Waiting for visionary leadership

”We still call for political reform to get rid of the current political system plagued with corruption and abuse of power.”

(Irish Examiner).

No, unfortunately, it’s not a call by Irish citizens but citizens in Thailand where former Prime Minister, Thaksin Shinawatra has been sentenced to two years in jail for corruption.

The red hot anger demonstrated by the elderly over the medical card debacle is impressive but it is focused on a narrow sectional interest. Once the politicians satisfy their demands the anger will dissipate and it’s business as usual.

Real change will never happen in Ireland until the people en masse realise that the entire political and bureaucratic administration of the country is seriously dysfunctional. And that will never happen until we see the emergence of a visionary and courageous political leader.

It’s worth noting that Thailand, in common with most countries, has a raft of laws for dealing with political and business corruption. The system they use is also common in most countries – police, prosecution, courts and appropriate punishment.

No such system exists in Ireland.

An open letter to Minister for Finance

I received the following by email yesterday. I’ts an open letter to the Minister for Finance from Justine McCarthy. It’s worth reading.

Dear minister,

You told us not to be frightened. You said you would make the budget “as fair as possible”. You promised us you were going to challenge the vested interests and protect the vulnerable.

Did you mix the two of them up? Have the vested interests so roundly usurped the position of the vulnerable that you can no longer tell them apart?

If the budget is your answer to our problems, I can only say, on behalf of the old, the sick and the handicapped – to use a phrase your own party coined to maximum effect 21 years ago – thanks, but no thanks.

They say it’s an ill wind that doesn’t blow somebody some good. Tom Parlon was testament to that truism last Tuesday. After hearing you pledge eight different times in your Dáil speech that you were protecting the vulnerable, the OPW could have illuminated the Rock of Cashel with Parlon’s satisfied grin.

Now there’s a man who is delivering for his generous paymasters, having segued without statutory impedimentfrom managing the state’s property portfolio as junior finance minister to lobbying for the Construction Industry Federation. Parlon’s denies this is a blinding conflict of interest.

Minister, you gave the builders fillip upon financial fillip, using the first-time buyer as a fig-leaf. Their increased tax relief on mortgages, the lowering of stamp duty on commercial buildings, the tax reliefs for decontaminating docklands sites and the new restriction on Housing Finance Agency loans exclusively to new-builds amount to a sedative prescription for nervous property developers and speculators.

Next, you turned your attention to established homeowners and your motto was ‘if it moves, tax it’. It is no coincidence that the rich men who told you how to fashion the budget got their way while the elderly, the ill, the children and the socially marginalised got bled dry.

Seán Fitzpatrick, whose Anglo Irish Bank is a beneficiary of the citizens’ €480bn bank guarantee, said you should terminate universal state pensions. You did.

The financier Derek Quinlan, whose investment consortiums pushed development land and property prices to Monopoly levels during the boom times, said you should announce incentives to kick start the property sector. You did.

Tom Parlon told you to cut stamp duty on commercial buildings. You did.

And they are just the ones we know were bending your ear. You even indirectly acceded to the Small Firms Association’s callous demand that you cut the minimum wage by imposing the 1% levy without exception.

The demarcation between winners and losers that hallmarked the Celtic Tiger as indelibly as the gulf between rich and poor is more pronounced than ever after your budget. The ethic of the survival of the fittest continues to flourish.

It is bad enough that older people are left fearful and fretting about how they will manage to pay the doctor but worse is that ordinary decent citizens who have tried to live responsible lives have been made to feel they are a burden on their country.

An 83-year-old lady, who suffers from two chronic conditions and lives alone but whose income is a paltry sum above the eligibility threshold for the medical card, said: “I think they’re trying to kill us with the stress of it all. That way, they’ll save a few quid.”

It might sound melodramatic to you, minister, but the likelihood is that people will die avoidable deaths as a result of this budget. Not everyone will be lucky enough to live to regret it. Ireland already records a 21% surge in winter deaths; between 1,500 and 2,000 people, or virtually double the incidence they have in Finland.

Most of these deaths are caused by cardiovascular and respiratory illness. After your predecessor introduced the medical card for everyone over 70 in the 2001 budget, an academic study threw up some interesting observations.

One was that possession of a medical card prompted people who were previously reluctant to go to their GP to do so. The other was that it did not make those who had the card go to the doctor more frequently. In other words, they did not abuse the facility.

