Moreover it unfortunately comes across as a personal "Pet Hate" single issue. Hypothetically, Fr Ted's unreleased 2nd Eurovision hit "Flogging a dead horse" is not available according to publishers as they allege it is now a "broken record". Forgive the humorous analogy, but this onslaught is getting a little tiresome.

Like others I'm content to wait and see the outcome of the ongoing evaluation process and have trust in the competance, judgement, diligence and bona fides of all involved across the association.



Z z z z z z z . . .

OceanFroggie

Oh Dear,

Seems like I might have struck a nerve there.

Now Noel, you should know better. If you don't like the content - just don't read it.

Humorous - I don't think so!

And there was me thinking that you used to espouse the view "Viva le difference" or something like that?

Am I wrong?

It seems to me that there is an intolerence by some in IWAI towards people who might dare ask questions.

What sort are ye at all at all.


Regards

Kieran

Hi Kieran
Agree, questions are important, and this was a good one, perhaps spoiled by asking it over and over again, diluting what was actually a good question, but unfortunately somewhat invalidated by being answered in the same breath as it was asked. You've clearly made your mind up and that's fine, and your opinion deserves respect, but others haven't yet concluded fully informed opinions including myself. As to "hitting a nerve", no just boredom. You can bring a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink. I don't want to get into an argument, or give this oxygen, so with respect agree to differ. Regards.
Noel out and listening on other threads.

OceanFroggie

Hi Noel,

Well, for the record, I too have no desire to have any arguments with you or indeed with anybody else.

It seems that you might not be the only one who has decided to not "to give this oxygen". "This is apparrent by their recent absence on this forum from this discussion.

I have to say that I fully agree with you when you say "but others haven't yet concluded fully informed opinions ". Yes, people need to draw their own conclusions. But you see, you can only do that when all the details are provided to you.

At this time, some important details (Financial) are not available. So at present, nobody can really make an informed decision. That includes both you & I.

You see Noel, for me, its not just the money. Its the fact that, in my opinion the attempt to justify this project is......well to say the least Weak.

Branch meetings - might suit one branch
Press Releases - how many of them every year do we put out
IWAI Shop - that could be anywhere (by the way, where is it now)
Training - Use existing educational establishments
Archive - If the stuff really is that important, give it to the Nation.

It really is a weak argument.

But ultimately - likely to be an expensive episode.

Also, the idea that IWAI would see RNLI as an Income stream really worries me. For gods sake, let them have access "Free Gratis".

Regards

Kieran

Kieran, you obviously insist on the last word, and you seem to almost now arguing with yourself

but

Quote:

Branch meetings - might suit one branch
Press Releases - how many of them every year do we put out
IWAI Shop - that could be anywhere (by the way, where is it now)
Training - Use existing educational establishments
Archive - If the stuff really is that important, give it to the Nation.

You choose to trivialise the IWAI and its achievements

Dunrovin, is not primarily about giving any on branch a meeting place,

- t is a home , a HQ and a centre for the organization as a whole

- It is an administrative centre, centralising various admin/shop that takes place spread about the place, ( if we can afford it, a permanent or semi permanent low-cost admin person, could deal with phone, email and mail queries, handle membership details and send out literature, campaign material, shop and other bits and pieces. Few volunteers have the time every day to handle such queries.

- Its a standard point of phone and mail etc contact to the organization

- we have a space that can be used to run public awareness campaigns, information days etc.

- Council meetings, IWAI workshops, Regional meetings etc.

- Training, firstly we want to develop IWAI training standards, we need a base for that.

- PLease don't trivialize our archives and heritage information, its valuable to our members, if less significant on a national basis. We need to mind it , display it and increase it.

I really feel you have a failure of imagination here, nor do I understand why you seek to wage a continuous one man campaign. The building will be a resource for the association for decades to come, Not to mention a proper and full use of the legacy bequeathed us by the Rice's. It will facilitate empowering the association to the next phase.


Financially, mechanisms exist, that would allow it to be built with little effect on the current day to day running of the Association, but that is up to the branches to decide.

