50 thoughts on “Beal na mBlath Speech”

  1. The minister says, “Fury is a quite reasonable response to the incredible recklessness and incompetence which fuelled the banking mania of the last Celtic Tiger years.”

    That would be the incompetence of FF ministers Ahern, McCreevy and Cowen. I presume the reference to “the last Celtic Tiger years”, alludes to the fact that it was Cowen and not him that was in charge. No such thing then as joint government responsibility or collective cabinet responsibility?

    Any chance that he would call for these incompetent people to resign forthwith?

    Then he gets to the part of the speech where he says, “I will try to ensure that the burden is borne by those who can best afford it.” He will try but Is he serious and do the facts support him having tried?

    Is it not apparent that he has already resiled himself from this position? Lenihan is a barrister and choose his words carefully. Note the three little words … “I will try”. This translates easily, into… I tried, what more could I have done.

    He could have said, ” I will make sure that those that can afford to pay most will pay most” or “I promise the Irish people that …”

    Well, it transpired he did not “try” very hard, “to make sure that the burden would be borne by those that could best afford it” NAMA is a gravy train that will earn the wealthiest in our society even more dosh 2.3bn in fees minimum, over the next ten years. It’s projected losses of 12bn will be borne by everyone including those that are least able to afford it with services and jobs being lost by the poorest sections of society. It was always the plan to socialise the losses of the banks. In January he exempted “642 special ones”, including senior officials from the DoF who were not prepared to submit to the budget they had drafted in Dec 08 for everybody else.

    It is easy to say one thing while doing the opposite. I don’t believe a word this minister says and I don’t believe his figures either which have been wrong numerous times.

  2. I would be willing to agree with the Minister on Anglo if he can clearly explain how keeping a “new bank” open with just €10bn in assets can significantly reduce the cost of Anglo.

  3. Not at all sure what the point is of the post. Lenihans speech is of zero significance, its just more of the same oul shite from the same oul shysters.

  4. Naturally the Minister was sensitive to his immediate audience for this speech, and for its potential to ignite silly (and politically self-serving) controversy if he said the ‘wrong’ thing or anything that might be interpreted as the ‘wrong’ thing. So he pulled his punches perhaps a little more than he might have done in different circumstances. Most of what he said, whether about our history as a nation state or our management of our own affairs, we already know or should know. Namely, that the founders of our state were all drawn from the same Sinn Fein pool. That they had serious personality flaws – although in Collins’ case he died before these could be made apparent in a subsequent political career – as well as many attributes of leadership. That they had more in common with one another, politically, culturally and socially, than a factionalised version of history later allowed. Lenihan subtly makes the argument that events and leaders must be judged in the context of their own time. He’s right and I agree with him, but I wish him luck if he thinks the 2016 commemorations won’t be riddled with factionalism and emotive claptrap of various political hues. Am I alone in dreading 2016?

    On the economy, he didn’t say anything new – the ‘stick to the present course’ message is reiterated for the umpteenth time. Calling on his fellow politicians to be ‘straight with the people’ about the difficulties we’re in and the limited options available to get us out of them is admirable, but I don’t expect I could ever live long enough to experience politicians being straight with themselves, never mind the people. He might make a start himself by dispensing with that line so beloved of politicians everywhere, that the burden of adjustment will not fall on those least able to pay for it. Historically that’s never been true and it’s not the case now either. I don’t question his integrity or his desire to protect the most vulnerable cohorts in our society from the worst of the recessionary impacts, but unfortunately, a whole new cohort of vulnerables has been created by this crisis, especially among self-employed, small business owners, previously self-sufficient middle class, young people coming on to the labour market etc., that the current social welfare apparatus is not designed to cater for.

  5. “That advice has strongly been that we must stand behind our banks in order to ensure that a sustainable financial system is established and, in the case of Anglo, to ensure that the resolution of its debts does not damage Ireland’s international credit-worthiness and end up costing us even more than we must now pay.”