Unlike, say, members of the medical profession with whom your colleague, the minister for health, negotiated the financial terms of the scheme, conceding such lucrative terms as to make you deem it untenable. So the doctors creamed it, and the elderly got punished.

The medical card provided an entry to a comprehensive community healthcare network for older people who are often intimidated into passivity by fast-paced modernity. It was an encouragement to look after themselves; something invariably absent when someone lives alone and does not want to be a bother to anyone.

According to Age Action Ireland, the people they represent are expert at developing coping mechanisms to deal with their financial situation. They go to bed early and get up late to save money on light and heating. They eat less than they should. They wear inadequate clothing.

There are 121,000 pensioners residing on their own. The living-alone allowance was designed specifically to protect these people from dangerous isolation.

Do you know what the living alone allowance is, minister? It is €7.70 a week. It has not been increased by a minister for finance since 1996, throughout all those years of squandered slap-ourselves-on-the-back prosperity.

There are people in their 70s and their 80s and their 90s, living alone with a small independent income to supplement their state pension who will now pay the 1% emergency levy along with the increased tax on their savings and, having lost their medical card, will be subjected to the €100 A&E charge and the 20% rise in hospital bed fees.

If they have medical insurance, the cost of that will go up 6% because of the hike in hospital charges. If they are admitted to a nursing home for long-term care, the exchequer will take 15% of the price of their house and call it a “Fair Deal”. You know, sometimes it is quite a challenge to feel patriotic love for a country that would do this to its people.

Speaking of patriotism, let’s examine this cherished value. Ireland is supposed to be a republic. That means its principal ethos is equality but, in reality, we gave up pretending a long time ago.

Eight years from now, the state will celebrate the centenary of the Easter Rising when Pearse and his compatriots envisaged in the proclamation that all the children of the nation would be treated equally. I can only imagine how mortified our patriots must be in their graves.

One of the most shameful legacies of the Celtic Tiger is Ireland’s 22nd place ranking for child poverty of 26 of the world’s richest countries in an ESRI report from December 2006.

Your solution, minister, was to give no increase whatsoever in child benefit and, moreover, to abolish benefit for 18-year-olds, the age when teenagers are recognised as being most prone to poverty.

These decisions represent a fundamental and seminal shift in Ireland’s attitude to its once cherished children. People are already holding their breath for your announcement that the child benefit that remains is to be taxed.

Your budget was so packed with landmark departures from erstwhile core values that many of them have slipped through almost unheeded. Because of the collective anger over the treatment of older citizens, the total abandonment of the long-articulated commitment on maximum class sizes for primary school children has barely been mentioned. So too with the deferred implementation of the Education for Persons with Special Education Needs Act.

You might, minister, have hoped that, at this stage, nobody was going to notice the 1% cut you announced in funding for voluntary disability bodies. That, however, isn’t even the half of it.

The HSE already imposed a 1% funding cut on the same organisations this year. When the deficit naturally arising from inflation is added, the true loss to the disability sector is 4-6%.

One of the starkest consequences of your budget is that those who were already treated as voiceless in our society will now become invisible too. The erosion of the Equality Authority and the Combat Poverty Agency, among others, will exacerbate inequality in our already unconscionably unequal society.

Yet, while the establishment is content to dispense with egalitarianism, it cynically uses another pillar of republican ideology – namely, fraternity – as a rallying call.

If you thought the cabinet’s 10% pay cut would shame everyone into following suit, it’s not going to work. Hard lessons have been learned about political cynicism since last we were in this economic hole.

The last time a politician went on television and told us to tighten our belts his name was Charlie Haughey and, unknown to us then, he was living off the beneficence of rich and powerful men.

While he was shopping for monogrammed silk shirts in Paris, we were donning our hairshirts. The last leader of Fianna Fáil, Bertie Ahern, eulogised Haughey’s patriotism at his graveside. Since then, Ahern’s own relationship with his country has come under the microscope in Dublin Castle. So don’t blame the citizens, minister, if you find your call to patriotic duty goes unanswered.

The trust that made us so acquiescent in the 1980s no longer exists. Nor is it about to come rushing back in light of your disingenuous announcement that you and your cabinet colleagues are taking a 10% pay cut.

What you failed to mention was that your €12,000 unvouched expenses – your ‘walking around money’ is not included in that or that your fabulous pension entitlements will continue to be calculated on the basis of the salary you were being paid before the budget.

