Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,thedublin
Date: 29 May 08 - 07:54 AM

south dublin, i really don't know what you are talking about. you say that you are not a member of comhaltas, so that leads me to believe that you probably don't understand the processes undertaken by the organisation, you probably dont know that people involved, you said that you read the other comments but you clearly did and if you did you drifted over important pieces of information.

i think the 'comhaltas bashing' you speak of is something that is only natural to come out of the situation. even before this people have given out about comhaltas and the way they conduct their affairs. you mightn't like to hear it but it is true, and with good reason. for all the good work cce has done, this has been slowed down since the 1980s when the organisation drifted into a political sphere with labhras at the head. you may remember big mistakes by the organisation such as the review of the state of traditional irish music by Labhras for the government some years ago, which was laughed at by mostly everyone who has a proper interest in the music. notable musicians came out in protest at this report and wasshot down, however labhras as stubborn as he is stood by it despite the fact the report upon reading read like an essay written by someone in primary school.

you may also remember cce trying to sell the rights to traditional music to imro. they wanted to sell the 'trad. arr.' that appears on almost every traditional music cd. this would also lead to people not being allowed to play in public (ie. sessions) without the prior consent of comhaltas. again this was met with scorn by actual traditional musicians.

most of the propaganda that i read coming out of the cce offices like the press release below, are all about promoting the organisation and the people in it. no longer are they saying how great the music is, but they are saying how great labhras is and how great comhaltas is for keeping the music alive. the truth is, the music doesn't need comhaltas anymore unless you want the fleadhs to keep going or the dreadful us, uk and irish cce tours. cce is a multimillion euro organisation but where is this money going? so much could be done if it weren't for a few grey hairs in the ard comhairle and the other committes in cce.

but the fact of the matter is is that cce have been stubborn in allowing communication with clontarf. if you read the thread and fully understood the situation south dublin, you would know that despite repeated attempts by clontarf to have discussions, cce have constantly denied them the privilage. and the only reason why clontarf have been put in this mess regarding money is because of cce. if you read earlier passages you would know that cce had said to clontarf that they would sign for a loan of 2million or around th mark to finish the job. since that the rest of the building work had taken place but when they went back to comhaltas to retrieve the loan cce decided that they didn't want to sign for the loan anymore. there are other reasons aswell for the mess but that is one of the main ones. it is comhaltas who have created this whole mess and it is clontarf who is being made take the blame. all of the planning was done with the backing of cce in realtion to things like that so it so difficult to suddenly find 2million euros when you main backer suddenly decides that it doesn't want you involved anymore.

maybe you should read this thread again.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,thedublin
Date: 29 May 08 - 07:58 AM

*you clearly did not and if you did...*

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,South of Dublin
Date: 29 May 08 - 03:00 PM

south dublin, i really don't know what you are talking about.

Well, I suppose that says it all...

You've completely avoided actually dealing with any of the issues being discussed

Yes, I certainly have! If the Committee and the Ard-chomhairle and associated spokespersons after years of working together and months of wrangling and interminable meetings can't agree on the issues and who is at fault, then nothing I say here is going to make a ha'p'orth of difference. I just expressed an opinion, based on what I've read here.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,thedublin
Date: 29 May 08 - 04:15 PM

again you dont seem to understand. there was no problems with getting the centre running until the inexplicable actions of comhaltas as regards signing for the loan and the VAT refund.

you also dont seem to understand that there have been NO meetings WITH comhaltas in the run up to getting the building running. there was a seperate board with members from all parties to get the centre running and anything that was decided was done through this committee. and as regards meetings to solve the problem, well obviously you have not read the whole of this thread. clontarf have tried and tried in vain to have meetings with comhaltas but are rebuffed everytime. if you are so damning of not having meetings, i suggest you contact cce and ask them about it. i doubt that you will have an easier time getting one. cce has had secret meetings and have made judgements on the situation without notifying clontarf or anyone involved. clontarf have not been allowed to state their position to cce since being dissolved simply because cce refuse to meet with them. clontarf are the ones being pro-active in the situation in trying to arrange a meeting to solve the problem, so why are you so critical of them?

so far cce have ignored approaches by the branch and have only served to stoke the fire by peddling untrue stories about the leadership of the branch, the leadership of the branch is the only thing that is keeping the branch going without cce's help at the moment so i think you are wrong in your criticism. the problems with the centre arose out of actions by cce, not by conflict within the clasac committee.

nobody closely involved with trying to get the centre open again is concerned with laying the blame, if they were they would not be approaching cce to solve the bloody problem.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,shaskeen
Date: 29 May 08 - 06:54 PM

I don't think anyone will really take into account what you said south dublin, seeing as you actually can't even spell 'comhaltas' (thats how its spelt by the way in case you didn't see it at the top of the thread there).

But contrary to your ignorant and ill-informed remarks, there IS huge support for clontarf. a lot more than the 40 people that you claim. but maybe if you were in contact with people within the music you would probably know that, im not even from dublin and i know about it. all of the other dublin branches have leant their support and lots of other branches from around the country. i was also at the fundraiser in april where a huge number of top class musicians also leant their support.

