GAA/State - Incapable of facing reality

The recent GAA controversy involving Kerry captain Paul Galvin and the ongoing DCC/Fyffes scandal are both indicative of how wrongdoing is dealt with in Ireland.

I’m not a big fan of the GAA and know little of its rules and regulations but I followed the Galvin saga with great interest.

Galvin, the captain of the Kerry team, received a six month ban for a number of offences including slapping the referees black book from his hand when he, Galvin, was about to be sent off.

I’m told that such behaviour in soccer or rugby would almost certainly result in very severe punishment and possibly even a life ban. In both these sports there’s just one appeals board so if a player fails to make his case at this point the matter is over and everybody gets on with their lives.

In Ireland, things are different. Over the years the GAA has created an unwieldy monster to deal with indiscipline on the field. Players trudge their way through the Central Competition Controls Committee (CCCC), the Central Hearings Committee (CHC), the Central Appeals Committee (CAC) and the Disputes Resolution Authority (DRA).

If, after all that trudging, they are not happy, they simply make their way back down the list of committees until get what they’re looking for – a full or partial pardon.

So here’s the key question – Why is Ireland different from every other country in the world in how it deals with indiscipline/wrongdoing, why is it that we seem to be incapable of setting up clearly defined and efficient systems to deal with errant sports people and other citizens who break the rules and laws?

The answer is simple – We don’t want to deal with wrongdoing, we don’t want to face the reality of dealing with indiscipline on the sports field, corruption in politics and fraud in the business world. At the same time we want to be seen as a modern, progressive, enlightened Western democracy and not some backwater banana republic.

In an effort to overcome this dilemma we have created a myriad of complex systems that, to an outsider, give the impression that we are indeed a properly run democracy.

Tribunals, government committees, a whole raft of so called regulatory agencies – Financial Regulator, ODCE, Financial Ombudsman, Data Commissioner, National Consumer Agency – the list is endless.

None of these organisations are effective; they issue glossy annual reports, make all the right noises when corruption is uncovered (invariably by the media) but have never actually operated like similar regulatory agencies in real democracies.

Paul Galvin wasn’t interested in righting any perceived injustice; he was using the system in the way it was supposed to be used – as a mechanism to avoid accountability. GAA authorities are happy that the impression has gone out that they are serious about dealing with indiscipline.

So called State regulatory agencies are conducting a similar pretence in the DCC/Fyffes scandal. Jim Flavin of DCC was found by the Supreme Court to have engaged in insider trading involving sums of over €83 million.

Instead of being arrested and charged he is instead being brought gently through a complex but ineffective system that will almost certainly fail to make him accountable for his fraudulent activities.

In the long run both the GAA and the State will lose out heavily for their failure to properly enforce the law.