Stephen Collins has shocked some Irish Times readers with his recent proposal that the Dail, rather than the electorate, should now ratify the Lisbon Treaty.
However, the likelihood of Brian Cowen taking the political risk involved seems even less than the likelihood of him actually getting a second referendum successfully past the post.
Finding our way out of the Lisbon impasse seems as far away as ever, particularly now that Mr Cowen has managed to further damage the cross-party political consensus in favour of the treaty.
Having been very late out of the traps, due to the distraction of Bertie Ahern’s extended lap of honour, followed by his own coronation and victory lap, Mr Cowen still felt it appropriate to give a very public slap in the face to Fine Gael, his largest political pro-Lisbon ally. That party’s natural resentment can be viewed in a new light, as analysis of the advertising spend on the campaign shows that Fianna Fail invested only a small fraction of the amount spent by Fine Gael.
Then the Taoiseach sought to exlcude the leaders of the two main pro-Lisbon opposition parties in the meetings with President Sarkozy, on his recent visit, thus relegating them to the same status as the unelected faction leaders on the NO side, who were each invited to make a three minute presentation at the French embassy. Only the public refusal of Messrs Kenny & Gilmore to accept this sidelining caused a last minute change of heart and averted a highly embarrassing diplomatic gaffe.
So when President Sarkozy came to call, he didn’t have to travel far to find the main reason for the failure of the referendum and the main obstacle to a successful re-run; it greeted him on the steps of Government Buildings.
Unless Brian Cowen demonstrates an ability to build rather than destroy political consensus, there’s no possibility of the Lisbon Treaty being ratified in Ireland.
Footnote: Published as a letter in the Irish Times but, sadly, they chose to edit out the Sarkozy bits (in italics) which I thought represented the most recent and relevant Lisbon concensus cock-up by Cowen.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Libertas political coup derails Lisbon Treaty
I think we’ve just witnessed a bloodless political coup, masterminded by the hitherto (politically) unknown Libertas organisation.
That coup successfully overthrew the aspiration of the democratically elected Government and both main opposition parties to pass the Lisbon Treaty. By doing so, it also set off a domino political crisis in 26 other democratic states which comprise the EU and many of which have already ratified the treaty through their parliaments.
A question which inevitably arises is whether Libertas is a genuinely Irish-born organisation or a front for some external party or government with an interest in derailing the EU project. Libertas was founded by businessman/oligarch Declan Ganley, but the political objectives and funding of that organisation are unknown at this point in time.
You have to ask who would be interested in scuppering the EU? Presumably parties intent on preventing the EU developing greater economic, political, diplomatic and, perhaps, military power on the world stage. The USA and Russia spring to mind.
Libertas founder Declan Ganley has strong connections in both countries. His company, Rivada Networks, provides telecommunications facilities to US-government agencies e.g. the national guard, police services, FEMA etc., while his early business career was built around the export of metals, particularly aluminium, from Russia.
It would have been easy to identify Ireland, the only country holding a referendum, as the weakest link in the Lisbon Treaty ratification chain. Is that what happened?
Another possible objective of the coup is the personal political ambition of Declan Ganley and the use of the Lisbon Treaty as a launch pad for his political career.
Ganley was the guest on Eamon Dunphy’s RTE programme yesterday where he revealed that, at the time Latvia declared independence from the USSR in August 1991, he was very friendly with members of the Latvian Popular Front, many of whom ended up in the first Latvian Government. His connections there arose from the fact that his company exported it’s Russian metals through Riga, the capital of Latvia.
Ganley expressed great admiration and enthusiasm for these Latvian patriots. When asked where these people were on the politcial spectrum, Ganley agreed that they were broadly conservative, with nationalists and some socialists in the mix. Much of Ganley's own rhetoric smacks of nationalism, patriotism, pride in irishness etc etc..
One suspects he's probably some brand of neo-liberal nationalist, but the fear is that Libertas might just stray into neo-fascism, given the political colour of some of its anti-Lisbon political bed-fellows. Not exactly a collection of dyed-in-the-wool democrats.
That coup successfully overthrew the aspiration of the democratically elected Government and both main opposition parties to pass the Lisbon Treaty. By doing so, it also set off a domino political crisis in 26 other democratic states which comprise the EU and many of which have already ratified the treaty through their parliaments.
A question which inevitably arises is whether Libertas is a genuinely Irish-born organisation or a front for some external party or government with an interest in derailing the EU project. Libertas was founded by businessman/oligarch Declan Ganley, but the political objectives and funding of that organisation are unknown at this point in time.
You have to ask who would be interested in scuppering the EU? Presumably parties intent on preventing the EU developing greater economic, political, diplomatic and, perhaps, military power on the world stage. The USA and Russia spring to mind.
Libertas founder Declan Ganley has strong connections in both countries. His company, Rivada Networks, provides telecommunications facilities to US-government agencies e.g. the national guard, police services, FEMA etc., while his early business career was built around the export of metals, particularly aluminium, from Russia.
It would have been easy to identify Ireland, the only country holding a referendum, as the weakest link in the Lisbon Treaty ratification chain. Is that what happened?
Another possible objective of the coup is the personal political ambition of Declan Ganley and the use of the Lisbon Treaty as a launch pad for his political career.
Ganley was the guest on Eamon Dunphy’s RTE programme yesterday where he revealed that, at the time Latvia declared independence from the USSR in August 1991, he was very friendly with members of the Latvian Popular Front, many of whom ended up in the first Latvian Government. His connections there arose from the fact that his company exported it’s Russian metals through Riga, the capital of Latvia.
Ganley expressed great admiration and enthusiasm for these Latvian patriots. When asked where these people were on the politcial spectrum, Ganley agreed that they were broadly conservative, with nationalists and some socialists in the mix. Much of Ganley's own rhetoric smacks of nationalism, patriotism, pride in irishness etc etc..
One suspects he's probably some brand of neo-liberal nationalist, but the fear is that Libertas might just stray into neo-fascism, given the political colour of some of its anti-Lisbon political bed-fellows. Not exactly a collection of dyed-in-the-wool democrats.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Mansergh defends 2003 Decentralisation "Plan"
Monday’s Irish Times “Head to Head” debate on the 2003 Decentralisation Plan , between Minister for State Martin Mansergh and AHCPS Dep.Gen.Sec. John Kelleher, provides some interesting insights into Government thinking in this area and its broader understanding of its own Spatial Strategy.
Defending the plan, Martin Mansergh paints an idyllic picture of civil servants decentralised to Tipperary town, informing us that they “are very happy to be within 15 minutes or less commuting distance from home”. The agency in question is the Immigration & Naturalisation Section of the Department of Justice. Minister Mansergh makes no reference to the commuting convenience, or otherwise, of the customers of this agency, whenever this might prove necessary. Customer convenience is clearly not a relevant consideration in Government thinking.
This lack of consideration for customers is confirmed by John Kelleher in his contribution on the topic, in which he illustrates a number of other examples of illogical relocations e.g. the Irish Prison Service to Longford, the Development Aid section of Foreign Affairs to Limerick, the Public Appointments Service to Youghal and the Equality Tribunal to Portarlington.
Minister Mansergh defends the lack of fit between the 2003 Decentralisation “Plan” and the 2002 National Spatial Strategy, explaining that “practically all the hubs and gateways already have civil service buildings, under previous decentralisation programmes.”
Yet a key objective of the 2002 National Spatial Strategy was to concentrate future development in a finite number of identified locations, the gateways and hubs, in order to achieve sufficient scale in those locations to support economic delivery of services and infrastructural investment.
Instead, the 2003 Decentralisation Plan proposes to scatter 10,300 civil servants to 53 locations, most of which are neither gateway nor hub, and Minister Mansergh is clearly happy to defend this “one for everyone in the audience” approach.
Taoiseach Brian Cowen has identified reform of the public service and extraction of better value for money as a key political priority. The thinking demonstrated in Minister Mansergh’s contribution, allied to several additional drawbacks outlined by John Kelleher, wouldn’t inspire any great confidence in a happy outcome for either public servants or taxpayers.
Footnote: Published as a letter in The Irish Times.
Defending the plan, Martin Mansergh paints an idyllic picture of civil servants decentralised to Tipperary town, informing us that they “are very happy to be within 15 minutes or less commuting distance from home”. The agency in question is the Immigration & Naturalisation Section of the Department of Justice. Minister Mansergh makes no reference to the commuting convenience, or otherwise, of the customers of this agency, whenever this might prove necessary. Customer convenience is clearly not a relevant consideration in Government thinking.
This lack of consideration for customers is confirmed by John Kelleher in his contribution on the topic, in which he illustrates a number of other examples of illogical relocations e.g. the Irish Prison Service to Longford, the Development Aid section of Foreign Affairs to Limerick, the Public Appointments Service to Youghal and the Equality Tribunal to Portarlington.
Minister Mansergh defends the lack of fit between the 2003 Decentralisation “Plan” and the 2002 National Spatial Strategy, explaining that “practically all the hubs and gateways already have civil service buildings, under previous decentralisation programmes.”
Yet a key objective of the 2002 National Spatial Strategy was to concentrate future development in a finite number of identified locations, the gateways and hubs, in order to achieve sufficient scale in those locations to support economic delivery of services and infrastructural investment.
Instead, the 2003 Decentralisation Plan proposes to scatter 10,300 civil servants to 53 locations, most of which are neither gateway nor hub, and Minister Mansergh is clearly happy to defend this “one for everyone in the audience” approach.
Taoiseach Brian Cowen has identified reform of the public service and extraction of better value for money as a key political priority. The thinking demonstrated in Minister Mansergh’s contribution, allied to several additional drawbacks outlined by John Kelleher, wouldn’t inspire any great confidence in a happy outcome for either public servants or taxpayers.
Footnote: Published as a letter in The Irish Times.
Sunday, June 08, 2008
Is Lisbon Treaty 98% of the EU Constitution?
Former French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing has claimed that the Lisbon Treaty is 98% identical to his failed EU Constitution.
“The EU Constitution has now been repackaged as the Lisbon Treaty.”
“The EU Constitution has not been repackaged as the Lisbon Treaty.”
Both the above sentences are more 98% identical, but their meanings are quite different.
Could that be what he means?
What's clear is that any major document could be modified by the inclusion or exclusion of key sentences, phrases or single words and its meaning can be substantially changed. So the "98%" claim can be essentially meaningless.
“The EU Constitution has now been repackaged as the Lisbon Treaty.”
“The EU Constitution has not been repackaged as the Lisbon Treaty.”
Both the above sentences are more 98% identical, but their meanings are quite different.
Could that be what he means?
What's clear is that any major document could be modified by the inclusion or exclusion of key sentences, phrases or single words and its meaning can be substantially changed. So the "98%" claim can be essentially meaningless.
Saturday, June 07, 2008
Sinn Féin & the Lisbon Treaty
What is the logic behind Sinn Fein’s opposition to the Lisbon Treaty, apart from that party’s normal ultra-nationalist anti-EU stance, which reflects its automatic denial of anything that may even appear to impinge on our sovereignty, as they choose to define it at any point in time?
Defence of our 12.5% Corporate Tax rate.
Didn’t Sinn Fein campaign for an increase in that rate as recently as the 2007 General Election? Are we now expected to be believe, 12 months later, that this Corporate Tax rate has become a core value for Sinn Fein? Who are they trying to fool? So the only question is this: are they just cynically scare-mongering or are they also trying to attract support and political donations from the business sector? Will Libertas leading lights feature on future lists of party donors?
Neutrality and Demilitarisation
The argument about the treaty requiring member countries to upgrade their armed forces would be better made by parties other than Sinn Fein. That party clearly had, in the past, a vested interest in keeping the security forces of this state in the weakest possible position. Doubtless there may well be some among their leadership/active membership who would wish to maintain that situation in the, hopefully unlikely, event of a return to “war”.
Sinn Fein’s concern for Irish neutrality and their desire to ensure that the Irish Army does not become involved in any EU adventures abroad is, in light of their own history, utterly lacking credibility. To be lectured thus by former terrorists is, frankly, FARCical.
Renegotiation of the Lisbon Treaty
Brian Cowen rightly made the point that this is far from the easy option so simplistically pushed by Sinn Fein and their fellow-travellers on the NO side.
As Cowen pointed out, if he goes back to Brussels with the list of problem areas being promoted by the NO campaigners, the other national leaders will be left scratching their heads while they say “but your tax position is protected by Lisbon, as is neutrality, abortion is unchanged, privatisation of public services remains a domestic policy decision etc etc etc”.
And let’s examine briefly the record of “ace negotiators” Sinn Fein: after 30+ years of mayhem and murder, for which that party must bear the greatest share of the blame.
What did they actually achieve?
(i) The territorial claim to Northern Ireland has been deleted from the Irish Constitution.
(ii) The constitutional position of NI as part of the United Kingdom is recognised by all parties, including the Irish Govt and Sinn Fein.
(iii) Ian Paisley (and now Peter Robinson, Baron Clontibret) becomes Prime Minister of Northern Ireland.
You couldn’t make it up! And these are the boyos who talk about renegotiating Lisbon? You wouldn’t send them out to buy a pint of milk.
Does anyone believe that the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Movement could have achieved LESS if left to pursue their peaceful approach for a decade? How prosperous would NI be now if they’d had 30 years of peace instead of Sinn Fein “negotiation”?
Defence of our 12.5% Corporate Tax rate.
Didn’t Sinn Fein campaign for an increase in that rate as recently as the 2007 General Election? Are we now expected to be believe, 12 months later, that this Corporate Tax rate has become a core value for Sinn Fein? Who are they trying to fool? So the only question is this: are they just cynically scare-mongering or are they also trying to attract support and political donations from the business sector? Will Libertas leading lights feature on future lists of party donors?
Neutrality and Demilitarisation
The argument about the treaty requiring member countries to upgrade their armed forces would be better made by parties other than Sinn Fein. That party clearly had, in the past, a vested interest in keeping the security forces of this state in the weakest possible position. Doubtless there may well be some among their leadership/active membership who would wish to maintain that situation in the, hopefully unlikely, event of a return to “war”.
Sinn Fein’s concern for Irish neutrality and their desire to ensure that the Irish Army does not become involved in any EU adventures abroad is, in light of their own history, utterly lacking credibility. To be lectured thus by former terrorists is, frankly, FARCical.
Renegotiation of the Lisbon Treaty
Brian Cowen rightly made the point that this is far from the easy option so simplistically pushed by Sinn Fein and their fellow-travellers on the NO side.
As Cowen pointed out, if he goes back to Brussels with the list of problem areas being promoted by the NO campaigners, the other national leaders will be left scratching their heads while they say “but your tax position is protected by Lisbon, as is neutrality, abortion is unchanged, privatisation of public services remains a domestic policy decision etc etc etc”.
And let’s examine briefly the record of “ace negotiators” Sinn Fein: after 30+ years of mayhem and murder, for which that party must bear the greatest share of the blame.
What did they actually achieve?
(i) The territorial claim to Northern Ireland has been deleted from the Irish Constitution.
(ii) The constitutional position of NI as part of the United Kingdom is recognised by all parties, including the Irish Govt and Sinn Fein.
(iii) Ian Paisley (and now Peter Robinson, Baron Clontibret) becomes Prime Minister of Northern Ireland.
You couldn’t make it up! And these are the boyos who talk about renegotiating Lisbon? You wouldn’t send them out to buy a pint of milk.
Does anyone believe that the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Movement could have achieved LESS if left to pursue their peaceful approach for a decade? How prosperous would NI be now if they’d had 30 years of peace instead of Sinn Fein “negotiation”?
Beware the Paramilitary-Industrial Complex!
In 1961, retiring President Dwight Eisenhower warned the American public about the potential risk to democracy of the growing influence of the emerging powerful Military-Industrial Complex.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
What similar warning should now be promulgated about the emerging Paramilitary-Industrial Complex advocating a "No" vote in the Lisbon Treaty Referendum?
I refer, of course, to that unholy alliance between Sinn Fein & Libertas.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
What similar warning should now be promulgated about the emerging Paramilitary-Industrial Complex advocating a "No" vote in the Lisbon Treaty Referendum?
I refer, of course, to that unholy alliance between Sinn Fein & Libertas.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Rising electricity, gas & fuel prices - plus Carbon Tax?
The Sunday Business Post today reports that the ESB will be seeking an electricity price increase of at least 15% this autumn. Bord Gais already has a 19% increase proposal with the Energy Regulator.
http://www.thepost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=IRELAND-qqqm=news-qqqid=33383-qqqx=1.asp
High Petrol/Diesel prices, likely to continue to rise at the pumps, are also reflected in the price of home heating oil.
What political or public appetite exists for a set of new carbon taxes in this year’s budget?
With the media reporting gloom & doom, and all commentators in agreeemnt that house prices continue to fall, the feel-good factor is rapidly disappearing from the national psyche.
It’s hard to see the Govt making any meaningful move on carbon taxes, particularly as no-one will believe that they are intended to be revenue-neutral, given the large and growing exchequer deficit as other tax revenues fall short of projections.
On the other hand, unless something meaningful is done this year, there’s no hope of achieving the 15% emissions reduction target by 2012, as set out in the Programme for Govt..
Could this be the [very heavy] straw that breaks the Green camel’s back?
http://www.thepost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=IRELAND-qqqm=news-qqqid=33383-qqqx=1.asp
High Petrol/Diesel prices, likely to continue to rise at the pumps, are also reflected in the price of home heating oil.
What political or public appetite exists for a set of new carbon taxes in this year’s budget?
With the media reporting gloom & doom, and all commentators in agreeemnt that house prices continue to fall, the feel-good factor is rapidly disappearing from the national psyche.
It’s hard to see the Govt making any meaningful move on carbon taxes, particularly as no-one will believe that they are intended to be revenue-neutral, given the large and growing exchequer deficit as other tax revenues fall short of projections.