I have to pull you up on your comment there because it really was a pathetic attempt at trying to 'contribute' (i use the term loosely here) to the thread. talking of 'boo-boos', 'the silence is deafening' and what not, thats pretty embarrassing.

the situation has nothing to do with being 'morally' right.the committee didnt 'screw up'. cce and clontarf had entered into a mutual agreement about the centre (and there also a seperate committee made up by clontarfr members and cce members and other independants) and cce broke all of these arrangements, some of the things asked of clontarf were highly illegal. and they were also dissolved for no reason, the majority of members are kids so thats needlessly punishing them.

you got fed up of the constant sniping at comhaltas (there's that speeling again!), well how did you expect people to react? the cce solution to problems regarding one of the biggest and most successful of its branches is to dissolve it. if that doesn't smack of bad decision making i dont know what does. and contrary to your belief most of the cce employees, ard comhairle and others, they work for labhras and comhaltas, not for the music. for them, that took a back seat long ago. i am a member of a comhaltas branch and i have spoken to many people who have worked very closely with labhras and the organisation over the years, and i dont have a 'personal grudge' against them. like many musicians, i dont like the way they conduct their affairs and the way they portray the music, which is often in a very stereotypical and uniform way.

I know your entitled to your opinion, but why not try next time to use the thing between your ears and show a some respect for the people involved.

as you put it yourself 'thats my tuppence worth'.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,sos
Date: 30 May 08 - 06:21 AM

I'm looking to contact branch members from Clontarf for coverage of issue in national press - please advise best phone number for branch officials

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 30 May 08 - 08:18 AM

Not a good idea to publish private info like that on an open-access web page. Their site has a list of names and a contact email, and you'll be able to reach people that way. I imagine they'll want to know who's asking -

http://www.cluaintarbh.net/index.htm

[e-mail]

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST
Date: 30 May 08 - 09:20 AM

tks Bonnie - I have emailed that gmail address - do you know whether someone checks it regularly

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,Guest - Áine
Date: 30 May 08 - 01:52 PM

Dear Guest,

Yes, that email is checked regularly. Thanks!

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,Guest - Brian
Date: 30 May 08 - 01:57 PM

Don't forget to sign our petition to show your support, Thank you. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/clontarf

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: bytheway
Date: 31 May 08 - 09:56 AM

From; martin

I am a member of the West london branch of comhaltas and have been following the thread for the last few weeks. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Clasac Affair the handling of this by Comhaltas HQ is nothing short of an alsolute disgrace.

Although I was not an active member of West london CCE during the 1979 expulsions I do know that to this day it has deeply affected the branch as it now stands. The branch was suspended in 1979 following a letter from the local committee refusing to participate in what they viewed as political activities, namely a celebration of Patrick Pearse in which branches were invited to make donations. Quite rightly the local committee felt that this ran counter to the non-political tenets of CCE. For this they awarded with suspension.

And why should this old history be of any importance today ?

Because the those responsible what what happened in 1979 are still in control of CCE HQ. More so, it still follows a certain political agenda and behaves in a manner which hold no truck with those with opposing views.

Just look at the Comhaltas website in which Labhras gets a unaminous vote of support at the 2th may Congresss in dublin. Its embarrassing to read. I have written to the CCE Provincial Chairman describing this motion as obsequous nonsence with echoes of a 1930s USSR motion of support for "Uncle Joe". I eagerly await his reply from him.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,Cluain Tarbh
Date: 31 May 08 - 04:21 PM

After all the angst in this blog here's something to put a smile on your face!
The dissolved Cluain Tarbh recently ran a benefit concert to raise funds, having lost all our assets on dissolution. The response from musicians and punters alike was amazing! Thanks everyone! We raised enough money to cover our insurance allowing us to operate as an independent entity.
The night was so successful and we do still have bills to pay so we are doing it again!
So put this in your diary -

The Cobblestone Pub, Smithfield, Dublin 7   
11th June 2008 at 9:00PM

Line up includes:

    Máire Breathnach,
    Niamh Parsons,
    Alan Doherty (Gráda) & Friends,
    Mick O Connor,
    Mary Nugent & Frank Walsh,
    Pat Good

...and its only €12.
Over 18s only!

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,Cluain Tarbh
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 05:25 PM

Hot off the presses.

Jesse Smith & John Blake have been added to an already impressive line up at our fundraiser on June 11th in the Cobblestone.

By the way the Mick O'Connor playing is Mick (accordion) O'Connor not Mick (flute) O'Connor or Mick (banjo) O'Connor.

See you all on the night!

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Gulliver
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 07:58 AM

Is that upstairs or in the room at the back?