As to your continual harping on about information. First detailed financial information takes time to assemble, Secondly branches) must decide what proportion of their reserves are going to be used and this affects the overall picture. Thats the first question and that process will begin at the next Council and will no doubt be discussed at branches in the forthcoming period. Branches are the key deciding mechanism in the IWAI and that process needs to happen first. I do not propose to have a discussion here in advance of branches getting to discuss it first with their members.


Then we as an Association will progress the discussion as appropriate.

Could I humbly suggest , that unless you have anything new to add, that we leave opportunities for others to comment. I am not going to engage in "ding-dong' arguments with you. You many be closed to this idea, but others are willing to listen and decide. I am not aware that you represent anything other then one members view.

Dave

Dave,

Thank you for the invitation to stop contributing to this thread. How dare you? Just who do you think you are? As far as I am concerned, you are just another member of the IWAI.

I will not be bullied into submission by the likes of you.

For the record, I did not start an Anti Dunrovin campaign. I asked questions and expressed views - my own views.

I have not cajoled any other members of IWAI to take a view which is contrary to yours, or anybody elses for that matter.

I resent your suggestion that I have trivialised the achievements of the IWAI.

I have not prevented anybody from making a contribution to this discussion thread of this forum, or on any other forum.

As I am on record as saying already, even if I don't like the proposed project and the way it may be financed in the future, naturally, I would be happy to go along with the majority view of IWAI members. Which part of that do you not understand?

As for the last word - you can talk. The members will have the last word and I am very happy with that.

As for "Ding Dong", I am only exchanging views and opinions with people who want to. If you don't want to then thats your right too and I respect that too.

But I won't be coming on here slagging you or inviting you to stop contributing to this or any other thread.

Regards

Kieran

Quote:

Kieran Kearns
As for "Ding Dong", I am only exchanging views and opinions with people who want to.
Regards
Kieran

Kieran,
You made 3 posts in a row, trying to get someone to respond to you - that's not "exchanging views". Richard and Les finally did, with a very good explanation of why we should wait for the committee to finish its research. Dave has also made his case very clearly.
I know nothing about Dunrovin, so I will take their advice and wait until we receive more facts from the Committee.
Until then, I don't see the point of discussing it further.

Dermot
Cheetah 304 ( Back in the water tomorrow)

Hi Dermot,

Thanks for sharing your view on this matter.

I think that if you review the thread, you will find that it was started back in June 2011. To date there have been in excess of 140 posts from a cross section of the subscribers here one IWAI forum.

I would call that an exchange of views. You can call it what you like.

Lets be honest, everybody (including me) will benefit from the research that is currently ongoing regarding this project. We will all be in a better position and will hopefully be better informed when we are eventually in possession of all the material facts. Then we will be in a position to make an informed decision about whether we are for or against this project.

To all members of IWAI I say - GET informed, Attend/question your branch, let them have your views. but ultimately, be happy with the outcome knowing that you had your say.

My experience of attending the branch was quite the surprise. Very friendly bunch. Will I go again - Absolutely. For me I hope to make it a monthly date in my diary. (by the way, my interest in my branch is not related to Dunrovin), they are a great bunch who do good stuff. Of course I want to spend time with those people.

By the way Dermot, good look with the cruising, now that you are back on the water. Enjoy.

Regards

Kieran



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23/03/2012 22:57 by Kieran Kearns.

Attn: Peter Mulvany,

I received your personal message and read it this morning.

Thats not nice.

If you dont like this thread or my contributions to it - then just don't read them. Just be nice.

Regards

Kieran



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 25/03/2012 14:06 by Kieran Kearns.

Hi Folks,

I was in attendance at my monthly IWAI branch meeting this evening.

One of the items on the agenda was a report back from IWAI Council. The Council meeting apparently took place on Saturday last 31st March. (Mullingar, I think?). There were reportedly about 40 people in attendance at the council meeting.

Anyway, tonight during the course of the report of that council meeting, the subject of Dunrovin was mentioned and it was reported that a ballot of the IWAI membership had been ruled out. I thought that this was not a good decision and said so at my branch meeting. A long discussion took place amongst those present on this matter.