On the other hand, unless something meaningful is done this year, there’s no hope of achieving the 15% emissions reduction target by 2012, as set out in the Programme for Govt..
Could this be the [very heavy] straw that breaks the Green camel’s back?
Wasteful Quangos
National Consumer Agency
The NCA should be renamed The National Survey Agency.
Since Biffo’s famous aside to Mary Coughlan, this agency has been revealed to be completely toothless when it comes to ensuring that the price benefits arising from the strength of the Euro are passed on to consumers.
Instead we’re offered the mind-blowing advice to “shop around” and reassured that the agency will continue to conduct and publish shopping surveys.
There may well be nothing the NCA can do. But, in that event, do we really need a separate agency to carry out such surveys? Surely this could be organised quite easily by the relevant Govt department, but with a substantially reduced overhead.
Financial Regulator
During the week, a Prime Time report involved some mystery shopping of financial institutions, using an 82-year old woman to seek advice about what to do with a substantial lump sum she had to invest. PermanentTSB landed themselves in hot water when one of their “financial advisors” gave her incorrect and misleading information.
Mary O’Dea, Consumer Director with the Financial Regulator was interviewed on Morning Ireland where it became clear that her agency don’t actually do any mystery shopping themselves. This is an extraordinary admission. Mystery Shopping is the most standard of techniques for a consumer agency, particularly where something intangible like “advice” is being sold.
It’s unbelievable that the Financial Regulator does not an ongoing programme of mystery shopping underway since its inception, providing regular reports to both the public and the financial institutions as to outcomes. This would serve to keep the institutions on their toes and provide some re-assurance to consumers.
Instead, they give us naff ads like “I don’t know what a tracker mortgage is”, and insist that all ads from financial institutions carry a long set of standard messages which, in reality, are virtually meaningless and are only there to remind us all that there is a Financial Regulator. But who actually reads that tiny fly-shit print at the bottom of a press or tv ad? Who actually believes Sean Moncrieff when he says “but no sneaky ones”? How carefully has he checked?
When it comes to enforcement, what exactly can the Financial Regulator do for consumers with a complaint against a financial institution that the Financial Ombudsman is not already charged with doing? I think it’s time to give Mary O’Dea the chop!
Office of Director of Corporate Enforcement
Then there’s the ODCE, which should have taken firm action against DCC & Jim Flavin following the Supreme Court decision that the Fyffes share sale had been a case of insider dealing. Instead, it was left to the IAIM to take a stand, and only then did ODCE do what is should have done years ago.
But what it does best is let the general public know it exists with a series of bloody stupid radio ads regarding the responsibilities of directors. The reality is that all these ads do is say “hey, we exist”.
Information regarding the responsibilities of directors would be best communicated through the appropriate industry bodies e.g. IBEC, ISME, SFA, through the legal and accountancy professions and through the companies office when a company is actually registered.
For a fraction of the cost of radio ads, detailed and relevant information could be delivered to the appropriate people.
The radio ads are just an ego-trip. Someone in the relevant Govt Dept should be asking “who gave these effers a marketing budget at all?”
The NCA should be renamed The National Survey Agency.
Since Biffo’s famous aside to Mary Coughlan, this agency has been revealed to be completely toothless when it comes to ensuring that the price benefits arising from the strength of the Euro are passed on to consumers.
Instead we’re offered the mind-blowing advice to “shop around” and reassured that the agency will continue to conduct and publish shopping surveys.
There may well be nothing the NCA can do. But, in that event, do we really need a separate agency to carry out such surveys? Surely this could be organised quite easily by the relevant Govt department, but with a substantially reduced overhead.
Financial Regulator
During the week, a Prime Time report involved some mystery shopping of financial institutions, using an 82-year old woman to seek advice about what to do with a substantial lump sum she had to invest. PermanentTSB landed themselves in hot water when one of their “financial advisors” gave her incorrect and misleading information.
Mary O’Dea, Consumer Director with the Financial Regulator was interviewed on Morning Ireland where it became clear that her agency don’t actually do any mystery shopping themselves. This is an extraordinary admission. Mystery Shopping is the most standard of techniques for a consumer agency, particularly where something intangible like “advice” is being sold.
It’s unbelievable that the Financial Regulator does not an ongoing programme of mystery shopping underway since its inception, providing regular reports to both the public and the financial institutions as to outcomes. This would serve to keep the institutions on their toes and provide some re-assurance to consumers.
Instead, they give us naff ads like “I don’t know what a tracker mortgage is”, and insist that all ads from financial institutions carry a long set of standard messages which, in reality, are virtually meaningless and are only there to remind us all that there is a Financial Regulator. But who actually reads that tiny fly-shit print at the bottom of a press or tv ad? Who actually believes Sean Moncrieff when he says “but no sneaky ones”? How carefully has he checked?
When it comes to enforcement, what exactly can the Financial Regulator do for consumers with a complaint against a financial institution that the Financial Ombudsman is not already charged with doing? I think it’s time to give Mary O’Dea the chop!
Office of Director of Corporate Enforcement
Then there’s the ODCE, which should have taken firm action against DCC & Jim Flavin following the Supreme Court decision that the Fyffes share sale had been a case of insider dealing. Instead, it was left to the IAIM to take a stand, and only then did ODCE do what is should have done years ago.
But what it does best is let the general public know it exists with a series of bloody stupid radio ads regarding the responsibilities of directors. The reality is that all these ads do is say “hey, we exist”.
Information regarding the responsibilities of directors would be best communicated through the appropriate industry bodies e.g. IBEC, ISME, SFA, through the legal and accountancy professions and through the companies office when a company is actually registered.
For a fraction of the cost of radio ads, detailed and relevant information could be delivered to the appropriate people.
The radio ads are just an ego-trip. Someone in the relevant Govt Dept should be asking “who gave these effers a marketing budget at all?”
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Carbon Taxes? I don't think so.
There seems to be little doubt now that we’re in a serious economic downturn. While it’s not a recession, the implications for Govt Income/Expenditure are quite significant and will require difficult political choices.
This week, Davy Stockbrokers has produced some dramatically revised economic forecasts
- GNP growth: 1% in 2008, 2% in 2009
- New houses: 45k in 2008, 25k in 2009
- Commercial construction: 10% reduction in 2009
- Unemployment: 4.6% in 2007, 6.1% in 2008, 7% in 2009
- Exchequer Deficit: €1.6bn in 2007, €8.3bn in 2008, €10.3bn in 2009
- House Prices: -10% in 2008, -7% in 2009
Net Result:
Reduced tax inflows, particularly as construction/housing market slows dramatically.
Reduced tax inflows and increased benefit outflows as unemployment rises dramatically (+50% in 2 years).
Rising Energy Prices
Driven by global demand/output e.g. oil @ $135 and on a rising curve, Northern Ireland Electricity has announced a 14% price increase for July 2008, and BBC reports a further 15% increase expected later in the autumn (partially driven by weak sterling).
However, we too can expect rising electricity and gas prices, to go with the already rising petrol/diesel prices.
This will all add to inflation - pushing up the costs to households, business and increasing wage demands.
Demand/Expectations:
Expect a winter of discontent from the public sector, who already feel aggrieved that their previous national agreement failed to keep pace with inflation, compounded by the failure of Benchmarking Phase II to deliver anything for most public sector employees (excluding the cabinet).
The insatiable demand from that perennial black hole that is the Health Service is unlikely to abate. A permanent political banana skin.
And the perpetual under investment in the school infrastructure, exacerbated by a rising rather than falling intake in primary schools, will only add to the Govt’s woes.
Carbon Taxes?
Against that background, how likely is it that Biffo will be willing to add to the electorate’s woes by introducing Carbon Taxes, particularly against a background of already rapidly rising fuel/energy prices? With rising domestic bills and industry struggling, how much can the public bear?
But if Biffo does introduce Carbon Taxes, I’ll wager they won’t be “revenue neutral” , as promised by the Greens.
Biffo will see them as a way to reduce the projected Exchequer Deficit (€10.3bn 2009) by adding such carbon tax revenues to the general taxation pot, safe in the knowledge that the Greens will be a political lightning rod for most of the inevitable public backlash.
Green Party reaction?
How will the Greens react to such a(nother) betrayal?
Recent opinion polls show falling support for the Greens, the glás has gone off their early poll ratings in Govt. An early election, with little tangible achieved in Govt but many core policies & principles sacrificed, could be catastrophic for them.
I suspect they’ll swallow hard and perform another policy u-bend (they’re long past u-turns, it’s now flushed straight out of the system) to stay in office at any cost.
An interesting year ahead.
This week, Davy Stockbrokers has produced some dramatically revised economic forecasts
- GNP growth: 1% in 2008, 2% in 2009
- New houses: 45k in 2008, 25k in 2009
- Commercial construction: 10% reduction in 2009
- Unemployment: 4.6% in 2007, 6.1% in 2008, 7% in 2009
- Exchequer Deficit: €1.6bn in 2007, €8.3bn in 2008, €10.3bn in 2009
- House Prices: -10% in 2008, -7% in 2009
Net Result:
Reduced tax inflows, particularly as construction/housing market slows dramatically.
Reduced tax inflows and increased benefit outflows as unemployment rises dramatically (+50% in 2 years).
Rising Energy Prices
Driven by global demand/output e.g. oil @ $135 and on a rising curve, Northern Ireland Electricity has announced a 14% price increase for July 2008, and BBC reports a further 15% increase expected later in the autumn (partially driven by weak sterling).
However, we too can expect rising electricity and gas prices, to go with the already rising petrol/diesel prices.
This will all add to inflation - pushing up the costs to households, business and increasing wage demands.
Demand/Expectations:
Expect a winter of discontent from the public sector, who already feel aggrieved that their previous national agreement failed to keep pace with inflation, compounded by the failure of Benchmarking Phase II to deliver anything for most public sector employees (excluding the cabinet).
The insatiable demand from that perennial black hole that is the Health Service is unlikely to abate. A permanent political banana skin.
And the perpetual under investment in the school infrastructure, exacerbated by a rising rather than falling intake in primary schools, will only add to the Govt’s woes.
Carbon Taxes?
Against that background, how likely is it that Biffo will be willing to add to the electorate’s woes by introducing Carbon Taxes, particularly against a background of already rapidly rising fuel/energy prices? With rising domestic bills and industry struggling, how much can the public bear?
But if Biffo does introduce Carbon Taxes, I’ll wager they won’t be “revenue neutral” , as promised by the Greens.
Biffo will see them as a way to reduce the projected Exchequer Deficit (€10.3bn 2009) by adding such carbon tax revenues to the general taxation pot, safe in the knowledge that the Greens will be a political lightning rod for most of the inevitable public backlash.
Green Party reaction?
How will the Greens react to such a(nother) betrayal?
Recent opinion polls show falling support for the Greens, the glás has gone off their early poll ratings in Govt. An early election, with little tangible achieved in Govt but many core policies & principles sacrificed, could be catastrophic for them.
I suspect they’ll swallow hard and perform another policy u-bend (they’re long past u-turns, it’s now flushed straight out of the system) to stay in office at any cost.
An interesting year ahead.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
It's time we had real Farmers' Markets
On last night’s RTE Questions & Answers, the woman panellist from the Farming Indo/Ear to the Ground said that Minister for Food, Trevor Sargent, was only focused on the 1% of farmers engaged in organic farming, he’s doing nothing for the other 99%. Minister John Gormless defended Sargent on the basis that this is official Green Party policy. What else did farmers expect?
Official Message to 99% of the farming community from the Green Party: “Go f*ck yourselves!”
Farmers’ Markets:
Why can’t we have proper farmers’ markets, as they do in France, for example.
Every town/village there has a market at least once a week. Dozens of stalls, many local producers, some professional who tour the markets, some amateurs who only attend their local market. Stalls with a wide range of seasonal fruit and vegetables at competitive prices. Ordinary working people, living on a budget, buying their weekly supplies of same. Some specialist producers charging premium prices for organic etc, but the majority are pitched at thrifty housewives.
In the larger French towns/cities there are permanent halles, with dozens, perhaps hundreds, of stalls catering for every taste and every pocket. A fantastic variety of fresh and cooked foods to suit all palates and purses.
In Ireland, on the other hand, “Farmers’ Market” means elitist, lifestyle shopping for the better off.
There’s a busy “farmers” market every Sunday in the Peoples Park in Dun Laoghaire. A couple of stalls sell spotty, over-priced organic vegetables. But the majority are expensive artisan food stalls, some ethnic food sellers and a couple of knick-knack sellers.
How many of these stalls are actually run by real farmers? Very few would be my bet!
The market is well attended, mainly by the affluent middle classes and their offspring. It’s a Sunday outing combined with a bit of life-style browsing/shopping to make themselves feel better, mingling among a better class of green. Then they load up into their Chelsea tractors and head off to meet their friends for a bottle of chablis, with no thought as to whether it’s organic, just make sure it‘s chilled.
If you want to experience Green Food Policy in action, this is what it represents.
Let’s ditch the elitism and get real farmers selling non-organic produce at competitive prices to ordinary customers.
Official Message to 99% of the farming community from the Green Party: “Go f*ck yourselves!”
Farmers’ Markets:
Why can’t we have proper farmers’ markets, as they do in France, for example.
Every town/village there has a market at least once a week. Dozens of stalls, many local producers, some professional who tour the markets, some amateurs who only attend their local market. Stalls with a wide range of seasonal fruit and vegetables at competitive prices. Ordinary working people, living on a budget, buying their weekly supplies of same. Some specialist producers charging premium prices for organic etc, but the majority are pitched at thrifty housewives.
In the larger French towns/cities there are permanent halles, with dozens, perhaps hundreds, of stalls catering for every taste and every pocket. A fantastic variety of fresh and cooked foods to suit all palates and purses.
In Ireland, on the other hand, “Farmers’ Market” means elitist, lifestyle shopping for the better off.
There’s a busy “farmers” market every Sunday in the Peoples Park in Dun Laoghaire. A couple of stalls sell spotty, over-priced organic vegetables. But the majority are expensive artisan food stalls, some ethnic food sellers and a couple of knick-knack sellers.
How many of these stalls are actually run by real farmers? Very few would be my bet!
The market is well attended, mainly by the affluent middle classes and their offspring. It’s a Sunday outing combined with a bit of life-style browsing/shopping to make themselves feel better, mingling among a better class of green. Then they load up into their Chelsea tractors and head off to meet their friends for a bottle of chablis, with no thought as to whether it’s organic, just make sure it‘s chilled.
If you want to experience Green Food Policy in action, this is what it represents.
Let’s ditch the elitism and get real farmers selling non-organic produce at competitive prices to ordinary customers.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Biffo's threats and waffle
The media has focused on Biffo's use of the “f-word”, but the serious example of unparliamentary language was Cowen’s series of explicit threats to have the leader of the opposition shouted down in the Dáil.
That was completely unacceptable, particularly coming from a Taoiseach. He should have been severely reprimanded by the Ceann Comhairle, made to retract it immediately and apologise to the Dáil. (He should now withdraw the threats and apologise on his next appearance in the Dáil. There would be no problem if he’d confined himself to asking Kenny to keep his hounds in check.)
Later, Cowen followed it up with some waffle about what his Government is doing to ensure consumers are getting the benefit of the euro exchange rate from retailers. He clearly didn’t believe his own spiel, even assuming that the relevant minister was actually doing something, because he felt it necessary to tell her, in the widely reported language, to get the finger out.
The opposition and the media need to identify and highlight all the waffle answers that are given by Government, both inside and outside the Dáil. The FF/PD axis has kept power for the past 11 years, largely on the basis of perceived competence, lacquered by the huge tax inflows of the Celtic Tiger period.
In tougher economic times, this is likely to be a fairly incompetent administration - in Health, Education, Transport etc. and it’s vital that the electorate actually realises this.
The message needs to be hammered home - repeatedly.
That was completely unacceptable, particularly coming from a Taoiseach. He should have been severely reprimanded by the Ceann Comhairle, made to retract it immediately and apologise to the Dáil. (He should now withdraw the threats and apologise on his next appearance in the Dáil. There would be no problem if he’d confined himself to asking Kenny to keep his hounds in check.)
Later, Cowen followed it up with some waffle about what his Government is doing to ensure consumers are getting the benefit of the euro exchange rate from retailers. He clearly didn’t believe his own spiel, even assuming that the relevant minister was actually doing something, because he felt it necessary to tell her, in the widely reported language, to get the finger out.
The opposition and the media need to identify and highlight all the waffle answers that are given by Government, both inside and outside the Dáil. The FF/PD axis has kept power for the past 11 years, largely on the basis of perceived competence, lacquered by the huge tax inflows of the Celtic Tiger period.
In tougher economic times, this is likely to be a fairly incompetent administration - in Health, Education, Transport etc. and it’s vital that the electorate actually realises this.
The message needs to be hammered home - repeatedly.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Did Cowen mislead the Dáil?
Did the Taoiseach deliberately mislead the Dáil?
Answering a query from Eamon Gilmore regarding the failure of retailers to pass on the exchange rate benefits of a strong euro, he assured the house that his Tanaiste was taking active steps to clarify/resolve the situation.
Then when Brian sat down beside Mary C, he’s overheard saying "Ring those people and get a handle on it will you...bring in all those f***ers..."
That suggests the Taoiseach thought that Mary Coughlan needed to be ordered to do something about the situation, i.e. that he didn’t believe the story that he had just told to the Dail.
Answering a query from Eamon Gilmore regarding the failure of retailers to pass on the exchange rate benefits of a strong euro, he assured the house that his Tanaiste was taking active steps to clarify/resolve the situation.
Then when Brian sat down beside Mary C, he’s overheard saying "Ring those people and get a handle on it will you...bring in all those f***ers..."
That suggests the Taoiseach thought that Mary Coughlan needed to be ordered to do something about the situation, i.e. that he didn’t believe the story that he had just told to the Dail.
Cancer care in Mayo, Sligo & Donegal.
