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

jack presley

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I never said it was and my post didn't refer to DCC specifically, just Ireland's over-regulated climate across the board. Full planning permission shouldn't be required for a feckin' concert, and a mandatory 10 week period for something like an event or concert is unimaginably stupid. Concerts and events should be treated entirely differently to planning permission for a building, and what I'm objecting to here is not only the laws for this, but laws across the board in Ireland which effectively say "If you want to do anything here which it's piss easy to do in another country, there are a bajillion conditions and rules we're going to attach first". As I said earlier, I'm not just talking about concerts. I provided examples of off licenses, nightclubs, fireworks and sports supplements - all of the above are restricted in Ireland to a level which the rest of Europe would laugh at. Why do we live in a country where there are so many rules attached to everything? It's unnecessarily bureaucratic.

10 weeks might be too long but knowing that, why would a promoter leave it so late to submit his?

hatrickpatrick

Happyman42 wrote: »

It does have a set of rules and a transparent (ee DCC website) process that Aiken was fully aware of. You can't short circuit that process legally, Aiken was aware of that too. His strategy was plainly based on pressure 'the event is too big to be refused'...he failed magnificently. What has happened since is attempts to further pressure and damage limitation. The DCC have had nothing to do with that.

Let me spell this out in bold lest it once again be lost on those replying: I'm suggesting that the law itself is moronically restrictive and should be changed. I'm not blaming DCC, I'm blaming the law. tl;dr version of my previous posts, Ireland has too many micro-managing rules and regulations. We need a more relaxed attitude in this country to pretty much everything.

hatrickpatrick

jack presley wrote: »

10 weeks might be too long but knowing that, why would a promoter leave it so late to submit his?

By the sound of things, because he didn't think this through at all and f*cked up considerably, precedent or not. To me though that's secondary to the fundamental lesson from all this, which is that Ireland has too many restrictions. People shouldn't have to jump through so many hoops to stage a concert in the capital city of a modern country.

Happyman42

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm suggesting that the law itself is moronically restrictive and should be changed. .

Well do that by all means but not because some people can't go to a concert.

muddypaws

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Let me spell this out in bold lest it once again be lost on those replying: I'm suggesting that the law itself is moronically restrictive and should be changed. I'm not blaming DCC, I'm blaming the law. tl;dr version of my previous posts, Ireland has too many micro-managing rules and regulations. We need a more relaxed attitude in this country to pretty much everything.

For the first 3 concerts a year in Croke Park, no planning permission is needed

Calina

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Let me spell this out in bold lest it once again be lost on those replying: I'm suggesting that the law itself is moronically restrictive and should be changed. I'm not blaming DCC, I'm blaming the law. tl;dr version of my previous posts, Ireland has too many micro-managing rules and regulations. We need a more relaxed attitude in this country to pretty much everything.

No. No we don't. We need people to stop taking the p1ss with the rules we do have.

Ergo.

Croke has clearance for 3 concerts in one year. One Direction played them.

This whole idea that because you can't go to Garth Brooks, we should change a bunch of rules which have worked fairly well for years, is monstrously self-centred.

In my view, the rule which needs to be enforced is that concert tickets do not go on sale until the licence has at least been applied for. That did not happen in this case.

secman

jack presley wrote: »

For the 1000th time

Application lodged - 17 April
Consultation/assessment period - 10 weeks (as per the legislation)
Decision date: 2 July.

So they were 3 days late but that's hardly a capital offence.

The issue, if there is one is therefore not with DCC.

AS IN THEY CANNOT GIVE A DECISION UNTIL 2nd JULY .10 weeks after application lodged..............

muddypaws

secman wrote: »

AS IN THEY CANNOT GIVE A DECISION UNTIL 2nd JULY .10 weeks after application lodged..............

It has to go to all of the relevant departments for consultation, transportation, health and safety, AGS etc, etc, etc.

hatrickpatrick

Happyman42 wrote: »

Well do that by all means but not because some people can't go to a concert.

This isn't the only reason I'm suggesting a change in the law. This is merely the latest in a long line of moronic incidents which have resulted from Ireland's climate of "you can't do anything without signing some form".

