Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Toaiseach intervenes in Brooks debacle.

1…78101213…21

Comments

  • #272
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Jim Rockford wrote: »
    Oh look the mask slips . . . lol
    The mask of... oh you didn't say. You were just waffling on again.


  • #273
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    IMO Keegan is now irrelevant to the discussion. The decision has been made and won't be re-visited. I am proud of that and Keegan...he has made one thing clear...things have finally changed in Ireland.


  • #274
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Forgeries have been removed and there was still plenty to go on to ban the concerts. Maybe I should send in one forged objection to every planning permission submission and by your rules permission therefore has to be granted?


  • #275
    Jim Rockford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 285 ✭✭Jim Rockford


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    The mask of... oh you didn't say. You were just waffling on again.

    you better get busy forging some more objections, isn't that what you cranks love to to :)


  • #276
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Objections are only part of what is taken into consideration...planning could be refused even without objections if the Event Plan isn't up to muster or the venue is unsuitable or crowd control is not possible.
    Spot on. Why local residents should have to go through the planning process in the first place to stop 400,000 people traipsing through their neighbourhood with 150 decibel noise pollution is beyond me.


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Jim Rockford wrote: »
    you better get busy forging some more objections, isn't that what you cranks love to to :)

    "cranks love to to"? Did you learn your English from Garth Brooks lyrics or something? What does that even mean?


  • #278
    Jim Rockford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 285 ✭✭Jim Rockford


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    "cranks love to to"? Did you learn your English from Garth Brooks lyrics or something? What does that even mean?

    given the sponging cranks can't even do decent forgeries, then I fear it would be a bit too much for you :)


  • #279
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #280
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    There is a very easy fix to all this.
    You cannot be licensed as a venue unless you have legal agreements and a code of practice agreed with residents. Reviewable every 5 years.
    Problem solved, nobody's rights get trampled on.


  • #281
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Where have the Gardai said that? You can't keep saying that without linking to a source.

    And while you are at it...link to a source that says they didn't verify objections before taking them into consideration.


  • #283
    Faolchu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,740 ✭✭✭Faolchu


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Where have the Gardai said that? You can't keep saying that without linking to a source.

    .

    Joan bruton said it yesterday morning on TV


  • #284
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Faolchu wrote: »
    Joan bruton said it yesterday morning on TV

    Joan is in the Guards? :rolleyes:


  • #285
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Why are you placing money ahead of the legitimate rights of local residents to peace and quiet and a night's sleep? You're just like Enda with his "sure, we're skinning babies alive to make handbags here, but it's all about the JOBS".


  • #286
    Jim Rockford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 285 ✭✭Jim Rockford


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Joan is in the Guards? :rolleyes:

    She's higher up than that. Lets see how you learn to respect authority when the 5 concerts are given the all clear this week.


  • #287
    AlanG
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,446 ✭✭✭AlanG


    Thoie wrote: »
    If the promoters had submitted the application in a timely manner, they would have received a response months ago (as early as April if they'd submitted it right after they sold all the tickets). The process takes a set amount of time to allow for the public to object.

    The fact is that the promoters submitted their application very late in the game, knowing that the acceptance/rejection would come only a couple of weeks before the concerts. I suspect that this was a deliberate ploy as they knew they were on dodgy ground, and were hoping for the "we can't cancel on x thousand people this close to the event" reaction.

    While I have no particular love of DCC, they have done nothing wrong here. The blame lies entirely at the feet of whoever it was who decided not to even submit the application until April.

    Your allegations that officials failed to do their jobs in a competent, clear, honest and transparent manner has no basis in reality. It comes across as a pathetic attempt to tarnish reputations, just because they didn't come to the conclusion you wanted.

    Totally agree with this post - the application was left until the last minute to try and force the planners hand. If DCC or the gov back down now it shows that little has changed in our planning systems since developers could get anything they wanted a few years back.
    This is all about profit margins, brooks will play the 3 gigs if DCC stand firm, that is why they have not refunded anyone yet.


  • #288
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #289
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Jim Rockford wrote: »
    She's higher up than that. Lets see how you learn to respect authority when the 5 concerts are given the all clear this week.
    Like you have learned to respect authority with the current ruling of three concerts I suppose? You must love that authority huh.


  • #290
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Nope. No strawman. Why are you bringing "money brought into Dublin" into this then? That's a strawman then if ever there was one. How is that connected to residents' right? Clue: it isn't.
    "Up to 40% may have been" is what I'm reading from a "source". i.e. garbage.
    And that's still 240 minimum legitimate objections, when one isn't really needed at all to deny the permission.


  • #291
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,260 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Nope. No strawman. Why are you bringing "money brought into Dublin" into this then? That's a strawman then if ever there was one. How is that connected to residents' right? Clue: it isn't.
    "Up to 40% may have been" is what I'm reading from a "source". i.e. garbage.
    And that's still 240 minimum legitimate objections, when one isn't really needed at all to deny the permission.
    40% is enough to deem it corrupt


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Ash.J.Williams wrote: »
    40% is enough to deem it corrupt
    40% is enough to deem to deem the other 60% irrelevant?
    So we're back to sending in a few forged objections and then permission has to be granted?
    That's after the fact really that what we have is some "source" saying "up to" 40% of objection "may have been" fraudulent.
    Like I said, every one of those in inverted commas are journalism keywods for bull****.


  • #293
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Ash.J.Williams wrote: »
    40% is enough to deem it corrupt

    The DCC are not responsible if forgeries come in.
    They are responsible for verifying objections, and they do with an answer back system.
    There is no evidence to suggest they didn't verify objections.
    They called in the Gardai when some (we don't know how many, despite 'unconfirmed' claims being made here) where found.


  • #294
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Jim Rockford wrote: »
    She's higher up than that. Lets see how you learn to respect authority when the 5 concerts are given the all clear this week.

    Not gonna happen


  • #295
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    But if the "legitimate residents" have no clue that someone is putting in forged objections then it's not their fault right? Should their objections be thrown out and ignored because of ALLEGATIONS of forged objections?


  • #296
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #297
    Valmont
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭Valmont


    Preferably something from a peer-reviewed, high impact-factor journal, please.


  • #298
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    And if some were forged (40%?) does that mean the other 60% from legitimate people should be binned?


  • #299
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #300
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    So no actual Gardai statement...carry on. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    Calina
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    And if their decision remains the same, what would you say then?


Advertisement