There are 8 cancer care centres “of excellence” planned in the National Cancer Strategy. To cater for the complete absence of any centre north of a line between Dublin & Galway, a satellite centre will be established in Letterkenny. It’s intended that all initial diagnostics and surgical management will take place at the cancer centres.
Professor Tom Keane has reluctantly accepted that an exception had been made for Letterkenny, but believes that the best and most logical solution would have been a cross border centre in Derry.
I agree with Prof. Keane with regard to cross-border facilities for those in the Derry catchment area of North Donegal, assuming that Derry would have a sufficient case-load to meet his centre of excellence requirements.
So instead of having a satellite centre in Letterkenny, why not have it in Sligo instead? Many residents of Co Donegal would be as close to Sligo as they are to Letterkenny.
The concept of having a satellite centre has been accepted, so its location should not be a major bone of medical or political contention.
A Sligo satellite could serve people from Sligo, South Donegal, North Mayo, Leitrim etc..
South Mayo could go to Galway, North Donegal to Derry or Sligo.
The National Cancer Strategy would still be intact and the major political problem would be defused.
No face would be lost on any side with such an honourable and logical compromise.
This one is free.
Professor Tom Keane has reluctantly accepted that an exception had been made for Letterkenny, but believes that the best and most logical solution would have been a cross border centre in Derry.
I agree with Prof. Keane with regard to cross-border facilities for those in the Derry catchment area of North Donegal, assuming that Derry would have a sufficient case-load to meet his centre of excellence requirements.
So instead of having a satellite centre in Letterkenny, why not have it in Sligo instead? Many residents of Co Donegal would be as close to Sligo as they are to Letterkenny.
The concept of having a satellite centre has been accepted, so its location should not be a major bone of medical or political contention.
A Sligo satellite could serve people from Sligo, South Donegal, North Mayo, Leitrim etc..
South Mayo could go to Galway, North Donegal to Derry or Sligo.
The National Cancer Strategy would still be intact and the major political problem would be defused.
No face would be lost on any side with such an honourable and logical compromise.
This one is free.
Biffo & Mary Coughlan - The Touchy & Tetchy Show
After yesterday’s Dail performance, the Indo’s Fionnan Sheehan has christened Biffo & Mary Coughlan as “The Touchy & Tetchy Show“. He concludes by wishing them both a “Welcome to the big leagues“.
(Mary Coughlan was tetchy with Sheehan when he pointed out to her that she was wrong, twice, about the number of EU commissioners the larger countries area entitled to.)
Will Touchy & Tetchy be a hit? Could they be our entry in next year’s Eurovision or are they just another pair of turkeys?
I heard another commentator on radio suggest that Biffo was only speaking to Mary in language she’d understand. Is she really a bit of Donegal rough?
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/welcome-back-to-the-dail-its-the-touchy-and-tetchy-show-1382643.html
(Mary Coughlan was tetchy with Sheehan when he pointed out to her that she was wrong, twice, about the number of EU commissioners the larger countries area entitled to.)
Will Touchy & Tetchy be a hit? Could they be our entry in next year’s Eurovision or are they just another pair of turkeys?
I heard another commentator on radio suggest that Biffo was only speaking to Mary in language she’d understand. Is she really a bit of Donegal rough?
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/welcome-back-to-the-dail-its-the-touchy-and-tetchy-show-1382643.html
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Dustin plucked & stuffed in Belgrade
A suitably chastened and unusually subdued Dustin was interviewed on RTE’s Morning Ireland, following last night’s ignominious failure to achieve a top 10 finish in the Eurovision semi-final.
That failure came as no surprise , as the song was greeted with some booing in the Belgrade venue, something I hadn’t heard before. Unfortunately, this semi-final wasn't broadcast on BBC, I was dying to hear what, if anything, Terry Wogan would have to say about the song's reference to "Terry Wogan's wig". Now we'll never know.
I was surprised by Dustin’s downbeat demeanour this morning, I can only put it down to a hangover. He surely couldn’t have rated his chances that seriously? He sounded gutted, plucked & stuffed, with none of his trademark cheek and quick-fire smart comments. There wasn't even the slighest chance of a "go on, ya good thing!"
Anyway, there’s some consolation for him - he’s in good company with last year’s turkeys Dervish and John Waters. And the previous year’s young sibling duo , whose names escape me (and most of the rest of the population, I suspect).
That failure came as no surprise , as the song was greeted with some booing in the Belgrade venue, something I hadn’t heard before. Unfortunately, this semi-final wasn't broadcast on BBC, I was dying to hear what, if anything, Terry Wogan would have to say about the song's reference to "Terry Wogan's wig". Now we'll never know.
I was surprised by Dustin’s downbeat demeanour this morning, I can only put it down to a hangover. He surely couldn’t have rated his chances that seriously? He sounded gutted, plucked & stuffed, with none of his trademark cheek and quick-fire smart comments. There wasn't even the slighest chance of a "go on, ya good thing!"
Anyway, there’s some consolation for him - he’s in good company with last year’s turkeys Dervish and John Waters. And the previous year’s young sibling duo , whose names escape me (and most of the rest of the population, I suspect).
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Credit Crunch hits Dublin PPP developments?
Shock and horror in Dublin as Bernard McNamara, one of the country’s biggest builders/ developers, pulls out of 5 Public Private Partnership development projects in the city. Under the deals, McNamara was to redevelop existing corporation housing sites, creating a mix of public and private housing/retail.
McNamara’s stated reasons, for withdrawing from the PPP developments, related to the increased costs created by (a) new regulations concerning minimum apartment size imposed by the City Council and (b) significantly increased insulation standards for new builds, imposed by the Dept of Environment.
Clearly both will have a material impact on the construction cost/price of individual units.
However, McNamara made no reference to the credit crunch, which might be an equally important consideration in arriving at his decision if not, in fact, the main one.
McNamara has been a major property/development investor in recent years e.g. his massive site at Merrion Road, hotels etc..
You’d have to speculate that perhaps
(a) he’s borrowed heavily to fund those investments.
(b) he has a lot of unsold units, which he’d anticipated would be unloaded long ago.
(c ) Cashflow/credit availability are likely to be constricted in current market conditions.
So my guess is that Bernard McNamara has looked at his cash flow projections, his revised P&L projections for the PPP builds and his lines of credit and he’s decided to cut his cloth to suit his measure.
Something had to give and the PPPs were the obvious first candidates.
From a PR perspective, best to blame some external interference e.g. Govt/City regulations, than admit that his bank manager was getting cold feet. That might trigger concern among his suppliers and sub-contractors, putting even more pressure on cash flow.
But if the choice is between delaying construction or accepting Zoe Development-type shoeboxes, then my vote is for the former every time.
McNamara’s stated reasons, for withdrawing from the PPP developments, related to the increased costs created by (a) new regulations concerning minimum apartment size imposed by the City Council and (b) significantly increased insulation standards for new builds, imposed by the Dept of Environment.
Clearly both will have a material impact on the construction cost/price of individual units.
However, McNamara made no reference to the credit crunch, which might be an equally important consideration in arriving at his decision if not, in fact, the main one.
McNamara has been a major property/development investor in recent years e.g. his massive site at Merrion Road, hotels etc..
You’d have to speculate that perhaps
(a) he’s borrowed heavily to fund those investments.
(b) he has a lot of unsold units, which he’d anticipated would be unloaded long ago.
(c ) Cashflow/credit availability are likely to be constricted in current market conditions.
So my guess is that Bernard McNamara has looked at his cash flow projections, his revised P&L projections for the PPP builds and his lines of credit and he’s decided to cut his cloth to suit his measure.
Something had to give and the PPPs were the obvious first candidates.
From a PR perspective, best to blame some external interference e.g. Govt/City regulations, than admit that his bank manager was getting cold feet. That might trigger concern among his suppliers and sub-contractors, putting even more pressure on cash flow.
But if the choice is between delaying construction or accepting Zoe Development-type shoeboxes, then my vote is for the former every time.
Waterford Wedgwood: the ultimate in unused wedding gifts?
The Government has, rightly, decided not to guarantee a €39m loan for Waterford Wedgwood.
Sir Anthony O’Reilly and his brother-in-law, Peter Goulandris, are reported to have invested up to €300m in the company in recent years, and are committed to investing a further €100m+ under current plans. The share price is currently just over 1c, which means the stock market values the entire company @ just €54m, so the two boys are nursing a very substantial loss.
It’s hard to see the light at the end of this particular tunnel, though Waterford Glass itself is probably viable. The millstone is the china division which includes several “iconic” brands e.g. Wedgwood, Rosenthal etc..
The investment rationale for this particular enterprise stems from Sir Anthony’s conviction of the value of quality brands with worldwide recognition. However, it seems that some “quality” brands have more historic than future value.
While the glass division has, in the past decade, taken many steps to produce more contemporary designs which might be used regularly by buyers (how many of you have [or your parents have] pieces of Waterford at home which still display those little green stickers?), you rarely find yourself seated in front of a place setting of fine bone china.
Perhaps the new slogan should be “Waterford Wedgwood, the ultimate in unused wedding gifts.”?
Peter Goulandris can at least console himself with this thought: Thank God Pan Am had already gone to the wall before his brother-in-law took off on this “brands” flight of fancy. Now that really would have been a black hole!
Sir Anthony O’Reilly and his brother-in-law, Peter Goulandris, are reported to have invested up to €300m in the company in recent years, and are committed to investing a further €100m+ under current plans. The share price is currently just over 1c, which means the stock market values the entire company @ just €54m, so the two boys are nursing a very substantial loss.
It’s hard to see the light at the end of this particular tunnel, though Waterford Glass itself is probably viable. The millstone is the china division which includes several “iconic” brands e.g. Wedgwood, Rosenthal etc..
The investment rationale for this particular enterprise stems from Sir Anthony’s conviction of the value of quality brands with worldwide recognition. However, it seems that some “quality” brands have more historic than future value.
While the glass division has, in the past decade, taken many steps to produce more contemporary designs which might be used regularly by buyers (how many of you have [or your parents have] pieces of Waterford at home which still display those little green stickers?), you rarely find yourself seated in front of a place setting of fine bone china.
Perhaps the new slogan should be “Waterford Wedgwood, the ultimate in unused wedding gifts.”?
Peter Goulandris can at least console himself with this thought: Thank God Pan Am had already gone to the wall before his brother-in-law took off on this “brands” flight of fancy. Now that really would have been a black hole!
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Bev's chance of a quick promotion?
It’s been announced that Seamus Brennan has advised incoming Taoiseach Brian Cowen that he wishes to resign from the cabinet, due to ill health.
This means that Brian Cowen now has 2 voluntary vacancies at the cabinet table to fill. This will inevitably result in a general shuffle upwards within FF.
I believe that, of the entire FF parliamentary, there are only 3 members who don’t currently have some “position” e.g. minister, junior minister, chair of committee etc. etc.. Those are Jim McDaid, Ned O’Keeffe and the recently re-admitted Beverly Flynn.
Assuming that neither Bertie Ahern or Seamus Brennan want any of those lowly jobs, Cowen will probably have to “promote” 2 of these 3 misfits to some position, however menial.
Which duo will he choose? Will that “class act” Bev get the nod and, if she does, what message will it send out regarding standards under Cowen ?
This means that Brian Cowen now has 2 voluntary vacancies at the cabinet table to fill. This will inevitably result in a general shuffle upwards within FF.
I believe that, of the entire FF parliamentary, there are only 3 members who don’t currently have some “position” e.g. minister, junior minister, chair of committee etc. etc.. Those are Jim McDaid, Ned O’Keeffe and the recently re-admitted Beverly Flynn.
Assuming that neither Bertie Ahern or Seamus Brennan want any of those lowly jobs, Cowen will probably have to “promote” 2 of these 3 misfits to some position, however menial.
Which duo will he choose? Will that “class act” Bev get the nod and, if she does, what message will it send out regarding standards under Cowen ?
Monday, May 05, 2008
Time to tax aviation fuel.
Why are there no duties/taxes on aviation fuel?
I understand that the traditional argument was that aircraft were flying between different jurisdictions with differing tax regimes. Thus, imposition of a fuel tax in one country would result in aircraft refuelling elsewhere, and might even deter airlines from offering services to a tax-levying destination.
We now live as part of the wider EU community, with most of the flights from airports within the EU travelling to other EU destinations (have a look at Aer Lingus & Ryanair websites). Therefore an EU-wide initiative to tax aviation fuel should not result in any competitive disadvantage.
The majority of flights to non-EU destinations are long-haul. Perhaps aircraft on such routes would maximise the fuel fill at the tax-free end of the route, but presumably much of their potential saving would be offset by the fuel burnt in carrying the extra weight long-distance. In any event, there would be no additional loss to the exchequer, as there are currently no taxes/duties levied.
The additional costs, passed on to the passenger, would probably be no greater than the current baggage charge, or the credit card “handling charge”, though undoubtedly Michael O’Leary would be apoplectic at such a proposal.
We are facing into an era of carbon taxes, where the cost of motoring, heating & lighting your home etc are all going to rise significantly. Why should that burden not be at least shared by the airline industry (and it’s passengers), which is widely recognised as one of the major and growing sources of carbon emissions?
It’s time this was tackled as a matter of urgency on an EU-wide basis. There’s much less potential benefit/impact from trying to do this on a unilateral basis, though that may be worth pursuing if getting an EU-wide environmental tax proves impossible.
Last year a BBC reporter became their “green man” for a year, measuring his family’s carbon footprint and doing everything he could to reduce it. This included selling the family car. After a year of “deprivation”, insulation etc., they took a family holiday and that single flight more or less wiped out the benefit of the family’s effort in the year before.
Worth thinking about as we hear of Govt plans for new building standards, insulation initiatives, heating systems etc.. and, of course, carbon taxes.
I understand that the traditional argument was that aircraft were flying between different jurisdictions with differing tax regimes. Thus, imposition of a fuel tax in one country would result in aircraft refuelling elsewhere, and might even deter airlines from offering services to a tax-levying destination.
We now live as part of the wider EU community, with most of the flights from airports within the EU travelling to other EU destinations (have a look at Aer Lingus & Ryanair websites). Therefore an EU-wide initiative to tax aviation fuel should not result in any competitive disadvantage.
The majority of flights to non-EU destinations are long-haul. Perhaps aircraft on such routes would maximise the fuel fill at the tax-free end of the route, but presumably much of their potential saving would be offset by the fuel burnt in carrying the extra weight long-distance. In any event, there would be no additional loss to the exchequer, as there are currently no taxes/duties levied.
The additional costs, passed on to the passenger, would probably be no greater than the current baggage charge, or the credit card “handling charge”, though undoubtedly Michael O’Leary would be apoplectic at such a proposal.
We are facing into an era of carbon taxes, where the cost of motoring, heating & lighting your home etc are all going to rise significantly. Why should that burden not be at least shared by the airline industry (and it’s passengers), which is widely recognised as one of the major and growing sources of carbon emissions?
It’s time this was tackled as a matter of urgency on an EU-wide basis. There’s much less potential benefit/impact from trying to do this on a unilateral basis, though that may be worth pursuing if getting an EU-wide environmental tax proves impossible.
Last year a BBC reporter became their “green man” for a year, measuring his family’s carbon footprint and doing everything he could to reduce it. This included selling the family car. After a year of “deprivation”, insulation etc., they took a family holiday and that single flight more or less wiped out the benefit of the family’s effort in the year before.
Worth thinking about as we hear of Govt plans for new building standards, insulation initiatives, heating systems etc.. and, of course, carbon taxes.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Boris Johnson elected Mayor of London
So Boris Johnson has beaten the incumbent Ken Livingstone in the election for Mayor of London.
I saw Boris's old man interviewed tonight on BBC - before the final result was in. He re-assured viewers that Boris was a serious candidate, on the basis that he had given up drink for the past 3 months. Johnson Pere pointed out that anyone who would make such an onerous sacrifice was (a) serious about the political quest and (b) worthy of consideration as a weighty candidate. Clearly idiocy doesn't skip a generation.
Which of them would I want go for a pint with? Boris.
Which would I want as mayor of my city? Ken.
Cameron should remember the old adage "be careful what you wish for". Cos if Mayor Boris turns out to be the same old buffoon we're all familiar with, he'll be Labour's trump card at the next general election.
But at least the Green candidate (3.15%) beat the BNP candidate (2.84%). I'd bet that an SUV candidate would have hammered both.
I saw Boris's old man interviewed tonight on BBC - before the final result was in. He re-assured viewers that Boris was a serious candidate, on the basis that he had given up drink for the past 3 months. Johnson Pere pointed out that anyone who would make such an onerous sacrifice was (a) serious about the political quest and (b) worthy of consideration as a weighty candidate. Clearly idiocy doesn't skip a generation.
Which of them would I want go for a pint with? Boris.
Which would I want as mayor of my city? Ken.
Cameron should remember the old adage "be careful what you wish for". Cos if Mayor Boris turns out to be the same old buffoon we're all familiar with, he'll be Labour's trump card at the next general election.
But at least the Green candidate (3.15%) beat the BNP candidate (2.84%). I'd bet that an SUV candidate would have hammered both.
Brian's priorities
In deference to the Greens, this is a (weak, old) joke recycled. No animals have died in the conversion.
Taoiseach Brian Cowen’s office phone rings.
'Hello, Taoiseach? This is Jimmy Murphy, the special branch man assigned as security to your home.
'Yes, Jimmy. What can I do for you? Is there a problem?'
'Ah, I was just calling to advise, Taoiseach, that your greyhound has died.'
' My greyhound? Dead? Which one? Not The Bertie Bowler, the one that won the Shelbourne Derby?'
“That's the one.'
'Jaysus! That's a bummer! That dog would have been worth a fortune at stud. What did
he die from?'
'From eating the rotten meat, Taoiseach'
'Rotten meat? Who the hell fed him rotten meat?'
'Nobody. He ate the meat of the dead horse.'
