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

Garth Brooks concerts cancelled - **READ FIRST POST FOR MOD NOTES**

Options
1…213214216218219…265

Comments

  • Options
    #6452
    reprazant
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,417 ✭✭✭reprazant


    First Up wrote: »
    That is exactly the problem. Knowing that five was a "big ask" (Keegan's words) and knowing the problem was the residents, it was screaming out for DCC to broker a deal in the wider interests of the whole city.

    So, the GAA and Aiken are completely off the hook even though they knew that there was issues with the residents and have admitted doing nothing at all about
    those issues? Would it not have been in their own interests to try and broker a deal?


  • Options
    #6453
    sidcon
    Registered Users Posts: 636 ✭✭✭sidcon


    https://twitter.com/98fm/status/489773981440811010


  • Options
    #6454
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Ah, so he should have trampled on local residents' rights because of the cash dollar bottom line?
    What was that about conflict of interest then?

    Sorry, but if you don't understand what brokering a deal means, there isn't much I can help you with.


  • Options
    #6455
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    First Up wrote: »
    Sorry, but if you don't understand what brokering a deal means, there isn't much I can help you with.

    A deal was brokered, 3 nights not 5.

    Or are you talking about the Let the five nights go ahead and we will fix the licencing issues afterwards" deal that so many thought should have happened?


  • Options
    #6456
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    reprazant wrote: »
    So, the GAA and Aiken are completely off the hook even though they knew that there was issues with the residents and have admitted doing nothing at all about
    those issues? Would it not have been in their own interests to try and broker a deal?

    Of course it would. But only DCC knew the five day licence was at serious risk and they were also they only ones who could act a honest broker.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6457
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    First Up wrote: »
    Sorry, but if you don't understand what brokering a deal means, there isn't much I can help you with.
    Sorry, but if you are incapable of forming a coherent post perhaps boards.ie isn't for you.


  • Options
    #6458
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    bumper234 wrote: »
    A deal was brokered, 3 nights not 5.

    Or are you talking about the Let the five nights go ahead and we will fix the licencing issues afterwards" deal that so many thought should have happened?

    A deal means an agreement acceptable to all. The 3 gig licence was patently not that.


  • Options
    #6459
    hynesie08
    Registered Users Posts: 9,767 ✭✭✭hynesie08


    sidcon wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/98fm/status/489773981440811010

    Hope they have a license :p


  • Options
    #6460
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    He personally? He makes all DCC decisions in person?
    No, he delegates roles to competent deputies within the local authority.

    I have zero interest in the City Manager getting involved in an application for a licence for a prescribed event.

    Nevertheless, the City Manager has chosen to get involved and chosen to say that he was willing to "allow" a fourth night, as is his legal right.

    The actions of the City Manager are problematic for reasons outlined by myself and others above.


  • Options
    #6461
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Sorry, but if you are incapable of forming a coherent post perhaps boards.ie isn't for you.

    Oh dear.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6462
    Sideshow Mark
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭Sideshow Mark


    First Up wrote: »
    Sorry, but if you don't understand what brokering a deal means, there isn't much I can help you with.

    How is "We want five", "Can't allow that but you can have three", NOT brokering a deal? Seems DCC are the only ones who wanted to meet halfway.


  • Options
    #6463
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    First Up wrote: »
    A deal means an agreement acceptable to all. The 3 gig licence was patently not that.
    It was perfectly acceptable to those who registered their objections, the Gardai and other emergency services who gave their input apparently.
    Only whiners I can make out are C+W fans and people who were lining their pockets.


  • Options
    #6464
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    First Up wrote: »
    Oh dear.
    Don't call me dear.


  • Options
    #6465
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    First Up wrote: »
    And you have done so. Not your faul or mine that nothing seems to be simple enough to penetrate some heads.
    And there seems to be a fair scatter of people too thick to accept a perfectly legitimate and above board licensing decision.
    That just so happens to rule their night out linedancing or whatever.


  • Options
    #6466
    Cienciano
    Registered Users Posts: 14,275 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    conorh91 wrote: »
    But he did succumb to pressure in terms of intervening later with the "fourth night" and matinee nonsense.
    You do know that the "matinee nonsense" was aikens idea?


  • Options
    #6467
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    First Up wrote: »
    A deal means an agreement acceptable to all. The 3 gig licence was patently not that.

    But Brooks wanted 5 or nothing so that would mean if he got his way the residents wouldn't be happy. There was no way to have an agreement to suit all because Brooks was too stubborn to compromise.


  • Options
    #6468
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    And there seems to be a fair scatter of people too thick to accept a perfectly legitimate and above board licensing decision.
    That just so happens to rule their night out linedancing or whatever.

    (Wearily). Don't you get the bit about economic benefit, international profile, reputation, feel-good factor etc? Everyone agrees we need a planning and licencing process. The issue is how to manage that process in a way that works for the benefit of all and not turn into a zero sum confrontation.
    It's called compromise and negotiation. Big words I know and possibly a concept you are unable to grasp.


  • Options
    #6469
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    Cienciano wrote: »
    You do know that the "matinee nonsense" was aikens idea?
    Yes. I criticised Aiken elsewhere.