Perhaps if politicians had vowed to work harder (I mean more than the 90-odd days you turn up in the Dáil in a year), if Enda Kenny had promised to provide an effective opposition and if you had sought ways to make real, lasting economies in the Oireachtas, you might have got a more enthusiastic response to your green-flag clarion call.

Instead of TDs claiming expensive accommodation expenses for attending the Dáil, why not adopt the Swedish model by accommodating deputies and senators in a dedicated Oireachtas hostel. I’m sure one of your builder pals would have a convenient place to sell you at a reasonable price.

One other thing, minister: could you not think of any ways to make the very rich contribute their fair share, having benefited so handsomely from the good times? Why did you not, for instance, impose a 3% levy on people with income exceeding €300,000, 4% for income exceeding €400,000, and so on?

Did you consider reintroducing probate tax on wills worth over a specific value, something on a sliding scale that would reflect the emergence from the Celtic Tiger of an inheritance class? Did any of your advisers recommend closing the ‘Cinderella’ loophole in the tax residency law that deprives the exchequer of millions upon millions of euro?

It would appear not. The solution you came up with was a €10 airport departure tax for Joe Citizen while Mr Moneybags flies out free gratis in his private jet.

You will be relieved to know, minister, that the single most unedifying spectacle of the entire budget was the sight of your backbenchers leaping to their feet at the end of your budget speech to raucously cheer you to the rafters.

Unless they do not read newspapers and listen to radio and television, Fianna Fáil backbenchers will have known as well asthe rest of us that the abolition of the medical card for people over 70 was being floated well in advance of the budget. Not one of them said boo.

It was only when they realised their constituents’ anger might jeopardise the security of their Dáil seats that they manfully revolted. These were the same backbenchers who drooled over the show of macho defiance by your predecessor, Charlie McCreevy, when the ESRI tried to warn him in 2002 that fiscal caution was required. His way of thanking them was to ridicule them as “pinko-liberals”.

You know, minister, if we had seen true patriotism being respected in recent years, we might be better disposed to donning the green jersey. But what we saw was naked cynicism bolstering naked greed.

Last year when, again, the ESRI raised concerns about the direction of the economy, Bertie Ahern, as Taoiseach, made a novel suggestion of his own. He told the economists to go off and kill themselves.

Forgive me if I sound dispirited. I am.

Justine McCarthy

Doctor's greed defended by Fine Gael

Fine Gael health spokesman Dr. James Reilly just couldn’t bring himself to admit the reality of his situation on the Marian Finucane Show on Sunday.

It was Dr. Reilly who negotiated the grotesquely greedy deal that saw doctors receive €640 for every patient over the age of 70. Now he’s trying to condemn the Government for attacking the elderly while at the same time defending his part in the deal.

When asked did he think the fee was a valid one he replied:

“I do because it works out at €55 per patient per visit and that is not excessive in my view.”

This was a cynical attempt to suggest that the fee is dependant on patient visits. In fact the €640 is paid whether or not a patient visits. I assume the €55 fee Reilly mentions is an additional fee for every visit making the deal even more objectionable.

On Liveline during the week another doctor moaned about overheads in an attempt to justify the greed. A doctor’s receptionist told me recently that her pay is so low she qualifies for a doctor only card.

Reilly would be better advised to come out straight and admit that doctors, like most other professions in Ireland, have lowered their moral standards in exchange money.

Copy to:
Dr. Reilly

AIB: Gut instinct

There’s been a lot of speculation on which Irish bank is most vulnerable to collapse in the present crisis. Most commentators seem to think that Anglo Irish will be the first to go but I think AIB is most at risk.

After all, AIB is the most powerful and most ruthless of all the banks. It has always been allowed to operate pretty much as it likes, has never been properly investigated despite robbing millions from its own customers and the State.

It seems obvious that such a powerful and untouchable entity would be much more likely to take huge risks in property speculation and development confident that a facilitatory regulatory regime was always close to hand should things go wrong.

Of course, this is just gut instinct on my part.

Special arrangements for special people

The fraudster Jim Flavin of DCC is walking around a free man because Fyffes, in their own interests, decided to take a civil rather than a criminal case against him. Despite the Supreme Court’s conclusion that Flavin was guilty of insider trading to the tune of €83 million the Irish State has made no move to press criminal charges.

The rogue solicitor Michael Lynn is also enjoying the benefits of being dealt with under civil rather than criminal law. Lynn, whose alleged fraud also involves a figure of around €80 million, is due to give evidence from London via video link next month in a case unrelated to his own dodgy activities.