'Dead horse? What dead horse?'
'The steeplechaser, Taoiseach'
'The chaser is dead? The non-resident one I got from JP as a tax-free inauguration present? '
'Yes Taoiseach, he died from all that work pulling a cartload of water barrels.'
'Why the hell would he be pulling anything?
'We needed the water to put out the fire, Taoiseach.'
‘What fire ??'
'The one at your house, Taoiseach! A candle fell and the curtains caught
on fire.'
'Jaysus, are you saying that my house has burnt down, because
of a candle?'
'Yes, Taoiseach.'
'But we use Gormley’s bloody CFL lightbulbs in the house! What was the candle for?'
'For the funeral, Taoiseach.'
'WHAT BLOODY FUNERAL?'
'Your wife's, Taoiseach. She came home very late and let herself in without turning on any lights. I thought it was a thief, so I hit her with the hurley you keep in the trophy cabinet. Afterwards, your daughter told me that she never bothered turning on the lights when she came in late because they take so bloody long to light up properly.'
'The hurley I got from Brian Whelehan, the one he used in the ‘98 All Ireland Final?'
'Yes, Taoiseach, that’s the one.'
SILENCE........... LONG SILENCE..........
'Jaysus Jimmy, if you broke that hurley, you really are in deep shit!'
Taoiseach Brian Cowen’s office phone rings.
'Hello, Taoiseach? This is Jimmy Murphy, the special branch man assigned as security to your home.
'Yes, Jimmy. What can I do for you? Is there a problem?'
'Ah, I was just calling to advise, Taoiseach, that your greyhound has died.'
' My greyhound? Dead? Which one? Not The Bertie Bowler, the one that won the Shelbourne Derby?'
“That's the one.'
'Jaysus! That's a bummer! That dog would have been worth a fortune at stud. What did
he die from?'
'From eating the rotten meat, Taoiseach'
'Rotten meat? Who the hell fed him rotten meat?'
'Nobody. He ate the meat of the dead horse.'
'Dead horse? What dead horse?'
'The steeplechaser, Taoiseach'
'The chaser is dead? The non-resident one I got from JP as a tax-free inauguration present? '
'Yes Taoiseach, he died from all that work pulling a cartload of water barrels.'
'Why the hell would he be pulling anything?
'We needed the water to put out the fire, Taoiseach.'
‘What fire ??'
'The one at your house, Taoiseach! A candle fell and the curtains caught
on fire.'
'Jaysus, are you saying that my house has burnt down, because
of a candle?'
'Yes, Taoiseach.'
'But we use Gormley’s bloody CFL lightbulbs in the house! What was the candle for?'
'For the funeral, Taoiseach.'
'WHAT BLOODY FUNERAL?'
'Your wife's, Taoiseach. She came home very late and let herself in without turning on any lights. I thought it was a thief, so I hit her with the hurley you keep in the trophy cabinet. Afterwards, your daughter told me that she never bothered turning on the lights when she came in late because they take so bloody long to light up properly.'
'The hurley I got from Brian Whelehan, the one he used in the ‘98 All Ireland Final?'
'Yes, Taoiseach, that’s the one.'
SILENCE........... LONG SILENCE..........
'Jaysus Jimmy, if you broke that hurley, you really are in deep shit!'
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Bertie's address to Congress
I thought Bertie delivered his speech well, including some pertinent advice for the US on the need for a multilateral, rather than unilateral, approach to international action. And, thankfully, no pompous, self-serving references from greek mythology.
However, what impact had the speech in the US itself, rather than here in Ireland?
On Morning Ireland, a Washington-based reviewer reported that the print editions of 3 US papers, which included the Washington Post and USA Today, carried no report whatsoever of the event.
There was some coverage on internet editions, but these are probably less read in the US and may indeed have been “international” rather than domestic online editions, accessed from Montrose.
Ditto with Bertie's 2007 Westminster address. While it was shown live on RTE, no UK channel broadcast it and it received very limited media coverage in UK, despite the blanket media coverage here and all the positive plaudits showered on Bertie for the speech content and his delivery of it.
There's a lesson for us in this: we shouldn't always believe our own hype.
However, what impact had the speech in the US itself, rather than here in Ireland?
On Morning Ireland, a Washington-based reviewer reported that the print editions of 3 US papers, which included the Washington Post and USA Today, carried no report whatsoever of the event.
There was some coverage on internet editions, but these are probably less read in the US and may indeed have been “international” rather than domestic online editions, accessed from Montrose.
Ditto with Bertie's 2007 Westminster address. While it was shown live on RTE, no UK channel broadcast it and it received very limited media coverage in UK, despite the blanket media coverage here and all the positive plaudits showered on Bertie for the speech content and his delivery of it.
There's a lesson for us in this: we shouldn't always believe our own hype.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Anthropomorphism gone mad(dog)?
As you know, anthropomorphism is the attribution of human characteristics to animals, plants (ask Prince Charles) etc., often to pets.
Currently Pedigree are using this concept to promote their dog teeth-cleaning product “dentisticks”.
The radio ad features a guy visiting a doctor/dentist (D) who asks him to “open wide” and then discovers the patient (P) has very bad breath.
D: “When did you last brush your teeth?”
P: “I tried it once years ago but I didn’t like it. So I gave it up”.
D: “What does your girlfriend think?”
P: “Funny that, I’ve never had a girlfriend”.
Clearly the objective is to imply that, if your pet’s breath smells, it will seriously inhibit his social activities and attractiveness to lady dogs.
Now correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s generally the nether region, i.e. the opposite end of the dog, which is the object of attention for other sniffing dogs. In which case, it seems to me, it’s highly unlikely they will be put off by mere bad breath.
Also, the doggy love-making position doesn’t seem to involve much scope for mouth-to-mouth contact, unless they’ve developed a new variation that I’m unfamiliar with.
Now if they could develop a similar product for humans which obviated the need for teeth-brushing, they could be on to a real winner!
Currently Pedigree are using this concept to promote their dog teeth-cleaning product “dentisticks”.
The radio ad features a guy visiting a doctor/dentist (D) who asks him to “open wide” and then discovers the patient (P) has very bad breath.
D: “When did you last brush your teeth?”
P: “I tried it once years ago but I didn’t like it. So I gave it up”.
D: “What does your girlfriend think?”
P: “Funny that, I’ve never had a girlfriend”.
Clearly the objective is to imply that, if your pet’s breath smells, it will seriously inhibit his social activities and attractiveness to lady dogs.
Now correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s generally the nether region, i.e. the opposite end of the dog, which is the object of attention for other sniffing dogs. In which case, it seems to me, it’s highly unlikely they will be put off by mere bad breath.
Also, the doggy love-making position doesn’t seem to involve much scope for mouth-to-mouth contact, unless they’ve developed a new variation that I’m unfamiliar with.
Now if they could develop a similar product for humans which obviated the need for teeth-brushing, they could be on to a real winner!
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Rationing the Media & Politicians
I have long held a healthy contempt for much of the media, particularly the broadcast variety. This contempt has grown exponentially with the growth of the 24-hour media monster and its seemingly insatiable appetite. I get worked up when I see politicians either actively seeking exposure on such media or allowing themselves to be doorstepped/ambushed, particularly when they allow themselves to offer instant answers to unexpected questions on topics which are clearly not part of their own brief. When is the last time you heard an honest “I don’t know” answer from a politician?
But the media technique which causes me most irritation is when a guest is invited to speak on a specific topic, but is then ambushed with questions about some totally unrelated, but currently hot, topic. Having caught the interviewee off-guard, s/he is then badgered to say something controversial or forced into a corner to take a specific, previously unannounced, position. Then, and this is what really pisses me off, the next news bulletin opens with the exclusive news that Deputy/Bishop X has told RTE that Minister/Father Y should do Z. It’s presented as if the interviewee had issued a press release calling for some specific course of action, an approach which is deliberately misleading. That, to me, is tabloid journalism at its worst. RTE routinely do it.
I long for the day when politicians are strong enough to say “that’s not my area of expertise and I won’t give you a top of the head view”, or “I’m not here to discuss that “ or, and this is too much to hope for, give the journalist a “John Prescott”, i.e. a right hook to the face.
How much of a politician’s time is wasted on media appearances, particularly Government ministers? Consider the additional time spent on preparation/briefings to anticipate questions, both on your own brief but also on other current political topics, both domestic and international. The politicians have, by default, allowed the situation to develop where they are supposed to be up speed on every aspect of national and world affairs and fair game for media questions on almost any topic that could be considered even peripherally relevant.
So here’s one possible solution:
All politicians are issued with a ration book of “media coupons”.
Each book will contain separate coupons for use on local, national and international media.
The number and mix of coupons will vary by the nature of political office held e.g.
- Govt ministers will have more national & international coupons than your local
- TDs will have more local media coupons that a Govt Minister.
- Local councillors will have mainly Local Media coupons.
Here’s how it works:
Every media interview, whether initiated by the politician or the media outlet, requires the cancelling of an appropriate ration coupon. When coupons are exhausted, no further interviews can be accepted.
This should make politicians more selective in their proactive publicity seeking activity, and also reduce the number of top-of-head views offered in doorstepped situations. Instead, “no coupon” could replace “no comment”, without any of the possible negative connotations which “no comment” often generate.
Indeed, it might also make sense to include media outlets in a similar rationing system, with each outlet restricted to a specific maximum number of political interviews/interviewees per day/week, across all programmes/publications. Think of the money the media would save and the number of cub reporters they could let go.
If both sides - media & politicians - have to ration themselves, by definition the interactions should become more selective. “ I want to talk to you but you don’t want to talk to me” would become quite commonplace - and acceptable.
The main benefits I see would be:
- better and more considered media coverage of politics
- politicians freed up to do the work they’re elected to do, rather than merely being fodder for, mainly broadcast, media.
- better, more in-depth overall news coverage, without all the easy fillers.
- fewer journalists, fewer media outlets, less noise, more clarity
We’d need to provide a mechanism to prevent a politician facing allegations of corruption etc from refusing interviews on the basis that s/he has “no coupons”, but that shouldn’t be insurmountable.
But the media technique which causes me most irritation is when a guest is invited to speak on a specific topic, but is then ambushed with questions about some totally unrelated, but currently hot, topic. Having caught the interviewee off-guard, s/he is then badgered to say something controversial or forced into a corner to take a specific, previously unannounced, position. Then, and this is what really pisses me off, the next news bulletin opens with the exclusive news that Deputy/Bishop X has told RTE that Minister/Father Y should do Z. It’s presented as if the interviewee had issued a press release calling for some specific course of action, an approach which is deliberately misleading. That, to me, is tabloid journalism at its worst. RTE routinely do it.
I long for the day when politicians are strong enough to say “that’s not my area of expertise and I won’t give you a top of the head view”, or “I’m not here to discuss that “ or, and this is too much to hope for, give the journalist a “John Prescott”, i.e. a right hook to the face.
How much of a politician’s time is wasted on media appearances, particularly Government ministers? Consider the additional time spent on preparation/briefings to anticipate questions, both on your own brief but also on other current political topics, both domestic and international. The politicians have, by default, allowed the situation to develop where they are supposed to be up speed on every aspect of national and world affairs and fair game for media questions on almost any topic that could be considered even peripherally relevant.
So here’s one possible solution:
All politicians are issued with a ration book of “media coupons”.
Each book will contain separate coupons for use on local, national and international media.
The number and mix of coupons will vary by the nature of political office held e.g.
- Govt ministers will have more national & international coupons than your local
- TDs will have more local media coupons that a Govt Minister.
- Local councillors will have mainly Local Media coupons.
Here’s how it works:
Every media interview, whether initiated by the politician or the media outlet, requires the cancelling of an appropriate ration coupon. When coupons are exhausted, no further interviews can be accepted.
This should make politicians more selective in their proactive publicity seeking activity, and also reduce the number of top-of-head views offered in doorstepped situations. Instead, “no coupon” could replace “no comment”, without any of the possible negative connotations which “no comment” often generate.
Indeed, it might also make sense to include media outlets in a similar rationing system, with each outlet restricted to a specific maximum number of political interviews/interviewees per day/week, across all programmes/publications. Think of the money the media would save and the number of cub reporters they could let go.
If both sides - media & politicians - have to ration themselves, by definition the interactions should become more selective. “ I want to talk to you but you don’t want to talk to me” would become quite commonplace - and acceptable.
The main benefits I see would be:
- better and more considered media coverage of politics
- politicians freed up to do the work they’re elected to do, rather than merely being fodder for, mainly broadcast, media.
- better, more in-depth overall news coverage, without all the easy fillers.
- fewer journalists, fewer media outlets, less noise, more clarity
We’d need to provide a mechanism to prevent a politician facing allegations of corruption etc from refusing interviews on the basis that s/he has “no coupons”, but that shouldn’t be insurmountable.
Empty Bus Lanes beside choked traffic lanes.
This morning at c. 7.20am on RTE, AA Roadwatch reported that the busiest stretch of road in the country was in Blackrock, Co Dublin. This seems to be regularly the case.
And I’ll bet that one of the least busy stretches of road at that time of the morning is also in Blackrock - the new bus lane.
In calculating the investment/cost of public transport, does anyone factor in the huge capital value of such a piece of road?
Does Dublin Bus measure and report bus frequency and/or passenger volume numbers for each bus lane? Are there any minimum targets set for bus frequency/passenger numbers?
Or is it just a relatively arbitrary process, in part intended to force cars off the road by, in most cases, halving the number of traffic lanes available to them?
Given the capital value of these key road routes, and the massive capital investment proposed for Luas, Metro, interconnector etc., surely the first priority must be to maximise bus lane usage in order to justify the conversion of hugely valuable road assets into bus lanes?
And if a bus lane in not performing - either because Dublin Bus is not providing a sufficiently frequent service on it or they simply cannot attract enough passengers, then there must be a standard mechanism which causes that bus lane to be automatically dropped and revert to normal traffic use.
And I’ll bet that one of the least busy stretches of road at that time of the morning is also in Blackrock - the new bus lane.
In calculating the investment/cost of public transport, does anyone factor in the huge capital value of such a piece of road?
Does Dublin Bus measure and report bus frequency and/or passenger volume numbers for each bus lane? Are there any minimum targets set for bus frequency/passenger numbers?
Or is it just a relatively arbitrary process, in part intended to force cars off the road by, in most cases, halving the number of traffic lanes available to them?
Given the capital value of these key road routes, and the massive capital investment proposed for Luas, Metro, interconnector etc., surely the first priority must be to maximise bus lane usage in order to justify the conversion of hugely valuable road assets into bus lanes?
And if a bus lane in not performing - either because Dublin Bus is not providing a sufficiently frequent service on it or they simply cannot attract enough passengers, then there must be a standard mechanism which causes that bus lane to be automatically dropped and revert to normal traffic use.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
What is RTE thinking about?
If you can get past the current RTE schedule without having to reach for the bucket, you’re someone with a strong stomach but questionable taste.
Currently, the absence of taste/talent is highlighted in shows such as
Podge & Rodge
Livin’ with Lucy
Celebrity Bainisteoir
Marry Me
If someone could identify what aspect of this tacky rubbish could be categorised as “public service broadcasting”, I might at least not feel quite so ripped off funding it through my licence fee.
RTE would undoubtedly defend this crap, perhaps explaining that the “hard of thinking” are also a key audience segment which must be catered for.
Currently, the absence of taste/talent is highlighted in shows such as
Podge & Rodge
Livin’ with Lucy
Celebrity Bainisteoir
Marry Me
If someone could identify what aspect of this tacky rubbish could be categorised as “public service broadcasting”, I might at least not feel quite so ripped off funding it through my licence fee.
RTE would undoubtedly defend this crap, perhaps explaining that the “hard of thinking” are also a key audience segment which must be catered for.
Monday, April 21, 2008
BOI missing laptops - RTE spice up the story!
Bank of Ireland is suitably embarrassed by the news that 4 BoI Life laptops containing personal details of c. 10k customers have gone missing in the past year.
The bank says that there has been no apparent attempt to use the data for fraudulent purposes in the interim, and the gardai have assessed that the unconnected thefts appear to be opportunistic in nature - someone just taking the opportunity to steal and sell a laptop - rather than any effort to exploit potential data on the laptops.
The media has, not unnaturally, sought to hype this story to maximum effect and RTE has outdone itself in this regard. On last nights 9.00 tv news, RTE revealed that it's not the first time BOI has had problems with computers, recalling that former CEO Mike Soden was forced to resign when he was found looking up a US escort agency website on his office computer, in May 2004.
Where the connection/relevance is between the two stories escapes me for the moment, but it certainly says a lot about RTE going tabloid in its news/business department. Scraping the barrel with your bottom?
The bank says that there has been no apparent attempt to use the data for fraudulent purposes in the interim, and the gardai have assessed that the unconnected thefts appear to be opportunistic in nature - someone just taking the opportunity to steal and sell a laptop - rather than any effort to exploit potential data on the laptops.
The media has, not unnaturally, sought to hype this story to maximum effect and RTE has outdone itself in this regard. On last nights 9.00 tv news, RTE revealed that it's not the first time BOI has had problems with computers, recalling that former CEO Mike Soden was forced to resign when he was found looking up a US escort agency website on his office computer, in May 2004.
Where the connection/relevance is between the two stories escapes me for the moment, but it certainly says a lot about RTE going tabloid in its news/business department. Scraping the barrel with your bottom?
Lisbon Treaty leads to 4rd Reich?
Ulick McEvaddy, multi-millionaire, has come out on the NO side of the Lisbon Treaty referendum campaign.
Interviewed on Pat Kenny’s RTE radio programme today, McEvaddy repeatedly said that we’re being asked to approve a treaty that will determine Europe’s future for “1,000 years”.
Then Pat Kenny read a message from Jim Dorney, another “NO” voter who‘s something significant in the construction industry, who also used the phrase “1,000 years”.
