[ad_1]
L The controversy of Páirc Uí Chaoimh is over but the implications still have a long way to go. Indeed, they are deep enough for the GAA and there is also a larger dimension.
We now know that the government – backed by the opposition – can ignore anything on its way to a populist pace.
Well, all that is not able to resist, that is. As for the more difficult challenges, they continue to be avoided.
There is no doubt that the GAA's decision to revert to their insistence that the rules did not allow Liam Miller to pay tribute to Páirc Uí Chaoimh was taken because of enormous political pressure . Park was the private manifestation of armed-arm tactics, while the public campaign led by a series of ministers and opposition members ensured that controversy remained high on a rather arid agenda at a time when the Dáil
First, let's deal with what the U-turn means for the GAA. Their rules on land use are the same today as last week but, in real terms, there is a big difference.
Before last Saturday, only Croke Park could be made available to non-GAA sports in all circumstances. It was an unnecessarily rigid approach, but the mandate was overwhelming, having received 77% support at the 2016 Annual Congress.
The vote was on a Clare motion that the Central Council, as opposed to Congress, be Equipped with the same powers for county lands as they have for Croke Park.
Given that Clare's motion enjoyed only 23% support, it could not be re-profiled for the next three years, leaving 2020 as close to possible as possible.
If Clare's proposal had been accepted, it would have been much easier for the GAA to treat the problem of Páirc Uí Chaoimh in a pragmatic way. Given the particular circumstances, they could have led the way and few objectors would have objected.
Instead, they were trapped by a rule – or rather the interpretation of a rule – that seemed to leave no room for maneuver. The settlement will have to be amended at next year 's Congress, as last week' s events made it absolutely useless.
This is very significant in that a congressional decision has been found to be non-binding. In the case of Rule 5, which deals with the use of property, it may not be a bad thing, but has it set a precedent for other regulations? ?
On a larger scale, the fallout from the controversy of Páirc Uí Chaoimh extends well beyond the GAA. This is worrying for everyone because it shows that the government is ready to intervene in areas where it should not be involved. Plus, he seems to believe that he can change his own rules – and others – as and when the agenda changes.
A central tenet of the argument advanced by Sports Minister Shane Ross and Deputy Minister Brendan Griffin for forcing GAA to yield to Páirc Uí Chaoimh, said the $ 30 million government subsidy euros had been granted on the grounds that the facility would be made available to a broad community of activities.
There is no doubt that government officials knew GAA's rules on the use of motives and would have required a change at that time. As for the GAA, they would have identified the implications of such a condition and would be busy with it.
Would this be a case of retrospective decision-making by the government? Mr. Ross and Mr. Griffin pointed out that future investments would depend on the availability of land for all sports, but it also seems that they wish to apply it retrospectively, which the GAA simply can not accept.
The threatening tone of the government's better articulated approach by Mr. Ross – must concern everyone, even those who were delighted by the GAA's uneasiness over the Páirc Uí Chaoimh problem.
million. Ross – citing the use of public money – was happy to intervene on this occasion, but refused to involve him in various transport disputes in the past on the basis that it would inappropriate. Confused? Me too.
Backed by a tornado of influence on social media, political clbades had the opportunity to look strong and decisive last week. And with such a sensitive issue as a fundraiser for an important sports figure as the backdrop of the whole affair, they felt that they could not lose.
So they took instructions from GAA, while threatening that if they did not succeed, there would be no more funding in the future.
Compare this with their ruthless response to the bailed out banks, which continue to charge mortgage holders the highest interest rates in Europe. There is no threat of government, or even public admonishment, but rather an implacable acceptance that nothing can be done about it.
The last ten days have been instructive on a variety of fronts.
For the GAA, it's a lesson about the dangers that allow bad rules to sit on their books, the ones that will likely be listened to and put into practice. Basically, the rules book needs to be completely revised, not just about the use of patterns, but also in many other areas of operation.
On a more important level, the unfortunate saga has shown a bad side of the political clbades, which should concern everyone.
Indo Sport
[ad_2]
Source link
