Government

You are currently browsing the archive for the Government category.

Exploiting the dark side of humanity

December 28, 2011 in Government, Regulatory Agencies, Social Welfare by Anthony | 1 comment

Anonymous tip-offs to the Department of Social Protection regarding suspected social welfare fraud increased from 600 in 2005 to over 16,000 this year (Irish Times).

Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton suggests two reasons for this sharp increase.

A cultural shift in Irish attitudes towards breaches of the law and, principally, a strong feeling in people that limited resources should be used for the benefit of those most in need.

I suspect the Minister is happy to occupy this cosy frame of mind regarding human psychology rather than facing the more sinister, and more likely reality that the increase is due to a deep resentment that a neighbour or acquaintance may be getting more than the informer.

Governments often exploit this dark side of humanity as a useful means of doing their dirty work.

The most extreme example being Nazi Germany when even parents informed on their own children and vice versa.

Share this:

Damaging conservatism in the Irish media

December 20, 2011 in Government, Local government, Media coverage by Anthony | 2 comments

Letter in today’s Irish Times.

When I read the particular Editorial referred to by the letter writer I came to the same conclusion.

The Editorial, and a number of other editorials on the same matter, reflect a deep and damaging ultra conservatism in the Irish media.

Sir,

Your Editorial on property tax is sheer nonsense. “We are living beyond our means”, it begins. Yes we are.

But the problem is not a lack of property tax: as anyone who has paid stamp duty knows,

Irish home-owners have been royally fleeced in recent years.

The reason is that as the Local Government Efficiency Review Group has identified, at a very minimum €511 million is being wasted on excessive layers of local government and hierarchy, waste which that report – commissioned by government – recommended be ended.

You could have used your Editorial to urge government to eliminate waste in local government.

And to curb eye-wateringly generous pay and pensions conditions enjoyed by the large number of the 32,000 local government employees whose role is administrative and unconnected with the provision of any real services to the public.

Instead you observe “Nobody likes to pay tax” before describing the “contempt for civic morality” of those opposed to the tax.

Can I suggest that the real “contempt for civic morality” is amongst those who expect hard- pressed homeowners to suffer more taxation to fund the egregious waste of public money.

Yours, etc,
Marc Coleman

Share this:

A nation sold into slavery

December 14, 2011 in Body Politic, Government by Anthony | No comments

One of the books I’m reading at the moment is Chronicles of the Tudor Kings.

Henry VIII died leaving England virtually bankrupt.

In 1547 Edward Seymour, Lord Protector after the death of Henry, introduced the notorious Vagrancy Act which proposed to deal with the problem of long-term unemployment by capital punishment.

I’m not sure if this measure was actually enacted but the following measures were:

Any able-bodied person who was out of work for more than three days should be branded with a V and sold into slavery for two years.

Other offences by the same individual would lead to a life of slavery.

While present day Irish rulers (lords) haven’t (yet) introduced the death penalty for being unemployed they have certainly, by their corruption, incompetence and arrogance, sold the country and its people into decades of (debt) slavery.

Share this:

Cardiff’s pack of wolves gets him the job

December 13, 2011 in Civil Service, EU, Government by Anthony | 3 comments

Depressingly, the incompetent Mr. Cardiff has been gifted his fat cat job in Europe.

Two Irish MEPs who voted against Cardiff were interviewed on Today with Pat Kenny.

Socialist MEP Paul Murphy said that Ireland needs someone on the Court of Auditors with a record of independence and with a capacity for uncovering corruption.

Somehow I don’t think Cardiff fits that particular bill.

The one good thing to come out of this disgraceful saga is the emergence of that very, very rare phenomenon – a straight talking, principled Irish politician.

Nessa Childers is under no illusions about the consequences she may face for taking a principled stand on this matter.

The Labour Party is likely to exact a heavy price on her for failing to run with the pack of wolves that supported Cardiff.

Here’s what she had to say on the matter:

This is what happens when you voice an opinion. It felt like a pack of wolves had burst out of the undergrowth on top of me.

I began to see that something was going on at the highest levels of government to do with Mr. Cardiff and what happened was an attempt to stop me and two other MEPs from voicing our opinions.

I think that has very serious consequences about the way government operates in Ireland.

Share this:

Ireland’s banana republic reputation spreads to Australia

December 9, 2011 in Banks & Finance, Financial Regulator, Government, Regulatory Agencies by Anthony | 1 comment

Ireland’s banana republic reputation, when it comes to financial regulation, has spread to Australia.

It was 2007 when The New York Times dubbed Dublin the wild west of European finance.

This was the opening line by Emma Alberici, European correspondent for the Australian current affairs programme AM (Read and listen to Alberici’s report here).

Alberici was reporting on the latest failure of Ireland’s so called Financial Regulator to enforce the law.

Jonathan Sugarman was the head of risk management at the Dublin office of Italy’s UniCredit bank which runs a $50 billion operation in Ireland.

Sugarman was forced to resign after his chief executive consistently asked him to break the law.