Best of luck, Don

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: dílis
Date: 07 Jun 08 - 07:54 PM

It's the room downstairs out the back.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,Cluain Tarbh
Date: 08 Jun 08 - 08:13 AM

I should point out that the venue is quite small with a capacity of up to 80 people. Tickets will available at the door but get there early to avoid disappointment. Doors open at 8:30 PM.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,Stringman
Date: 11 Jun 08 - 07:28 AM

I think the press release from Comhaltas accusing the former Clontarf branch of exploitation of children is inappropriate in the extreme, and is slanderous and demeans the whole organisation. Also the press release in Praise of Labhras seems so out of touch with reality that one wonders has he got a future at all!
When an organisation accuses a branch of such impropriety as a means to strengthen their own position, they are stepping out on very thin ice, particularly when these statements have the endorsements of all members of the ardcomhairle. This has got nothing to do with the central mission of Comhaltas.
Incidentally,members of this thread may be interested to hear that independent offers of mediation were made to both Clontarf and Labhras before the breaking news on the Joe Duffy show. Clontarf agreed, but head office said no.
This could have been handled out of the public domain, but the ardstiurthoir declined.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 11 Jun 08 - 09:27 AM

Are they not accountable to anyone? If this is officially the case - that no rights of dispute or redress to an unjust balance of power actually exist - then this state of affairs should be legally contested and remedied.

Having the same leader, elected by the same quasi-secret council decade after decade, still raises major questions in my mind regarding democracy. So does that six-year waiting period between any possible amendment to the constitution by the dues-paying membership.

Surely no organisation with Comhaltas' assets in real estate and funding should have that kind of autonomy and protection from public scrutiny. It's too open to abuse. How much else goes on behind the scenes that no one knows about?

Apart from self-adoring PR they seem to be doing nothing to address this Clasac issue. But it looks like they don't have to. That non-accountability should be challenged. If there's no law governing this situation, they need to make one. Oh, wait: government. Fianna Fáil, isn't it?

Sometimes if something doesn't seem fair and doesn't look fair and doesn't smell fair... it isn't fair. It's time for a change. An official, legal one.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: The Sandman
Date: 11 Jun 08 - 10:32 AM

Democracy is a farce anyway.
Are you eligible to vote tomorrow[Lisbon Treaty]Bonnie,I am not,yet I am affected and have lived in Ireland for 18 years.
   I dont think Comhaltas are right,.
but their attitude is typical of Fianna Fail,Haughey, Ahern etc.
power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Nerd
Date: 11 Jun 08 - 01:51 PM

Again, I think there is more here than either side is admitting.
I understand that Comhaltas has done things in the past to make people on this forum angry, but the fact is we just don't have the evidence to know what is going on in this case. Both sides have put out highly partisan documents outlining their own side and ignoring the other's side.

For example: "Independent offers of mediation were made?" By whom? Why should either side accept them, if they are not likely to favor that side? If one side accepts them and the other does not, it MIGHT mean that the side that doesn't accept is being unreasonable, or it might mean that the "independent" mediators weren't as independent as they claimed, and one side smelled a rat. How are we on this list supposed to know which was the case?

Comhaltas's answer to that, by the way, is: "The matter under review was an internal issue for Comhaltas and processed within the terms and requirements of the Bunreacht. It was people in the dissolved branch who brought it into the public domain." This seems also to be true, which suggests to me that the "offer" of independent mediation could have been an ultimatum: "submit to mediation by our chosen mediators, or we will go to the press and make Comhaltas look bad." If that was the case, Comhaltas did the only thing it reasonably could do.

Finally, I've made this point before, but it bears repeating: organizations like Comhaltas are not democracies. They are corporations. They do have some features of democratic governance, but those features are limited. The ardchomairle is indeed accountable to membership, but it seems that changing the ardchomairle takes time, and changing the constitution takes even longer.

The structure of the archomairle is not a secret. You can find it on the Comhaltas website, here:

http://comhaltas.ie/about/structure/

Essentially, the body is made up of the provincial council chairpeople, and two more members of each provincial council. Provincial councils are made up of county/regional board members, and county/regional boards are made up of branch committee members.

So if you feel strongly about what has happened to Clontarf, the appropriate action is to become active in your branch and vote out your branch committee members, replacing them with new ones. This will inevitably change the ardchomairle.

If you can find out which of your branch committee members, if any, is actually a member of the ardchomairle, so much the better. You can oust the responsible parties more easily that way. People here have alluded to the difficulties in finding out who is on the ardchomairle, but enough people in the organization know that it can hardly be very difficult to find out, if you are an active comhaltas member.

If you're NOT an active comhaltas member, and you feel strongly about this situation, your best bet is to become an active member. Otherwise, you'll never have any real say in what happens.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: Declan
Date: 11 Jun 08 - 02:09 PM

Can't make it to the Cobblestone tonight.

I'm sure it will be brilliant.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: Barry Finn
Date: 11 Jun 08 - 06:56 PM

"organizations like Comhaltas are not democracies. They are corporations"

NOT!

I believe Comhaltas is a non profit or at least in all appearances it is, though being a member of the Boston branch I'm not sure of the legal foundations outside the US.

It relies on private & public funding, private & public sweat & membership fees!
As such their books, polices, discissions, etc. should be at the very least be open & public to the membership if not to to their communities.