    It is obvious from the bond rates that our credit worthiness is already wrecked – by the very support of the banking system which he claims the experts have advised, i.e the unaffordable blanket guarantees, combined with the apparently bottomless pits of Anglo et al, down which we are blindly pouring capital.
    If our credit worthiness would be damaged at little immediate cost by not supporting the banks, or at enormous cost by supporting them – the obvious thing would be to have initially chosen the cheapest option.

  6. Is it the correct allocation of burden – to those that can “best afford it”? How about allocating the burden firstly to those that are most responsible for it and only then allocating any remainder on the basis of affordability?

    The criteria of who can “best afford it” is simply a weasel way of saying “whoever we can tax without too much difficulty”.

    It’s perfectly possible that many people who should bear the burden couldn’t afford to bear it and would be wiped out by their share of the burden – but that would still be the “right” thing to do before allocating any of the burden to anyone else.

  7. @all

    FF & FG – time to form FFG. New century and all that ………….. only difference is that the former has had more opportunity …….

  8. From today’s indo re latest tranche bound for Nama:

    “Non-recourse loans and loans backed up by multiple securities have been the chief problems pushing up the Anglo discount.”

    Follow the money. People who can bear it and people who get a walk from it. The phrase non recourse is a beauty! Wish someone on here or elsewhere with a bit of clout would follow it up the food chain. May bring us somewhere closer to the truth of our current predicament. May also lead to the end quicker.

    If we are now at 61% write off what’s the estimate of when we get to 100% or even, the mind boggles, exceed it. Tick tock, the clock keeps ticking.

    Who is benefitting from non-recourse loans people?

  9. “Job creation….”

    Will the governing class – of all political complexions, elected and appointed – ever learn that jobs (steady work at decent wages) are “earned” as a by-product of selling of goods and services, internationally from a base that consistently promotes competition? Jobs are not “created” by whimsical and arbitrary governments which act on the assumption that we, 4m+ people on this island, can prosper by selling property to one another.

    Many jobs were “created” during the property bubble – in construction and “development” along with the associated dependent services eg. legal, advertising, construction dependent services, public service etc.

    We will live the effects of such “job creation” for years.

  10. BTW – although it’s perhaps not best placed in this thread.

    Article 15.5.1 prohibits the government from bringing in retroactive declaration of illegality, so it may be the case that many of the creative activities during the Celtic Tiger years never become eligible for criminal prosecution….potentially preventing any criminal burden being borne by those responsible.

    However, it doesn’t seem to imply any prohibition of taxation today of things that happened in the past. After all, if I have savings and you increase taxes on savings today, then you’re essentially taxing activity in the past. Does any other article – or some EU law – prohibit such “retroactive taxation” of certain types of economic activity or outcome?

    Might it be constitutionally possible – albeit politically toxic – to impose a tax today on certain types of economic outcome from the past? This would not imply that the activity was illegal in any way, but would potentially allow the burden of the banking meltdown to be borne by deserving people (even if only partially) rather than by convenient people.

  11. @ Hugh

    re savings being an act of the past – its not the savings being taxed, but the interest earned on them, hence it being a ‘current’ activity.

    I have to imagine it’d be legally difficult to tax prior activities anyhow (hence why i’ve never heard of it occurring), all you can really do is try and tax whatever the proceeds are now doing. ie raise DIRT to an even higher rate once the interest earned goes above say 1mio, maybe do similar with CGT once it goes above 10mio. But the danger is of course that people who were not involved with dodgy shenanigans will of course still get caught in this web unfairly.

  12. @Eoin.
    Retroactive taxes, or changes in taxation that apply retroactively, or changes in law that impose financial costs on people for things that already happened aren’t that rare, as far as I know. I’ve read that it happens in the US all the time and has been to the Supreme Court. The question is whether it’s legal in Ireland.

    In any case, on your point re savings, the procedure where taxation is on the income from current interest from the savings and not on the fact of having saved in the past is exactly the kind of sophistication (in the sense of sophistry) that could allow a creative government to come up with something which could be applied to the Celtic Tiger. Besides, as it stands right now, everyone who was not involved with dodgy shenanigans is currently caught up in the web unfairly.