Happyman42

Calina wrote: »

No. No we don't. We need people to stop taking the p1ss with the rules we do have.

Ergo.

Croke has clearance for 3 concerts in one year. One Direction played them.

This whole idea that because you can't go to Garth Brooks, we should change a bunch of rules which have worked fairly well for years, is monstrously self-centred.

In my view, the rule which needs to be enforced is that concert tickets do not go on sale until the licence has at least been applied for. That did not happen in this case.

And that 'SUBJECT TO LICENCE' is written in bigger writing on tickets for the visually and otherwise challenged.

Faolchu

Calina wrote: »

In my view, the rule which needs to be enforced is that concert tickets do not go on sale until the licence has at least been applied for. That did not happen in this case.

I'd take that one step further and suggest teh license should be granted

muddypaws

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This isn't the only reason I'm suggesting a change in the law. This is merely the latest in a long line of moronic incidents which have resulted from Ireland's climate of "you can't do anything without signing some form".

But they could, they could put 3 concerts on

SpaceTime

secman wrote: »

The amount of "ignorance" and hair brain solutions as in "just sort it" , "fcking useless govt" "Get Obama on the case" " " just change the law" are beyond belief, do they not have newspapers, radios, TV up in them hills.

secman

We don't live in a dictatorship, so there's actually very little the Government or the Taoiseach can do. There's a legal process to go through with rules, due process, public consultation systems etc.

Unlike a 'Banana Republic', no amount of lobbying can actually reverse this as it's been through the system, through the appeals system and decided on in a normal and quite open process.

I can't really see what the endless debate is about. The most the Taoiseach could do is to try and get the 'talent' to agree to some kind of compromise situation which operates within the law i.e. new venue for the other dates or something like that.

The reality is that he's booked into a historic 'downtown stadium' that has a lot of regulations around it due to its city centre location.

That's no different from what would happen if you tried to host something in Fenway Park in Boston or even some of the big NYC downtown locations.

That's also why all of these cities have big out-of-town stadiums or setups like London has with the O2 and the huge spaces that the olympics project created.

Happyman42

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This isn't the only reason I'm suggesting a change in the law. This is merely the latest in a long line of moronic incidents which have resulted from Ireland's climate of "you can't do anything without signing some form".

Have you been under a rock or something...familarise yourself with what happened in this country because of slack and non existent regulations.

Ravenid

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why do we live in a country where there are so many rules attached to everything? It's unnecessarily bureaucratic.

Actually Ireland has one of the more liberal time frames when it comes to concerts.

The UK is initially 6-8 weeks once the plans have been submitted, then there is a 2-3 week period for objections, then a 2 week period where the local council must discuss it with the local Police.

http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/sites/default/files/concerts_cop_v_3_0_september_2012_0.pdf

jack presley

secman wrote: »

AS IN THEY CANNOT GIVE A DECISION UNTIL 2nd JULY .10 weeks after application lodged..............

Sorry if my maths were out or if I'm a day or two wrong with the 17 April for lodgement date but that's even better if they weren't late at all.

SpaceTime

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This isn't the only reason I'm suggesting a change in the law. This is merely the latest in a long line of moronic incidents which have resulted from Ireland's climate of "you can't do anything without signing some form".

There isn't a long list of moronic incidents like this and Ireland's actually not particularly bureaucratic. You'd have similar planning issues in any 'downtown' location in almost any city I can think of.

Elsewhere in Europe you'd actually have vastly more bureaucracy to deal with and the US is certainly not short of bureaucratic systems either.

end of the road

iguana wrote: »

A major purpose of a democracy is to ensure that the rights of a minority are not over-ridden by the wants of a majority.

but thats not what happened here, what happened here was a few nimbys were able to stop a large amount of people including other residents from being able to attend a few concerts by using the concerts as a way of getting at the GAA because of their vendetta against the GAA, so in this case planning law should be ridden over to make these concerts happen with a new system put in place after that including the appeals system which needs to be introduced

secman

The best way forward, Every venue in the country to be assessed and allocated a maximum amount of events per annum... Don't use them.....lose them in that year. Venue owners, promoters, artists Councils can never fck up............happy days

hatrickpatrick

Calina wrote: »

No. No we don't. We need people to stop taking the p1ss with the rules we do have.