For reasons best known to himself the DPP has decided not to initiate criminal charges against Lynn. This situation makes life very easy for the rogue solicitor; he can come and go as he please so long as he doesn’t return to Ireland.

The Garda Fraud Bureau investigation into Lynn is slow and cumbersome and according to Garda sources will not be completed for a number of months.

When the investigation is complete the DPP must then make a decision on whether criminal charges should be brought. According to a report in today’s Irish Independent this will also take several months. We are not told why a decision like this should take so long.

Here’s what I think.

Civil rather than criminal proceedings allow Lynn the freedom to continue operating his businesses. This means he can work away at trying to resolve his ‘difficulties’.

Meanwhile, the low key and long drawn out process here in Ireland, whether intentional or co-incidental, leaves the way open for a deal to be eventually worked out to the satisfaction of all parties.

We shouldn’t therefore be surprised if at some point there’s an announcement that ‘arrangements’ have been made between the interested parties and the DPP doesn’t have to resort to all that embarrassing and nasty criminal proceedings stuff after all.

The powers that be can then continue to operate under the illusion that Ireland is on a par with other Western jurisdictions where the rule of law is seen as vital to a healthy democracy.

Ahern has nothing to worry about

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has submitted his resignation letter to the country’s President, Shimon Peres. Olmert is under investigation by police on corruption charges.

Bertie Ahern, who is suspected of far more serious crimes, is not being investigated by the police and nobody would even think of using the word ‘corruption’ when reporting on the allegations against him.

Immediately after resigning Ahern was hailed as a great statesman and all thoughts of making him accountable in Dail Eireann were forgotten.

Enda Kenny called for a general election and was roundly condemned by all and sundry. The general consensus, even among the media, was that this was Bertie’s day and any criticism was crass and unwarranted. Even Kenny’s party colleagues maintained an embarrassed silence.

By resigning Ahern became untouchable because there’s no State authority capable or willing to make him accountable. The tribunal farce will run its course but no matter what conclusions it reaches Ahern’s status as a hero will not be affected.

During a media interview after his last appearance at the tribunal Ahern said he had nothing to worry about – He’s absolutely right, he hasn’t.

Manipulated and discredited law

My posting ‘Two Views’ was a comment on the ridiculous practice of prosecuting people because they had broken what is effectively a religious law. Michael Kelly makes an equally valid point, strongly supported by comments, that judges should not be allowed to pick and choose which laws are to be applied.

The existence of medieval like religious laws and the casual attitude to law in general are simply reflections of the kind of country we live in.

Here are just a few examples.

The Beef Tribunal uncovered massive fraud and corruption within the Irish meat industry. Apart from a few minor officials who received a slap on the wrist nobody was made accountable. The only person to be charged, for refusing to reveal her sources, was Susan O’Keeffe the Granada Television reporter who broke the story.

It would have been extremely embarrassing for Ireland if O’Keeffe was found guilty after the tribunal whitewash had exonerated all those who were actually guilty. A legal technicality was conveniently discovered and O’Keeffe was acquitted.

It is almost certain that Bertie Ahern committed perjury at the Mahon Tribunal. The facts are simple. He stated under oath that he never dealt in significant amounts of sterling. The tribunal produced irrefutable evidence that Ahern’s statement was untrue.

In a functional democracy it wouldn’t matter that the tribunal was ongoing, it wouldn’t matter that the alleged perjurer was Prime Minister, immediate police and legal action would have been taken.

The conflict between Irish Times journalists Geraldine Kennedy and Colm Keena and the Mahon Tribunal over the disclosure of sources is still unresolved nearly a year after the event.

It is a very serious case where the journalists openly admit that they destroyed evidence despite being ordered not to do so by the Tribunal. It doesn’t matter that the journalists are, at least, morally right, it doesn’t matter that the tribunal is ongoing.

If Ireland was a country where the law enjoyed the same respect as it does in functional democracies both these journalists would long ago have been made accountable for their actions.

These cases and countless other examples ranging across every level of society demonstrate that Ireland is not like any other Western democracy, that Ireland is a country where the law is manipulated to suit events and circumstances rather than acting as a protector of society in general.

The horrors are still happening

Anyone unfamiliar with the horrors done to women by Michael Neary at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda should read this article by Marie O’Connor in yesterday’s Sunday Independent.

