Bertie Ahern – Still a hero

The Cowen interview on the Late Late Show was further evidence that Ireland is a nation in denial.

Tubridy asked Cowen did he envy Bertie Ahern’s extraordinary foresight in resigning before the economy collapsed. The audience reacted with loud applause obviously agreeing with Tubridy that Ahern was a great leader who had done all he could for his country before deciding, without pressure, to gracefully retire.

The fact that Bertie Ahern was forced to leave office in disgrace has been completely forgotten by most Irish citizens and media.

Indeed, the very moment he announced his resignation almost the entire nation went into denial and acclaimed him as a great Irish statesman when they should have been making room for him in Mountjoy.

No more reason needed to destroy the system

Here’s why the current political system needs to be destroyed

Since the last general election in 2007, over €18m has been paid out to 166 TDs in expenses and allowances on top of their basic salaries of €106,500, the country’s 60 senators claimed a further €5.6m.

Ceann Comhairle John O’Donoghue, who chairs the body that oversees expenses, claimed almost €330,000 since his appointment as Dail chief.

(Irish Independent)

Dangerous naivety of ECB

The European Central Bank (ECB) has issued a stark warning to the Government not to pay too much for property loans bound for the National Asset Management Agency (NAMA).

The president of the ECB, Mr. Jean Claude Trichet, has also warned that it will be vital to keep tabs on the banks to ensure that they lend to business and not just use money from NAMA to rebuild their balance sheets.

Irish taxpayers have serious cause to worry at such naivety from the ECB.

It is crystal clear that this government is planning to pay well above the market value for properties in order to bail out the banks and property developers.

As for keeping tab on Irish banks? Mr. Trichet is obviously completely unaware that it is Irish banks that instruct politicians and so called regulatory agencies on policy and not the other way around.

Lee – Now part of the system

On 19th May last I wrote about the passion and honesty of Fine Gael’s new TD George Lee after he suggested Seanad Eireann should be abolished.

Keeping in mind that Fine Gael, in common with all political parties, sees the Senate as a very rich gravy train I warned that it was only a matter of time before George was taken to one side and indoctrinated into the realities of Irish political life. Here’s some of what I wrote:

It’s only a matter of time before George is hauled down into the dark, damp pit of Irish politics where all new arrivals on the political scene are strapped into a seat, have a very bright light shone in their faces and ruthlessly indoctrinated into the realities of Irish political life.

And judging from a report on Newstalk 106 it seems that George has had his first session in the pit. He has denied that he called for the Seanad to be scrapped saying he meant it needed reform.

We can see from Lee’s response to the O’Donoghue expenses scandal (Irish Independent) that he is by now almost totally integrated into the mostly corrupt Irish political system.

After first expressing the usual but meaningless outrage Lee goes on to mouth the standard waffle we have come to expect from politicians who want to give the impression that action is about to be taken on an issue.

I’m going to raise a parliamentary question about this matter, it’s unacceptable behaviour in the present climate, it’s time to tighten up on the rules and I’ll be asking if there are any reforms planned in this area. This is all pure truth avoiding, playing for time waffle – Express outrage, promise reform and hope that, in time, people will forget.

According to the report in the Irish Independent:

Mr Lee said he was more interested in finding out if there had been a culture of over-spending by ministers during the reign of former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern rather than pursuing an explanatory statement from Mr O’Donoghue.

This is the usual cynical strategy, put the focus on the past and restrict your comments to a narrow range of politicians, ministers in this case from a previous Fianna Fail administration.

This sly strategy allows politicians to avoid mentioning the elephant in the room – that practically all parties, including George Lee’s party, have been for decades, feeding out of the same expenses trough at huge cost to the taxpayer. Much of this greedy and unregulated feeding is nothing less than straightforward theft.

The choice of the common people

Former President Mary Robinson has taken a voluntary 10pc cut to her presidential pension; she will now only get €131,400 instead of €146,000 (Irish Independent).

Mrs. Robinson is following in the footsteps of President Mary McAleese who has also taken a voluntary 10pc cut to her €325,000 salary. Judges, politicians and senior civil servants were asked to take a voluntary cut but most of them refused.