Clearly, Sugarman’s boss was confident that he operated in a jurisdiction where financial law enforcement does not exist.

The Central Bank told the Australian broadcaster that it was still examining the allegations first brought to it by Sugarman four years ago.

Here’s what Sugarman had to say:

I left the bank’s offices, I walked down to the regulator’s office, I wasn’t going to leave it to anyone to deliver it but myself, and nothing happens.

That is like walking in to a police station with a knife with blood on it and saying I’ve just killed someone and you expect the police to say well where’s the body? Where’s the person? What have you done? And they just say, fine, just don’t do it again.

And that left me dumbfounded.

The bottom line is that the Irish Financial Regulator does not actually regulate, it does not enforce the law.

For many years now it has, effectively, operated a policy of telling white collar criminals to pay back any money robbed and not to do it again.

This irresponsible attitude has resulted in massive hardship and loss for countless thousands of Irish citizens.

The policy has also played a major role in the loss of Ireland’s financial sovereignty and the impoverishment of generations of Irish citizens to come.

Copy to:
Financial Regulator

Share this:

Anglo: Another arrest, another couple of billion

December 9, 2011 in Banks & Finance, Government by Anthony | 3 comments

Sean Fitzpatrick has been arrested again.

Irish citizens must be due to pay another couple of billion to Anglo

Share this:

Dail question on CHC scandal

December 8, 2011 in Banks & Finance, Financial Regulator, Government, Regulatory Agencies by Anthony | No comments

My local representative, Fine Gael TD David Stanton, has replied to my request for a Dail question on the CHC scandal.

Dear Anthony,

Thank you for your email below. Just to let you know I tabled the below Dail question to the Minister for Finance today, so should have a response next Wednesday evening. I will pass it on to you as soon as I receive it.

Best regards

David Stanton TD

Written Question from David Stanton TD

To ask the Minister for Finance if he has received a report from the Financial Regulator in 2009 regarding an investigation into a company (details supplied); if it is intended to publish same and will he make a statement on the matter.

(Details: Customs House Capital)

(See below for my letter to deputy Stanton).

6th December 2011

Dear Mr. Stanton,

In early 2009, after receiving information from an unknown source, the Financial Regulator carried out an investigation into a wealth management company called Customs House Capital (CHC).

Apart from some supervisory and organisational issues the Financial Regulator found no significant problems with the company. The Financial Regulator adopted the following strategy – I quote.

Following the identification of these supervisory concerns, related to compliance and organisational issues, the strategy was to encourage CHC to identify and engage with potential buyers for the firm, which would be the best outcome to protect client investments and funds.

CHC took up this advice and sold its non-property assets to a company called Appian Asset Management.

Within a very short time Appian Asset Management discovered that CHC had been engaged in major fraud and immediately informed the Financial Regulator.

In 2010 the Financial Regulator carried out yet another investigation into CHC and found that major fraud had indeed been going on within the company.

Full details of the 2010 investigation are available to the public on the Financial Regulator’s website.

I requested details of the (alleged) 2009 investigation and was informed that this report was not available to the general public under secrecy laws. (Section 33AK of the Central Bank Act, 1942 (as amended).

The conduct and conclusions of the 2009 report are absolutely crucial in determining whether the Financial Regulator is, as claimed by this government and its predecessor, truly reformed and fit for purpose.

I request that you ask the following questions in Dail Eireann.

Why is the 2010 report legally available while the 2009 report on the same company, on the same matter, is deemed to be a state secret?

Why did the (alleged) 2009 investigation by the Financial Regulator fail to detect the major fraud that was going on right under the investigator’s noses?

Has the Financial Regulator taken any action to determine why its staff failed to detect what a company (which was not conducting an investigation) detected almost immediately on examining the books of CHC?

Why has there been no arrests arising from this matter? It is a verifiable fact that similar cases, in functional jurisdictions, quickly resulted in arrests, charges and prosecutions.

The following is a quote on the matter from High Court Judge Mr. Justice Hogan delivered on 28th October 2011.

In fact, the report describes a long litany of general misfeasance and wrong-doing, ranging from the systematic deliberate misuse of funds, gross impropriety, corporate misfeasance and false accounting to trading in a fraudulent manner.

Yours etc.

Anthony Sheridan

This request has also been forwarded to a representative of every political party.

Copy to:
Financial Regulator

Share this:

Financial Regulation: Secrecy and obfuscation still the weapons of choice

December 8, 2011 in Banks & Finance, Corporate, Financial Regulator, Government, Regulatory Agencies by Anthony | No comments

The Custom House Capital (CHC) false accounting and fraudulent trading scandal is a very serious matter but, unfortunately, not a rare event in Ireland.

What should be of much greater concern to the people of Ireland is how this scandal has exposed the lie that financial regulation has been reformed and is now fit for purpose.

Soviet style secrecy and obfuscation are still the principal weapons employed by the Financial Regulator to prevent even the most basic information concerning its activities being made public.

