|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Jim Carroll Date: 26 Mar 08 - 03:41 PM Breandán, Thank you for your explanation - it goes some way to satisfying my curiosity - but certainly not all the way. Virtually all the organisations I have belonged to at one time or another have had safeguards built in to prevent abuses of power by those in authority. I listened with growing disbelief to the discussion on the phone in last week and I have to admit that my first thought was 'here we go again'. "The former Cluain Tarbh branch, at this point, has been dissolved, so does not exist". Is it really the case that CCE leadership have the power to close down a branch without consulting the membership (and from what I heard, without consulting the branch in question)? Does the branch have no right of appeal - is that it - wave of the wand, whoosh - you're an ex branch!!!! It would appear that my first instincts were the right ones, but I wait with some interest to be proved wrong. Jim Carroll To those who have commented on my disrespect for O Murchu - sorry, past experiences and observations have left me with no respect whatever for the man and it would have been hypocritical of me to pretend otherwise. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,Aine in dublin Date: 26 Mar 08 - 03:33 PM Yes it is true that local branches are flourishing as was the Branch in Clontarf - the biggest in Ireland I understand. Yet the democratically elected committee and the entire branch have been dissolved and a handful of older members of the branch are taking over in a coup like fashion.The parents of the young people and children in Clonrarf are expected by the Ard Chomhailrle of CCE to allow their children to attend classes run by the new imposed branch committee. This is nothing short of outrageous. How can Labrahas be in any way complimented by ArdMhaca for the treatment he has overseen of the entire Clontarf branch. How can music flourish against this background. As for the Fleadh - well apart from Scoil Eigse and the competitions and sessions in the day - the Fleadh is in good part a drunken jamboree from Friday evening to Sunday night. It is certainly not a conducive atmosphere for appreciating a session. It is becoming increasingly difficult to get into a session you can hear - most people appear to have a vague interest and are largely there for the 'craic and the booze' For years now I have been of the view that the Fleadh needs a radical rethink and overhaul. Over the weekends of the Fleadh the towns that host it look like Beiruit at the height of the trouble there. You cannot say the drunken shambles the Fleadh is at present is somthing that Head Office and O'Mhurucu should be proud of. Yhey are not doing a good job. It is time for a new structure in CCE at the top level that is democratic, transparent and accountable. I am a member of a trade union and have reservations about their level of democracy but they are an oasis of democracy compared to HO of CCE. Yes many thousands go to the Fleadhs to get off their heads and parents of young children largely stay out of the town over the weekend for security reasons other than to attend competitions. The CCE HQ and structures need to be overhauled as does the Fleadh. Think again Ard Mhacha. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: ard mhacha Date: 26 Mar 08 - 03:20 PM Mick In my time associated with out Branch I have seen children progress to such an extent we have our weekly Mass in Irish the children play their music throughout, an oul heathen like myself is moved to hear the beauty of our traditional airs. This is all through CCE some of us have never met O`Murchu those that have have nothing but praise for his work, the facts are there, CCE is thriving, maybe someone will tell us different, I would be very interested to be given the rest of the faults, as I am completely in the dark about the many failures. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: michaelr Date: 26 Mar 08 - 03:16 PM Breandan claims not to speak for Comhaltas, yet here and at thesession.org he has posted at length, clarifying CCE's position. I wonder if he has not been charged with damage control... Cheers, Michael |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Big Mick Date: 26 Mar 08 - 02:45 PM Fair enough, ard mhacha, he did indeed. But he isn't the first I have heard that from. I will leave that argument for those that know this man, and I have always respected your opinions. I get your point as to the effectiveness of CCE, in your experience. All I am saying is that there are others whom have a different experience. As to me, I am just trying to sort it out, as it certainly seems to be an issue in how it was handled. Although we don't always agree, you may rest assured that I always have great respect for your point of view. I hope my post didn't seem to indicate otherwise. All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: ard mhacha Date: 26 Mar 08 - 02:31 PM The boul Mick, have a look at the`postshots` Jim gave O`Murchu insults such as `Larry the lab rat`, in my branch of Comhaltas I have never ever heard him slurred thus,I have heard nothing but praise for CCE. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,Jim Martin Date: 26 Mar 08 - 12:04 PM The official statement is one heck of a long time coming, it must be going to be good! |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Big Mick Date: 26 Mar 08 - 09:47 AM People that are taking potshots at Jim Carroll are just spouting ignorant blather. His musical credentials, as well as his stated and demonstrated love of the cultural treasure that belongs to all of Ireland's children and grandchildren whether in Ireland or around the world, is well known. Clearly there are issues here, and he has raised them. I really appreciate Breandan's comments as well. They bring clarity to the Comhaltas position, even if unofficial, and show some of the opposing arguments. As a person who has often worked with volunteer organizations, I would say that it is not unusual for their passion and efforts to exceed their ability to manage them. God bless all volunteers, but sometimes they get a bit out front and over their heads. It is the job of the parent organization to monitor that all is in keeping with the law and fiduciary responsibility. I am holding my breath a bit. One of the things that makes me wonder a bit about Breandan's posts here is that they seem to be at odds with the political facts of the case. I know that if one works in an organization, especially a hidebound and rigid organization, that unauthorized releases of information would be frowned upon and dealt with severely. It does puzzle me that he releases such detailed information and this Ard Ri of Comhaltas doesn't stop him. That seems at odds with what one and all are saying about him to this old political hack. He is either due for a hidin' or he may be releasing what the organization wants released in a manner that suits them. But at this point I will hold my concerns and just trust that he is what he seems to be. No offense intended, Breandan, just observations. When one has been organizing unions his entire adult life, they tend to look for the bridge beyond the fog. I especially take note of my old friend and foil, ard mhacha's comments. This is another whose love of the culture and music cannot be questioned. His comments about keeping an eye on what is important is good sauce for this goose that is being cooked. Le gach dea-mhéin, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Breandán Date: 26 Mar 08 - 05:59 AM Jim, I'd also like to hear an official statement! I believe there's one in the pipeline, and it should be out soon. I don't believe that the hold-up is actually in preparing such a document, but rather that the decision was made (unwisely, in my opinion) that public statements could be damaging to the branch and its officers. Obviously, Comhaltas isn't really up on 20th century news cycles, nevermind 21st .... but I definitely agree with you on the need for an official explanation. However, I would dispute that we have here an example of a "major decision [] taken by unelected individuals". The decision to dissolve the Clontarf branch was made by two elected boards: Dublin County Board and the Ardchomhairle of Comhaltas. Because Labhrás Ó Murchú tends to be the public face of Comhaltas, people to assume that all organisation decisions are taken by him alone, which is not the case. Senator Ó Murchú is the Director-General of Comhaltas, which is a staff position appointed by the Ardchomhairle, an elected body. If the Ardchomhairle representatives from the provincial organisations decided tomorrow that he should no longer administrate the day-to-day affairs of the organisation, they could push him out with a 2/3 vote at their next meeting. I would also dispute that a group has been "ejected [] from premises they have built." A site already leased to Comhaltas and a building already owned by Comhaltas is undergoing a shake-up in the local management committee. That's all. This has been a joint project of Comhaltas and the branch for years, and it has been a mutually supportive relationship. Dublin is on the brink of opening an incredible new cultural resource, something that should work well both for the members of Clontarf Comhaltas and for everyone else who enjoys Irish traditional music and dance. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: ard mhacha Date: 26 Mar 08 - 05:34 AM The question is, if O`Murchu has been a liability over the years, how is it that CCE is so strong?, our local branch is flourishing, it is a delight to see young children so adept and happy to play their music. The many thousands that go to the Fleadhs are proof enough that someone somewhere is doing things right. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Jim Carroll Date: 26 Mar 08 - 04:15 AM Which guy - a ringer for whom? I would still like to hear an official statement on the affair - which has remarkable echoes of the London Branch expulsion. This matter has been rumbling on for some time - does it really take so long to prepare a public statement (for the members of CCE and for the general public, who's taxes help to fund the organisation to the tune of €millions annually.) The danger of allowing major decisions to be taken by unelected individuals should be more than apparent following the highly embarrassing affair of Labhras's 1999 report to the Oireachtas on the state of music in Ireland, which did much damage to the credibility of CCE and no good at all to Irish traditional music in general. Surely the simple morality (or lack of same) of the outrageous act of ejecting a group from premises they have built should be the key issue here. Still waiting for an explanation to GUEST,Highkingoftara's posting, but won't hold my breath - sniping is a well tried and trusted form of defence! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: michaelr Date: 25 Mar 08 - 11:42 PM Anyone think this guy might be a ringer? |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,sparkles Date: 25 Mar 08 - 10:50 PM Thanks for taking the trouble to write all that, Brendan. It's interesting & helpful to know, tho I have to admit that I still have some doubts in my mind. You described the unanimous voters in your earlier post as Comhaltas's high council, so even if there are representatives from all those places, it's pretty clear which side of the fence they're on. Its not like putting it to a general democratic vote. I don't know why people are taking potshots at Jim. All he did was raise a perfectly fair question which hasn't been officially answered yet. That's not protesting too much, either the way Shakespeare meant it or as a straightforward statement. As for going off half cocked, how else can you go when you only have HALF the information? He asked the high king of Tara to explain what he meant by that remark but I bet he won't. Why didn't Comhaltas issue a formal statement explaining themselves? They still haven't. Brendan writing as a private person on this non-Irish website isn't the same thing however good his posts are. The fact that the big bosses are saying nothing is just weird. No wonder people get suspicious. Jury's still out on this, IMO. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Breandán Date: 25 Mar 08 - 06:27 PM Ouch, that was probably an unfortunate sentence, wasn't it! Anyway, the committee that ultimately cast the vote was comprised of representatives of each province in Ireland, along with representatives from the USA and Britain. As far as I know, the branch would be liable for their annual membership dues again in October anyway, so there's no financial impact to switching to a "different" branch in the meantime. Dues are 12 Euro/year for a single senior membership (less for children and families), and are used largely to help with insurance costs for branch events. I can lobby the members of the Dublin County Board and Ardchomhairle to make their reasoning known publicly, and personally I'd find it refreshing and healthy if they would do exactly that. I can also see their argument that it would be hard not to single out members of the branch committee, etc., which has been a factor in the silence thus far. If I find out anything further that would have a bearing on the issue, I'll let you guys know. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Bonnie Shaljean Date: 25 Mar 08 - 06:15 PM Breandán, thanks for all the info, which is food for thought. I can wholeheartedly echo Big Mick's opening sentence in the post above. But I have to say that, whatever the shortcomings or alleged misdemeanours of the original branch, I find the statement "The former Cluain Tarbh branch, at this point, has been dissolved, so does not exist" is just too chillingly Big-Brother for me. If this dissolution was decided by a unanimous vote, as stated above, then the branch obviously were allowed no input on a ballot which so vitally affected them. Non-existence is pretty effective as a disempowerment tool. Whatever the branch committee did or didn't do, whatever control the Official Rule Book allows the management, this liquidation leaves a deeply nasty smell and smacks of despotism. It certainly does not inspire confidence in HQ. OK so folks can all form a new branch and join up again, but I can't see why the whole manoeuvre was necessary, except perhaps as a slate-wiping (or committee-ousting) exercise. I assume members have to pay a subscription to belong (though I can find no figures anywhere on the website which is a little strange). Doesn't this give them some rights? And what if some people don't want to re-join a new cleansed branch? Will Comhaltas refund them the balance of their fee? Breandán wrote, "I'm not on the Ardchomhairle or the Dublin county board, and ultimately it was their decision." Buttons wrote, "I'm not placed to be able to say anything more about whether the decision of the central organisation was warranted." Neither am I. That's the whole point. The only people who ARE so placed are those within said organisation. Not a reason to forego questioning. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Big Mick Date: 25 Mar 08 - 05:38 PM Just the very nature of your posts, Breandain, gives you much credibility. You don't seem to be muddying the waters, and are not rising to the bait. I am very interested in all points of view on this. Nothing you have said changes my opinion of the hide bound nature of the organization's leadership. Nor do I believe they have handled it well. But neither is it what the local branch members tried to make it appear be. I sure hope it gets worked out to the benefit of those that simply want to keep the culture, music and arts alive for their children and grandchildren. All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Breandán Date: 25 Mar 08 - 05:29 PM Actually, my intention, kevink, was not to muddy waters, but to bring some clarity. I have enormous sympathy for the members of Cluain Tarbh Comhaltas -- if the Dublin County Board decided to suspend my own branch I'd be absolutely livid, and I have no idea what kind of explanation would be able to convince me otherwise. Which means that this situation is pretty much guaranteed both to make Comhaltas look bad, and also to engender fear, uncertainty and doubt in a bunch of very devoted and principled people. Which makes it really, really unfortunate. However, there is still more to this than has been put forward by the former committee of Cluain Tarbh. And while I have a great deal of sympathy for the awful situation that we're all in, I'd like to ask that people consider the full set of facts before jumping to conclusions. Thanks. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Jim Carroll Date: 25 Mar 08 - 05:23 PM "Jim Carroll needs a ciggie to calm his nerves. Looks like he's gone off half-cocked here." Please explain - and don't forget we've been here on numerous occasions before, Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: kevink Date: 25 Mar 08 - 05:22 PM these unofficial explanations (alibis)for the outrageous actions of Labhras and his coterie have also been sent to this site http://www.thesession.org under this discussion title (The TRUTH about Cluain Tarbh CCÉ and CLASAC) and have been answered by cluain tarbh members. There is an attempt to muddy the waters. There is no reasonable justification for such an act of cultural vandalism. The people who set up a new branch represent little more than themselves but obviously have the support of Labhras and co. Its the type of maneouvre and snow job typical of the man. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: the button Date: 25 Mar 08 - 04:00 PM Thanks for the response, Breandan, and for all your contributions to this thread. I'm going to keep my gob shut about all this now. In any branch-based organisation, there's always got to be some give-and-take between branch autonomy and central control, and I'm not placed to be able to say anything more about whether the decision of the central organisation was warranted. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Breandán Date: 25 Mar 08 - 03:51 PM Button, I don't believe that the cost overruns were the issue per se, but rather the lack of contingency or reasonable response over a period of many months. There were issues with communications, and with promises made but not kept. They really had quite a long time to try and sort something out before things came to this unfortunate pass. The branch committee chose their own sovereignty above the best interests of the branch and of the project, in my opinion. I can't speak on the actual decision for dissolution, though: I'm not on the Ardchomhairle or the Dublin county board, and ultimately it was their decision. I just happen to be aware of the problems with the construction project and with the committee, mostly because I was in the room when the creditors would ring. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Breandán Date: 25 Mar 08 - 03:41 PM Don, enjoy the Convention! Should be some great tunes, and the organisers have done great work pulling it together. I'm hoping to get Sen. Ó Murchú to sign off (from there) on a press release about the Clasaċ theatre project and Cluain Tarbh, which I'll post on the Comhaltas website before he speaks. With any luck that means he'll start making some public statements -- I know that musicians there (and elsewhere) are concerned. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: the button Date: 25 Mar 08 - 03:39 PM Cheers for the long and considered response, Breandan. But the problems with the project that you cite, which come down to poor risk analysis in the costings of the project -- regrettable, but human -- somehow don't lead me to think that this: - "The former Cluain Tarbh branch, at this point, has been dissolved, so does not exist" was a reasonable course of action. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Breandán Date: 25 Mar 08 - 03:21 PM I'm happy to answer a few questions, if it's helpful. Starting with the most recent: * The cost overruns were mostly due to site clearance. Our surveyor told us that the site (which was reclaimed landfill) was suitable for building. However, subsequent drilling showed the existence of "hazardous waste" (mostly old oil drums which had been dumped in the landfill illegally.) So the site clearance ended up costing us €80/ton rather than €8/ton. It adds up - there was a lot of dirt to move. * There were also problems with the engineering site survey (discrepancies on the number of support posts to be drilled), environmental impact, road access (running utilities across the public road and coming up with the required deposit to Dubin County Council), etc. Basically, nothing that's unremarkable on a building project these days, especially on reclaimed land. The overruns weren't really anyone's fault -- certainly not the fault of either the Clontarf committee or Comhaltas headquarters. With a bank-funded construction project, you can often extend a line-of-credit further in these circumstances, but because the project wasn't loan-funded and because we can't borrow against the land (since Dubiln County Council still owns it), covering the overrun is a lot harder. * Yeah, I also heard on Duffy that the Clontarf folks who called in only heard about the dissolution on the programme. It's ridiculous, obviously - Comhaltas sent the secretary a letter in the usual way in plenty of time before the suspension, and then again before the dissolution. I can only speculate that the former branch committee hadn't shared this correspondence with the membership. Which