I suspect this may well be part of a concerted marketing effort by the “NO Lobby” to create a subliminal impression that we’re being asked to sign up to something equivalent to the 3rd Reich.
Is anyone, even those the NO Lobby, stupid enough to believe that anything enacted in 2008 will last 100 years, never mind 1,000?
When the Shinners and the millionaires are united in advocating a NO vote, it only reinforces my determination to vote YES.
Interviewed on Pat Kenny’s RTE radio programme today, McEvaddy repeatedly said that we’re being asked to approve a treaty that will determine Europe’s future for “1,000 years”.
Then Pat Kenny read a message from Jim Dorney, another “NO” voter who‘s something significant in the construction industry, who also used the phrase “1,000 years”.
I suspect this may well be part of a concerted marketing effort by the “NO Lobby” to create a subliminal impression that we’re being asked to sign up to something equivalent to the 3rd Reich.
Is anyone, even those the NO Lobby, stupid enough to believe that anything enacted in 2008 will last 100 years, never mind 1,000?
When the Shinners and the millionaires are united in advocating a NO vote, it only reinforces my determination to vote YES.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Dun Laoghaire Plage - update
The detailed drawings, including cross-sections, for the two concepts are now on display in Dun Laoghaire Town Hall until 16th May.
Concept A, which includes the Lagoon Beach, is costed at €126.5m.
Concept B, which features an open-to-sea beach at Newtownsmith, comes in at €92m.
Unsurprisingly, I favour Concept A, as the Lagoon Beach element most closely resembles my original “Dun Laoghaire Plage” proposal.
BUT
Concept A implementation is proposed in 4 distinct phases.
Phases 1 & 2, which include the 500 space underground car-park, are collectively priced @ €76m.
The Lagoon Beach is only Phase 3, which is priced @ €32m.
However, given that Minister Dermot Ahern (?) recently announced that there isn’t a red cent available to build a new hospital in Navan, it’s hard to see central Govt providing major funding for either of these concepts.
It’ll be interesting to see if any elements of either concept ever get beyond the display stands in the Town Hall.
Meanwhile, local socialist activist Richard Boyd Barrett was holding a public meeting in the Kingston Hotel tonight (Mon 14th) which I was unable to attend. I await media reports with limited interest.
Concept A, which includes the Lagoon Beach, is costed at €126.5m.
Concept B, which features an open-to-sea beach at Newtownsmith, comes in at €92m.
Unsurprisingly, I favour Concept A, as the Lagoon Beach element most closely resembles my original “Dun Laoghaire Plage” proposal.
BUT
Concept A implementation is proposed in 4 distinct phases.
Phases 1 & 2, which include the 500 space underground car-park, are collectively priced @ €76m.
The Lagoon Beach is only Phase 3, which is priced @ €32m.
However, given that Minister Dermot Ahern (?) recently announced that there isn’t a red cent available to build a new hospital in Navan, it’s hard to see central Govt providing major funding for either of these concepts.
It’ll be interesting to see if any elements of either concept ever get beyond the display stands in the Town Hall.
Meanwhile, local socialist activist Richard Boyd Barrett was holding a public meeting in the Kingston Hotel tonight (Mon 14th) which I was unable to attend. I await media reports with limited interest.
Carpe Diem, Brian!
The death of Paddy Hillery provides a timely reminder that, over the decades, there have been many FF politicians who were, at least by Irish standards, paragons of probity and focused on enriching the national rather than the personal purse.
Charlie Haughey seems to have been an infection of major proportions, some of his close associates have been shown to be “on the take”, and the cloud of suspicion hangs over others, most notably Bertie Ahern, our current Taoiseach. The fish rots from the head and inevitably, if low standards are the norm at the highest levels of the party, junior acolytes will assume that’s the way business is done, particularly if (a) you seem to get away with it and (b) the electorate seems relatively indifferent.
I have no doubt that many serving FF politicians are hardworking, honest and motivated by the purpose of public service.
What I find interesting about the tribunal revelations in the past decade is the reaction of the Fianna Fail party and its senior members. Rather than acknowledge the obvious corrupt practices, the diversion of party funds into personal pockets etc, and the need for root & branch reform, blind loyalty to the party has instead caused a circling of the wagons, and created an ethos of defence and denial. If it hasn’t been proven definitively in court, it can and will be denied.
It reminds me of the catholic church reaction to charges of physical and sexual abuse. Blind loyalty to the institution caused many good men to deny the offences and prevented them from outing and ousting the offenders in their midst. We now know how that particular story developed. I’m sure that many clerics today regret that they suppressed their own ethical misgivings out of loyalty to the institutional church.
Brian Cowen has the opportunity to perform that “root & branch” reform of standards in FF, though Beverly’s return surely sends out the wrong signal. However, Cowen’s selection, at his press conference, of Sean Lemass as his role model could be a sign that he intends to revert to the straight standards of FF of an earlier era.
Cowen should learn the lesson of the catholic church and the long-term damage it has suffered, largely because of its earlier approach to dealing with its own scandals. Clear the cupboard of all those Haughey-related skeletons and set out a new ethical course for FF.
Carpe Diem, Brian.
Charlie Haughey seems to have been an infection of major proportions, some of his close associates have been shown to be “on the take”, and the cloud of suspicion hangs over others, most notably Bertie Ahern, our current Taoiseach. The fish rots from the head and inevitably, if low standards are the norm at the highest levels of the party, junior acolytes will assume that’s the way business is done, particularly if (a) you seem to get away with it and (b) the electorate seems relatively indifferent.
I have no doubt that many serving FF politicians are hardworking, honest and motivated by the purpose of public service.
What I find interesting about the tribunal revelations in the past decade is the reaction of the Fianna Fail party and its senior members. Rather than acknowledge the obvious corrupt practices, the diversion of party funds into personal pockets etc, and the need for root & branch reform, blind loyalty to the party has instead caused a circling of the wagons, and created an ethos of defence and denial. If it hasn’t been proven definitively in court, it can and will be denied.
It reminds me of the catholic church reaction to charges of physical and sexual abuse. Blind loyalty to the institution caused many good men to deny the offences and prevented them from outing and ousting the offenders in their midst. We now know how that particular story developed. I’m sure that many clerics today regret that they suppressed their own ethical misgivings out of loyalty to the institutional church.
Brian Cowen has the opportunity to perform that “root & branch” reform of standards in FF, though Beverly’s return surely sends out the wrong signal. However, Cowen’s selection, at his press conference, of Sean Lemass as his role model could be a sign that he intends to revert to the straight standards of FF of an earlier era.
Cowen should learn the lesson of the catholic church and the long-term damage it has suffered, largely because of its earlier approach to dealing with its own scandals. Clear the cupboard of all those Haughey-related skeletons and set out a new ethical course for FF.
Carpe Diem, Brian.
Has Bertie Ahern been deliberately snubbed by the Hillery family?
Has Bertie Ahern been deliberately snubbed by the Hillery family?
It seems that the family has asked Tanaiste Brian Cowen to deliver the late president’s graveside oration on Wednesday next, rather than inviting the incumbent FF Taoiseach to do so.
After all, Bertie did a particularly fine job at CJH’s funeral, I almost had a tear in my eye. Vincent Browne certainly had in his.
It is widely believed that Haughey and his cronies were behind the scurrilous and untrue rumours widely circulated about the Hillery marriage. It’s probably safe to assume that there was little love lost between Paddy Hillery and CJH. So the family are unlikely to want that gurrier’s chief gofer delivering his funeral oration.
Mind you, this is not without precedent. In 1999, the Lynch family asked Des O’Malley to deliver the graveside oration for former FF Taoiseach Jack Lynch, rather than inviting the then current FF Taoiseach Bertie Ahern to perform the tribute.
Draw your own conclusions.
It seems that the family has asked Tanaiste Brian Cowen to deliver the late president’s graveside oration on Wednesday next, rather than inviting the incumbent FF Taoiseach to do so.
After all, Bertie did a particularly fine job at CJH’s funeral, I almost had a tear in my eye. Vincent Browne certainly had in his.
It is widely believed that Haughey and his cronies were behind the scurrilous and untrue rumours widely circulated about the Hillery marriage. It’s probably safe to assume that there was little love lost between Paddy Hillery and CJH. So the family are unlikely to want that gurrier’s chief gofer delivering his funeral oration.
Mind you, this is not without precedent. In 1999, the Lynch family asked Des O’Malley to deliver the graveside oration for former FF Taoiseach Jack Lynch, rather than inviting the then current FF Taoiseach Bertie Ahern to perform the tribute.
Draw your own conclusions.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
The last time our currency hit stg 80p
Many moons ago, after we broken the exchange link with sterling, but long before the advent of the euro, the punt had dropped back to a value of stg80p.
At the same time, the price of the pint was increasing, through a combination of excise duty increases and the brewers/publicans margins, and rapidly approaching the then almost unimaginable price of 80p (god be with the days!).
I recall a TV sketch at the time featured Eamon Morrissey, studying his pint at the bar and, shaking his head in wonder, asking: “Who’da thought the punt would hit 80p before the pint?”
Nostalgia isn’t what it used to be, and neither is the real price of the pint.
At the same time, the price of the pint was increasing, through a combination of excise duty increases and the brewers/publicans margins, and rapidly approaching the then almost unimaginable price of 80p (god be with the days!).
I recall a TV sketch at the time featured Eamon Morrissey, studying his pint at the bar and, shaking his head in wonder, asking: “Who’da thought the punt would hit 80p before the pint?”
Nostalgia isn’t what it used to be, and neither is the real price of the pint.
Saturday, April 05, 2008
The Greens and the Weighting of Ethics
On some political websites, Green Party participants don’t talk about political pragmatism when justifying continued participation in Govt, despite all the revelations at the Mahon Tribunal of unaccounted sums of money, including foreign currency, washing through the Taoiseach’s hands and accounts linked to him.
Instead, they talk about applying “ethical weightings” to the dilemma, justifying staying in Govt on the basis of getting Green policies enacted, rather than acting as moral watchdog on Fianna Fail. (Pat Rabbitte recycled an old political joke on radio this week: “Faced with the choice of saving the planet or keeping FF straight, the Greens have taken the easy option.”)
But here’s the real problem with Green Weighting of Ethics:
Into one pan of their scales the Greens put “Saving the Planet“, which means that you could put the foulest things imaginable into the other pan and they could still justify their actions. So political corruption, war, famine, pestilence - “bring them on, we’re saving the planet, we have to hold our nerves and our noses and persevere in Govt”. They could have served with Pol Pot on that basis!
And yet, even if Ireland does reach the target of 15% reduction in emissions by 2012, what micro-fraction of 1% reduction in the overall global warming problem will that achieve?
When the Greens work out that micro-fraction, is there any chance they might put it in the pan of their ethical scales and see what level of political corruption can be carried in the other pan before it reaches the tipping point?
Instead, they talk about applying “ethical weightings” to the dilemma, justifying staying in Govt on the basis of getting Green policies enacted, rather than acting as moral watchdog on Fianna Fail. (Pat Rabbitte recycled an old political joke on radio this week: “Faced with the choice of saving the planet or keeping FF straight, the Greens have taken the easy option.”)
But here’s the real problem with Green Weighting of Ethics:
Into one pan of their scales the Greens put “Saving the Planet“, which means that you could put the foulest things imaginable into the other pan and they could still justify their actions. So political corruption, war, famine, pestilence - “bring them on, we’re saving the planet, we have to hold our nerves and our noses and persevere in Govt”. They could have served with Pol Pot on that basis!
And yet, even if Ireland does reach the target of 15% reduction in emissions by 2012, what micro-fraction of 1% reduction in the overall global warming problem will that achieve?
When the Greens work out that micro-fraction, is there any chance they might put it in the pan of their ethical scales and see what level of political corruption can be carried in the other pan before it reaches the tipping point?
Friday, April 04, 2008
More of the same.
Regardless of one’s own political affiliation, it is a matter of national shame when a Taoiseach resigns under a cloud of suspicion, particularly as this is not the first such event in modern times.
Activities which are perceived to demonstrate a lack of ethical standards at senior Government level reflect badly on the country as a whole and the political classes in particular.
The anticipated elevation of Brian Cowan to the office of Taoiseach should have provided an opportunity for a fresh start and a commitment to new and higher standards.
However, the speedy re-admission of Beverly Flynn to the ranks of Fianna Fail suggests that, instead, we’re merely in for “more of the same”.
Footnote: Published as a letter in the Irish Times.
Activities which are perceived to demonstrate a lack of ethical standards at senior Government level reflect badly on the country as a whole and the political classes in particular.
The anticipated elevation of Brian Cowan to the office of Taoiseach should have provided an opportunity for a fresh start and a commitment to new and higher standards.
However, the speedy re-admission of Beverly Flynn to the ranks of Fianna Fail suggests that, instead, we’re merely in for “more of the same”.
Footnote: Published as a letter in the Irish Times.
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
Bertie Ahern - the latest victim of The Curse of the Good Friday Agreement
So Taoiseach Bertie Ahern is the latest leader to fall victim to The Curse of the Good Friday Agreement.
Almost all the other major players have already fallen from grace since the signing of the agreement 10 years ago and, in some cases, their political parties have suffered severe reverses.
Tony Blair - forced out by his own party.
Bertie Ahern - victim of the Mahon tribunal.
David Trimble & UUP - decimated at elections by DUP.
John Hume & SDLP - easily outflanked by Sinn Fein
Bill Clinton - disgraced and almost impeached.
John Alderdice - hated even by the Alliance Party
David Irvine RIP
Gary McMichael & UDP
Monica McWilliams & The Women's Coalition
Each of these men would claim the GFA as one of their outstanding political achievements, yet all essentially left office under a cloud of one sort or another.
So who’s left standing? Of the main leaders in Castle buildings, only Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams. And rumour has it that Gerry may have just cause to feel nervous.
And look who’s going to outlast (just) Bertie - the Rev. Ian Paisley, who’s hanging on as First Minister until after the NI Investment Conference (7-9 May).
Who would have thought, witnessing the abuse of Paisley by fellow loyalists on the night of the GFA signing, that he and the DUP would be cock of the walk in NI politics today?
That politics sure is a funny game.
What odds Gerry to be gone by end 2008?
Almost all the other major players have already fallen from grace since the signing of the agreement 10 years ago and, in some cases, their political parties have suffered severe reverses.
Tony Blair - forced out by his own party.
Bertie Ahern - victim of the Mahon tribunal.
David Trimble & UUP - decimated at elections by DUP.
John Hume & SDLP - easily outflanked by Sinn Fein
Bill Clinton - disgraced and almost impeached.
John Alderdice - hated even by the Alliance Party
David Irvine RIP
Gary McMichael & UDP
Monica McWilliams & The Women's Coalition
Each of these men would claim the GFA as one of their outstanding political achievements, yet all essentially left office under a cloud of one sort or another.
So who’s left standing? Of the main leaders in Castle buildings, only Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams. And rumour has it that Gerry may have just cause to feel nervous.
And look who’s going to outlast (just) Bertie - the Rev. Ian Paisley, who’s hanging on as First Minister until after the NI Investment Conference (7-9 May).
Who would have thought, witnessing the abuse of Paisley by fellow loyalists on the night of the GFA signing, that he and the DUP would be cock of the walk in NI politics today?
That politics sure is a funny game.
What odds Gerry to be gone by end 2008?
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Celia's loan - @ just 2% pa interest rate
According to today’s Irish Times, the loan of £30k (€38.1k) to Celia Larkin in 1993 was repaid as €49k in January 2008.
That equates to an annual compound interest rate of just 2%.
Clearly, the Bank of St Lukes was the place to get your mortgage.
That equates to an annual compound interest rate of just 2%.
Clearly, the Bank of St Lukes was the place to get your mortgage.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Never marry a jerk
Today’s “Morning Ireland” on RTE featured an interview with retired Professor Linda Hirschmann, in Dublin to address a conference in Trinity College on why women are less successful in business that their male counterparts.
This coincided with another discussion item on the programme; “Boys continue to trail girls in exams”, which discussed the routine finding that girls do better in the Leaving cert than boys.
So the question, discussed between female guest and female interviewer, was why the cleverer sex continues to trail the dumber one in terms of top jobs.
It turns out that Prof. Hirschmann has a set of golden rules for successful women to follow, which includes the following gem: “Never marry a jerk”.
That got a laugh in Montrose. I even laughed myself. But if a male guest in a similar discussion had offered “never marry a cow” as a golden rule for successful men, he’d have been immediately jumped on by the interviewer and doubtless RTE’s switchboard would have melted with calls from outraged females. Undoubtedly, Trinity College would have been pressurised to withdraw his invitation to speak at a conference.
So let’s consider the undisputed fact that girls do better academically than boys, but men do better than women in the workplace.
Women have consistently diagnosed this as a result of endemic prejudice against women in the workplace, the infamous glass ceiling.
But the reason may be far more straightforward and simple.
Could it just be that Women are generally better in theory, but men are generally better in practice. ?
This coincided with another discussion item on the programme; “Boys continue to trail girls in exams”, which discussed the routine finding that girls do better in the Leaving cert than boys.
So the question, discussed between female guest and female interviewer, was why the cleverer sex continues to trail the dumber one in terms of top jobs.
It turns out that Prof. Hirschmann has a set of golden rules for successful women to follow, which includes the following gem: “Never marry a jerk”.
That got a laugh in Montrose. I even laughed myself. But if a male guest in a similar discussion had offered “never marry a cow” as a golden rule for successful men, he’d have been immediately jumped on by the interviewer and doubtless RTE’s switchboard would have melted with calls from outraged females. Undoubtedly, Trinity College would have been pressurised to withdraw his invitation to speak at a conference.
So let’s consider the undisputed fact that girls do better academically than boys, but men do better than women in the workplace.
Women have consistently diagnosed this as a result of endemic prejudice against women in the workplace, the infamous glass ceiling.
But the reason may be far more straightforward and simple.