  13. @ Hugh

    The bigger problem with your proposal is that many of the those who fuelled the bubble by borrowing heavily to push asset prices skywards have been left with negative net worth.

    Maybe you are proposing a retrospective tax on those lucky or good enough to have sold property and banked the proceeds. However, I assume these lucky few are fully tax compliant. If I was in that lucky situation and saw this proposal coming, I would be out of Dodge quick smart.

  14. @tull
    I wouldn’t yet grace anything I’m saying with the title of a “proposal”. It was more a thought in response to the repeated platitudes about how the solution will have to be to screw many “innocent” people based on their supposed ability to pay rather than on any factor related to actual responsibility for the messed up state we’re in.

    On your other points, I realise that many have negative net worth and that much of the money went to people in Bulgaria selling land there or to car factories in Germany, but many people don’t have negative net worth and are still holding “ill gotten gains”.

    Again, there are lots of people and lots of assets that are not going to move and could be taxed. In any case, even if one were to leave the country the tax liability may well be able to follow – since it’d be related to a period when you were resident in the country.

    Is a retroactive taxation of some sort – based on an assessment of “excess profits” that were not adequately taxed at the time – not a better approach than unjustly taxing people many of whom (as Eoin nicely put it) were not involved in dodgy shenanigans?

    There probably isn’t enough money available to completely or even largely avoid unjustly taxing many non-shenanigan people, but it’d be a start.

  15. @ hugh

    We agree to differ. Anyone who went agains the mania and sold property at the peak of the bubble, refused to go back in again, paid their CGT and left their money in the bank or indeed bought a new BMW deserves to keep it. What was ill gotten about their gains? By all means increase DIRT and CGT on future returns and see what happens to the money then.

  16. @ tull

    you would even let the people keep the millions they got for the glass bottle site, when this was taking advantage of mentally-deficient “management” who had no idea what they were doing, and is having such catastophic consequences for the people of Ireland who never gave this mandate (indeed, the majority sufferred during the “boom” because of property nonsense). Surely it is morally correct to set this deal aside? Why should these people benefit at our expense?

  17. @tull
    There could be much discussion of what qualified as “ill gotten”.

    Your suggestion of what shouldn’t qualify for retroactive taxation might be right. It sounds sensible, although I might argue that we should look at income from sales of recently re-zoned development land in the applicable period. I hadn’t offered any definition.

    I will offer one, in principle at least. There could be a tax applicable to any director of any institution in receipt NAMA-esque bailouts, with this tax to be 95% of any salary above €150k per year and pension funds accrued beyond that gained in the average private pension for all periods after – say – 2002 up to some other date. There’d obviously be lots of detail required.

    Actually, here’s another. All salaries and pensions in the Financial Regulator, the Department of Finance and of the Minister of Finance above €x (tbd, but akin to the above) between – say – 2002 and the installation of the new Financial Regulator and Central Bank Director.

    It’ll never happen, but the fact that it’ll never happen illustrates that Lenihan’s claims that he’s all for just and equitable placement of the “burden” is simply BS.

  18. @ Hugh,
    there is another method of taxing said bureaucrats, pols, managers, directors etc. -the P 45. Never happen though!!

    Peadar,
    If i was lucky enough to have sold the IGB site and read your post, I would have my mone tucked away in Zurich. when you figure how to “set this deal aside or any other deal aside ring 1850 715 815 or email Joe@RTE.ie

  19. @tull
    Many have already left the positions from which they did such damage. They’re still sitting pretty. A certain character has even promised to return money but does not (visibly) seem to be doing it – last I looked.

    On the IGB site discussion, putting the money in Zurich might be a practical impediment to collection, but not necessarily a permanent way of avoiding the liability unless you also left the jurisdiction with all your other assets too, and maybe not even then. It’d depend on details, as usual.

    In any case, a retroactive surcharge tax on property sales from a certain period would not be a terribly unjust tax – certainly not in comparison to taxing working people more tomorrow to pay for the lunacy from which the seller profited.

    All moot most likely in any case, but a nice thought experiment.