Ergo.

Croke has clearance for 3 concerts in one year. One Direction played them.

This whole idea that because you can't go to Garth Brooks, we should change a bunch of rules which have worked fairly well for years, is monstrously self-centred.

In my view, the rule which needs to be enforced is that concert tickets do not go on sale until the licence has at least been applied for. That did not happen in this case.

Can I just point out that I'm not a Garth Brooks fan (not saying I don't like him, I'm honestly a bit ignorant of him and have probably heard his songs, but I don't listen to him at all and wouldn't be able to point out a song of his even if it's a song I know). I had no tickets for this show and most of my friends didn't either.

I'm not asking for a change because I specifically want Garth Brooks to play these gigs. I'm asking for a change because I don't want to live in a country in which the capital city isn't able to stage big international events like this because of a bunch of laws which make it difficult to do so, I want to live in a country in which we do everything we can to attract such events and all the tourism and banter which comes with them. Obviously not everyone has to agree with me, I'm merely setting out my own stance on all this. It's not about Brooks himself, it's about the principle that in the capital city of a modern country which claims to be an innovative, happening place, it shouldn't be in any way surprising or difficult when that capital city regularly plays host to large events. Events in Ireland are massively popular as I've mentioned before, and if the only reason we're not internationally renowned as an entertainment centre is because of too many regulations getting in the way, then in my view those regulations should go. It's the same reason I object to curfews in places like Grafton St and Temple Bar even though I only rarely get the chance to take part in such late-night events. It's about the principle that a capital city shouldn't have laws designed to enforce a psuedo-rural existence.

If others would rather live in a capital city in which events like these are the rare exception than the regular norm then that's absolutely fair enough. I'm merely outlining my own preference here.

jack presley

SpaceTime wrote: »

There isn't a long list of moronic incidents like this and Ireland's actually not particularly bureaucratic. You'd have similar planning issues in any 'downtown' location in almost any city I can think of.

Elsewhere in Europe you'd actually have vastly more bureaucracy to deal with and the US is certainly not short of bureaucratic systems either.

The woman from Nashville Radio interviewed on RTE after the press conference yesterday said that there's no way tickets would be sold for a gig there without all the permits in place.

zagmund

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Then why are there still discussions ongoing about how to resolve the issue? Why is there another protest planned? Why is there still a ship of concert props en route. Why is Brooks still saying he is willing to play? Why have the residents done a U-turn on their objections?

Very good questions. The answers to all of which are "Garth Brooks is still allowed to play 3 concerts here". Except maybe the last one, but that's a silly question. "The residents" are no more a homogeneous blob of borg like people with a single mindset than the people on this thread.

z

Tarzana

iguana wrote: »

A major purpose of a democracy is to ensure that the rights of a minority are not over-ridden by the wants of a majority.

A key point lost on many. :rolleyes:

zagmund wrote: »

V "The residents" are no more a homogeneous blob of borg like people with a single mindset than the people on this thread

Another key point lost on many.

SpaceTime

jack presley wrote: »

The woman from Nashville Radio interviewed on RTE after the press conference yesterday said that there's no way tickets would be sold for a gig there without all the permits in place.

That's nothing to do with the system though it's to do with the companies that sold the tickets.

Ravenid

end of the road wrote: »

so in this case planning law should be ridden over to make these concerts happen

Why are there so many people looking for the law to be broken in here because someone who they disagree with, followed the law?

Edit: Sorry forgot what forum thread this was for a moment.

muddypaws

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Can I just point out that I'm not a Garth Brooks fan (not saying I don't like him, I'm honestly a bit ignorant of him and have probably heard his songs, but I don't listen to him at all and wouldn't be able to point out a song of his even if it's a song I know). I had no tickets for this show and most of my friends didn't either.