Could it just be that Women are generally better in theory, but men are generally better in practice. ?
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Buffett tops the funny list too!
Warren Buffett (78) is, according to the 2008 Forbes Rich List, the wealthiest man in the world, his personal wealth valued at $62bn. He’s also a man with a good sense of humour.
In a recent letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders he revealed that "I've reluctantly discarded the notion of my continuing to manage the portfolio after my death, abandoning my hope to give new meaning to the term 'thinking outside the box'."
You just can't see Bill Gates coming out with that cracking line, can you?
In a recent letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders he revealed that "I've reluctantly discarded the notion of my continuing to manage the portfolio after my death, abandoning my hope to give new meaning to the term 'thinking outside the box'."
You just can't see Bill Gates coming out with that cracking line, can you?
Tackling Anti-social behaviour - a points system?
Plenty of coverage in the media in the past week regarding drink-fuelled anti-social behaviour, ranging from drunken revelry to rioting to serious assault. Today’s Irish Examiner quotes CSO figures that show a 57% rise in Public Order Offences in the past 5 years.
There’s a growing frustration among the majority of peaceful citizens that the minority can apparently engage in persistent anti-social behaviour and petty crime, without fear of falling foul of the justice system.
The current system seems to be incapable of dealing with many such offences, which may be individually relative minor, but which can make life intolerable for others and which may also lead the perpetrators to become more and more out of control, leading ultimately to more serious offences.
It’s quite understandable that the gardai are reluctant to take legal action in the majority of cases of anti-social behaviour. Scarce garda resources would be tied up in paper-work and court appearances, the court system would be jammed up, while the perpetrators would generally walk away with a slap on the wrist. Young offenders are well aware of the limits and the slim possibility that they’ll receive a custodial sentence and, indeed, the age limits which apply to such sentences.
Possible Solution - The Points System
However, we already have a system, currently applied to a different area of the legal code, which might provide a template for a revised approach to anti-social behaviour and petty crime.
The Points System targets drivers for offences which, individually, would not merit disqualification from driving. However, persistent offenders will accumulate points within a 3-year period and are likely to be ultimately disqualified from driving.
In addition, fines are levied each time such points are awarded. It is possible to appeal the imposition of points for an offence through the courts, but unsuccessful cases trigger a doubling of the penalties, essentially to deter people from wasting garda and court time.
A further financial penalty is likely to be incurred, as annual motor insurance will probably prove to be more expensive, even though the offender hasn’t yet reached the disqualification points level.
It should be possible to create a schedule of appropriate “public order offences”, each with a standard tariff, both financial and penalty point, which can be applied as a “spot fine” by the gardai.
Offenders will accumulate points for each offence and, on reaching a pre-determine level, will face a custodial sentence or other appropriate punitive measure.
Points will lapse after a 3-4 year period.
Unpaid fines will be deducted from any social welfare payments made to the offender, or his/her family if no direct payment is being made to the offender.
I see the main benefits of such a scheme as being:
1. Gardai can take immediate action, imposing fines and penalty points, without having to jam up the court system.
2. The cumulative effect of points makes any public order offence potentially one which will result in a custodial sentence for persistent offenders.
3. The carrying forward of points over a number of years creates a mecahnism for dealing with more juvenile offenders, who currently know that they are too young to face a custodial sentence.
4. Imposing unpaid fines on family welfare incomes will, hopefully, concentrate parents on taking more responsibility for the actions of their “dependant” children.
Footnote: published as a (very long) letter in the Irish Examiner. Also, a sizeable extract aired by Pat Kenny on RTE. I've also emailed it to Charlie Flanagan, FG's Justice spokesman, who has acknowledged it and promised to give it due consideration.
There’s a growing frustration among the majority of peaceful citizens that the minority can apparently engage in persistent anti-social behaviour and petty crime, without fear of falling foul of the justice system.
The current system seems to be incapable of dealing with many such offences, which may be individually relative minor, but which can make life intolerable for others and which may also lead the perpetrators to become more and more out of control, leading ultimately to more serious offences.
It’s quite understandable that the gardai are reluctant to take legal action in the majority of cases of anti-social behaviour. Scarce garda resources would be tied up in paper-work and court appearances, the court system would be jammed up, while the perpetrators would generally walk away with a slap on the wrist. Young offenders are well aware of the limits and the slim possibility that they’ll receive a custodial sentence and, indeed, the age limits which apply to such sentences.
Possible Solution - The Points System
However, we already have a system, currently applied to a different area of the legal code, which might provide a template for a revised approach to anti-social behaviour and petty crime.
The Points System targets drivers for offences which, individually, would not merit disqualification from driving. However, persistent offenders will accumulate points within a 3-year period and are likely to be ultimately disqualified from driving.
In addition, fines are levied each time such points are awarded. It is possible to appeal the imposition of points for an offence through the courts, but unsuccessful cases trigger a doubling of the penalties, essentially to deter people from wasting garda and court time.
A further financial penalty is likely to be incurred, as annual motor insurance will probably prove to be more expensive, even though the offender hasn’t yet reached the disqualification points level.
It should be possible to create a schedule of appropriate “public order offences”, each with a standard tariff, both financial and penalty point, which can be applied as a “spot fine” by the gardai.
Offenders will accumulate points for each offence and, on reaching a pre-determine level, will face a custodial sentence or other appropriate punitive measure.
Points will lapse after a 3-4 year period.
Unpaid fines will be deducted from any social welfare payments made to the offender, or his/her family if no direct payment is being made to the offender.
I see the main benefits of such a scheme as being:
1. Gardai can take immediate action, imposing fines and penalty points, without having to jam up the court system.
2. The cumulative effect of points makes any public order offence potentially one which will result in a custodial sentence for persistent offenders.
3. The carrying forward of points over a number of years creates a mecahnism for dealing with more juvenile offenders, who currently know that they are too young to face a custodial sentence.
4. Imposing unpaid fines on family welfare incomes will, hopefully, concentrate parents on taking more responsibility for the actions of their “dependant” children.
Footnote: published as a (very long) letter in the Irish Examiner. Also, a sizeable extract aired by Pat Kenny on RTE. I've also emailed it to Charlie Flanagan, FG's Justice spokesman, who has acknowledged it and promised to give it due consideration.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Dun Laoghaire Plage - might actually float!
From today's Irish Times
Two rival designs for development of Dún Laoghaire unveiled
A multimillion-euro plan to transform Dún Laoghaire's coastline into a "world-class" tourist attraction was unveiled yesterday.
Two designs for the site along the East Pier to Sandycove were presented to councillors at a private local authority meeting.
"Concept A", which would cost €129 million, envisages a lagoon beach and a pedestrian bridge adjacent to the East Pier. An aquatic play area is intended for the old public baths site, alongside a civic space comprising a restaurant and spa. An underground car park with up to 500 spaces would be provided for visitors.
"Concept B" would cost €92 million and involves provision of a new promenade and sandy beach from the East Pier to the Newtownsmith section. The works entail construction of offshore and shore-connected breakwaters approximately 250m (820ft) out to sea. A new water sports centre in a revamped Sandycove Park would feature.
Either concept would be a massive undertaking and necessitate reclaiming one and a half acres of land from the sea. Councillors decided both should be presented for public consultation.
Public interest is sure to focus on the future use of the derelict public baths - a controversial project in 2005 was the catalyst for the latest designs.
Local conservation groups mobilised against a public-private, high-rise apartment proposal for the site. A petition of 15,000 signatures and several street demonstrations successfully called for the plan to be dropped.
In June 2006, the council adopted a framework for the baths site, setting out a publicly owned amenity that excludes high-rise residential development.
Royal Haskoning Engineers, an international maritime civil engineering group, was asked to produce a feasibility study and preliminary design for the coast from the East Pier to Sandycove, including the public baths.
Management at Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council now faces the challenge of raising finance for the project.
Both design concepts accommodate the proposed Sutton to Sandycove promenade and cycleway. It is thought this will be beneficial when a likely appeal for EU funding is made.
"The public said before they didn't want a private or residential development of the site and we listened," said Fine Gael councillor Mary Mitchell O'Connor. "Our big job now is to find the money for the imaginative and inventive plans."
========================================
If either of these plans resembles my "Dun Laoghaire Plage" proposal, posted here 25th August 2006, then I presume I can expect an appropriate fee from DLRCoCo. LOL.
I also emailed it to Owen Keegan, the County Manager, at that time and it didn't even merit an acknowledgement. (I attached a "read receipt" which confirmed that the email had been opened.)
Footnote: Concept A - Dun Laoghaire Lagoon is very similar in concept to my "Plage" proposal, though the orientation of the beach is slightly different.
Two rival designs for development of Dún Laoghaire unveiled
A multimillion-euro plan to transform Dún Laoghaire's coastline into a "world-class" tourist attraction was unveiled yesterday.
Two designs for the site along the East Pier to Sandycove were presented to councillors at a private local authority meeting.
"Concept A", which would cost €129 million, envisages a lagoon beach and a pedestrian bridge adjacent to the East Pier. An aquatic play area is intended for the old public baths site, alongside a civic space comprising a restaurant and spa. An underground car park with up to 500 spaces would be provided for visitors.
"Concept B" would cost €92 million and involves provision of a new promenade and sandy beach from the East Pier to the Newtownsmith section. The works entail construction of offshore and shore-connected breakwaters approximately 250m (820ft) out to sea. A new water sports centre in a revamped Sandycove Park would feature.
Either concept would be a massive undertaking and necessitate reclaiming one and a half acres of land from the sea. Councillors decided both should be presented for public consultation.
Public interest is sure to focus on the future use of the derelict public baths - a controversial project in 2005 was the catalyst for the latest designs.
Local conservation groups mobilised against a public-private, high-rise apartment proposal for the site. A petition of 15,000 signatures and several street demonstrations successfully called for the plan to be dropped.
In June 2006, the council adopted a framework for the baths site, setting out a publicly owned amenity that excludes high-rise residential development.
Royal Haskoning Engineers, an international maritime civil engineering group, was asked to produce a feasibility study and preliminary design for the coast from the East Pier to Sandycove, including the public baths.
Management at Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council now faces the challenge of raising finance for the project.
Both design concepts accommodate the proposed Sutton to Sandycove promenade and cycleway. It is thought this will be beneficial when a likely appeal for EU funding is made.
"The public said before they didn't want a private or residential development of the site and we listened," said Fine Gael councillor Mary Mitchell O'Connor. "Our big job now is to find the money for the imaginative and inventive plans."
========================================
If either of these plans resembles my "Dun Laoghaire Plage" proposal, posted here 25th August 2006, then I presume I can expect an appropriate fee from DLRCoCo. LOL.
I also emailed it to Owen Keegan, the County Manager, at that time and it didn't even merit an acknowledgement. (I attached a "read receipt" which confirmed that the email had been opened.)
Footnote: Concept A - Dun Laoghaire Lagoon is very similar in concept to my "Plage" proposal, though the orientation of the beach is slightly different.
Bertie's explanations all greek
The Taoiseach is to address the joint Houses of Congress in Washington on 30th April and doubtless his scriptwriting team is already working hard to finalise his speech. Presumably this is the same team which scripted his very well received Westminster speech to the joint Houses of Parliament. That speech drew on Greek mythology for an appropriate analogy for the Northern peace process, likening it to the toils of Sisyphus, who was condemned to eternally push a rock uphill, only for it to roll back down each time.
Did the speechwriters, or Bertie Ahern, ever suspect that Sisyphus would also provide a perfect analogy for the ongoing efforts of the Taoiseach to explain his financial dealings in the 1990’s at the Mahon Tribunal?
So I’m awaiting with interest the further mythological references which will undoubtedly appear in the Washington speech. Pandora’s Box, perhaps?
Footnote: Published as a letter in The Irish Times.
Did the speechwriters, or Bertie Ahern, ever suspect that Sisyphus would also provide a perfect analogy for the ongoing efforts of the Taoiseach to explain his financial dealings in the 1990’s at the Mahon Tribunal?
So I’m awaiting with interest the further mythological references which will undoubtedly appear in the Washington speech. Pandora’s Box, perhaps?
Footnote: Published as a letter in The Irish Times.
Monday, February 11, 2008
The Greens - right questions, wrong targets?
From The Green Party Website
(http://www.greenparty.ie/en/library/agreed_programme_for_government)
“The Government will set a target for this administration of a reduction of 3% per year on average in our greenhouse gas emissions.”
The net result should be a 15% reduction in emissions by the end of this Govt’s term of office in mid-2012, a little over 4 years away.
So what are the green Party Initiatives to achieve this reduction?
1. New Housing regulations.
With a projected 50-60k new housing units per annum, compared to an existing housing stock of 2m+, the impact of this will be minimal in the next 4 years.
2. Changes in VRT & Motor Tax, taxing emissions rather than engine size.
Up to 70% of 2008 registered cars will be purchased by 1st July (and probably 100% of SUVs etc) so any impact in the second half of 2008 will be minimal.
With the size of the 2nd-hand car market in Ireland, it will actually take about 10 years to turnover the national fleet.
The majority of cars purchased in Ireland are already relatively small-engined Fords, Toyotas, Nissans, Fiats etc..
Given the combined impact of the above 3 points, the net effect of the tax changes, within the life of the current Govt, will probably be relatively small in terms of emissions reduction.
3. Light Bulb ban.
This ban comes into effect on Jan 1 2009. Presumably most existing householders will only change when their existing bulbs burn-out, so it will probably be mid-2009 before the full beneficial effect is achieved. While welcome, this will make a very small contribution to the overall 15% target.
4. Renewable Energy Sources
Frequently raised by Minister Eamon Ryan as the solution, he talks about the abundance of free wind, wave and tidal power and our capacity to grow bio-fuels.
Now, the bio-fuel debate has changed significantly, with recent studies showing that they are even more injurious to the environment than the fossil fuels they are supposed to replace.
Wave & tidal power are only at the experimental/prototype stage. Even if approval was given in the morning, there would not be a single wave or tidal installation producing electricity on a commercial basis by the time this Govt has to leave office in 2012.
5. Transport
Minister Ryan has advocated “carbon-free methods of transport”, by which he means walking and cycling. How feasible is this for many commuters, given the urban sprawl we live in?
Major infrastructural investment in public transport, such as Dublin’s proposed metro, extension of Luas, rail connection to Navan, Western Rail Corridor etc. will all take years to deliver, any emissions-reduction impact by mid-2012 will be minimal.
Conclusion:
It’s clear that none of the above, while all broadly welcome as long-term initiatives, has the capacity to seriously contribute to the 15% emissions reduction target during the life of this Govt..
So where is the detailed programme of initiatives which will achieve this particular target from the Programme for Govt?
I suspect that the only way the Greens can achieve this objective is through very punitive measures, banning activities they see as wasteful or at least taxing them to the point where they become unviable, except for the most well-off and, of course, elected officials.
Wouldn’t it be good to see leadership from the top on this - with the Govt imposing restrictions on both itself and the public services, before imposing them on the rest of us?
In any event, we urgently need to see the detailed integrated plan to show how the national 15% target will be achieved by mid-2012.
(http://www.greenparty.ie/en/library/agreed_programme_for_government)
“The Government will set a target for this administration of a reduction of 3% per year on average in our greenhouse gas emissions.”
The net result should be a 15% reduction in emissions by the end of this Govt’s term of office in mid-2012, a little over 4 years away.
So what are the green Party Initiatives to achieve this reduction?
1. New Housing regulations.
With a projected 50-60k new housing units per annum, compared to an existing housing stock of 2m+, the impact of this will be minimal in the next 4 years.
2. Changes in VRT & Motor Tax, taxing emissions rather than engine size.
Up to 70% of 2008 registered cars will be purchased by 1st July (and probably 100% of SUVs etc) so any impact in the second half of 2008 will be minimal.
With the size of the 2nd-hand car market in Ireland, it will actually take about 10 years to turnover the national fleet.
The majority of cars purchased in Ireland are already relatively small-engined Fords, Toyotas, Nissans, Fiats etc..
Given the combined impact of the above 3 points, the net effect of the tax changes, within the life of the current Govt, will probably be relatively small in terms of emissions reduction.
3. Light Bulb ban.
This ban comes into effect on Jan 1 2009. Presumably most existing householders will only change when their existing bulbs burn-out, so it will probably be mid-2009 before the full beneficial effect is achieved. While welcome, this will make a very small contribution to the overall 15% target.
4. Renewable Energy Sources
Frequently raised by Minister Eamon Ryan as the solution, he talks about the abundance of free wind, wave and tidal power and our capacity to grow bio-fuels.
Now, the bio-fuel debate has changed significantly, with recent studies showing that they are even more injurious to the environment than the fossil fuels they are supposed to replace.
Wave & tidal power are only at the experimental/prototype stage. Even if approval was given in the morning, there would not be a single wave or tidal installation producing electricity on a commercial basis by the time this Govt has to leave office in 2012.
5. Transport
Minister Ryan has advocated “carbon-free methods of transport”, by which he means walking and cycling. How feasible is this for many commuters, given the urban sprawl we live in?
Major infrastructural investment in public transport, such as Dublin’s proposed metro, extension of Luas, rail connection to Navan, Western Rail Corridor etc. will all take years to deliver, any emissions-reduction impact by mid-2012 will be minimal.
Conclusion:
It’s clear that none of the above, while all broadly welcome as long-term initiatives, has the capacity to seriously contribute to the 15% emissions reduction target during the life of this Govt..
So where is the detailed programme of initiatives which will achieve this particular target from the Programme for Govt?
I suspect that the only way the Greens can achieve this objective is through very punitive measures, banning activities they see as wasteful or at least taxing them to the point where they become unviable, except for the most well-off and, of course, elected officials.
Wouldn’t it be good to see leadership from the top on this - with the Govt imposing restrictions on both itself and the public services, before imposing them on the rest of us?
In any event, we urgently need to see the detailed integrated plan to show how the national 15% target will be achieved by mid-2012.