  20. I think it quite inappropriate that a Fianna Fail member be allowed attend never mind speak at the Beal na Blath gethering. My Grandfather was a Collinsmans, who fought in 1916, was imprisioned in Kilmainham and served a 40 day hinger strike for POW status thus I find it insulting that a FF TD got to speak at this gathering.

    Lest it be forgotten Micheal Collins was a native born Irishman, De Valera was not. De Valera also connived to place Collins in the position he found himself after the creation of theIrish Free State and then that illigitimate half cast junk bond salesman De Valera had our own man killed.

    Is Fianna Fail actually GOOD for anything.

  21. @ Donal O’Brolchain

    Quite right, there seems to be a fundamental inferiority complex amongst the permanent government in this country that resists any attempts to set up a manufacturing base here, or wean the country off FDI. Don’t get me wrong, its been good for the country, but lets not fool ourselves, the Republic needs to wake up and build something other than houses in order to lay a clear path for the future.

  22. @Adrian

    Not all civil war wounds are healed obviously. Your comments about Dev are inaccurate. Whle he was born in NY, he probably was had 100% irish blood in his veins and not 50% Cuban. Moreover, one suspects he knew this. I presume your reference to the junk bond salesman is to the means by which he raised finance to buy the Irish Press. Nothing untoward or criminal was ever proved.

    Having Brian Lenihan at Beal na mBlath is a step forward in the healing process. Hopefully next year the Commitee will see fit to invite a member of Welsh-Norman, a Cromwell & a Black and Tan. Each in his own way has contributed to what we are as a nation.

  23. Wonder what Collins would have done with Fitzpatrick and Fingleton not to mention others. To be fair to lenihan, I think he would personally like to do the same. Anyway, looking at today’s equity markets, anyone else getting really worried as we head into September?

  24. @Gavin s
    “Anyway, looking at today’s equity markets, anyone else getting really worried as we head into September?”
    I’m confused. There have been many posts on here that suggest we might be in trouble, that the government’s ‘plan’ is not working and that we might want to be a little harder on the banks and scrap NAMA and only now you’re worried? When CRH gets cut back to a still pretty rich price for a concrete seller in a building recession?

  25. @Hogan

    No US recovery, no export led recovery for Europe not to mind Europe’s most open economy. Moreover, we have an ECB oblivious to the risks of debt deflation, running an excessively tight monetary policy.

    In that context, obsessing about NAMA discounts, retrospective wealth taxes, diluting bank shareholders matters not a whit.

  26. Pah, you two have spent too long Lucey bashing and lost sight of the reasons he is saying what he is saying. You are counting trees in a burning forest.

    If you think weeing the guts of 50 bn (as it will be) down the drain doesn’t matter given what is to come with the world economy, you are delusional. Half the money is already spent and gone. It is suicidal to spend the other half. It is all debt and debt matters.

    Oh and there’s this to think of too:
    http://www.cnbc.com/id/38838316
    Unfortunately Mr. Honohan’s attempts at jawboning have failed.

    @Gavin s
    What am I supposed to think you meant? “looking at today’s equity markets” – only the ISEQ performed out of line, solely due to CRH. For the rest, we’re still in “sell in May…”. September, as you say, will be the kicker.

    @Tull
    That’s right, we’ll all have export surpluses with each other. Bound to work, isn’t it. The Germans will do fine. They’ve moved their focus. The French have too. So tell me why the ECB would loosen policy to bail out the periphery and risk blowing bubbles in the centre, where they will be much tougher to pop?

    Debt deflation has an alarming inevitability about it. Once you reach the point of too much debt, you have to pay it back or default on it. The US recovery, like the japanese attempts before it, was so many bridges to nowhere. Except they didn’t even build any bridges – they bought imported bling and tat instead. Tax rebates? Home buyer’s credits? Free money for Wall St.? HAMP? Turns out its purpose is to slow foreclosure rates and nothing more. It is the obverse of NAMA.

    Everyone with an ounce of sense is girding their loins what is to come. Why do you think Mr. Honohan was in the far east? Because that’s where the money is.

    Bah humbug.