Barry

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Nerd
Date: 12 Jun 08 - 02:57 PM

Sorry, Barry. Just because you shout "NOT" won't make a corporation into a government. For the record, you're leaving out an important word. It's a "non-profit," you say. A non-profit what? It's a non-profit corporation.

Comhaltas has a six-tiered governing structure (individual members, branch committees, county-region boards, provincial boards, ardchomairle, and finally the high officers of the ardchomairle). This ensures that very few individual members have actually voted for any member of the ardchomairle. This makes it difficult to cause a change in the high officers of the organization through a broad grassroots movement, because only members of their own branches vote for them directly. But you err if you assume that this is somehow illegal or outrageous. Plenty of non-profit corporations have far less in the way of democracy.

I've worked most of my working life for non-profit corporations that "take public money." This does not make them democracies in which "the public" that provided the money has a direct role. (They don't hold public elections on who runs the Red Cross.) A lot of people seem not to understand this. If you are not vested in the organization by being a member, your only say would be to call your governmental representative and say "please don't fund so-and-so." But your governmental rep is insulated from that decision anyway; typically in the arts, the money goes through an arts board or arts council before an organization like Comhaltas gets it, and their decisions on which organizations to fund are subject to pretty rigorous oversight. In particular, they will put together a truly independent panel of arts experts to vet the various applications. I have served on many grants panels making this kind of decision; they include artists, administrators, and scholars in relevant disciplines. By the time a grant is made, everyone's ass is pretty well covered, and it would be hard for a member of the public to argue from sensationalized news accounts that an organization isn't worthy of the money that an expert panel awarded it.

I'm sure most arts experts, looking at the totality of Comhaltas's activities, and being aware of the controversy over this one decision, would still not vote to de-fund Comhaltas. And I believe that members of all the other branches would agree.

Beyond denying it funding, there is generally no mechanism for the government to interfere in a non-profit corporation's business.

Corporations are also not democracies internally, although comhaltas itself is structured on semi-democratic principles. They are governed only by their own bylaws, generally established by the founding board of directors and modified by subsequent boards when necessary. If these bylaws give individual members no power at all in guiding the organization, then that's the way it is, and that's perfectly legal. (Members knew what rights they had before joining, so it's hard to argue that anyone has been wronged.) Many non-profits don't even HAVE individual members of any kind, and board members are simply selected by the board itself.

Comhaltas happens to be MORE democratic than many other non-profits, but you still shouldn't make the mistake of assuming that it's "a democracy." To be governed by a convoluted, semi-democratic system such as Comhaltas has developed is probably fully legal (I'm in the US, not Ireland, so I don't know for sure.) We can sputter about it all we like, but it's not "a democracy," and it won't respond to our outrage.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: Barry Finn
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 01:44 AM

I've worked most of my working life for non-profit corporations that "take public money." This does not make them democracies in which "the public" that provided the money has a direct role

But it does make them accountable & it should make them transparent

Barry

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Nerd
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 02:15 AM

We had this discussion already in this thread, Barry. They're accountable for how they spend public money, not for whether they hurt the feelings of branch members. In this regard, I'm sure Comhaltas is as transparent as the law requires. We all know where the money went; the Clasac centre is there for all to see. That's all the guardians of the public purse care about, not which particular members of an organization got their toes stepped on in the process.

Another way to look at it: no one outside of Comhaltas is accusing Comhaltas of mishandling public money. Comhaltas said their branch was mishandling public money, and that the national organization stepped in and remedied the situation. Clontarf branch says no one mishandled public money at all. The upshot of both stories is that the public money went where it was supposed to go: to get the centre built and operational. Why should the guardians of the public money waste MORE public money investigating this situation? Neither side alleges that the mishandling of money remains unresolved, just that the organization hurt some feelings in resolving it. Bottom line is, the government isn't likely to care, and arguably, they shouldn't. Whether the central committee can or can't dissolve a branch according to the comhaltas constitution really isn't a matter for anyone outside of comhaltas.

I do see one way to get the government involved: the former branch members could sue the national organization in court. The fact that they aren't doing so suggests that (1) it's not worth it to them; or (2) they don't feel they can win.

Non-profit organizations always have internal politics, jockeying for power, sudden ousters of board and staff and members, etc. Funding agencies don't care. They are assured by the new powers that be that all is well, they are showed the books proving that the money is where it should be, and all goes on as before.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 02:28 AM

Nerd,
'Hurt feelings' seems somewhat of an understatement when it comes to the expulsion of a branch and the seizure of its premises, and doesn't your premise ignore the political and personal influence O'Murchú undoubtedly has and is more than ready to use?
The Cap'n is right on this occasion; when it comes to CCE, 'Democracy is a farce', though O'Murchú appears ready to pay lip-service to it with the somewhat lickspittle 'support our glorious leader' which he has encouraged on this and other similar occasions.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 05:00 AM

> ...your best bet is to become an active member. Otherwise, you'll never have any real say in what happens.

How much "real say" - i.e. actual power - does any member outside the inner sanctum have?

