In the hunt for a Rule 42 type spark
TOMMIE KENOY is most associated with the GAA’s annual Congress of 2005.
This was where the historic decision to amend Rule 42 was taken.
Now, on the eve of another Congress, it is disarming to hear Kenoy’s frustration with what is regarded as an important decision-making body within the GAA.
He cites as an example of the problems besetting Congress, a vote taken at the 2018 edition.
A motion associated with the CPA was put forward by the St Mary’s Club in Rosslare, the home club of Liam Griffin.
It proposed that ‘each delegate’s vote on all motions at annual or special Congress shall be recorded and published in the minutes thereafter’.
It was, argued the CPA, simply a matter of transparency.
The motion was, remarkably, defeated by over 83 per cent of the vote.
‘A highly-respected man like Liam Griffin goes up and proposes it, and it was effectively blocked by the establishment,’ says Kenoy, still amazed by the incident two years on.
An indication of the motivation behind the motion’s defeat – antipathy towards the CPA – could be found in the words of one delegate, who dismissed the club players’ body as a ‘nutty’ organisation.
In its aftermath, the chair of the CPA, Micheál Briody, spoke out passionately against what had transpired.
‘It’s embarrassing that we don’t have transparency of the nature that’s required,’ said Briody.
‘They can no longer tell us this is the most democratic organisation, because democracy dies in darkness.
‘And if you don’t have transparency, then you don’t have a true democracy, or a true democratic unit.’
The memories of that incident inform
Tommie Kenoy’s reflections on Congress two years on.
‘This is what the CPA was looking for: transparency in how counties vote,’ says Kenoy now.
‘Are they behaving in line with the mandate from their counties, if there was a mandate?
‘The system is there to allow that to happen, to show Roscommon yes, Leitrim no, or whatever. But they’re refusing to use it. Why? Are they afraid of transparency?’
Kenoy is a veteran of Congress, having attended many, including through nine years as chairman of the Roscommon county board, and during his time on Central Council, too.
He reflects warmly on the Saturday of the 2005 meeting, when the change to Rule 42 was carried and he dealt with requests from British broadcasters afterwards for interviews about a momentous day.
But he understands, too, that seismic change of the kind now required to fix the fixtures is highly unlikely to emerge through Congress.
‘In the Rule 42 campaign, the spark that lit it was the thought of the rugby team having to play home games overseas,’ he says.
‘We need a spark like that to get the club fixtures crisis centre stage.’