  27. Hogan

    Essentially you are correct. Once you reach the limits of debt you either pay it down, inflate, grow or default. Post the blanket guarantee, we we committed to pay down and praying for inflation and growth.

    Absent our prayers being answered, default then looms. That has always been a distinct possibility. We had no option but to set off on the road we set off on two years ago. I doubt very much if we would have been allowed default/restructure bank liabilities given the EU’s “no creditor left behind policy”. Even if we had defaulted on bank debt, that would have resulted in a massive uncontrolled deleveraging of the banking sector given that we were and still are chronically dependent on wholesale funding.

    Stopping NAMA at this stage will achieve nothing. It just leaves half the toxic waste on bank balance sheets. Not guaranteed to attract funding.

    An T is right on one issue “We are where we are”. The IMF approaches.

    It is not bashing anyone to point out that his proposal is flawed. I call that robust debate.

  28. @tull
    What I object to is the idea that we could have done nothing differently. We could and should have. Even now the sunk cost can be abandoned and default can be avoided. It is a matter of spine. I for one would rather not see the IMF involved. Usually it means they present a target and leave it up to the gubbernment to decide what gets cut. The gubbernment plays to its audience with the resultant bad outcomes.

    Can anyone else smell an emergency budget, wrapped in a “we were going to do the social insurance changes at this time all along”?

  29. @Hogan

    when you are a member of a club (EU), possibly two clubs (BIS), which appear unwilling to countenance write downs to anything other than a capital instrument then you have limited options.

    We may have reached the tipping point. +1 202 623 7000.

  30. @hogan

    I assume you either jest or propose leaving the company of developed nations and seek solace with the like of North Korea. Perhaps, this would be appropriate given the past allegiances of the most popular pol in the country.

  31. I jest… maybe 😕

    I was more thinking of the baton effect of one crook passing the party on to another and finally an idiot son. No enterprise lasts three generations, don’t you know…

  32. I think many of you are missing the point. What Lenihan said about economic policy at Beal na mBlath is less important than his speaking there at all and his choosing to justify his economic policies in such a setting. It is the last place one would normally expect anyone to discuss the minutiae of economic policy.

    This was a carefully choregraphed ‘happening’, and is all of a piece with the recent unexpected victory of Enda Kenny in his leadership contest. That victory was presented as a simple triumph of culchie-dom. It was more significant than that. The oligarchy that rule this country can now rest assured that the leader of the opposition is a man who will not rock their boat. The next Minister of Finance will be Michael Noonan, a man that would fit happily into any FF cumann. The trumpeting of Lenihan as a man transcending FF/FG divisions is about flying a kite for plan B, a coalition of a castrated FG and FF after the next election , that will keep the secrets of Anglo and NAMA hidden forever from the electorate. The division beteen FF anf FG is not about the civil war and has not been for decades, it has been about a small residue of integrity that survived in FG , but has now been neatly sidelined. The more talk you hear in the coming months about ‘ bridging civil war divides’ , the more you can assume that the the oligarchs confident that they have eradicated the last traces of FG integrity.

    There may well be little policy lee-way left ‘to the most popular pol’ in the country, as Eamonn Gilmore is snidely called above, but their is some justice that could still be administered. The oligarchs do not really fear much change in policy when FF finally fall, their only fear now is the remote possibility that a few of their lesser lights might face the ordinary workings of the law.

  33. @Tim

    anymore left wing fantasies that you would like to bring to your attention. The fact is died in wool FG hate FF for destroying the country, hate Lenny cos he is from a family of turncoats. FF & FG will not coalesc at the next election. One or other of them is doomed to an alliance with the former fellow traveller of Erich Honecker. There is that a snide enough reference to the most popular pol

  34. @anonymous

    Lenihan is from a family of fools and that is good enough for the FG’s neanderthals. If Lenihan’s appearance meant nothing why is so much being made of it ? Why is some part of FG collaborating in building Lenihan as some larger than life figure, when he is author of the single greatest economic policy mistake in the history of Western democracies.