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: The Sandman
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 05:46 AM

if you are a member WHO is on the county board,you have a little more power.
as a member of Skibbereen branch,All that I can do is[apart from signing the petition which I have done] is raise the matter at the Skibbereen agm in November [under any other business].
every branch will vary as to how they are run,some of them seem to be run by families,and are almost a personal feifdom.
on the other hand both my local branches do a lot to encourage music making among children,which is why[For the moment] I will continue to be a member.
I do not think CCE have handled this well,I am not happy about the Clontarf situation.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Gulliver
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 09:51 AM

Declan wrote: I'm sure it will be brilliant.

I thought Niamh Parsons was, but when I said it to her, she said: "I bet you say that to all the girls!"

Well, emmm....

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Nerd
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 10:10 AM

Jim, you could be right about the "seizure of premises" part. This would depend on the way the law views a branch of CCE, and I just don't know. If branches are separate legal entities with their own articles of incorporation, and if the Clontarf branch was in fact part-owner of the Centre, then the national organization could be breaking the law by seizing it. But if the branches are, legally speaking, merely parts of Comhaltas, as Comhaltas asserts, then Comhaltas can't "seize" their "property," because Comhaltas technically already owned it. (This would be like a management company reorganizing and eliminating a branch office that managed a block of flats, bringing that building under the wing of the central office. Five people might lose their jobs, but the company didn't seize anything it didn't own already. We might have sympathy for the folks whose jobs were lost, but the government won't step in to do anything about it...)

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,Stringman
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 05:59 PM

Nerd, whether or not Comhaltas is a democracy in a distraction from the central issue.
The Clontarf branch overran their budget to the tune of 2 million. They produced a business plan and needed the executive to act as guarantor on the loan , which Clontarf were willing to shoulder. For whatever reasons, the member of the ard comhairle involved with the Clasach project declined to do this.
At an E.G.M to present their case to Clontarf, the ard stiurthóir of my organisation delivered a rant to the people present, which offended them greatly, and being articulate and intelligent they were having none of it. The dissolution stems from this event.
To my mind in an act of personal vengeance at the lack of respect accorded to Labhrás, Paddy Kelly and others, the ard stiurthóir personally initiated the dissolution of Clontarf. I have spoken to some of the members of the the county board who were involved in this process. They said they were brought into a room and had a meeting with Labhrás, who alerted them to "the problem", and who showed them documentation to substantiate his position. I suggested that they might have asked for Clontarf's side of the story and in fairness, they accepted what they were shown at face value.
Labhras instructed the county board to dissolve Clontarf, and the board felt they had no choice but to do this. This is how your model of a corporation is working. To assume it can function as a transparent democracy is naive, as most organisations are run by its executive officers.
Labhrás O'Murchú has been central to the dissolution of Clontarf. This had nothing to do with vat refunds, taking control of assets of Clasach or anything of that nature. Another distraction.
The decision of the ardstiurthoir to dissolve Clontarf has done incredible damage to the work and mission of Comhaltas. I say this foremost as a musician, but also as a card carrying member of Comhaltas, a committee member, music promoter etc.
I felt that the whole project was too big for one branch in the first place, however Labhrás was happy to let them go ahead.
Music is about people, and the creation of community in a world that is becoming more alienating. Some of us would rather work with the Clontarf's of this world, and with the Labhrás' also to create these connections between people.
An offer of mediation sprung from this desire to avoid all that has happened in the public domain, which has discredited the efforts of all of us who promote music. Whether the offer was from a truly independent source, or one more favourable to one side than the other, well who's to say.
Some of us care deeply enough about this to look at and listen to both sides, without trying to score clever points with clever arguments.
The mediation was offered to help solve this "in house", but that channel was declined.
In the overall scheme of things for Comhaltas worldwide, Clontarf may be just very small spuds. But the human cost in the way these people were treated is enormous.To the best of my knowledge only three members of the Ard Comhairle have questioned the ard stiúrthóir on this .Staggering, even for a'corporation' that has met many times to discuss this issue.

Your suggestion that the former Clontarf sue the members of the Ard Comhairle, I think this has already happened. All members of the Ard Comhairle received a solicitor's letter in the past two days.
Also, the accusation in the press release from the Ard Comhairle referring to the exploitation of children by the former Clontarf branch is totally unacceptable. This kind of language has no place in an organisation seeking to promote music in children.
It casts a shadow over the work we do in our branches to foster a climate where children can join our organisations in safety.
This is the wrong message from the Ard Comhairle.
The involvement of children in protesting outside congress was done in a dignified and non hostile manner. All credit to the leadership in Clontarf, for this.
Children are often involved in branch activities, and the ard comhairle was happy to let them busk for 15 years to raise the funds for Clasach!
Some of us will keep hoping that eventually sense will prevail, and if only for the good of the organisation and its image, Clontarf's dissolution will be overturned by the Dublin County Board at some future date.
Now if you want to explore the manipulation of the county board Nerd, and the use of the Bunreacht as a whipping tool,you have material for months of work ahead of you.
Beir bua.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Nerd
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 10:14 PM

Stringman, I have no axe to grind in all this. I don't care if Comhaltas is a democracy or not; I know that it's not and indeed cannot be. I agree that the human cost is staggering. But I still think there is culpability on both sides. That's all I'm saying.