The key word here is, of course, ‘voluntary’ and it is this word more than anything else that separates the ruled from the ruling elite.

All common people must accept ruthless pay cuts, must accept penal tax increases, must accept mass unemployment and must accept responsibility for the catastrophe caused by the ruling elite, they have no other choice – except rebellion.

(Marie Antoinette) O'Rourke defends her friend John O'Donoghue

The people of Ireland, as they struggle with the disastrous consequences of political incompetence and corruption, can take solace in the knowledge that Fianna Fail TD Mary O’Rourke, the Marie Antoinette of Irish politics, understands their anger.

Speaking in defence of John O’Donoghue’s extravagant expenses on Newstalk’s Lunchtime (Wed 19th), O’Rourke said she could understand people’s anger as they struggled to cope with the economic crisis but didn’t think it was her place to criticise O’Donoghue.

This is not Fianna Fail propaganda but I wouldn’t put pressure on him to explain, why should I, he’s a minister and I’m a back bencher and we each live our lives according to ourselves and I would think he would be best positioned whether he should go public or not.

Civil servants, she said, were to blame for the expensive hotels, nothing to do with politicians.

Questioned on the need for O’Donoghue to spend a full week in Cheltenham at taxpayer’s expense she replied:

Agencies like Horse Racing Ireland would always want a front of house person to add a bit of glitz and colour.

On the angry public reaction to the scandal she said:

It’s 2009 and things are extremely difficult so we’re judging what happened some years ago in a land of plenty, at a time of plenty. We’re judging them by today’s much more rigorous and much more stringent circumstances and of course that gives an added patina of dissatisfaction and envy.

She goes on:

That kind of atavistic spirit which is so evident now and I can understand it being evident because times are very tight and people are wondering how to get school books and clothes on the back of kids. At a time like that sentiments of that kind of atavistic nature can produce themselves and can lead to anger.

I checked out the definition of ‘atavistic’. Pertaining to, or characterized by atavism; reverting to or suggesting the characteristics of a remote ancestor or primitive type.

On O’Donoghue’s refusal to provide an explanation.

Maybe he sees that in his present position of Ceann Comhairle that he doesn’t want to go public explaining things of three or four years ago, I mean what does he want (need) to explain?

On the practice of taking along partners on trips:

There are men and women who feel better and can perform better if they have a partner with them I don’t see anything wrong in that.

Here’s my interpretation of O’Rourke’s mindset.

I absolutely refuse to make any criticism of my fellow party colleague. I do, however, think he’s a brilliant servant of the State and its people. Civil servants are to blame for any extravagance and my colleague has no responsibility in the matter whatsoever.

Some citizens are, of course, angry but this is because they are too stupid to see that all this happened a long time ago and we now live in different times. This has resulted in a reversion to primitive instincts among the peasant class making them resentful and envious.

My good friend John may at some point decide to briefly lower himself to peasant level to explain, in simple terms, the intricacies of wielding great power but he must take care not to become too familiar with ordinary folk as this could have a detrimental affect on the prestige and respect due to him as holder of the illustrious office of Ceann Comhairle.

NAMA letters

NAMA letters in today’s Irish Examiner and Irish Independent.

NAMA is nothing short of economic treason.

THE column by Brian O’Mahony headlined ‘NAMA delays would be bad for the country’ (August 8) was, to quote Judge Peter Kelly, “trespassing on fantasy”.

NAMA must not be rushed. Had the Government properly managed evoting, PPARS, PULSE or decentralisation, we might have got some value from the millions it wasted on these projects.

With its latest project, its not millions but billions of taxpayers’ revenues that are being wasted on overvalued rubbish. Had the financial regulator (Government watchdog?) done its job properly and not just walked, our troubles would undoubtedly not be so great.

And we are giving the same Government the same power? Again? It’s legitimate to demand an unequivocal answer as to why the state, via the actions of the Government, favours de facto private interest over the citizens?

NAMA, in its current form, is nothing short of economic treason — banking legislation written by bankers for bankers and for the good of nobody except bankers and their property development debtors.