    But (thankfully) Peter Aiken is a punter running a business with no greater restriction on chancing his arm with loony suggestions than any other private citizen.

    We are right to expect higher standards from public officials. Keegan's behaviour, lack of common sense, and lack of judgement for a man in whom so much public trust is vested, is unsettling.


  • Options
    #6470
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    First Up wrote: »
    (Wearily). Don't you get the bit about economic benefit, international profile, reputation, feel-good factor etc? Everyone agrees we need a planning and licencing process. The issue is how to manage that process in a way that works for the benefit of all and not turn into a zero sum confrontation.
    It's called compromise and negotiation. Big words I know and possibly a concept you are unable to grasp.

    What compromise did Brooks/Aiken offer?


  • Options
    #6471
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,952 ✭✭✭Daith


    conorh91 wrote: »
    We are right to expect higher standards from public officials. Keegan's behaviour, lack of common sense, and lack of judgement for a man in whom so much public trust is vested, is unsettling.

    What behavior? He allowed three concerts to go ahead?

    It's the Brooks camp who completely won't compromise at all and self serving politicians wanting to ignore planning regulations for money.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6472
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    bumper234 wrote: »
    But Brooks wanted 5 or nothing so that would mean if he got his way the residents wouldn't be happy. There was no way to have an agreement to suit all because Brooks was too stubborn to compromise.

    (Also wearily) I'm trying to explain that a deal means an agreement acceptable to ALL. That includes the 160,000 who had tickets for the other two concert - AND the residents.


  • Options
    #6473
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,952 ✭✭✭Daith


    First Up wrote: »
    (Also wearily) I'm trying to explain that a deal means an agreement acceptable to ALL. That includes the 160,000 who had tickets for the other two concert - AND the residents.

    Such as?


  • Options
    #6474
    reprazant
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,417 ✭✭✭reprazant


    First Up wrote: »
    (Also wearily) I'm trying to explain that a deal means an agreement acceptable to ALL. That includes the 160,000 who had tickets for the other two concert - AND the residents.

    So what you are saying is that the only compromise should have been to allow all gigs to go ahead?


  • Options
    #6475
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    Daith wrote: »
    What behavior? He allowed three concerts to go ahead?
    His inconsistency. His willingness to "allow" a fourth night. His involvement in the absolutely farcical matinees idea.

    As First Up says, Keegan was not willing to get involved at an early stage, which might have been constructive and prevented a lot of unnecessary cost and strife to residents, fans, and those involved in the event. The reason for staying out? He said it wasn't his role to get involved and doing so would be unfair. Yet he immediately turned around and started getting involved in the ridiculous and the bizarre, absolutely getting himself involved when it was too late.

    That behaviour.


  • Options
    #6476
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,952 ✭✭✭Daith


    conorh91 wrote: »
    His inconsistency. His willingness to "allow" a fourth night. His involvement in the absolutely farcical matinees idea..

    The matinee idea wasn't his idea......

    Why did Aiken offer the matinee idea when Brooks didn't want to play in the day?


  • Options
    #6477
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    First Up wrote: »
    (Also wearily) I'm trying to explain that a deal means an agreement acceptable to ALL. That includes the 160,000 who had tickets for the other two concert - AND the residents.

    Cool.

    Tell me how that would be feasable please seeing as Brooks said 5 in a row or nothing.


  • Options
    #6478
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    Daith wrote: »
    The matinee idea wasn't his idea......

    Why did Aiken offer the matinee idea when Brooks didn't want to play in the day?

    This is getting silly.

    i can understand not reading the thread, but at least read the last few posts guys.
    conorh91 wrote: »
    Yes. I criticised Aiken elsewhere.

    But (thankfully) Peter Aiken is a punter running a business with no greater restriction on chancing his arm with loony suggestions than any other private citizen.

    We are right to expect higher standards from public officials. Keegan's behaviour, lack of common sense, and lack of judgement for a man in whom so much public trust is vested, is unsettling.


  • Options
    #6479
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,952 ✭✭✭Daith


    conorh91 wrote: »
    This is getting silly.

    i can understand not reading the thread, but at least read the last few posts guys.


    Why would Aiken propose a matinee idea when Brooks was opposed to it?

    You haven't come up with a solution that would satisfy the residents and the promoters either


  • Options
    #6480
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    conorh91 wrote: »
    We are right to expect higher standards from public officials. Keegan's behaviour, lack of common sense, and lack of judgement for a man in whom so much public trust is vested, is unsettling.
    Which you have yet to show there is any issue with.
    Care to present any evidence other than "Garth didn't get his 5 nights"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6481
    Woodville56
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭Woodville56


    Totally unbelievable that those gobs***e TDs etc on the Dail Tourism sub committee should suggest that the Dublin City Manager resign or be removed for doing his job !! Gombeen politics aided and abetted by the GAA elements in high places.
    As for Mr.Aiken willing to swear an affadavit regarding his earllier discussions with Mr Keegan, its too little too late now, pity he wasn't as meticulous when applying for the licenses in the first place ! Trying to save his own ass now and the TDs in the Dail Committee just seeking to make some political capital out of calling for heads to roll etc ..they never miss a chance ! And to think that we vote these chancers into office !


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement