Garth Brooks/Dublin City Council

cork

Registered User
Messages
338
Why no political intervention?

This would have been a boost for business in Dublin.

Yet at political level - they carry on regardless.
 
Absolutely. Compulsory purchase orders for the properties belonging to the residents who complained should be issued. The President should be on the next flight to meet Mr. Brooks personally and apologise on behalf on the nation. Croke Park should be given to the FAI as punishment for this mess. A Dail inquiry should be set up immediately to establish who is to blame.

This would never have happened with Bertie at the helm. Bring back Bertie I say......
 
Surely this is a very simple problem to solve for the future.

Each venue gets a license to hold a set number of concerts a year and whatever conditions attach to them. Say Croke Park is allowed to hold 6 concerts, and no more than 3 in any one month or on consecutive days.

Then when they plan their concerts, they don't have to apply for special permission for that concert. They can sell tickets knowing that the concerts will go ahead.

Brendan
 
The Garth Brooks five concerts debacle was handled dreadfully from the start. Initially, nobody involved talked to anybody who would be affected. This was a typical crass case where money was going to win, no matter what. But, greed mounted and mounted and for once the money mongers failed.

I lived on the route to and from a major concert venue in the past. I must say it was not a great experience. You had to protect your family and your property from people who just did not care what they did. Urinating in our front garden by the concert "patrons" was relatively minor. Believe me, far worse used to happen.

Five consecutive major concerts in Dublin's City Centre was never going to be a runner. These five concerts were on top of several recent concerts plus some major sporting events and more to come.

OK the business community lost out this time. From their past gains did they even show any form of compensation to the people who live in the immediate area? For once decent people stood up for themselves and won. Now, I am not saying that everybody involved in the objections were in a position of high moral ground.

The whole matter could have been handled much better, but nobody chose to negotiate and they deserved what they got.
 
The aspect of this that strikes me is that the decision to licence 3of5 concerts seems to have been taken by one person without any explanation of the basis for the decision or any possibility of appeal.

I don't know ( or even care ) whether the decision taken was the correct one, but it strikes me as a process that should be unacceptable in a democracy
 
The aspect of this that strikes me is that the decision to licence 3of5 concerts seems to have been taken by one person without any explanation of the basis for the decision or any possibility of appeal.

I don't know ( or even care ) whether the decision taken was the correct one, but it strikes me as a process that should be unacceptable in a democracy

Dub City Manager gave the nod to 3 of the 5. The other 2 were'nt allowed go ahead for public order reasons....but why you'd have no public order problems for 3 but would for the other 2 seems odd to me.

Turns out now that the Chairman of the Croke Park Streets Committee does'nt even live in the area. He's connected to the Handball Alley in Croke Park that have been in dispute with GAA bosses for the past number of years over relocating the handball premises
 
As I understand it, the promoters were taking a real flyer in going for 5. It is hard wired into Croke Park's 1993 planning permission that it can't stage more than 3 in a row.

We have planning rules for a reason, you can argue why 3? why not 5? The fact is the rules said 3. The promoters hoped that the sheer enormity of cancellation would force a bending of the rules. It was bullying, it was mob rule. Democracy would not have been served by giving in no more than up North on flags and parades.

As to Garth Brooks saying 5 or none, well that just beggars all belief for arrogance and disregard for his Irish fans.
 
The aspect of this that strikes me is that the decision to licence 3of5 concerts seems to have been taken by one person without any explanation of the basis for the decision or any possibility of appeal.

I don't know ( or even care ) whether the decision taken was the correct one, but it strikes me as a process that should be unacceptable in a democracy

Dublin City Council has a chequered history of elected repesentatives being involved in planning decisions.
 
The loss of tax revenue to the state.
The inability of public representatives to intervene was a disgrace.

Time we havd proper local government reform.

Directly elected majors with executive powers.
 
The loss of tax revenue to the state.
The inability of public representatives to intervene was a disgrace.

Time we havd proper local government reform.

Directly elected majors with executive powers.

The ability of public representatives to intervene has resulted in many a disgrace in the past! We don't need to give them more powers to overrule planning law when it suits them or their buddies, or wins a few votes.

As for the loss of tax revenue to the state, I think this card is being overplayed. Sure, Dublin hotels and restaurants would do well that week, but at a cost to those in the rest of the country, unless those who would have spend their money going to these concerts put this money under their matresses and never, ever spend it in the future.

