Failures by the Irish fiscal authorities have been blamed, in recent newspaper and TV interviews, by ECB Executuve Board member Bini-Smaghi for precipitating the October crisis and Ireland’s resort to bail-out.
Gary O’Callaghan of Dubrovnik International University thinks the culprits were ECB Executive Board members.
Attached are the four conclusions of the IMF’s Financial Stability Update just released, in so far as they concern the Eurozone, with my comments:
‘In the European Union, the steps listed below are needed to reduce uncertainty and help restore confidence in markets.
Comment: The IMF is suggesting new stress tests and ‘follow-up’ recapitalisation and re-structuring of banks. In that order, not in the reverse order.
Comment: Means the EFSF is inadequate in size and function, particularly for countries with large banking systems, such as Ireland.
Comment: Means the IMF wants to share bank losses with bank creditors and re-capitalise banks with EU-wide, and not just national, fiscal support.
Comment: Means that ECB has been overly restrictive on both counts.
Does anyone still believe that the IMF was happy with the design of the Irish bail-out?
Since the emergence at the weekend of unanimity amongst political parties that the Seanad should go, contrarian commentators have been forced to argue that this is not a ‘real’ political reform, what we need is fundamental change, etc etc.
The move to a unicameral parliament is a pretty big change, and for the better. This is what I wrote for today’s Farmers Journal.
The decision of the Labour Party to support Fine Gael’s plan to scrap the Seanad pretty much seals the fate of Ireland’s experiment with a two-chamber parliamentary system. Fianna Fail and the Greens have also, however belatedly, come to the same conclusion, and all the main political parties are now signed up to this particular political reform. The Seanad costs around €25 million per annum directly, and An Bord Snip suggested, in July 2009, that its time was up. The direct saving however is not the full cost of the second chamber.
Civil servants spend a considerable amount of time dealing with queries (they call them ‘reps’, short for representations) from Senators, many of whom see themselves as trainee TDs and engage in clinics and general messenger services for voters in whatever constituency they have their eye on. Ministers must attend the Seanad regularly in addition to making themselves available for questioning in the Dail. This eats into the time ministers can devote to running the country, and while Dail accountability is essential, the demands of the Seanad on ministerial diaries is substantial and very hard to justify. I recall spending several hours with senior officials some years back waiting for a minister detained in the Seanad who apologised profusely and predicted, quite accurately, that not a syllable of the Seanad proceedings which detained him would make it into the parliamentary reports in the newspapers the following day. In addition to the direct saving of €25 million per annum, there should be further savings in civil service personnel and a reduction in the time-wasting demands on ministers.
Under the current Irish system, we have 166 TDs and 60 Senators, for a total of 226 national parliamentarians. This is rather a lot for a small country, and most countries of our size make do with a single-chamber parliament. The public seem quite happy to let the Seanad go and there have also been calls for a reduction in the number of TDs. Bord Snip did not feel that a major reduction in the size of the Dail was advisable, although the number does not have to be 166. Cutting numbers saves only the direct costs: scrapping the second chamber in its entirety provides opportunities to make all sorts of indirect savings as well.
There have been numerous distinguished Seanad members over the years, including some of those elected from the university panels. But there have also been legions of defeated TDs and wannabe TDs, leading one wag to describe the Seanad as a mixture of creche and retirement home. There is nothing to stop the better class of senator to welcome the inevitable and run for the Dail. I can think of a few I might even vote for! But the occasional emergence of good contributors in the Seanad cannot conceal the overall mediocrity that has been its hallmark. The Irish Times managed to disagree with itself last weekend on the following crucial issue: how many reports have been prepared over the years (the first was in 1928) on the reform of the Seanad? Harry McGee thinks there have been twelve, Noel Whelan plumped for thirteen. I recall, as a student in the late 1960s, attending a discussion group called Tuarim, whose leading lights included Tom Barrington, Barry Desmond and Garret FitzGerald. One spirited debate was about , you guessed it, reforming the Seanad. Any institution still searching for a meaningful role seventy four years after its re-creation in current form needs to be scrapped.
Of course scrapping the Seanad is not a political reform programme on its own. It is essential that the Dail becomes a more effective chamber and that a better balance be restored between executive and legislative branches of government. But scrapping the Seanad will help both directly and indirectly. Those with ambitions to serve in national politics will now have no option but to shoot for the Dail, which should make that a better chamber. The politicians need to restore credibility as a group, and the public will see abolition as evidence of serious intent to reform, at the cost of some cushy numbers for the political class. This will help when the time comes to face the music on local government reform, through eliminating the excessive number of local councils, and on reforming the public service, where numerous useless quangoes survive.
In case you have missed it, this guy seems to have grasped the essentials.
It is unusual to find ready-to-hand predictor variables which work. After all the revelations about corruption at FIFA, readers might have expected countries with too many scruples about governance and suchlike to fare poorly. The rankings of the four bidders in the recent Corruption Perceptions Index published by Transparency International in Berlin were as follows (a high rank means less corrupt).
Netherlands/Belgium 7 and 22
United Kingdom 20
Spain/Portugal 30 and 32
Russia 154
Russia of course won, and the Ireland – Finland grudge game in Vladivostok should be a cracker!
The United Kingdom spent £50 million on its bid, presumably on hairstyles for Beckham, Prince William, Powerpoint presentations, & c. Small-denomination dollar bills are freely available at kiosks in Heathrow….
They