Monday, January 07, 2008
Gobshite Gongs for 2007
The vote has been counted in a (Kenyan) democratic process and here are the results:
Best Individual Gobshite: a dead heat between John Deasy & Pat Magner, both chosen for the same reason - Sabotage.
Deasy famously sought to undermine Enda Kenny’s leadership in the run-up to the general election, to the delight of a media which was already generally sceptical about the Mayoman’s credentials to be Taoiseach.
Deasy’s reward has been to find himself consigned to the back bench of the back benches where he can nurse his family chip-on-the-shoulder while watching the new FG intake, e.g. Hayes, Reilly, Varadkar etc, eat his political lunch. His best move now would probably be to throw his hat into the ring for leadership of the PDs (Politically Destitute).
Magner had retired as Labour Party National Organiser in 2006 but, in the run-up to the election, became a bit of a media whore, passing no open microphone without taking the opportunity to denounce labour’s agreed electoral strategy (the Mullingar accord) and tout the keeping open of the FF option. A delighted media was able to use this to continue pressing Pat Rabbitte, at great length, on the FF question in every interview rather than allowing him to promulgate Labour policies. Unlike Deasy, one of Magner’s primary objectives was actually achieved with the post-election resignation of party leader Pat Rabbitte.
It appeared to be the case that Messrs Deasy and Magner would prefer to see their respective parties fail in the elections rather than have their leaders succeed. Certainly, neither sought to enhance the prospects of the Rainbow Coalition which, in the event, was only a handful of seats short of the target.
Best Gobshite Group: Willie O’Dea & his eFFin’ Shannon Rebels.
What have Willie and the Grand Old Duke of York got in common? They’re both military men of some stature, each with an army of broadly similar size and both favour a particular type of military manoeuvre.
However, Willie is the only one of the pair with a magnum: “I only agreed to pose with the magnum because I thought they were talking about a feckin’ ice-cream.”
Best Media Gobshite: Aengus Fanning of the Sindo.
Aengus has long been known as a bit of a ladies man, conquests are rumoured to include Ann Harris, Sinead O’Connor and Mary Coughlan. That aging BMW convertible, letting his long locks blow in the wind, must be a bit of a babe magnet. There was never any public indication that he might swing both ways.
Then he was photographed strolling along the canal bank with Bertie Ahern and suddenly it was splashed all over the Sindo.
The love affair continues, with Bertie pouring his little heart out in regular instalments in the Sindo - he’s almost qualified to join the incestuous little in-house coterie of “Sindo Celebs”.
What I haven’t figured out is why the Sindo wanted payment by way of stamp duty reform. Would Sir Anthony be buying or selling?
Best Individual Gobshite: a dead heat between John Deasy & Pat Magner, both chosen for the same reason - Sabotage.
Deasy famously sought to undermine Enda Kenny’s leadership in the run-up to the general election, to the delight of a media which was already generally sceptical about the Mayoman’s credentials to be Taoiseach.
Deasy’s reward has been to find himself consigned to the back bench of the back benches where he can nurse his family chip-on-the-shoulder while watching the new FG intake, e.g. Hayes, Reilly, Varadkar etc, eat his political lunch. His best move now would probably be to throw his hat into the ring for leadership of the PDs (Politically Destitute).
Magner had retired as Labour Party National Organiser in 2006 but, in the run-up to the election, became a bit of a media whore, passing no open microphone without taking the opportunity to denounce labour’s agreed electoral strategy (the Mullingar accord) and tout the keeping open of the FF option. A delighted media was able to use this to continue pressing Pat Rabbitte, at great length, on the FF question in every interview rather than allowing him to promulgate Labour policies. Unlike Deasy, one of Magner’s primary objectives was actually achieved with the post-election resignation of party leader Pat Rabbitte.
It appeared to be the case that Messrs Deasy and Magner would prefer to see their respective parties fail in the elections rather than have their leaders succeed. Certainly, neither sought to enhance the prospects of the Rainbow Coalition which, in the event, was only a handful of seats short of the target.
Best Gobshite Group: Willie O’Dea & his eFFin’ Shannon Rebels.
What have Willie and the Grand Old Duke of York got in common? They’re both military men of some stature, each with an army of broadly similar size and both favour a particular type of military manoeuvre.
However, Willie is the only one of the pair with a magnum: “I only agreed to pose with the magnum because I thought they were talking about a feckin’ ice-cream.”
Best Media Gobshite: Aengus Fanning of the Sindo.
Aengus has long been known as a bit of a ladies man, conquests are rumoured to include Ann Harris, Sinead O’Connor and Mary Coughlan. That aging BMW convertible, letting his long locks blow in the wind, must be a bit of a babe magnet. There was never any public indication that he might swing both ways.
Then he was photographed strolling along the canal bank with Bertie Ahern and suddenly it was splashed all over the Sindo.
The love affair continues, with Bertie pouring his little heart out in regular instalments in the Sindo - he’s almost qualified to join the incestuous little in-house coterie of “Sindo Celebs”.
What I haven’t figured out is why the Sindo wanted payment by way of stamp duty reform. Would Sir Anthony be buying or selling?
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
What's Fintan going to do about it?
It’s Tuesday and the country has largely ground to a halt.
Government Departments are closed, as are most public services. There are no newspapers and the national broadcaster is transmitting an almost unrelenting diet of religious services, Christmas carols and children’s movies. Public transport is virtually non-existent, airline and ferry services are suspended. Shops and pubs are closed, the latter by legal statute.
How can this be happening in a multi-faith Republic?
Fintan O’Toole must be apoplectic, I can’t wait to read his proposed remedies for this appalling situation in the Irish Times.
Happy Christmas
Government Departments are closed, as are most public services. There are no newspapers and the national broadcaster is transmitting an almost unrelenting diet of religious services, Christmas carols and children’s movies. Public transport is virtually non-existent, airline and ferry services are suspended. Shops and pubs are closed, the latter by legal statute.
How can this be happening in a multi-faith Republic?
Fintan O’Toole must be apoplectic, I can’t wait to read his proposed remedies for this appalling situation in the Irish Times.
Happy Christmas
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Bertie Ahern redefines friendship
Is there anything sadder than regarding people are your close personal friends when those sentiments are not reciprocated?
Taoiseach Bertie Ahern clearly regards Padraic O’Connor, Brian Cowan and Ned O’Keeffe as close personal friends.
From his tribunal testimony it’s clear that Padraic O’Connor regards Bertie as an acquaintance rather than a friend. (Could Bertie have confused him with the famous FFer FFer Pat O’Connor Pat O’Connor?)
All the poll corrs seem to agree that there is little “personal” relationship between Bertie and Brian Cowan and they expressed some surprise at the personal warmth of Bertie’s annointment of Brian as his nominated successor.
Now Bertie is claiming Ned as a close personal friend. Could the poll corrs all be wrong, as they seem to think that Ned hates Bertie’s guts?
However, this apparent disconnection may provide an explanation of Bertie’s “digouts from friends”.
For if you can categorise almost any living human being as a friend, without regard for their reciprocal feelings, then you can categorise any fund-raising operation as a dig-out from friends.
And if they’ve had the good grace to pass away in the interim then, truly, God alone knows how many such fund-raisers they may have actually contributed to. Or if the events actually took place at all.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
7 dead in Omagh fire - father suspected of arson
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror Horror
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
High Court rules against the Irish Times
Irish Times editor Geraldine Kennedy is quoted today in that paper as saying that “it is disappointing that the issue of public interest seemed to receive no weighting in the judgement”, following the decision of the High Court to order herself and Colm Keena to reveal the source of an article about payments to Bertie Ahern, gleaned from confidential documents produced by the Mahon Tribunal.
The High Court ruled that, in this case, journalistic privilege regarding confidentiality of sources was “overwhelmingly outweighed” by the need to maintain public confidence in the Mahon Tribunal itself.
I’m puzzled by the Irish Times claim that this was a publication “in the public interest”. The source was a document from the Mahon Tribunal, detailing information which would, in due course, be put into the public domain via the public hearings of the tribunal. What purpose was served by it’s premature publication in the Irish Times?
The obvious commercial answer is that it was a significant journalistic scoop, generating significant publicity and boosting the reputation of that paper, if not necessarily greatly increasing circulation. However, the downside is that leaks from the Tribunal damage public confidence, reduce political support and provide ammunition to those who are willing to go to the High & Supreme Courts in order to delay and/or stymie the workings of the Tribunal and/or the scope of its ultimate findings.
The problem is further compounded by the destruction by Messrs Kennedy & Keena of the documents received, allegedly from an anonymous source. This effectively rules out any possibility of identification of the original source of the leak to the Irish Times. The corollary of this is that neither Ms Kennedy nor Mr Keena can now provide any credible assurance that the Tribunal itself is not the source of the leak, thus leaving it open to the accusation of resorting to trial by media and depriving those who are under investigation of natural justice.
The High Court ruled that, in this case, journalistic privilege regarding confidentiality of sources was “overwhelmingly outweighed” by the need to maintain public confidence in the Mahon Tribunal itself.
I’m puzzled by the Irish Times claim that this was a publication “in the public interest”. The source was a document from the Mahon Tribunal, detailing information which would, in due course, be put into the public domain via the public hearings of the tribunal. What purpose was served by it’s premature publication in the Irish Times?
The obvious commercial answer is that it was a significant journalistic scoop, generating significant publicity and boosting the reputation of that paper, if not necessarily greatly increasing circulation. However, the downside is that leaks from the Tribunal damage public confidence, reduce political support and provide ammunition to those who are willing to go to the High & Supreme Courts in order to delay and/or stymie the workings of the Tribunal and/or the scope of its ultimate findings.
The problem is further compounded by the destruction by Messrs Kennedy & Keena of the documents received, allegedly from an anonymous source. This effectively rules out any possibility of identification of the original source of the leak to the Irish Times. The corollary of this is that neither Ms Kennedy nor Mr Keena can now provide any credible assurance that the Tribunal itself is not the source of the leak, thus leaving it open to the accusation of resorting to trial by media and depriving those who are under investigation of natural justice.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Judge Carney attacks media in Holohan case
Judge Carney hard-hitting address in Cork should not have confined criticism to "tabloid" media, unless his comments regarding Joe Duffy were intended to include RTE in that classification.
RTE & Pat Kenny were among the greatest offenders in this case. Kenny shamelessly and relentlessly retried Wayne O'Donoghue on both radio & TV following Majella Holohan's victim impact statement and the revelation of the finding of traces of semen on the body of her dead son.
Perhaps Judge Carney should also have queried who on the garda and/or prosecution teams revealed this information to Majella Holohan. If my recollection is correct, these turned out to be microscopic traces which might have been picked up from a bathroom mat and were subsequently shown not to be from Wayne O'Donoghue.
It’s hard not to sympathise with Majella Holohan - presumably if she had included those comments in her pre-prepared script, they would have been disallowed by the court? Her own response, reported this morning on RTE, to Judge Carney’s comments also suggest that she still believes there was some sexual background to the death of her son.
RTE & Pat Kenny were among the greatest offenders in this case. Kenny shamelessly and relentlessly retried Wayne O'Donoghue on both radio & TV following Majella Holohan's victim impact statement and the revelation of the finding of traces of semen on the body of her dead son.
Perhaps Judge Carney should also have queried who on the garda and/or prosecution teams revealed this information to Majella Holohan. If my recollection is correct, these turned out to be microscopic traces which might have been picked up from a bathroom mat and were subsequently shown not to be from Wayne O'Donoghue.
It’s hard not to sympathise with Majella Holohan - presumably if she had included those comments in her pre-prepared script, they would have been disallowed by the court? Her own response, reported this morning on RTE, to Judge Carney’s comments also suggest that she still believes there was some sexual background to the death of her son.
Friday, October 05, 2007
Time for some real bench-marking
Christian Pauls, the German Ambassador, was a guest on Marian Finucane’s RTE radio programme last Saturday to answer the charges arising from his briefing to a visiting German business delegation.
Some of his comments on public service pay levels in Germany were very interesting.
For example, he revealed that his own gross monthly salary is €7,330 (€87,600 pa) which, he said, equated to the salary of quite a senior civil servant in Germany.
He also said that his daughter is a paediatrician, the number 2 in the Paediatric Dept of a large Berlin Clinic, which suggests that she may well at “consultant“ level there. He said that she'd be delighted to earn €70k pa as doctors in Germany earn between €50k-€65k pa.
Herr Pauls said that salary levels for doctors and other professionals working in the public sector are linked to civil service pay levels +/- 10%-15%.
This was the background to his comments on the hospital consultants dismissal of a proposed salary of €200k+ as “mickey-mouse”.
This man is clearly an incorrigible trouble-maker. His comments suggest that we do need another round of bench-marking for the public services, but this time against their counterparts in the EU!
It also raises the following question: just as business now routinely out-sources support functions to other companies and countries (e.g. call centres in India), has the Govt considered outsourcing to other EU countries? It sounds like we could get things done a lot more cost-effectively if we wanted to.
Given that there are many state functions which would be similar in structure, it would probably only require modest systems tweaks and a translation service to handle matters e.g. why not a single “factory” to handle all motor registrations in the EU?
Some of his comments on public service pay levels in Germany were very interesting.
For example, he revealed that his own gross monthly salary is €7,330 (€87,600 pa) which, he said, equated to the salary of quite a senior civil servant in Germany.
He also said that his daughter is a paediatrician, the number 2 in the Paediatric Dept of a large Berlin Clinic, which suggests that she may well at “consultant“ level there. He said that she'd be delighted to earn €70k pa as doctors in Germany earn between €50k-€65k pa.
Herr Pauls said that salary levels for doctors and other professionals working in the public sector are linked to civil service pay levels +/- 10%-15%.
This was the background to his comments on the hospital consultants dismissal of a proposed salary of €200k+ as “mickey-mouse”.
This man is clearly an incorrigible trouble-maker. His comments suggest that we do need another round of bench-marking for the public services, but this time against their counterparts in the EU!
It also raises the following question: just as business now routinely out-sources support functions to other companies and countries (e.g. call centres in India), has the Govt considered outsourcing to other EU countries? It sounds like we could get things done a lot more cost-effectively if we wanted to.
Given that there are many state functions which would be similar in structure, it would probably only require modest systems tweaks and a translation service to handle matters e.g. why not a single “factory” to handle all motor registrations in the EU?
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Revealed: Why there are so few women in Leinster House
Interesting B&A survey of women's attitudes in today's IT - the sample size was 1,003 women aged 18+.
Combining the scores given under “Very Important” and “Quite Important”, the survey throws up some very interesting conclusions:
Personal care (skin/hair) 93%
Financial Independence 91%
Leisure Time 90%
Female friends 90%
Keeping fit 81%
Equality of the sexes 78%
Husband/boyfriend 75%
Taking care of children 69%
Having children in the future 42%
Politics 38%
Good to see that their men made it into the top 10.
And are you still wondering why there aren’t more women in Leinster House?
Combining the scores given under “Very Important” and “Quite Important”, the survey throws up some very interesting conclusions:
Personal care (skin/hair) 93%
Financial Independence 91%
Leisure Time 90%
Female friends 90%
Keeping fit 81%
Equality of the sexes 78%
Husband/boyfriend 75%
Taking care of children 69%
Having children in the future 42%
Politics 38%
Good to see that their men made it into the top 10.
And are you still wondering why there aren’t more women in Leinster House?
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Des O'Malley renounces core PD philosophy
On Friday (14th Sept) Des O’Malley had a letter published in the Irish Times calling for Government intervention in order to ensure retention of the Aer Lingus Shannon-Heathrow service.
The current situation, and the Government’s decision not to intervene, is an obvious outworking of the free-market philosophy so strongly espoused by the Progressive Democrats during their last decade in Government.
O’Malley‘s plea might be more compelling if he was not the man most responsible for the creation of that party and its “let the market decide” philosophy.
If he’s still a member of the PDs he should resign immediately in protest at the Govt‘s action. If not, he should be expelled. What a laugh that would be!
It just goes to prove the old Tip O’Neill adage that “all politics are local”. O’Malley is from Limerick and his daughter may well try for a Dail seat there at the next general election. She lost her seat in Dun Laoghaire last May, and there’s a strong chance that Dun Laoghaire will be reduced from five to four seats next time around.
O'Malley's Letter
Madam, - I spent a good part of my political career seeking to encourage inward manufacturing investment. I had some success.
I realise, therefore, the vital importance of a frequent schedule of air services between the west of Ireland and Heathrow. That overcrowded and unpopular airport is nonetheless Ireland's best point of contact with the rest of the world because of its onward connections.
The termination of services from Shannon to Heathrow will have its greatest effect in making it much more difficult to attract that kind of investment in the future. Apart from the loss of existing jobs, thousands of jobs that might have been created will not materialise. It will be impossible to quantify what might have happened. As a result, those who cause this situation will claim that they are not to blame.
The Shannon region was, and is, one of the few successes in real decentralisation we have. Will it now remain so? Spending hundreds of millions moving junior civil servants down the country is no substitute for real economic activity.
The Minister for Transport, among others, is espousing a version of company law with which I am not familiar. He seems to think that management is supreme, to the exclusion of all others. The Companies Acts envisage the board of directors as responsible for the actions of a company. The board in turn is answerable to the shareholders. The shareholders have the ultimate sanction of dismissing the board if they disagree with the company's policy.
Why retain a blocking minority if it is not going to be used to stop the very sort of thing that we were told it was kept for in the first place? President Sarkozy retained for the French state a blocking minority of shares in the recent merger of Suez and Gaz de France. Does anyone think he would refuse to use it in a similar situation to this? - Yours, etc,
DESMOND O'MALLEY, Merrion Road, Dublin 4.
The current situation, and the Government’s decision not to intervene, is an obvious outworking of the free-market philosophy so strongly espoused by the Progressive Democrats during their last decade in Government.