My other responses are mainly to the people who keep stating that Comhaltas is not a democracy, and seems not to be accountable to anyone, and that therefore they've broken some law. I'm just trying to explain that this is probably not the case, and that I will be very surprised if they are found to have broken any law or even any of their own bylaws.   Time will tell, of course.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 13 Jun 08 - 11:07 PM

You don't need to explain it. We can see for ourselves that they obviously are not accountable to anyone and they obviously are not a democracy. That in itself speaks volumes.

Since when should the status quo not be questioned and imbalances in power/resources remain unchallenged? If they haven't broken any laws - and they probably haven't - all it tells me is that it's time to take another look at the laws.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jun 08 - 02:15 AM

Nerd,
Once again, I find your over-simplification on the question of democracy, well - oversimple.
An organsiation divided into branches suggests that the members of those branches have some sort of say in the policy and running of the organsisation - other than the raising of the arm to salute the leader.
If I join an organisation I want to know my voice is going to be heard and my money is going to be used for the purposes intended.
Are you saying that that does not, and need not exist in CCE? If this is the case, what is the role of a member.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: The Sandman
Date: 14 Jun 08 - 04:16 AM

The benefits of membership :The cost of entering competitions is cheaper.children can participate in music making and socialise with other children in a safe environment,.
by becoming amember you are helping to strengthen an organisation that while it has many faults also does much good.
members are free to become involved as branch treasurer, secretary ,publicity officer etc,it is actually up to people to get involved and try and change things from grass roots level.
of course that is much easier said than done[and thats an understatement]
what needs to happen is that less power should be given to the central body and more to the regional branches.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,Castle kelly
Date: 15 Jun 08 - 05:03 PM

Clasac is a centre with a social obligation to the people in the surrounding areas. It is meant to have an outreach programme for the benefit of the local community. It has already alienated the people of clontarf and elsewhere who are involved in traditional music/arts and and as a result it is in a position where it would have little or no local support. If you alienate all of the traditional local community then how will it work as a profit making business? How will it use its' revenue to promote trad music song and dance. Clasac has to operate as a profit making business in order to survive and to do this it needs the local traditional community. Balm is needed to heal wounds,trying to damage people's reputations cannot improve the situation. Local politicians have a role to play and should be to the fore of seeking a solution.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jun 08 - 09:31 AM

I read in this morning's Irish Times that the Comhaltas leadership has refused the services of a mediator in its negotiations with Clontarf - can anybody tell me why I am not surprised?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: knight_high
Date: 16 Jun 08 - 03:06 PM

From Irish Times 16th June 2008

Comhaltas rejects call for mediator in dispute over €11m music centre
PAUL CULLEN

COMHALTAS CEOLTÓIRÍ Éireann, the body that promotes traditional music, has rejected calls for a mediator to be appointed to resolve an internal dispute over an €11 million music centre in Clontarf, Dublin.

A weekend meeting of the Comhaltas ardchomhairle discussed the dispute with its Clontarf branch, which it has dissolved, but did not accede to requests for the appointment of a mediator.

The organisation now intends to open the Clasach arts centre on East Wall Road in the autumn without the co-operation of most local members.

Dublin lord mayor Paddy Bourke and other local councillors had asked CCÉ to agree to mediation. Saturday's ardchomhairle meeting also received a written request for mediation from the branch itself.

CCÉ chief executive Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú told The Irish Times last week a mediated settlement was not possible under the rules of the organisation. In May, its annual conference had confirmed the original decision by the ardchomhairle in March to dissolve the branch and this decision excluded the possibility of mediation.

Mr Ó Múrchú likened the situation to the administration of the GAA: "If some of the Dublin players were sent off in a match, the GAA would hardly pay heed to councillors asking them to review the decision. So why should we?"

Both sides have traded allegations in the dispute. Comhaltas has accused the Clontarf branch of leaving contractors on the building unpaid and of wrongfully applying for a VAT refund.

Rejecting these claims, the branch alleged head office wrested control of the building after its members had "done all the hard work", and that it withdrew support for previously agreed loans.

Mr Ó Murchú, a Fianna Fáil senator who has led Comhaltas for more than 40 years, accused his critics of personalising the issue and of abusing him personally.

Maurice Mullen, chair of the dissolved branch, said Clontarf members had been given no right of appeal. He called for a "courageous conversation" on the issues.

Mr Ó Murchú insisted the ardchomhairle's decision involved an "in-built appeal".