We were also informed that a presentation was done, to those present at the council meeting, on the progress to date on this project. A figure of €7,000.00 (seven thousand euro) was mentioned, as being the costs spent to date associated with this project.

We were also told that it was hoped that IWAI would hope to be in a position to make a decision some time around September about whether the project should get the green light.

Our branch decided that we will need to get fully informed of the pros & cons of the project and be ready to make an informed decision, as to whether we support the project or not. Some decisions were made at tonights meeting to start that process within our branch.

There was no clarity as to how a final decision will be arrived at, in so far as, it was a bit unclear if the decision to go ahead will be done on a one branch - one vote basis, or whether it would be by weight of numbers of the various branches.

There were financial figures mentioned there tonight at the meeting that, quite honestly, would concern me.

There were figures mentioned about the National Executive reserves, the cost of servicing a mortgage over 10 years, the projected running costs, Leader funds that "Might", yes just "Might" be available for the project. Apparently, National entities, such as our own National Executive Council who are driving this, may not themselves qualify for leader funds. So a "Local" branch might have to apply. I wonder which branch that might turn out to be? Anybody care to hazzard a quess? Actually, please don't.

Anyway, in your own interest, if you are a member of a branch of IWAI, I would encourage you to get fully informed of the latest developments, just in case your branch meets with a view to deciding one way or the other.

For the record, I want to repeat, that in a democracy - the majority rules, and that if a majority of IWAI members want this project to proceed, then naturally I would fully respect & accept that.

I am not asking any IWAI member to take a stand one way or the other in relation to this project. I would never be so arrogant as to do that.

Your view is important - share it with your branch.

Regards

Kieran

Hi Kieran,

In fairness to all concerned, I did mention that I found out after the Council meeting, that the definate no to a ballot/referendum was based on a legimate concern on the Executives part, that a YES by the members, to a NO by the branches, or vice versa, might spark something of a "constitutional" crisis within the Association.

It's undeniably true that this should have been stated during the course of the meeting, rather than by unofficial means afterwards, but we all make ommisions on occassions. As you pointed out at the branch meeting this evening, this concern could easily be circumvented by means of "Branch Postal Ballot", whereby each branch would poll its own members and bring their respective decisions to Council.

As regards the final decision, being a "newbie" at Council, I dont as yet know how the go/no go decision will be determined. I have no idea as to wheather it will be based on, one rep., one vote; one branch, one vote; a pro rata vote based on branch membership numbers; enough cash pledged to procede; or on what exact basis we can move, or not, on this.

I have to admit, that of those who spoke on the matter, (approx 1/3 of attendees) the vibe was generally very positive.

The financial details would seem to suggest that it is affordable, but I personally still have serious reservations as to the validity of locating a Corporate Head Quarters in a remote location.

I suspect we'll have to wait till Dave addresses the branch to answer some of the above, because quite frankly, I'm a bit lost.

M(W&W)F

PS...Keep asking the questions as I've not thought of some of them...!!

Hi Mick,

Thank you for you response.

As Alice would say "This is getting curiouser & curiouser".

So now there is confusion about just preciseley how the decision is to be arrived at whether IWAI will proceed with this project. If it was'nt so serious for the future of the association, it would probably be funny.

For the record - I'm not laughing.

Is there anybody out there from the executive who can outline which method will be used to make this decision. ie by way of a count of the 22 branches (one branch - one vote) or will the size of the membership per branch have any influence on the outcome?

Your reference to the location is interesting. Would "Craggy Island" be any worse?

I was hoping that there would be no mystery about this process. Now, I'm not quite so sure.

Regards

Kieran

Craggy Island.......?
Have you been to visit Dunrovin Kieran, I have.
I didn't think it so isolated either by road or by water as to earn it "Craggy Island" status. Must be my rural upbringing.....!
R

Dunrovin is not in Dublin or Belfast but is a couple of miles from Athlone on the edge of the biggest Inland waterway and in the geographical centre of Ireland. So what better place unless you put it in Carrick-on-Shannon as I understand this was once considered. If the original building is going to be demolished then its only a site so surely could be sold and the HQ located anywhere. Unless there are restrictions on the bequest. But then everybody might want it on their own doorstep.