The Financial Regulator claims it carried out an investigation into CHC in 2009 and found nothing more than some supervisory, compliance and organisational issues.

It was only when an outside agent became involved, in this case a company that had bought a section of CHCs business, that the fraud was uncovered.

The failure of the Financial Regulator to detect major fraud within a company that it was, allegedly, investigating raises some very serious questions.

In my opinion there are four possible reasons for this failure in regulation.

1. There was no investigation in the first place and the Regulator is now lying to cover up its failure.

2. There was an old style, pre financial catastrophe investigation. This would involve much drinking of coffee, hours of friendly chat with an occasional glance at some minor aspect of the business under investigation and the compilation of a report that found everything was just hunky dory.

3. Financial Regulator staff are so incompetent that they failed to uncover what Appian Asset Management immediately uncovered on taking over CHCs books.

4. There was a serious investigation and serious fraud was discovered but a cover-up strategy was adopted by the Financial Regulator.

This last possibility is most likely to be the truth.

Irish citizens know, to their great cost, that it is quite common for so called regulators to cover up fraud and criminality within the financial sector.

The DIRT and Ansbacher frauds are just two of the more serious examples of this strategy.

The crucial point arising from this particular scandal is not just that white collar crime is still tolerated by state authorities but that the same old strategies of secrecy and obfuscation are being employed to, effectively, protect the guilty.

Copy to:
Financial Regulator

Share this:

CHC fraud: Liam O’Reilly’s evidence

December 7, 2011 in Banks & Finance, Corporate, Government, Regulatory Agencies by Anthony | No comments

Liam O’Reilly was the Property Fund Administrator with Custom House Capital when the company was engaged in false accounting and fraudulent trading.

I have been assured by the Financial Regulator that this is not the same Liam O’Reilly who once held the position of Financial Regulator.

Here’s some of Mr. O’Reilly’s evidence.

Liam O’Reilly – Property Fund Administration – 3pm on Monday 18 July.

4.2 Sworn testimony to Inspectors.

The witnesses called by the Inspectors were asked to describe the Destiny structure, comment on whether they were aware of a process whereby funds from one sub-trust may have been used to fund the expenses of another or others and asked who authorised such payments..

Further on in the evidence of Mr. Liam O’Reilly

Q. Right. Okay. The problem being some are under water.

A. Exactly. And the money isn’t there. It has been very, very difficult the last few months

Q. All right. Okay. So in the context of I suppose the clients statements in relation to — well, the areas that you’re familiar with, Liam, are — would it be true to say that some of those clients, their unit position there is not really reflecting the true position if — if the pooled accounts were pulled apart?

A. I sign off on them and I stand over it, you know. They’re 100 percent accurate. The issue is, if that client, you know, wanted to sell his property in the morning, and maybe there was a cash balance of 100,000 in one of these accounts, it may be difficult in getting that out.

4.4 Conclusions

The Inspectors are of the view that the practice of using available cash balances on the pooled cash accounts to pay invoices and other expenses of individual sub-trusts, particularly those of the larger commercial/syndicated trusts, was pervasive within CHC for a considerable time.

Unit holders in the affected sub-trusts would not be aware that this was taking place having regard to the pooled nature of the cash accounts and the fact that in any statement issued to them by CHC their holdings in the trusts would be reflected as units held.

As each trust would appear to be a separate legal entity, the problems in resolving this issue will be most acute in relation to those trusts which a) in aggregate owe money to the pooled accounts and other trusts, b) have little cash holdings in their own right and c) have poor or negative cash flows.

A thorough analysis of each trust’s transactions will be required.

Based on the testimony received and the forensic examination the practice would appear to have existed for some time within CHC.

The scale of the problem appears to have increased to some extent in 2011.

Share this:

Taoiseach’s speech: The usual waffle and denial

December 5, 2011 in Banks & Finance, Body Politic, Government, The State by Anthony | 2 comments

Because Enda Kenny’s address to the nation was little more than the usual collection of meaningless platitudes it is easy to analyse.

Point One: As a nation we are living beyond our means (Borrowed from the criminal politician Haughey).

Point Two: You, ordinary citizens, are not to blame. (But you will pay the price for the political and financial corruption that has destroyed the country).

Point Three: We must ensure this never happens again. (This is standard waffle which is usually followed up with – we must move on, the past is another country; anger is not a policy etc., etc.).

The key point in the Taoiseach’s speech was, however – who he blamed for the catastrophe?

If, as he had already stated, the Irish people weren’t to blame – then who?

Let me be clear – Ireland supports stronger economic governance throughout Europe, and particularly in the Eurozone.

In fact, the Irish people are paying the price now for the absence of such rules in the past.

So there you have it. It is now almost universally believed within Ireland that Europe is the cause of our complete failure as a state.

No mention of political corruption, no mention of financial corruption and no mention of bureaucratic corruption.

And why would there be any mention of the real causes of our failure as a state?

After all, to do so would mean having to leave the bubble of denial and enter the brutal realty of what we really are as a nation.

Share this:

« Older entries § Newer entries »