The article exposes the rotten underbelly of how this country is ‘managed’. And don’t for a moment think that things are any different today, they’re not – Nothing has changed.

Slightly schizophrenic No voters

Michael O’Regan, parliamentary correspondent with the Irish Times, had some very odd things to say about the result of the (First) Lisbon Treaty Referendum (Today with Pat Kenny, Friday).

“The No vote was a rather peculiar vote…essentially, it wasn’t a vote against the detail of the Lisbon Treaty, it was a No vote of a slightly schizophrenic nature and it was also very marginal, a very, very narrow victory.”

A 53 to 47 per cent No vote is a ‘very, very narrow victory’?

Anyway, being described as ‘slightly schizophrenic’ prompted me to look up the medical meaning of the condition.

“A psychiatric diagnosis that describes a mental disorder characterized by abnormalities in the perception or expression of reality. It most commonly manifests as auditory hallucinations, paranoid or bizarre delusions or disorganized speech and thinking in the context of significant social or occupational dysfunction.”

Seems to me like a very accurate description of your typical Irish politician and judging from his remarks it looks like O’Regan has been infected.

Scourges, crucifixions and hypocrisy: Second Lisbon Treaty debate begins

The second Lisbon Treaty debate is on and it’s obvious that the pro treaty crowd have learned nothing. In fact, it seems that their arrogance and undemocratic attitudes have become even more extreme.

Dick Roche is still calling the anti treaty side a bunch of liars and Fine Gael MEP Gay Mitchell obviously doesn’t like the idea of democracy when it comes to ratification of the treaty.

Anti treaty campaigner, Ulick McEvaddy, in a debate (Tuesday) with Mitchell, expressed a very reasonable point of view:

“They’ve been misleading us or they have not got their act together. If it takes us another ten years to get a proper treaty in place that people can understand, let us wait that ten years and spend that ten years doing something that’s right instead of putting this treaty back to the people.”

When RTE presenter, Myles Dungan, put it to Mitchell that he was ‘scaremongering’ the Fine Gael MEP began to lose the run of himself.

“I resent that comment and you shouldn’t have used that comment Ulick (He didn’t make the comment, Myles Dungan did) and everything I’ve said has been very measured on this both this morning and at other times and we’ve let this go… (Interrupted by McEvaddy) there you are interrupting me now, you said you didn’t interrupt (He didn’t say that). You should not be using those terms (He didn’t) if we’re to have some reasonable discussion and debate on this.

I’ll tell you what has to happen Ulick; we have to put people like you in your place. You’re a good businessman but you know sweet damn all about politics and what we’ve really got to do and this is the real problem here… We’ve got to restore to Dial Eireann the democratic deficit between the Dail and the people.

All the TDs have left themselves with is responsibility and they’ve given away authority…It’s time for the Dail to take back authority and to say to people like Ulick…the business of politics requires people to be able to find real solutions to problems.”

Phew, what a roasting for poor Ulick. Let’s do a small analysis on Mitchell’s outburst.

He wants people like McEvaddy taken out of the democratic process, banned from participating in political campaigns. Mitchell would probably allow Ulick to express a personal view and maybe even vote but any kind of campaign that challenges the body politic would be forbidden.

Mitchell admits that Dail Eireann has lost its authority but fails to acknowledge that this situation was brought about by the corruption and cowardice of politicians themselves. Fine Gael, in common with all the major parties, constantly waffle on about Dail reform but do not posses the courage or vision to actually implement change.

Later, Mitchell brings up the question of funding political campaigns:

“Ulick, I don’t know anything about running your business…my business is politics…and it’s people like you and your other wealthy pal down in Galway, Ganley, walking on to the pitch with your millions of pounds (sic) and being able to tell us our business…this is a little game for people like yourself and others.”

It takes a special kind of hypocrisy to attack non politicians for operating under a system carefully set up by politicians to make sure that the millions they get from big business remains hidden from public scrutiny.

In addition to attacking those from outside the body politic for having the neck to mount a political campaign Mitchell is obviously not happy that the people themselves should be trusted to have a direct say in such important matters.

“Do you know that the people in Germany voted for the Third Reich, the people outside Caesar’s palace (sic) voted for the crucifixion of Christ, what has a referendum got to do with…if you ask the people tomorrow to vote for the Government…”

Unfortunately, he was cut off at this point before he made a complete eejit of himself.

Ah yes, there’ll be many a scourging and crucifixion before this campaign is done.

Copy to;
Gay Mitchell