John Geary
(Rose - E - Belle)

John,

The "Craggy Island" reference was a bit tongue in cheek. (Just jesting really).

I also happen to believe that Carrick might have been a nicer location,but where exactly in Carrick that it was being proposed to be located, I would have no clue. If the site that was on offer from Leitrim County Council was out of town, then maybe it too would also have been seen as unsuitable.

There is nothing wrong with Athlone. I quite like to visit when I cruise through and generally will stay at least one night.

If Dunrovin can be sold, then maybe a better location somewhere in Athlone town could be aquired.

Regards

Kieran

Kieran , again I will try to answer your questions, unlike some I don't haunt this forum.

At the council meeting a financial review of the project was presented . This would be funded by a combination of using somes of the associations considerable cash reserves ( which are lieing unused) and a borrowing with an annual servicing cost of around 15k which could easily be funded out of central funds.

I laid out the options with considerable clarity, I don't beleive anyone in the room was left confused.

As to the decision, this is in the hands of the branches and it was agreed on the suggestion of carrick branch, that we review and take a definitive decision at the September meeting. I would say that there was a general positive view of the project and the funding is doable within the resources of the association, and not affecting future activities. Coosan is not remote it's less then 5 minutes by road from Athlone , it is very popular spot in the summer, the brittas of Athlone actually as its the closest "beach" on the lake. It is undiniably a beautiful spot as well.

As to a ballot. The iwai for better or for worse is a branch based organisation, decisions are taken at branch level and then branches take a majority decision at council. Branches can reach an indivual decision by whatever legimate way as long as it is agreed by the members of the branch. The associations has not normally engaged in postal ballots, but I see no impediment to a branch. If a branch was a postal ballot amongst its members it can do so.

As to the location, Athlone is served by an excellent motorway unlike carrick, it is a rail hub and it's a large town. More importantly it is the birthplace of the association and in my view it's entirely appropriate to site it there. Selling the land bequeathed to us would be a travesty.


As to other issues. leader grant funding may be available , that's all that can be said. Ultimately you get grants in arrears also I beleive the grant should not make the difference. This is either a good project and affordable within the association finances ( it is I beleive) or it is not. Grant Aid would be a bit of icing and would perhaps allow us to do other things

I beleive the project has significant merit

As I said at the council , I or one of the development team is willing to attend branch meetings to discuss the project and it's financing.

As to your continued critiitism of me , I find strange, I will not engage in "ding dong" discussions with one person. you are clearly not in favour, I see no point in endlessly discussing these points with you as clearly it achieves little. Equally I personally would prefer to see the issues debated by more listees rather then one or two.

As a final comment , there are no hidden agendas , no hidden questions, no secret committees or no unanswered questions other then those where information is not available.

I fully support a debate on Dunrovin, I do not support a ceaseless repetition of one persons views ( which is why I do not consciously keep relying to your posts, the thread would just end up,with two people in it .)

Dave

Dave



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/04/2012 11:33 by Dave McCabe.

Further more on the comment about the RNLI. The RNLI would not wish to receive the building gratis. They raise funds, but they want to pay their way. They Would normally put considerable funds into such a station and hence in this case there desire is to pay their way.

I know this as I am chairman of the local Rnli lifeboat committee.

Dave

Good morning all,

Dave Thank you for your latest contribution.

I too hope this forum is not haunted.

Just a couple of things, you said

"At the council meeting a financial review of the project was presented . This would be funded by a combination of using somes of the associations considerable cash reserves ( which are lieing unused) and a borrowing with an annual servicing cost of around 15k which could easily be funded out of central funds."

But those funds were not accumulated by branches for the purpose of building a National Headquarters for IWAI. Those funds were accumulated by branches for branch activities.

I would suggest that the IWAI start a fund from scratch to finance this project.

Get grants (if they are available),
Get sponsorship (if you can)
Get donations from all those people & groups who wish to see this project through to conclusion.