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: The Sandman
Date: 16 Jun 08 - 03:53 PM

Mr Ó Murchú, a Fianna Fáil senator who has led Comhaltas for more than 40 years, accused his critics of personalising the issue and of abusing him personally.
Has he been abused on this thread?
heres one,
President ,Labhrás ó Murchú, (known affectionately here as 'Larry-The Lab Rat') ballisticated, claiming that ALL money raised by branches which was not needed for local organisation, automatically belonged to Head Office.
probably best to avoid any more comments like this.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,Guest-North Dublin
Date: 16 Jun 08 - 04:05 PM

Dear Stringman,

I found your blog of 13th June '08 very interesting but disturbing reading? Why am I not surprised?

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,Emmo
Date: 16 Jun 08 - 04:47 PM

According to the Irish Times - Mr Ó Murchú insisted the ardchomhairle's decision involved an "in-built appeal".

Lads, tell me, what's an "in-built appeal"?

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: GUEST,caitlín
Date: 16 Jun 08 - 06:42 PM

I think this is an example of in-built appeal:

> "CCÉ chief executive Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú told The Irish Times last week a mediated settlement was not possible under the rules of the organisation."

Why not?

Because it isn't, that's why.

It's where you don't have to prove anything to anyone but yourselves. It's where the rank and file pay their dues but can't change things for years at a time. It's where a politician can stay in power for 40 years and do whatever he likes with no outside restraint.

And then he whines and snivels about being criticised. Poor baby.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Nerd
Date: 16 Jun 08 - 08:03 PM

I'm not being over-simple at all, Jim. In fact, I'm trying to recognize the complexities of arts management in the nonprofit world.   The oversimple thing is just saying "this situation is bad; comhaltas isn't democratic." The complicated thing is figuring out if it should be, and if so, what to do about it.

All I'm saying is that different organizations are organized differently, and that

(1) there is no legal obligation for a membership organization to be organized as a democracy

and

(2) many are less democratic than CCE.

Thus, wondering "how could this happen?" doesn't make a lot of sense. Furthermore, there are good historical and practical reasons why such organizations aren't democracies.

As the Captain points out, membership already comes with benefits, and people join in order to access those benefits. If the benefits aren't good enough, no one is forced to join. It's not like a country, where you are forced to pay the taxes even if you disagree with the government! Right now, the vast majority of members will stay with the organization no matter what happens with Clontarf, because the benefits are worth it to them.

Some such organizations give members some form of "voting" rights, others don't. Whether we should change the law to force the issue is a question for the Houses of the Oireachtas, and ultimately the voters. As Bonnie says, that option is certainly possible.

However, you are being simplistic if you think all non-profit organizations with members who contribute money should be democracies, and if you think you could create legislation to ensure that. I tend to agree with you that Comhaltas could use more democracy, not less. But that's different from saying that there's some kind of legal "accountability" requirement. If that requirement were enacted for all nonprofit membership organizations, it would be a logistical nightmare that would cripple many small organizations.

For most such organizations, "members" are really just contributors who derive some benefits from their contributions--like, say, getting a program guide from a local arts centre, or a newsletter from a local historical society. If an arts centre decides to fire a popular manager, or to move to a new building, the membership does not get to vote on this, generally speaking.

If membership DID vote on such decisions, most organizations would shut their doors. Politicians have the lure of actual power calling them to run for office. Imagine if you had to "run" for a low-paid, arts administrator job and could be voted out after a couple of years for not doing what the current membership wants. Or, imagine if you had job security, but had to enact whatever program plans were voted in by the members, so you'd just be a "rubber stamp." No one with any sense would take such a job.   

Because of this, it would not be workable to organize most arts organizations as democracies. The problem with legislating something like this separately for comhaltas is figuring out the legal grounds on which to claim that comhaltas differs from other organizations who could not survive being that democratic. This is a very complicated proposition.

Finally, I think you are once again not only oversimplifying but in fact distorting the facts in your posts. When you say that Labhras refused "the services" of a mediator, it sounds like a friendly offer of service was made by a trusted mediator. In fact, when you read the article, you find out what happened: some local politicians, including the Mayor, tried to force both sides to recognize the authority of an outside mediator. This is an "offer" that is bound to be "accepted" by whoever has lost this round of the fight (they have nothing to lose by accepting), and "rejected" by whoever has won (they have nothing to gain by accepting).

What Labhras rejected was the notion that politicians who aren't part of comhaltas should be allowed to tell the organization what to do. He is making a claim that the comhaltas constitution is authority enough. His position is understandable. One, he practically HAS to say that, or he is voting "no confidence" in the system that has kept him Chief Executive for 40 years. Two, he's probably right, legally. But anything can happen, and the more politicians get involved, the more likely he is to cave and accept mediation, especially if the politicos can make it hard for the Clasac Centre to function.

As you say, his rejecting the imposition of legally-binding mediation isn't surprising. But it doesn't prove that Comhaltas is wrong. It also doesn't prove that Clontarf is right, or even that they're negotiating in good faith. It just proves that the former Clontarf branch is trying to find a way to reverse the ardchomairle's decision, and that Comhaltas doesn't want it reversed.

Wait, we knew that already, didn't we?