I'm not asking for a change because I specifically want Garth Brooks to play these gigs. I'm asking for a change because I don't want to live in a country in which the capital city isn't able to stage big international events like this because of a bunch of laws which make it difficult to do so, I want to live in a country in which we do everything we can to attract such events and all the tourism and banter which comes with them. Obviously not everyone has to agree with me, I'm merely setting out my own stance on all this. It's not about Brooks himself, it's about the principle that in the capital city of a modern country which claims to be an innovative, happening place, it shouldn't be in any way surprising or difficult when that capital city regularly plays host to large events. Events in Ireland are massively popular as I've mentioned before, and if the only reason we're not internationally renowned as an entertainment centre is because of too many regulations getting in the way, then in my view those regulations should go.

If others would rather live in a capital city in which events like these are the rare exception than the regular norm then that's absolutely fair enough. I'm merely outlining my own preference here.

But I don't see where such events are being prevented, if they were put on in the correct location. Trying to put 5 consecutive nights on in a stadium in a residential area in the city centre doesn't seem very sensible.

zagmund

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm not asking for a change because I specifically want Garth Brooks to play these gigs. I'm asking for a change because I don't want to live in a country in which the capital city isn't able to stage big international events like this because of a bunch of laws which make it difficult to do so, I want to live in a country in which we do everything we can to attract such events and all the tourism and banter which comes with them.

If you'll let me land my helicopter in your back garden every time I'm in the neighbourhood, then that's fine. Or maybe in Stephens Green when I'm in town with my rich friends. After all it's for the good of the country, I'm bringing in money and all. We don't want a bunch of laws getting in the way.

z

SpaceTime

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Can I just point out that I'm not a Garth Brooks fan (not saying I don't like him, I'm honestly a bit ignorant of him and have probably heard his songs, but I don't listen to him at all and wouldn't be able to point out a song of his even if it's a song I know). I had no tickets for this show and most of my friends didn't either.

I'm not asking for a change because I specifically want Garth Brooks to play these gigs. I'm asking for a change because I don't want to live in a country in which the capital city isn't able to stage big international events like this because of a bunch of laws which make it difficult to do so, I want to live in a country in which we do everything we can to attract such events and all the tourism and banter which comes with them. Obviously not everyone has to agree with me, I'm merely setting out my own stance on all this. It's not about Brooks himself, it's about the principle that in the capital city of a modern country which claims to be an innovative, happening place, it shouldn't be in any way surprising or difficult when that capital city regularly plays host to large events. Events in Ireland are massively popular as I've mentioned before, and if the only reason we're not internationally renowned as an entertainment centre is because of too many regulations getting in the way, then in my view those regulations should go. It's the same reason I object to curfews in places like Grafton St and Temple Bar even though I only rarely get the chance to take part in such late-night events. It's about the principle that a capital city shouldn't have laws designed to enforce a psuedo-rural existence.

If others would rather live in a capital city in which events like these are the rare exception than the regular norm then that's absolutely fair enough. I'm merely outlining my own preference here.

We have stadia in stupid places is the main reason for that! Almost every other city I can think of has major out-of-town event centres that can host these kinds of gigs without any major disruption to the city centre or to busy traffic routes.

jack presley

SpaceTime wrote: »

That's nothing to do with the system though it's to do with the companies that sold the tickets.

Showing common sense?

secman

end of the road wrote: »

but thats not what happened here, what happened here was a few nimbys were able to stop a large amount of people including other residents from being able to attend a few concerts by using the concerts as a way of getting at the GAA because of their vendetta against the GAA, so in this case planning law should be ridden over to make these concerts happen with a new system put in place after that including the appeals system which needs to be introduced

What actually happened is..... Croke park used up their guaranteed 3 gigs.......knew then they were on thin ice.........allowed Aiken to sell 5 more gigs, which under the planning permission granted were always at risk once the permit was applied for, DCC got the permit application on 17th April or thereabouts....... under law had to wait the full 10 weeks and give their decision, and in fairness they were allowing a further 3 gigs.

Aiken is either dim, economical with the truth, arrogant or a combination of all 3 when he said he did not forsee any problem with 5 on top of the guaranteed 3 ( i say guaranteed , once all criteria are met,.. safety etc)