I for one would not like to see any branch of IWAI forced to hand over any of their reserves for a project that they may not be in favour of or indeed get much use of.

I have no idea how many members are in each branch. But it does seem odd that a small branch with very little funds/reserves would have the same say as a branch with a larger membership and possibly also a large fund/reserve.

Dave, I am dissapointed that you feel that I am critical of you personally. I want to assure you that that is most definately not the case. We are both just members of the same organisation.

Yes, we differ on our opinon of this proposal for Dunrovin. But youknow, we may have common views on other IWAI matters. But there you go - thats life.

Dave, you went on to say

"As a final comment , there are no hidden agendas , no hidden questions, no secret committees or no unanswered questions other then those where information is not available."

Well I am delighted to read that. I accept that comment in good faith.

Then you said

"I fully support a debate on Dunrovin, I do not support a ceaseless repetition of one persons views ( which is why I do not consciously keep relying to your posts, the thread would just end up,with two people in it .)
"

As you are aware, I created this thread originally back in June 2011. Whilst there have been many views (4297 to date) and there have been 157 contributions to the thread, it is obvious that there has been a lot of readers. We can't make people contribut to this or any thread.

Finally you said

"Further more on the comment about the RNLI. The RNLI would not wish to receive the building gratis. They raise funds, but they want to pay their way. They Would normally put considerable funds into such a station and hence in this case there desire is to pay their way.

I know this as I am chairman of the local Rnli lifeboat committee."

Well, I understand their willingness to pay. I am not sure that we should see them as an income stream. They may feel a need to pay to secure a certain guarantee to be able to continue for a 5 or 10 year period. Surely, IWAI could agree that in writing for a nominal rent (say €100 per year).

When we read that you are Chairman of RNLI Athlone, Member of IWAI Athlone, Member of Dunrovin Development committee and a member of IWAI Executive, it's not hard to see why you are passionate about the project.

But please accept that not all members of IWAI are as passionate about the project.

Now on that note - It's Easter. I wish all IWAI members a very Happy & Safe weekend. I'm off to the water for a couple of days. (Coincidently, in the Athlone area) might even try to view this Dunrovin site in the flesh.

Enjoy.

Regards

Kieran

Quote:

"At the council meeting a financial review of the project was presented . This would be funded by a combination of using somes of the associations considerable cash reserves ( which are lieing unused) and a borrowing with an annual servicing cost of around 15k which could easily be funded out of central funds."

But those funds were not accumulated by branches for the purpose of building a National Headquarters for IWAI. Those funds were accumulated by branches for branch activities.

This is as valid a project as any other, it is up to branches to decide. It os a project for all branches .you could argue what the funds are for, but it's up to each branch to decide. Todaye branches have not spent such funds in years. Most branches receive enough funds from capitation to meet project requiremeents. It unfortunate that some branches, that have large memberships build up reserves when do e smaller branches struggle. But it's the system we have.. Even after Dunrovin, the branches would have more then enough reserves left over. Thankfully the decision isnt yours to make( or mine for that matter)

Quote:

I for one would not like to see any branch of IWAI forced to hand over any of their reserves for a project that they may not be in favour of or indeed get much use of.

I would take you more seriously, if you didn't use such perogeratove words like "forced" I am aware as you said recently that you know little of the workings of the iwai. But nobody can be forced to do anything. Please stop the debating tactics.

Quote:

I have no idea how many members are in each branch. But it does seem odd that a small branch with very little funds/reserves would have the same say as a branch with a larger membership and possibly also a large fund/reserve.

It's the way we are set up for better or worse.

Quote:

As you are aware, I created this thread originally back in June 2011. Whilst there have been many views (4297 to date) and there have been 157 contributions to the thread, it is obvious that there has been a lot of readers. We can't make people contribut to this or any thread.

I wouldn't get too big headed the sinking boat thread generated 6000 views. !!

Kieran you are being less the honest here, you have almost singlehandedlt kept this thread alive, you constantly post last to ensure its bumped up the list. Could I suggest you don't post for a week and let's see the other responses. I don't post here as a response to you, I post because I am trying to answers genuine questions about the project in my capacity as a member of the committee. Whereas I have a object in that , I fail to see your continuous haranguing of the debate.

