This had the potential to be a very consequential GAA Congress. The main issue in the run-up was a proposal to extend the All-Ireland championships by two weeks. The committee that suggested the move back into August was led by Páraic Duffy.
On the other side, were arguments made with absolute conviction. About a four-month club season being squeezed even further, about increased participation levels being put at risk, about club players missing out on championship games simply because July All-Ireland finals don’t sit right with people.
It became a classic example of what still makes Congress a powerful idea. A proposal was put forth and looked set to be rejected by the rank-and-file, who were anxious to make their voices heard. That the motion was withdrawn without a vote may have been a mercy to Duffy, but in any case the message had been delivered with quiet force. And it had been delivered by GAA members to the top table, in exactly the correct forum.
But that is not what last weekend will be remembered for. The GAA decided this was not the place to discuss commercially sensitive arrangements, and for that reason, Allianz would not be mentioned, apart from in the director general’s report on Friday evening. When the floor was opened for comments after that, none of the nine counties who passed a motion questioning the Allianz sponsorship of the GAA leagues and football championship were moved to speak on the issue.
READ MORE
For all concerned, it is best to hope that conversations were had before the start of Congress about the “pointlessness” of raising the issue from the floor.
The best-case scenario for the idea of GAA democracy may well be that pressure was applied from people in Croke Park to those nine county boards. Because what’s the alternative?
The elected officials of those counties heard the concerns of their clubs, heard the result of the motions at their own county board meetings – and ignored them? Or they were left absolutely to their own devices by GAA management, believed deeply in the motions their own county boards passed, but had dinner reservations and wanted to get about their evenings?
It appears as if one of those three things happened, and none of the options speak highly of those delegates.
The issue should have been discussed, because that is what Congress is for. For all its failings, for all that it has become in large part a rubber-stamping exercise for motions brought from Croke Park itself, it is still wonky, weird, and an example (as displayed by the August All-Irelands motion) of democracy in action.
There were no motions on the Clár relating to Allianz. So is it utter naivete to suggest that Colm O’Rourke, Pat Gilroy or Peter Canavan should have been invited to make a presentation about their principled opposition to the sponsorship on Friday night? Invite them in, let everyone see how seriously the GAA take people’s concerns.
[ GAA Congress reminded us why the Allianz sponsorship storm will never blow overOpens in new window ]
Maybe the GAA weren’t to know that county boards weren’t going to speak – if they hadn’t been tipped off about it, they would have been extremely foolish not to have expected someone from those counties to try and put forward the views of their own clubs – but it would have made perfect sense to have aired the alternative view. Nothing that could have been said by any speaker on the issue of Allianz had the potential to change a single thing. But the opponents of the deal might have felt like they’d been treated with respect.
On Saturday, the GAA were seemingly caught unawares again by that level of opposition. The protest outside Croke Park was well-flagged. The idea that some of those protesters would then make their way out on to the floor of Congress and hoist banners was unexpected, but perhaps not entirely surprising.
All winter, protesters went with motions from their clubs, to their county boards, with a view to going to Congress. When the sponsorship was maintained, when they were told that sponsorship arrangements fall under the remit of the GAA’s management committee and thus outside the control of Congress, and when they heard the GAA president equate their misgivings to someone reading a Facebook post and adopting that as their stance, they could perhaps be forgiven for thinking that they had exhausted all avenues of legitimate protest. Whatever the rights and wrongs of storming past volunteers to get to the top table – and causing injury along the way – it is an uncomfortable fact that true protest is seldom polite.
Amateurism, and the introduction of a form of licensing, was another talking point last weekend. We all appear to be in agreement that it is something that should be protected, for reasons of history and ethos. But amateurism also gives you freedom – there is some money that you don’t need. There is no better arena than Congress to tease out when the GAA should behave like a corporate entity, and when it should remain “amateur”, at least in spirit.
A true reckoning with the depth of feeling among the rank and file is still possible. Whatever about those delegates who stayed quiet when they had a chance to speak on behalf of their members, that reckoning is urgently needed to save one of the most impactful and forward-thinking GAA presidencies of this century.
