogie, eh, woogie woogie on behalf of the people of this island of Ireland.[/SmugMayoAccent]

golfball37

raymon wrote: »

Enda shouldnt have got involved in a planning matter.

The trap was sprung by Fianna Fail sleeveens and he fell right into it.

He has followed their lead at every turn since March 2011, from day one in fact.

Rightwing

golfball37 wrote: »

He has followed their lead at every turn since March 2011, from day one in fact.

Well FF are the popular party. The country is just itching to have them back in. The likes of Mary Hanafin. We don't care if she gets golden handshakes and pensions, we'll vote her back to the local, then to the Dail, and even Europe if she so wishes.

wrt40

apparently Merkel had tickets. Starting to make sense now...

raymon

golfball37 wrote: »

He has followed their lead at every turn since March 2011, from day one in fact.

You mean he has lied under oath, misrepresented his address, forged receipts, lodged developers money to his wifes bank account, interfered with sentencing of drug dealers, demanded money witg menaces, taken bribes from developers, performed drunken hit and runs, etc?

Sorry i missed all of those things that enda did.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

golfball37

raymon wrote: »

You mean he has lied under oath, misrepresented his address, forged receipts, lodged developers money to his wifes bank account, interfered with sentencing of drug dealers, demanded money witg menaces, taken bribes from developers, performed drunken hit and runs, etc?

Sorry i missed all of those things that enda did.

He has lied and followed their lead with regards to running a failed state. What FF people did personally is something I would never accuse him of. He is a rotten politician with no ability but he is not a bad person.

HeidiHeidi

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Meh, both reports from the Indo. You'll forgive me if I don't place a huge amount of credence in them. I haven't seen any more trustworthy sources for these stories so far.

I still maintain that a legitimate planning decision was made by the appropriate body, and NO politician has any business interfering with, or trying to overturn, that decision.

Happyman42

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Investigating 'some' of the objections.

Local resident Brian Duff has admitted that individuals who "wanted to take the GAA down" provided him with a suit and €15,000 in cash to seek a High Court injunction against the concerts.

Clearly, there has been underhandedness and chicanery on the other side of the fence, too.

What is underhand about it? There is a division within the GAA. There is nothing illegal about gathering funds to fund a court challenge...happens all the time.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

If the Pope's signature was on the bleedin thing it wouldn't make a difference. Decision has been made. There is no appeal and 10 weeks to get a licence. TO allow the gigs to go ahead now would **** all over current planning law from a great height. Why bother with laws at all if the boss man is just going to step in whenever he damn well pleases?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Happyman42

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

One of those directly references their source as The Sindo while the other refers to 'It is reported'

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Which means what exactly? If there is a doubt of course they would question everybody involved.

So, you believe it's legitimate for unnamed individuals to slip €15,000 in cash to a local resident to seek a High Court injunction against the concerts, on the basis of internecine infighting within the GAA? Is that how business is done in Ireland?

Who 'slipped' anybody anything? People raise money to take injunctions all the time, nothing unusual or illegal about it.

cormacjones

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The licences for five shows weren't refused because of any petition. Not sure why you're making such a big point about it

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Reekwind

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Yes we want them listening to Joe soap. But we don't want them interfering in local government in issues which are none of their concern. Planning law is set in stone. The decision has been made. There is no appeals process and it would take a minimum of ten weeks to get a licence for a new event. Enda cannot change this except with emergency legislation. Which I am sure you would agree with be a total debacle at this stage.

I certainly wouldn't agree with emergency legislation, which is why I'm glad that it seems to have been ruled out.

But nor do I agree with the primacy of process. If a bad decision has been made by an authority then I have no problem with a higher authority taking action to correct this. That is, local decisions are not necessary the correct ones and government interference to address this is not inherently bad. (See below.)

In this case, I'd like to see legislation (in the long-term) to correct the ludicrous scenario of events not being approved until the last moment. In the short-term, I don't have a problem with government trying to mitigate the worst of this fiasco for hundreds of thousands of citizens.

For once the council do there job to the letter of the law and immediately there is back lash and high level politicians getting involved. Does it not strike you as strangely similar to how planning law worked (or didn't work) under Bertie Ahern. We should be deeply suspicious of any TDs getting involved in planning debates. It is not their concern.

I disagree with the comparison. Planners taking bungs or waving through pet projects is one thing, reacting to popular distress is another entirely. That the latter has arisen in the first place suggests that something has gone wrong with the local approval processes.

Kensington

Godge wrote: »

The planning decision wasn't made independently. It was made because of the pressure from a very small minority of Dublin residents. They were the only ones putting pressure on and they got their decision, threatening injunctions, protests etc.

The rest of the public woke up to what was going on after the decision was made. This was one of the clearest examples of how incompetent public officials and local politicians bow down to local pressure groups without any consideration of the wider interest.

Define "wider interests".

As going by your logic, should a small group of midlands people hold the ESB to ransom over erecting pylons? Or Airtricity for erecting windfarms?
After all, a stable and efficient electricity supply which is built and upgraded at the best value for money is in the "wider interest" of Ireland is it not?

I think a major international airport is in the "wider interests" of tourism in Ireland, let's go slap an airport in the midlands, land is cheap, it's in the centre of the island to every Irish city so the tourists are only at most two hours from any extremity on the island and sure there's loads of rolling green fields. What's it if a few people in the countryside get upset? It's in "the wider interest" you see...

But let's not stop there.
Should a small island nation dictate to the UK what they can and cannot do in their nuclear power stations and waste treatment facilities?
There's a lot more people living in the UK than on the island of Ireland after all? And effective treatment of nuclear waste is in the wider interest of the EU?

Then, who are we to tell the US Military they can't land their planes or carry or stow arms in or through Shannon airport.
After all, they'd argue it's in the wider interest of the Western nations?

Thankfully, planning law and decision making doesn't work like that. Nor should it ever.