Currently it has got all the hallmarks and financial engineering brilliance of Enron. The old Celtic Tiger could afford previous levels of Government waste and incompetence but Ireland — European Capital of Incompetence 2009 — cannot afford to get NAMA wrong.

Don’t let the Government hoodwink the nation into accepting the flawed NAMA bill in its current form and please, please, don’t allow it to be rushed.

Paul Feeney
Botanic Hall
Glasnevin
Dublin 11

NAMA ‘death warrant’ hanging over us

The voice of reason has been spoken by the Supreme Court on the Liam Carroll appeal for enough time to stick the taxpayer, through NAMA, with paying bloated values for property assets which have no basis for assessing their true worth now or any time soon.

It is incredible how, within an hour of the ruling, that the Department of Finance could issue a statement to the effect that NAMA will proceed unaffected by the judgment. Clearly the disdain shown by the State to its citizens is set to continue unabated.

Three months ago, you published a letter from me calling for a referendum on NAMA. I believe that the dangers inherent in NAMA are staggering. I have no confidence in this Government to do anything other than facilitate an enormous over-payment of our money to the banks for property assets that have no prospect of recovering to even 50pc of the value ascribed to them when the irresponsible lending took place.

This will be a disaster for Ireland.

Regrettably there is but one solution to this problem and that is to nationalise the banks. NAMA can make sense after nationalisation. It cannot be the other way round as we will see our money paid out in exchange for grossly over-valued assets and we will have no control over those who are in charge of the banks.

If we do nothing then the NAMA legislation will be passed and sent to the President for her signature by the end of September. The enormity of this brings to mind the sadly prophetic words of Michael Collins on signing the treaty as “feeling I have just signed my own death warrant”.

Patrick Byrne
Dublin 14

The Irish taxpayer will be screwed left, right and centre when NAMA is up and running.

The Government will tax us more to repay the massive debt they will accrue on our behalf and the banks will hike rates so they can make the huge profits they need to justify their existence to shareholders.

It is about time we woke up and smelt the coffee. The only people who will benefit from NAMA are the banks, the private investment funds and the shareholders. And the home buyers are being hung out to dry.

Justice in this country is the preserve of the elite.

Martin Barnes
Carrick on Shannon
Co Leitrim

What is wrong with Ireland?

This will be a long post, so stay with me if you can:

Countries are in a desperate economic situation for one simple reason—the powerful elites within them overreached in good times and took too many risks. Emerging-market governments and their private-sector allies commonly form a tight-knit—and, most of the time, genteel—oligarchy, running the country rather like a profit-seeking company in which they are the controlling shareholders. When a country like Indonesia or South Korea or Ireland grows, so do the ambitions of its captains of industry. As masters of their mini-universe, these people make some investments that clearly benefit the broader economy, but they also start making bigger and riskier bets. They reckon—correctly, in most cases—that their political connections will allow them to push onto the government any substantial problems that arise.

In Ireland, for instance, the private sector is now in serious trouble because, over the past seven years or so, it borrowed at least $130 billion from banks and investors on the assumption that the country’s property sector could support a permanent increase in consumption throughout the economy. As Ireland’s oligarchs spent this capital, acquiring other companies and embarking on ambitious investment plans that generated jobs, their importance to the political elite increased. Growing political support meant better access to lucrative contracts, tax breaks, and subsidies. And foreign investors could not have been more pleased; all other things being equal, they prefer to lend money to people who have the implicit backing of their national governments, even if that backing gives off the faint whiff of corruption.

But inevitably, oligarchs get carried away; they waste money and build massive business empires on a mountain of debt. Local banks, sometimes pressured by the government, become too willing to extend credit to the elite and to those who depend on them. Overborrowing always ends badly, whether for an individual, a company, or a country. Sooner or later, credit conditions become tighter and no one will lend you money on anything close to affordable terms.