would certainly account for the outrage. After the first programme, Comhaltas sent a letter to Duffy stating the status of the branch (but not saying anything substantive, far as I know.) Then on the second programme folks said they were hearing about things from Duffy first. It's nonsense, anyway. I don't blame the branch members or the folks who called in - they hadn't been given good information by their committee leadership. * I believe that the moratorium was called to try and provide more time for ironing things out. Things with the creditors were already bad, but I believe the intention was to come up with a deal with the Clontarf committee, who were (after all) running the project. * As far as the current status of Clontarf branch: The Comhaltas rules say that any group of five adults can get together and apply for membership as a branch of Comhaltas. It's designed to be a pretty easy process, and doesn't depend on having a lot of members at time of application - just the original few is enough to get going with the process. The former Cluain Tarbh branch, at this point, has been dissolved, so does not exist. But, some adults from Clontarf have recently gotten together to apply for membership as a new branch. I believe this application is ongoing, though I'm sure that the Dublin County Board of Comhaltas will approve it. Once there's a branch in place, others (including former members of Clontarf) will be free and encouraged to join it. I'm sure that the new Clontarf committee, which is mostly made up of former branch chairs and secretaries, expects that most if not all of the former members will want to remain affiliated with Comhaltas, and will therefore become members of the newly-formed Clontarf branch. I believe that the committee would be hoping to sign people up before the membership lists are sent in at the end of October, by which time I hope this thing has receded quite a bit in people's minds. In the meantime, I believe that the new committee is taking responsibility for classes, insurance and so forth. But yes, there's the possibility for rival factions, or even for the former branch members to affiliate themselves as some new body, like incorporating as a private music school, for example. * The new committee is composed mostly of former members of the Cluain Tarbh committee, so they know Comhaltas procedures and personnel quite well. I believe that between them they have something like 35 years in the *chair* of the Clontarf branch committee. Some were involved in the original plans for the Clasac theatre. But the branch is split at the moment, yes. I would expect and hope that more members would gravitate toward the new structure, once it becomes clear that branch activities and projects are continuing unchanged. That drift will probably depend on how well the new committee can make its case, and how Comhaltas is perceived coming out of the conflict. Of course, I'm personally frustrated that Comhaltas hasn't been out there all over the airwaves since this thing broke. The Clontarf guys are good folks, they have a great tradition as a branch, and it's stupid to alienate a bunch of people who should be on the same side. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,Don Meade Date: 25 Mar 08 - 03:12 PM Breandán - if this were a not a dispute about control over property and money, there would be no dispute at all, and no need to sack the branch leadership. I will be attending the CCÉ North American convention this weekend and will be interested to hear what Sen. Ó Murchú and the other visiting Comhaltas leaders have to say about this issue - unless, of course, they choose to continue not to discuss it publicly. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Richard Bridge Date: 25 Mar 08 - 02:43 PM "The day-to-day contacts on site management were mostly handled by a Comhaltas staffer, and people like myself have been involved with aspects of the building fit-out." Er - so why were there uncontrolled cost overruns? Looks like Comhaltas central screwed it up and is now trying to punt the blame upfield. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Bonnie Shaljean Date: 25 Mar 08 - 02:43 PM Yes, it really does help to hear the other side of the tale, for which many thanks. Still a few questions, though. Is there currently an operative Clontarf branch or is there not? Are they empowered to act as a membership-body or has this been nullified by suspension (which hardly seems democratic). What is this new committee who "know what's going on" (didn't the others?) and where have they come from? Is the branch itself split over this matter? There are still a lot of blank spaces in the story, and a lot depends upon whose side you read. Clontarf are saying that Comhaltas did not confirm the dissolution to them and that they only heard about it on the radio, days later, when it was a fait accompli - a statement which conflicts outright with the 5-week notice cited above, and sounds arbitrary if true. And what was the reason for calling a period of moratorium over an issue as contentious and pressured as this, with creditors pounding on the door? I'm not demanding that Breandán answer to every charge - he's not responsible for this sorry situation and is certainly not obliged to defend it. But a lot of questions do remain in the mind. Thanks to him for posting, though, because it is very helpful to get a better balance of views. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: ard mhacha Date: 25 Mar 08 - 02:28 PM Brendan thank you for letting some light on to a one-sided argument, as old Will said,`methinks Jim dost protest too much`. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Breandán Date: 25 Mar 08 - 02:22 PM Don, I suppose that in part I was hoping to present this issue in a larger context, beyond a "quick grab for control of the property and money." As I said, the property was already leased to Comhaltas (not to the branch). The money for construction was already subvented through Comhaltas' own grant from Government. The day-to-day contacts on site management were mostly handled by a Comhaltas staffer, and people like myself have been involved with aspects of the building fit-out. All that's been "grabbed" by Comhaltas is the responsibility for a large debt incurred by the former committee. And am I uncomfortable as an "unofficial spokesman" - of course I am! Comhaltas is working on a press release at the moment, but as you've noticed, PR (and damage control in general) is something that Comhaltas isn't great at (read, "really bad"). Doesn't mean we're a bunch of crooks, though. I'd agree that the mechanism of conveying the facts to the Cluain Tarbh membership was flawed, but I'd submit that if the members had been kept properly informed as to the state of things by their own committee over the past year, there wouldn't be nearly the bad blood that we see at the moment. This needn't have been such a dramatic problem - if the committee had made arrangements for a line-of-credit at a bank or even dealt more forthrightly with the vendors, this could have been resolved long ago. This isn't a sudden problem in the least, and I and others have been seriously concerned since last summer. I also believe that once the Clontarf membership have a chance to hear the other side presented in a rational way, that there will be no objections to continuing the project more or less as originally envisaged. The staff members at Comhaltas who have the most to do with the project are, after all, long-standing members of the branch. The membership has done an excellent job of developing an outstanding teaching programme, well-regarded tour group, professional contacts and provided excellent support for the music community of North Dublin and beyond. I'm pretty sure that none of the elected officers at Comhaltas would say any different. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,Concerned tina Date: 25 Mar 08 - 02:02 PM |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: the button Date: 25 Mar 08 - 01:59 PM Quite -- it's a bit of leap from "you could have managed this project better" to "... so we're going to dissolve your branch." |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,Don Meade Date: 25 Mar 08 - 01:55 PM I'm also grateful to Breandán for his level-headed contribution to this discussion. But in his position (employee of CCÉ), I would be uncomfortable serving as the informal spokesman for an organization that doesn't care to explain itself officially. Regardless of the financial/managerial deficiencies that have been used to justify the dissolution of the Cluain Tarbh branch, and regardless of the right of the central office to do so according to CCÉ rules, the manner in which this was done seems to have seriously alienated not only the now-ousted leadership but the bulk of the active membership of one of CCÉ's biggest and most successful branches. As Cluain Tarbh have a large membership and a lot of vocal support outside of Comhaltas, this could easily lead to the establishment of a competing organization. As I think it unhealthy to have one bureaucratic and politicized outfit soak up most of the funds available to subsidize traditional music activities in Ireland, this might even be a good thing (though no one in Cultúrlann is likely to think so). It is telling that the top priority for the CCÉ brass in this crisis was not to attempt to resolve the dispute in a way that respected the branch membership, but to make a quick grab for control of the property and money. Who is really bringing Comhaltas into disrepute here? |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Big Mick Date: 25 Mar 08 - 12:59 PM Talk about good timing. I was just about to post that I thought it odd that no one spoke out for the other side. It is very odd on the Mudcat for there not to be a person who says something to the effect of "wait a minute, there is another side....". So I came on to ask what that was and there was Breandan (sorry for the lack of fada). Thank you for the report. It will be interesting to see where the discussion goes after your very level accounting. All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,Highkingoftara Date: 25 Mar 08 - 12:57 PM Jim Carroll needs a ciggie to calm his nerves. Looks like he's gone off half-cocked here. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Barry Finn Date: 25 Mar 08 - 12:49 PM Not a yell from here but thanks for sheding more light on the subject. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Breandán Date: 25 Mar 08 - 12:36 PM Just wanted to correct a few of the facts here. There's a bit more to this whole mess than is apparent from Clontarf's web page (quite a bit more), and actually the genesis of the dispute goes way back. (I'm speaking here as someone who works for Comhaltas, but isn't directly involved in the dispute. I have, however, spent lots of time working on the theatre project over the past year and I'm really, really looking forward to the new centre. I don't speak for official policy, though, not being an elected representative.) Simply put, the Clontarf committee got in a bit of a mess over money, with construction cost overruns of about 2 million euro. Since the money was raised primarily from government grants, it's proving difficult to get the remaining money sorted out. The Clontarf committee has been making promises to pay vendors that they couldn't keep going back into last summer, and vendors have been ringing up Comhaltas head office every day for months to demand payment. Construction contractors and sub-contractors have started going to the media in hopes of embarrassing Comhaltas into paying -- to a contractor, it doesn't really matter whether the project is being run by a branch or by the parent organisation. The committee's been stonewalling. Eventually Comhaltas asked the branch for a new arrangement to raise the remaining money and get the thing opened, but the committee's been stubborn about not giving up control, and not proposing any workable solutions for raising the 2 million. Eventually after a 5-week notice period and and a further period of moratorium, the branch committee was dissolved by unanimous vote of Comhaltas' elected high council. Some members of the branch who know what's going on have formed a new committee and are trying to sort things out, while Comhaltas will do its best to get the construction project back on track. For the parents and children of the branch, there's no reason to think that the teaching programme and all of the rest of the great work of the branch won't continue — the musicians aren't and will certainly not be "homeless"! Clontarf members who have been promoting and working on this project for the last 12 years should be extremely pleased and extremely proud -- this is a great thing for Irish music, for Dublin, and for culture. The centre is clearly needed, and I'm hoping that it will become a huge success, with lots of praise and appreciation for Cluain Tarbh Comhaltas. It does seem clear, though, that the branch needs new leadership if they're going to get this project working: the current stand-off with the vendors isn't getting the centre opened. It should be noted that Comhaltas isn't *taking* anything here - the site is owned by Dublin County Council but leased to Comhaltas, and the building itself was always going to be vested in Comhaltas upon completion. The branch's role has been to manage the construction, make arrangements to appoint the first management board and hire staff for the theatre. They'll also use the building for classes and activities, of course, provide artists for the shows and participate in the commercial operations. None of that is in dispute. The dispute right now is about how to manage the rest of the construction and get the theatre opened. The VAT refund is a bit of a side issue: the Department of Sports and Tourism instructed Comhaltas to obtain from the branch money that had been applied for and improperly refunded to the branch directly. Under instructions from Government, Comhaltas asked for the refund back in order to forward it back to Government. The branch instead made the refund directly to the Revenue, which is essentially the same outcome. This wasn't the reason for suspension -- the problem is the branch former committee's management of the construction project, which was deemed to put Comhaltas in a position of disrepute. Just wanted to set the record straight -- you guys can all yell at me now. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,aine in dublin Date: 25 Mar 08 - 12:25 PM A thoroughly undemocratic top heavy organization. There clearly needs to be a closer look at how the top brass in Comhaltas operate as a large amount of public money is given in grants to them on a yearly basis. Is there a role for the public accounts committe of the Dail or what about demanding an inquiry into the functioning of Comhaltas Head Office. Dissolving a branch in order to secure CONTROL over the new CLASAC centre is very strange and makes me believe that an investigation is long overdue. What about a petition demanding an inquiry into HQ of Comhaltas. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Bryn Pugh Date: 25 Mar 08 - 09:47 AM Jim, I have no brief for bullying of any kind. If I can help in any way, you know where to reach me. Slan leat, Bryn |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,George Henderson Date: 25 Mar 08 - 07:52 AM Don't know what we can do to help but we can but try. I remeber the reason "report" authored by Labhras which tried to control all arts council money for the traditional arts through CCE. After an uproar it was quietly shelved. We must keep publicity about this injustice to the forefront. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Richard Bridge Date: 25 Mar 08 - 04:40 AM I am surprised, given the amount of money involved, that m'learned friends are not involved. By and large I approve in principle of purity of traditions - that's what makes them traditions, otherwise they simply get assimilated - but traditions must also address the present or become no more than musuems (this is one of the aspects of genius of the 1954 definition). This story, however, looks on the face of it less about the tradition and more about power politics. Follow the money! Also, of course, be grateful that there are enough people in Ireland with an interest in the tradition for there to be two views about how best to deal with it! I often think that we could do with more pressure to retain and apply the English heritage. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Barry Finn Date: 25 Mar 08 - 03:29 AM I saw & talked with the Chair of the Boston branch tonight. Not a long talk & not one of much depth either but. It seems that this topic will be brought up for more than just a discussion during the upcoming North American Convention in NJ next week & that there may already be some sort of solution in the making. I hope that it's a solution that the Clontarf Branch is very happy with, they should be made to feel happy & should be made to feel proud too. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: Jim Carroll Date: 25 Mar 08 - 03:12 AM You need to remember that Comhaltas is divided into two parts - (rank and file (branches) and leadership), and don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. The branches have kept the music alive for over half a century by organising sessions and classes and promoting the music, while on the other hand the leadership........... well!!! Breandán Breathnach once describes them as "an organisation with a great future behind it!" Personally, I have a problem with any organisation based on competitions, but that's me. It seems astounding to me that there has not been a murmer from any of the branches. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru From: MARINER Date: 24 Mar 08 - 06:16 AM I once heard Comhaltas described as "Cultural Facsists" . I took that with a grain of salt but after reading this ,i ain't so sure anymore |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: GUEST,doc.tom Date: 23 Mar 08 - 07:29 AM Useless, I know, but all sympathy to the branch and those who do/did the work. I've seen similar with English self-appointed custodians of the tradition - it gets very painful and very unjust - all you can do is have the members fight. Good luck. Tom |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus From: Barry Finn Date: 22 Mar 08 - 10:47 PM I just became a member of the Boston Hanafin-Cooley Branch. It's been at least 25yrs since I let my membership lapse, for reasons that are of no importance to the subject at hand. I'll be seeing my branch Chairman this coming Monday at the session I attend & ask what news he has. There's the 2008 North American Convention coming up in Parsippany, NJ this March 27-30, 2008. I won't be attending but I'll ask if the subject can be broached & I'll ask about any news if it has been discussed. It seems to me that this is of importantance to all members world wide & that an airing of this should be demanded. It would also be great subject matter for any local members that are songwriters in the traditional style (please don't make that a subject of debate here!). I'd also think that any members of the Local branch at Clontarf should be proud of what they've done & how they've carried on what should be the HQ's direction, unfotunately from all that's so far gathered it's the HQ's, who's leadership should be brought into question & disolved. After hearing from my local chair & hoping to becoming more educated on the subject I'll also be sending condemnation & support in an e-mail to any & all parties involved. Thanks Jim for bringing this into the light. Here is a link to Comhaltas & here is a link to the Cluain Tarbh Branch Barry |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf - round two From: GUEST,redsnapper Date: 22 Mar 08 - 05:26 PM Perhaps a breakaway faction is now in order? RS |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf - round two From: Big Mick Date: 22 Mar 08 - 04:06 PM Jim, I just read the "Guide for the Perplexed" at the website you linked to (after I fixed the link). I sent an email of support, and am not sure what more I can do. I did suggest that they petition for a new election, and then re-elect the same officers, thereby putting HQ in a political bind. All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf - round two From: GUEST,the button Date: 22 Mar 08 - 03:58 PM I'd say The Living Tradition would definitely be interested, Jim. Unfortunately, the new issue's not long out, so it'd be a while before any story saw the light of day. I don't have an "in" there, though -- just a subscriber. I suppose the quickest one in terms of getting something out there would be a letter (well an e-mail) to Musical Traditions -- Rod seems to update the letters page once a month or more. |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf - round two From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Mar 08 - 03:49 PM Publicity seems to be what's needed now. Wonder if anybody has an in to fRoots, Musical Traditions, The Living Tradition, et al.... couldn't do any harm. Have to say I'm appalled by the lack of interest shown by the Irish forum Irtrad! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf - round two From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Mar 08 - 02:20 PM The full story of what is happening is to be found here. I would suggest that anybody wishing to make their views known and offer the branch support should do so direct to the branch. http://www.cluaintarbh.net/index.htm Jim Carroll |
| Share Thread: |
