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
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.
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".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.
As to Garth Brooks saying 5 or none, well that just beggars all belief for arrogance and disregard for his Irish fans.
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
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!
That sums it up for me.We have planning rules for a reason