The downward spiral that follows is remarkably steep. Enormous companies teeter on the brink of default, and the local banks that have lent to them collapse. Yesterday’s “public-private partnerships” are relabeled “crony capitalism.” With credit unavailable, economic paralysis ensues, and conditions just get worse and worse. The government is forced to draw down its foreign-currency reserves to pay for imports, service debt, and cover private losses. But these reserves will eventually run out. If the country cannot right itself before that happens, it will default on its sovereign debt and become an economic pariah. The government, in its race to stop the bleeding, will typically need to wipe out some of the national champions—now hemorrhaging cash—and usually restructure a banking system that’s gone badly out of balance. It will, in other words, need to squeeze at least some of its oligarchs.

Squeezing the oligarchs, though, is seldom the strategy of choice among governments. Quite the contrary: at the outset of the crisis, the oligarchs are usually among the first to get extra help from the government, such as preferential access to foreign currency, or maybe a nice tax break, or—here’s a classic Dublin bailout technique—the assumption of private debt obligations by the government. Under duress, generosity toward old friends takes many innovative forms. Meanwhile, needing to squeeze someone, most emerging-market governments look first to ordinary working folk—at least until the riots grow too large.

Eventually, as the oligarchs in Cowen’s Ireland now realize, some within the elite have to lose out before recovery can begin. It’s a game of musical chairs: there just isn’t enough cash to take care of everyone, and the government cannot afford to take over private-sector debt completely.

First, an admission. The above is a quote from Simon Johnson’s excellent essay in the Atlantic in May of this year, The Quiet Coup. But I have modified it ever so slightly. I simply replaced the word ‘Russia’ with ‘Ireland’, and other slight edits to take into account energy versus property. You can see the original here.

Why the modification? Well it demonstrates at exactly the level Ireland is at.

We are a two-bit emerging market economy, dominated by political and business elites. I think it’s an open and shut case. Every word Johnson intended for Russia accurately applies to Ireland. We are almost the definition of a banana republic.

The only difference is in the last paragraph. “Some within the elite have to lose out before recovery can begin.” No. In Ireland, no oligarch property developer will lose out if the government can help it – thanks to NAMA.

The only people who will end up paying are you and me, our children, and our grandchildren. If people think our political leaders are acting out of the interest of the taxpayer they are dead wrong. Our political leaders are acting only in the interests of themselves and their paymaster developers.

Let us examine some of Johnson’s indicators that we are an emerging market, dominated by oligarchs. We could make a checklist:

* “Emerging-market governments and their private-sector allies commonly form a tight-knit—and, most of the time, genteel—oligarchy, running the country rather like a profit-seeking company in which they are the controlling shareholders.”
Check.

* “As masters of their mini-universe, these people make some investments that clearly benefit the broader economy, but they also start making bigger and riskier bets. They reckon—correctly, in most cases—that their political connections will allow them to push onto the government any substantial problems that arise.”
Check.

* “As Ireland’s oligarchs spent this capital, acquiring other companies and embarking on ambitious investment plans that generated jobs, their importance to the political elite increased.”
Check.

* “Growing political support meant better access to lucrative contracts, tax breaks, and subsidies.”
Check.

* “Oligarchs get carried away; they waste money and build massive business empires on a mountain of debt.” Check.

* “Local banks, sometimes pressured by the government, become too willing to extend credit to the elite and to those who depend on them.”
Check.

* “Overborrowing always ends badly, whether for an individual, a company, or a country. Sooner or later, credit conditions become tighter and no one will lend you money on anything close to affordable terms.”
Check.

* “Enormous companies teeter on the brink of default, and the local banks that have lent to them collapse.”
Check.

* “If the country cannot right itself before that happens, it will default on its sovereign debt and become an economic pariah.”
Check.

* “The government, in its race to stop the bleeding, will typically need to wipe out some of the national champions—now hemorrhaging cash—and usually restructure a banking system that’s gone badly out of balance. It will, in other words, need to squeeze at least some of its oligarchs.”
Check.

* “Squeezing the oligarchs, though, is seldom the strategy of choice among governments.”
Check.

* “At the outset of the crisis, the oligarchs are usually among the first to get extra help from the government, such as preferential access to foreign currency, or maybe a nice tax break, or—here’s a classic Dublin bailout technique—the assumption of private debt obligations by the government“.
Check. NAMA.