The extra travel involved would have resulted in lots more fuel used, more money out of the country... Also, how many million was Brooks going to take out of the country in his suitcase? The economics are a lot more complex than those representing the vested interests would have you believe.
 
The ability of public representatives to intervene has resulted in many a disgrace in the past! We don't need to give them more powers to overrule planning law when it suits them or their buddies, or wins a few votes.

As for the loss of tax revenue to the state, I think this card is being overplayed. Sure, Dublin hotels and restaurants would do well that week, but at a cost to those in the rest of the country, unless those who would have spend their money going to these concerts put this money under their matresses and never, ever spend it in the future.

The extra travel involved would have resulted in lots more fuel used, more money out of the country... Also, how many million was Brooks going to take out of the country in his suitcase? The economics are a lot more complex than those representing the vested interests would have you believe.
I was going to make a similar point. The net gain/loss to the country is given by the trade balance. As you say the trade balance would probably have been negative. All other flows are internal with balancing "winners and losers".
 
Dublin City Council and in particular Owen Keegan seem to be getting the blame for this. In my opinion the blame lies with the promoter. He's ultimately responsible as the project manager for the event. He might be constrained by legislation and bureaucracy but he should have worked around this and within the limits. Perhaps he knew the 3 night limit but decided to wait very late to lodge the application, taking the "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" approach?
 
As to Garth Brooks saying 5 or none, well that just beggars all belief for arrogance and disregard for his Irish fans.

I'm not sure about this Duke. There would have been 160k fans unable to go - not sure the 3 concerts would have been very good as a result...bad karma and all that?
 
Everyone in this mess comes out badly.

Tommy Gorman needs to be dispatched to Nashville immediately to ask Mr. Brooks one question. 'What about the children Garth?'.....
 
Dublin City Council and in particular Owen Keegan seem to be getting the blame for this. In my opinion the blame lies with the promoter. He's ultimately responsible as the project manager for the event. He might be constrained by legislation and bureaucracy but he should have worked around this and within the limits. Perhaps he knew the 3 night limit but decided to wait very late to lodge the application, taking the "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" approach?

Apparently, the Promoter submitted all his plans weeks earlier than normal...per the Ray Darcy show this AM. Followed all the rules and guidelines
 
Apparently, the Promoter submitted all his plans weeks earlier than normal...per the Ray Darcy show this AM. Followed all the rules and guidelines

That may be the case but he still should have ensured that everything was in order and processed. DCC may well be an issue here but the PM is ultimately responsible for the successful delivery of the project...
 
That may be the case but he still should have ensured that everything was in order and processed.

Absolutely, and as one of the biggest promoters in the country should have been well aware of the 3 night restrictions. It's also reported in the Times that Keegan told Aiken in advance that there was little chance of securing the 5 nights, and the likely outcome was only 3 would get licenced. That was conveyed to Brooks who insisted on 5 or nothing!
 
Absolutely, and as one of the biggest promoters in the country should have been well aware of the 3 night restrictions. It's also reported in the Times that Keegan told Aiken in advance that there was little chance of securing the 5 nights, and the likely outcome was only 3 would get licenced. That was conveyed to Brooks who insisted on 5 or nothing!

That's unfair. I have never seen it reported like that. The Council 'raised concerns' about the concerts whatever that means. As far as I know, they never said there was little chance of them being licenced or said three would get licenced. I could be wrong though. Do you have a link?

Why would the council licence three anyway? They are breaking the planning laws there as well hence the guy attempting court action. They should have either said no concerts or allow the five. All the parties in this saga are guilty of messing about.
 
We have planning rules for a reason
That sums it up for me.

Our crooked banker friends, etc rode roughshod over the rules and regulations with the blessing of the regulator for years. The outcry now around planning rules being enforced undermines any righteous indignation around what the bankers were getting away with.

There is another argument about this bringing shame on the country and making us a laughing stock. Are we so insecure as to believe a charade involving a Country and Western singer from Oklahoma is a credible long term influence on how we are perceived worldwide?

Maybe someone should be getting on to Bruce Springsteen to offer him three nights playing to 240,000 people in croke park. That would be a good result.
 
We need proper reform of local government.

Proper directly elected mayors with exucutive powers.

Why did Dublin City Council not bother to come out sooner?
 
Back
Top