Your views are clear, I can't see why you persist in simply arguing any post here.

Quote:

Finally you said

"Further more on the comment about the RNLI. The RNLI would not wish to receive the building gratis. They raise funds, but they want to pay their way. They Would normally put considerable funds into such a station and hence in this case there desire is to pay their way.

I know this as I am chairman of the local Rnli lifeboat committee."

Well, I understand their willingness to pay. I am not sure that we should see them as an income stream. They may feel a need to pay to secure a certain guarantee to be able to continue for a 5 or 10 year period. Surely, IWAI could agree that in writing for a nominal rent (say €100 per year).

The RnLI will seek to extend the development to incorporate a lifeboat station, including dedicated facilities, these will be combined into the one ultimate development. ( the planners will not support two buildings) the Rnli will cover the cost of such a construction, additionally they will reach an agreement to use the rest or some part of the rest of the building.. We will reach a mutually agreeable position for all parties. But that's in the future.

Quote:

When we read that you are Chairman of RNLI Athlone, Member of IWAI Athlone, Member of Dunrovin Development committee and a member of IWAI Executive, it's not hard to see why you are passionate about the project.

But please accept that not all members of IWAI are as passionate about the project.

yOU are not supportive, that's all that can be drawn from this debate/thread . Based on feedback at council I'd say many are supportive and even those with doubts are giving the process time to see what happens. As you noted I get around the iwai , the feedback from a lot of uses has been positive, and this excludes the overwhelming view in Athlone in favour of the project.

Where this thread a viewpoint of many members, I might coincide your point, to date it's simply not true. Are there people out there that disagree, I suspect so, it will never win over everyone. But I beleive at the end of the day it's a valuable addition to the Association, it's finanable without too much effort and it's a modest enough proposal that will benefits the iwai for decades to come.

By the way I'm on. Several more iwai committees , youre more then welcome to roll up your sleeves and help. My passion is for th iWAI, dunroving was something that I become involved in when I took over in Athlone and I resolved to deal with the questions of the land once and for all. One way or the other this will do that..

I'm commodore of the Shannon rally, we are looking for volunteers, ???

Happy boating I'm on the water for a few days next week.

Dave



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/04/2012 20:44 by Dave McCabe.

Hi Folks,

I was away on the water for a couple of days - quite the enjoyable experience.

It is dissapointing to come back to the forum to read comments from Dave McCabe where he suggests :

"I wouldn't get too big headed the sinking boat thread generated 6000 views. !!"

It's dissapointing when a member of IWAI has to suffer this type of abuse on this forum from another member of IWAI. For the record, I was not being bigheaded - I was simply stating a fact. The numbers are there for all to see.

That abusive comment was then followed by this next comment:

"Kieran you are being less the honest here, you have almost singlehandedlt kept this thread alive, you constantly post last to ensure its bumped up the list. Could I suggest you don't post for a week and let's see the other responses. I don't post here as a response to you, I post because I am trying to answers genuine questions about the project in my capacity as a member of the committee. Whereas I have a object in that , I fail to see your continuous haranguing of the debate.

Your views are clear, I can't see why you persist in simply arguing any post here."

So now I am accused of not being honest.

Then Dave McCabe issues a second invitation to me not post to this forum (suggested timeline being a week). That is a form of bullying in itself.

Dave, are you really a bully?

I did not come along to this forum to argue with anybody (yes Dave, that includes you). I asked questions about a project. I appreciate the contributions from ALL posters on this subject/thread. Dave has provided this forum with some information on the subject matter - for that I am grateful.

If there is/are any moderators out there reading this thread can you confirm if Dave McCabe has been given the additional duty of issuing gagging orders on this forum.

Dave, in your most recent contribution, you said:

"My passion is for th iWAI, dunroving was something that I become involved in when I took over in Athlone and I resolved to deal with the questions of the land once and for all. One way or the other this will do that.."

So Dave, if Plan A fails (proposed development of Dunrovin) tell us about plan B. Is there one?

Regards

Kieran