* “Under duress, generosity toward old friends takes many innovative forms. Meanwhile, needing to squeeze someone, most emerging-market governments look first to ordinary working folk—at least until the riots grow too large.”
Check, minus the riots. Yet.

* “Some within the elite have to lose out before recovery can begin. It’s a game of musical chairs: there just isn’t enough cash to take care of everyone, and the government cannot afford to take over private-sector debt completely.”
Except in Ireland, where we are trying to assume €90bn in private sector debt. Liam Carroll as the elite one losing out? Check.

And so we return to the original question posed: What is wrong with Ireland? My answer is this: We believe we are something we are not.

We believe we have a more mature regulatory environment, a mature, transparent and accountable political system, we believe the media holds our government to account, and we believe that our elected leaders will act in the best interests of citizens. Even the media believes it holds the government to account.

These assumptions are all wrong.

When you examine, even to a minor degree, any aspect of Irish society, you will invariably find a distinct lack of all the above factors. For example captured regulators: The Financial Regulator, the Irish Stock Exchange, the ODCE, ComReg, the Financial Ombudsman.

Whenever and wherever corruption is discovered, nothing happens. Whenever and wherever whistles are blown, nothing happens. We live in a country where the very idea of accountability, or that our politicians are our servants, simply does not exist.

As a nation state, we are a failure. As a democracy, we have failed. As a country we are bankrupt, both morally and financially. We are the emerging market, banana republic of the European Union. Our political system is broken. It is beyond redemption.

Some will reply that I am a socialist, or other such attacks. I am actually right of centre economically, I just recognise what is standing in front of me for what it is. An almost incalculable political and financial mess – generations are being saddled with the debts of the oligarchs, and the taxpayer is being lied to by its own government.

The only hope is this: That the people, in whose hands all power rests, will realise the appalling vista of a broken Ireland – a country in need of radical political reform – and demand that it is changed.

If it is not, everything that has happened, will continue to happen, and we, the citizens, will continue to pay the price.

[Cross posted to my blog]

A law for ordinary citizens and a law for the privileged

Friday 31st July: Former Thomas Cook employees occupied the company’s premises in Dublin in an effort to get a better redundancy deal.

Saturday 1st August: A High Court judge issued a court order ordering them to leave the premises. The protesters refused to comply.

Sunday 2nd August: The High Court judge directs Gardai to have those found on the premises after 7pm on Monday arrested and brought before him to answer for their contempt.

On Tuesday 4th August (at 5am) a large force of Gardai arrested the protesters and hauled them off to court.

In just four days the legal and law enforcement arms of the State acted to bring the guilty to account.

The judge in the case said:

In a democratic society the rule of law “cannot be broken” or else there would be “anarchy”.

Nine years ago, in 2000, Jim Flavin of DCC committed the crime of insider trading on the Irish Stock Market.

Two years ago the highest court in the land confirmed that Flavin was indeed guilty of fraud on the stock market to the tune of €83 million.

Jim Flavin is still a free man, still walking around enjoying the same rights and privileges of innocent citizens.

Nine years and we’re still waiting for action against Flavin so let me rephrase the judge’s comment.

In a democratic society the rule of law cannot be broken by ordinary citizens or else there would be anarchy – privileged citizens will be treated differently.

Facing up to corruption

Letter today’s Irish Times.

Madam,

Is Elaine Byrne suggesting that it might be better if the Moriarty tribunal didn’t make any adverse findings against the State (Opinion, July 28th)? She speaks of embarrassment, and perceptions on the international stage and suggests that the final findings will be practically irrelevant anyway.

She ends by asserting:

“The challenge is to distinguish between systemic and individual corruption; petty and grand corruption; moral and legal corruption; and rumours and reality of corruption.”

I disagree. The real challenge is that, for once, we face up to reality and do what all other accountable democracies do – prosecute and mete out appropriate punishment to those found guilty of corruption. – Yours, etc.

ANTHONY SHERIDAN,