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Jun 08 - 02:13 AM

Nerd
2 responses
Still don't know what 'rights' - apart from "come in, sit down, shut up" - a member has.
2 isn't there a word missing from your reply - how about "music" - which is what it is supposed to be about.
You may not know who is wrong or right - some of us have been here before when it was blatantly about politics, and when it was swept under the carpet - thanks to the lack of democracy you appear to either actively support or be an apologist for.
If, as you appear to be saying, there is no democracy in Comhaltas, nor the need for it, surely a second - best step would be a mediator - or is that out of the question also?
In many quarters O'Murchú is referred to as 'Chairman Lao' (for the non-Irish - Labhras is pronounced 'Lowros'.
Now where did I put my little red book!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,Cathal
Date: 17 Jun 08 - 04:54 AM

Nerd,
You wrote
<>
My understanding is that the site for the Clasach centre was given to Clontarf by the City Council. Surely that gives the Lord Mayor and the local councillors every right to get involved in trying to restore local involvement in the centre?
By refusing to accept the councillors offer of mediation, Labhras just keeps digging himself into a deeper hole .

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,Frank F.
Date: 17 Jun 08 - 05:07 AM

Nerd

The local politicians you refer to are the councillors for the area. As the site that Clasac was built on is owned by Dublin City Council and leased to Comhaltas at a negligible rate the councillors have a very direct interest in this controversy.

One question for you! Do you think that the Dept of Arts, Sport and Tourism would have given funded the Clasac development had they known beforehand that it would have had the direct and almost immediate consequence of dissolving a vibrant branch of over 400 members thereby putting at risk the promotion and propagation of Irish music and culture in Dublin and beyond?
(And it is a direct consequence - without funding there would be no clasac and without clasac there would be no dissolution!)

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,Fiddleruairi
Date: 17 Jun 08 - 09:18 AM

i haven't been on this in a while but i was reading some very interesting comments below and thought i might as well share some more of my views.

i (think) i understand what nerd is saying but i do agree with the point that it should be about the promotion of music.

the sole purpose of the clasac centre is to promote music, that is the whole point of its existance. but because of this controversey i for one do not know how on earth the centre is going to be run. I can't see any of the dublin branches, let alone clontarf, using the building for their personal use and i can't see people coming up from other branches around the country to use it because it doesn't make sense with the commuting and all. The use of it for concerts is also seriously in doubt, people that are asked to play may not due to the circumstances and im sure that people in the dublin area won't attend such concerts in protest.

this is surely not just damaging for the promotion of music in dublin but for music in general. it is also logistically insane to try and run such a centre when you have a good idea that people probably wont avail of its services due to the ongoing controversey. how are comhaltas going to pay employees and bills and such if they have no sizeable income? if the head organisation are not going to try to resolve the clontarf issue from a principles point of view than maybe they should just consider it from a business point of view because that clearly makes sense. you have to question what advice cce are getting on the situation business wise.

labhras' comparison with the GAA and sending offs is a bit wide of the mark. it would be closer if he compared it to the GAA dissolving a local GAA club like the crokes or na fianna, because that is what clontarf is in terms of CCE.

also it is a bit much to be complaining about being personally attacked and criticised if you are a senator (or whatever he is). how can you expect to be untouchable and not criticised if you are in such a powerful position? the only thing i can think of is that the 40 years of power has clouded his judgement and he is becoming more disillusioned. there is also good reason for his critics to remark on his peformance due to past ridiculous decisions made by himself and the ard comhairle.

i just have one question for you nerd that i'd like to know the answer to, if i made a donation to a charity organisation for example concern that works in africa, do i have a right to know where and how my money is being used? and do i have a right to access their bank accounts seeing as they are a publicly funded and non profit making organsation? if you could clear that up it would be great!

finally, i dont know about anyone else, but i really dont think comhaltas is a 'non-profit making organisation'! cce clearly makes a huge profit, you only have to look at the amount of money made from the fleadh, bru boru and other such ventures. it is also widely known that cce has millions in the coffers, so why is this term used?

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: Declan
Date: 17 Jun 08 - 04:56 PM

Ruarai,

Comhaltas would be described as a "not for profit" organisation, rather than a non-profitmaking one. Some "not for profit" organisations actually make large amounts of profit. The disctinction is that not for profit orgs are supposed to be primarily motivated by considerations other than profit - in the case of Comhaltas that would be (you might expect) the promotion of the music. Labhrás and Co would do well to remember that.

Comhaltas was founded by a group of musicians whose main interest was promotion of the music, the survival of which was under a real thrat at the time. Through the efforts of these people and others the music is now thriving and thankfully is in no danger of dissappearing any time soon. However the current leadership of Comhaltas can claim little credit for this situation. They have lost their way a long time ago and those interested in the survival of Comhaltas (personally I don't care too much about whether it does or not) would do well to do something about that.

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interruptus
From: GUEST,Fiddleruairi
Date: 17 Jun 08 - 07:17 PM

thanks for clearing that up declan!

Subject: RE: Battle of Clontarf-round two/Comhaltas Interru
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Jun 08 - 02:34 AM

The 'not for profit' tag now stretches in to many €millions in the form of grants from the public purse.
Jim Carroll