    PS You are setting the bar pretty low if all you can say in defence of FG and Lenihan is that they are better than Kim Il sung or Erich Honecker.

  35. @Tim
    While I’d be only delighted to see FF -or at least the Me Fein wing of FF, which is most of it – shown the door and I little or no faith in about 90% of FG, the historical admiration that people in Labour expressed for people like Nicolae Ceauşescu worries me more than a little.

    I still remember one connected Labour character way back who thought – adamantly – that Ceauşescu’s Romania was the ideal state.

    He, and people like Ireland’s most popular pol today, were and are far to old to use the Churchillian variant of the twenty/thirty excuse.

  36. @Hugh

    Not a lot of choice-99% of FF, 90% of FG are beyond the pale. I take it you are suspicious of the “bostic” wing of the Labour Party or about a third of the party.

  37. @Hugh et Tull

    Ceausesco? The bar justs gets lower and lower.

    Brian Lenihan is better than Pol Pot. So what ? Is that an argument for him ? What has this to do with the campaign to canonise Lenihan. Its like in Catch-22 where the bigger the cock-up, the higher the military honour that is bestowed to cover it up.

  38. @Tim.
    “Brian Lenihan is better than Pol Pot. So what ? Is that an argument for him ?”

    Ehm, yes. It’s not much of an argument for sure, but it is an argument. And if current Irish politicians had been admirers of Pol Pot and were still in politics I’d call them on that too.

    Essentially, while I can be perfectly comfortable with someone who does a full moral values volte-face at 18, I find people who have managed to do such gyrations at 30+ to be particularly worrying – so the Labour leadership worries me, yes. Political pragmatism has its limits; eventually ones moral compass gets in a twist.

    It remains true that most of FF and much of FG show no discernable moral values at all. Not sure which is worse, really.

    Meantime, I wouldn’t be the first person who’s response to the recent survey about preferred leaders in Irish politics was to wonder why there was a chance to answer “Don’t know” but there wasn’t a chance to say “Almost anyone other than this lot”.

    As for the original point of this thread, the Collins/Lenihan speech, it’s scary to realise that the Civil War – which was a long time ago – is still an active political issue in Ireland.

    We’re bleeding money, bleeding people, and instead of interviewing emigrants at an airport – any airport – the press were concentrating on an anodyne speech at an annual memorial to a guy who’s dead. Whether you’re an admirer or Kevin Myers, Collins has been dead for a long time.

    Dead soldiers have done their thing. They can’t help us now.

    We have more pressing issues, and need living leadership.

  39. I stated unequivocally in my article entitled “Time to rethink bank rescue plan” (Irish Examiner 20th August 2010), that a correct analysis shows that Anglo’s loan losses will rise to not less than €36bn (i.e. 50% of its total loan book of €72bn) and that INBS’s loan losses will rise to not less than €6bn (75%-80% of its property development and investment loan book).

    In fact, I would go further! Based on extensive professsional experience in the area of property loans work-outs and recoveries, I would add a further 15% loss margin respectively (i.e. €5.4bn for Anglo and €0.9bn for INBS) to those above-mentioned levels of predicted losses. This additional 15% loss margin is based on the unassailable reality that there is increasing negative paralysis in the property market arising directly because of bottleneck / clogging-up of the loans recoveries process as a result of that process being funnelled into one large stagnating proerty loans reservoir, namely NAMA.

    Also, bank credit has contracted viciously as a result of huge under-capitalisation at the banks and huge nervousness amongst depositors. In fact the entire Irish Banking Sector is totally dependent on continuation of the all embracing State blanket guarantee for the liabilities of the Irish owned banks.

    In the cases of Anglo and INBS, both should be closed. All bondholders would bear the consequences of the shortfall of assets to liabilities and depositors would be protected ahead of Bondholders even if this meant passing special legislation to address this supe-extraordinary situation.

    What is alarming and indeed depressing at this point in time, is that the loans recoveries process hasn’t even got under way yet, 24 months after the crisis! In addition, the banks remain woefully under-capitalised ! And the boards at the banks haven’t yet been fully cleaned out and the senior bank managements haven’t yet been replaced and infused with energised new leadership!

    It’s Time indeed to rethink the bank rescue plan!

    What we need to do is:–Re-capitalise the 3 viable banks, AIB, BoI and EBS, at adequately at the right levels …€10bn, €6.5bn and €1bn respectively. That makes a total €17.5bn re-capitalisation requirement. Then present €6.5bn of that total re-cap bill to AIB and BoI bondholders (we might allow the bondholders a token very small debt for equity swap). We, the State would provide the balancing €11bn re-cap amount by way of a zero rate State Banks re-Cap Bond Issue thereby nationalising the banks for a temporary period of say 5years…. and we would reverse the NAMA loans transfers, while at the same time tasking the nationalised banks to get on with loan recoveries at the steeply written down values, within dedicated loans recoveries divisions at the banks!

    This correct Banking Sector Recovery Action Plan could be commissioned and implemented in weeks rather than months!

    As a Nation…have we got the collective Will to do what’s right?

    Peter Mathews

  40. As a direct result of the government’s mis-handling of the Anglo case and its appallingly flawed NAMA / bank rescue (bail-out) approach, the government has effectively STOLEN €17.4bn (i.e. €15.1bn Sen Bonds + €2.3bn Sub Bonds) from the citizens of the State!

    To put it in Lady Bird simple terms… A NAMA fraud and a €17.4bn (Anglo) theft have been delivered to the citizens of Ireland by an appalling self-serving FF led government dependendent on its collaborator Green Party partners in the destruction of the Irish economy.

    What a record!

  41. Bank Bond Investors analyse Bank Balance sheets and read and study bank reports on bank trading activities and lending operations. At least they should.

    Bank Bond Investors are the experts and employ qualified professionals (Accountants, Lawyers, Actuaries, Stock brokers, Valuers, etc) to assess and appraise the soundness or otherwise of banks’ operations, trading, lending, markets exposures etc. Thus it actually is incumbant on the Bond Investors to asses if Banks’ Capital positions are adequate and if their revenues and profits are properly reported and sustainable. It’s very much their judgement call. The Regulatory Authorities are not Nannies or nursemaids for Bond Investors. Besides, proper due diligence professional assessment of Anglo’s balance sheets over more than a few years and also the startling rate of growth of its balance sheets should have raised loud alarm bells….even ignoring the fact that the Regulator seems to have been very deaf.

    For Bond Investors to rely on catch phrases such as “XYZ Bank is regulated by the Financial Regulator and licensed by the Central Bank etc” would be ridiculous.

    However, I think you’d agree that the ordinary citizen could reasonably argue that he/she is entitled to rely on such catch phrases / invitations to treat. That’s the sort of reasonable distinction that arises when considering the duties of care and custody a Bank owes to people who deposit funds compared with those professional Bond Investors who invest monies for higher returns.

    In reality, there shouldn’t be any need to spell this out.

    Anglo and INBS should be closed

  42. @ Peter Matthews

    This government is like a person who goes to a psychiatrist, is told the truth, given clear guidelines as to what he must do to get some order back into his life.

    However, as he does not want to change his Pavlovian miscreant ways, he keeps on mumbling mantras about “only game in town and repeating something like “I am where I am”.

    He continues on his disastrous errant ways until the pain of his bankruptcy and problems becomes so great, the evidence so overwhelming, that it no longer even has to be adduced. The lie cannot be maintained any longer.

    Ireland which is FF and Greens, will not reverse their disastrous failed policies until the pain becomes too great. NAMA, the Anglo black hole and the further recapitaqlisations required will bring the country to its knees and this is where we have to be, before this government listens.

    Many times, like yourself I have implored this government to listen to common sense, to spare a thought for our children and the type of society being created by us, for them. All of this falls on deaf ears! I wrote to the the President a number of times about forming a national government and at a minimum referring NAMA to the Supreme Court. Again pleading to deaf FF ears! The only thing this government will listen to are the bond markets. The bond traders and dealers are our friend they will do what democracy and pleading to common sense can not and will not do.

Comments are closed.