O’Malley‘s plea might be more compelling if he was not the man most responsible for the creation of that party and its “let the market decide” philosophy.
If he’s still a member of the PDs he should resign immediately in protest at the Govt‘s action. If not, he should be expelled. What a laugh that would be!
It just goes to prove the old Tip O’Neill adage that “all politics are local”. O’Malley is from Limerick and his daughter may well try for a Dail seat there at the next general election. She lost her seat in Dun Laoghaire last May, and there’s a strong chance that Dun Laoghaire will be reduced from five to four seats next time around.
O'Malley's Letter
Madam, - I spent a good part of my political career seeking to encourage inward manufacturing investment. I had some success.
I realise, therefore, the vital importance of a frequent schedule of air services between the west of Ireland and Heathrow. That overcrowded and unpopular airport is nonetheless Ireland's best point of contact with the rest of the world because of its onward connections.
The termination of services from Shannon to Heathrow will have its greatest effect in making it much more difficult to attract that kind of investment in the future. Apart from the loss of existing jobs, thousands of jobs that might have been created will not materialise. It will be impossible to quantify what might have happened. As a result, those who cause this situation will claim that they are not to blame.
The Shannon region was, and is, one of the few successes in real decentralisation we have. Will it now remain so? Spending hundreds of millions moving junior civil servants down the country is no substitute for real economic activity.
The Minister for Transport, among others, is espousing a version of company law with which I am not familiar. He seems to think that management is supreme, to the exclusion of all others. The Companies Acts envisage the board of directors as responsible for the actions of a company. The board in turn is answerable to the shareholders. The shareholders have the ultimate sanction of dismissing the board if they disagree with the company's policy.
Why retain a blocking minority if it is not going to be used to stop the very sort of thing that we were told it was kept for in the first place? President Sarkozy retained for the French state a blocking minority of shares in the recent merger of Suez and Gaz de France. Does anyone think he would refuse to use it in a similar situation to this? - Yours, etc,
DESMOND O'MALLEY, Merrion Road, Dublin 4.
BoE should have let Northern hit the Rocks
The Bank of England should not have bailed out Northern Rock .
Fiscal Prudence may seem boring but it’s an essential prerequisite for any serious financial institution and its customers.
Prudence doesn’t come free. It limits management’s capacity to “take a punt” and thus they may seem to miss out of profit opportunities in rising markets. It also means that prudent institutions are contributors to industry-wide insurance schemes such as FSCS, even though they will never need to call on such insurance.
The Northern Rocks, on the other hand, are the “wide boys” of the financial services business, claiming to be innovators, mould-breakers, more customer-focused than their fuddy-duddy competitors. Often lauded by the media who take their every press release at face value.
Northern Rock has been operating a dangerously unbalanced business model, the dangers of which have been recognised by banks for generations: using short-term deposits and interbank loans, repayable on demand or within a relatively short period, to fund 20-year mortgages leaves you seriously exposed if confidence in your bank is in any way damaged, and/or market conditions change.
The sub-prime credit crunch was unforeseen, but it’s only one of many events which might have precipitated Northern Rock’s current liquidity problems.
The Bank of England should not have bailed Northern Rock out. The business is solvent and depositors funds should not be in any real danger, even if depositors were alarmed and temporarily discommoded by a closure. In such a scenario, Northern Rock would have been bought by a competitor within weeks, if not days. However, the message to the other “wide-boys”, and the public who do business with them, would have been stark. The management team and board of directors would be immediately unemployed and their professional reputations in the industry would be destroyed. The shareholders would be looking at even greater losses, making the likelihood of investment in similar enterprises unlikely for some time to come.
By bailing Northern Rock out, the Bank of England instead sends the signal to Wide-Boy management that it’s OK to keep sailing close to the wind - and they will keep doing just that. Meantime, the prudent serious players will continue to fund insurance schemes to protect their competitors customers.
Fiscal Prudence may seem boring but it’s an essential prerequisite for any serious financial institution and its customers.
Prudence doesn’t come free. It limits management’s capacity to “take a punt” and thus they may seem to miss out of profit opportunities in rising markets. It also means that prudent institutions are contributors to industry-wide insurance schemes such as FSCS, even though they will never need to call on such insurance.
The Northern Rocks, on the other hand, are the “wide boys” of the financial services business, claiming to be innovators, mould-breakers, more customer-focused than their fuddy-duddy competitors. Often lauded by the media who take their every press release at face value.
Northern Rock has been operating a dangerously unbalanced business model, the dangers of which have been recognised by banks for generations: using short-term deposits and interbank loans, repayable on demand or within a relatively short period, to fund 20-year mortgages leaves you seriously exposed if confidence in your bank is in any way damaged, and/or market conditions change.
The sub-prime credit crunch was unforeseen, but it’s only one of many events which might have precipitated Northern Rock’s current liquidity problems.
The Bank of England should not have bailed Northern Rock out. The business is solvent and depositors funds should not be in any real danger, even if depositors were alarmed and temporarily discommoded by a closure. In such a scenario, Northern Rock would have been bought by a competitor within weeks, if not days. However, the message to the other “wide-boys”, and the public who do business with them, would have been stark. The management team and board of directors would be immediately unemployed and their professional reputations in the industry would be destroyed. The shareholders would be looking at even greater losses, making the likelihood of investment in similar enterprises unlikely for some time to come.
By bailing Northern Rock out, the Bank of England instead sends the signal to Wide-Boy management that it’s OK to keep sailing close to the wind - and they will keep doing just that. Meantime, the prudent serious players will continue to fund insurance schemes to protect their competitors customers.
Northern Rock - Irish Govt intervention?
Northern Rock depositors in the Republic are covered by the UK’s Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
However, compensation under the FSCS scheme is limited: 100% for the first £2,000 in savings and 90% for the next £33,000.
On savings above £35,000 you get nothing.
In other words, the FSCS pays out a maximum of £31,700 per person. Yet we’re told that the average Northern Rock deposit in the Republic is €100k, which is approximately double the amount covered by the FSCS.
In those circumstances, should Finance Minister Brian Cowen be offering such reassurance to Irish depositors?
However, compensation under the FSCS scheme is limited: 100% for the first £2,000 in savings and 90% for the next £33,000.
On savings above £35,000 you get nothing.
In other words, the FSCS pays out a maximum of £31,700 per person. Yet we’re told that the average Northern Rock deposit in the Republic is €100k, which is approximately double the amount covered by the FSCS.
In those circumstances, should Finance Minister Brian Cowen be offering such reassurance to Irish depositors?
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Eddie Hobbs & Brendan Investments
Eddie Hobbs has already had wide media coverage for his new property investment vehicle, Brendan Investments Pan European Property PLC and he’ll be a guest on the Late Late Show tomorrow to put the icing on his PR cake.
The aim of the Company is to raise €50m in capital and borrow a further €150m to create a property investment portfolio worth €200m. The prospectus says that “the company will work with current and future bank lenders to secure bank finance AT A MINIMUM LEVEL OF 75% of the value of the property.”
Page 12 of the prospectus covers the fees payable by investors:
The fees will be as follows:
= No entry fees.
= 1% of the gross asset value of the company is payable to Brendan Investments Property Management Limited for the management of the property and development portfolio.
Assuming that the company succeeds in raising €50m and investing it with 75% gearing, the gross asset value of the company would be €200m. At this level the 1% fee payable to the management company would be €2m annually.
The prospectus advises that the expected life of the company is 7-10 years, at the end of which period the assets will be liquidated and distributed to the company.
This suggests that, even if there is no capital appreciation from the property assets purchased, the management company will receive €14m-20m in fees. If the value of the underlying assets increase, the annual fee will also increase pro-rata.
Assuming the company makes only the initial call on investors, one would assume that they will try to invest the funds raised fairly quickly, within the first 12-18 months? Some development projects may take longer but the company strategy is to invest 75% of funds in existing rent-producing commercial properties.
An annual fee of €2m may be reasonable in the initial couple of years when management activity will be at its maximum, but in the later years of the scheme, when little new investment is being undertaken, it seems like a tidy little earner for the promoters.
An annual charge 1% of Gross Assets, rather than 1% of the investors capital, is a way of disguising the real annual 4% charge being levied by promoters. This approach is not unique to Brendan Investments.
The aim of the Company is to raise €50m in capital and borrow a further €150m to create a property investment portfolio worth €200m. The prospectus says that “the company will work with current and future bank lenders to secure bank finance AT A MINIMUM LEVEL OF 75% of the value of the property.”
Page 12 of the prospectus covers the fees payable by investors:
The fees will be as follows:
= No entry fees.
= 1% of the gross asset value of the company is payable to Brendan Investments Property Management Limited for the management of the property and development portfolio.
Assuming that the company succeeds in raising €50m and investing it with 75% gearing, the gross asset value of the company would be €200m. At this level the 1% fee payable to the management company would be €2m annually.
The prospectus advises that the expected life of the company is 7-10 years, at the end of which period the assets will be liquidated and distributed to the company.
This suggests that, even if there is no capital appreciation from the property assets purchased, the management company will receive €14m-20m in fees. If the value of the underlying assets increase, the annual fee will also increase pro-rata.
Assuming the company makes only the initial call on investors, one would assume that they will try to invest the funds raised fairly quickly, within the first 12-18 months? Some development projects may take longer but the company strategy is to invest 75% of funds in existing rent-producing commercial properties.
An annual fee of €2m may be reasonable in the initial couple of years when management activity will be at its maximum, but in the later years of the scheme, when little new investment is being undertaken, it seems like a tidy little earner for the promoters.
An annual charge 1% of Gross Assets, rather than 1% of the investors capital, is a way of disguising the real annual 4% charge being levied by promoters. This approach is not unique to Brendan Investments.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Fintan O'Toole wants Nothing!
In his Irish Times column (Tues 28th Aug) , Fintan O’Toole tells us that “the choice is simple: all or nothing” when it comes to religious symbolism and influence in public life and public services. He comes down firmly on the side of the “nothing option”.
That same day I heard him interviewed on radio about his column, where he extolled the virtues of the USA system where that same “nothing option” operates.
That’s the same USA which lacks universal healthcare or social welfare, whose draconian legal system keeps record numbers in jail, mainly blacks, and executes large numbers each year, and where the Christian right constantly and publicly seeks to exercise political influence with some success, notably in the case of President Bush.
Contrast that with the Ireland of today, seemingly crippled under the weight of Catholicism in O’Toole’s view. Some of his concerns are valid e.g. the over-reliance of the state on the churches for education and hospital care, but some are simply prime examples of political correctness .
The Dail’s opening prayer, Bertie’s ashes and RTE’s Angelus are long-established custom and practice which may offend the super-liberals and the bigots, but they oppress no-one and that is the most important consideration.
From the perspective of societal outcomes, I’d suggest to Fintan that USA theory looks somewhat better than USA practice with, hopefully, the reverse situation pertaining in Ireland.
That same day I heard him interviewed on radio about his column, where he extolled the virtues of the USA system where that same “nothing option” operates.
That’s the same USA which lacks universal healthcare or social welfare, whose draconian legal system keeps record numbers in jail, mainly blacks, and executes large numbers each year, and where the Christian right constantly and publicly seeks to exercise political influence with some success, notably in the case of President Bush.
Contrast that with the Ireland of today, seemingly crippled under the weight of Catholicism in O’Toole’s view. Some of his concerns are valid e.g. the over-reliance of the state on the churches for education and hospital care, but some are simply prime examples of political correctness .
The Dail’s opening prayer, Bertie’s ashes and RTE’s Angelus are long-established custom and practice which may offend the super-liberals and the bigots, but they oppress no-one and that is the most important consideration.
From the perspective of societal outcomes, I’d suggest to Fintan that USA theory looks somewhat better than USA practice with, hopefully, the reverse situation pertaining in Ireland.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Festival of World Cultures.
I’m not a great fan of my local authority DLRCoCo, but top marks to them for the Festival of World Cultures.
It’s a great reminder that culture & craic are not synonymous with wealth - great music and dance from some of the poorest countries on the planet.
Respect!
It’s a great reminder that culture & craic are not synonymous with wealth - great music and dance from some of the poorest countries on the planet.
Respect!
Friday, August 24, 2007
Pat Rabbitte - the next leader of Fine Gael.
This may seem like an outside bet, but “what-if”…
Following the precedent set by Michael O’Leary in 1982 - Pat Rabbitte resigns from the Labour Party and joins Fine Gael.
FG & the country would benefit greatly from a revivial of the “just society” ethos in one of the major parties and a Rabbitte-led FG could be just the ticket. A combination of “left-wing” social policies funded by “right-wing” economic policies could well be a winning combination.
In 5 years time we could have a Labour Party which has moved to the Left and is scaring the middle classes with socialist economics, a Green Party which is mortally wounded by the embrace of FF and no PDs to contend with. FF may still be mired in the fallout from the various tribunals (which hasn’t seemed to deter voters to date).
In such an electoral scenario, a “Just Society” FG could clean up. Unfortunately, there’s not enough liberalism within the existing FG to achieve that change of direction without an injection of external talent. Enter Pat Rabbitte.
Following the precedent set by Michael O’Leary in 1982 - Pat Rabbitte resigns from the Labour Party and joins Fine Gael.
FG & the country would benefit greatly from a revivial of the “just society” ethos in one of the major parties and a Rabbitte-led FG could be just the ticket. A combination of “left-wing” social policies funded by “right-wing” economic policies could well be a winning combination.
In 5 years time we could have a Labour Party which has moved to the Left and is scaring the middle classes with socialist economics, a Green Party which is mortally wounded by the embrace of FF and no PDs to contend with. FF may still be mired in the fallout from the various tribunals (which hasn’t seemed to deter voters to date).
In such an electoral scenario, a “Just Society” FG could clean up. Unfortunately, there’s not enough liberalism within the existing FG to achieve that change of direction without an injection of external talent. Enter Pat Rabbitte.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Fintan O'Toole calls for Willie O'Dea's head.
In today’s Irish Times, Fintan O’Toole calls for the political head of Defence Minister Willie O’Dea on the grounds that O’Dea has opposed agreed Government policy on the Aer Lingus Shannon-Heathrow decision and that he is breach of collective cabinet responsibility. But are either of these serious charges valid?
O’Toole quotes Article 28.4.2 of the Constitution: "The Government shall meet and act as a collective authority, and shall be collectively responsible for the Departments of State administered by the members of the Government."
O’Toole then outlines the basis for his charges: “Last week, in a statement issued through the Department of the Taoiseach - implying that she was in effect acting Taoiseach at the time - and explicitly "speaking on behalf of the Government", Mary Hanafin issued a strong statement of its policy on the Aer Lingus decision to end its Shannon to Heathrow service.
She could not have been clearer about Government policy on the matter: "As a listed plc, Aer Lingus has to take its own decisions. It is inappropriate for the Government to intervene in the decision making of a private company. To do so would ultimately be damaging to the company and its customers."“
And later in his article he says that “a Government decision not to interfere with the Aer Lingus move was taken last week - otherwise Mary Hanafin could not have issued her statement.”
Surely Article 28.4.2 of the Constitution implies that a some sort of meeting of Government is required to determine Government policy and, as far as I’m aware, no such meeting has taken place. How can a statement issued by the Minister for Education, on a topic that is totally unrelated to her brief, assume the weight of a policy position formally agreed at a cabinet meeting? Does Fintan O’Toole believe that this is how the constitution envisaged that cabinet decisions would be taken and communicated to cabinet members?
In addition, the assertion in Minister Hannifin’s statement that “it is inappropriate for the Government to intervene in the decision making of a private company” is somewhat misleading, particularly in light of the fact that many cabinet members have indicated that they are unhappy with the Aer Lingus decision. It's quite common for minority shareholders to vote their shareholding in whatever way suits their broader business objectives and not necessarily the interests of the company in question e.g. Ryanair’s holding in Aer Lingus!
O’Toole quotes Article 28.4.2 of the Constitution: "The Government shall meet and act as a collective authority, and shall be collectively responsible for the Departments of State administered by the members of the Government."
O’Toole then outlines the basis for his charges: “Last week, in a statement issued through the Department of the Taoiseach - implying that she was in effect acting Taoiseach at the time - and explicitly "speaking on behalf of the Government", Mary Hanafin issued a strong statement of its policy on the Aer Lingus decision to end its Shannon to Heathrow service.
She could not have been clearer about Government policy on the matter: "As a listed plc, Aer Lingus has to take its own decisions. It is inappropriate for the Government to intervene in the decision making of a private company. To do so would ultimately be damaging to the company and its customers."“
And later in his article he says that “a Government decision not to interfere with the Aer Lingus move was taken last week - otherwise Mary Hanafin could not have issued her statement.”
Surely Article 28.4.2 of the Constitution implies that a some sort of meeting of Government is required to determine Government policy and, as far as I’m aware, no such meeting has taken place. How can a statement issued by the Minister for Education, on a topic that is totally unrelated to her brief, assume the weight of a policy position formally agreed at a cabinet meeting? Does Fintan O’Toole believe that this is how the constitution envisaged that cabinet decisions would be taken and communicated to cabinet members?
In addition, the assertion in Minister Hannifin’s statement that “it is inappropriate for the Government to intervene in the decision making of a private company” is somewhat misleading, particularly in light of the fact that many cabinet members have indicated that they are unhappy with the Aer Lingus decision. It's quite common for minority shareholders to vote their shareholding in whatever way suits their broader business objectives and not necessarily the interests of the company in question e.g. Ryanair’s holding in Aer Lingus!
Saturday, August 11, 2007
From Major to Minor.
After 2 rounds of the USPGA, the final Major of the season, normal service has been resumed with Tiger Woods on -6, leading the field by 2 strokes.
One of the interesting practices of the USPGA is to put the winners of the previous three majors of that season into the same three-ball, so Padraig Harrington (British Open), Zach Johnson (Masters) and Angel Cabrera (US Open) played together for the first two rounds.
After the first two rounds, the cut came at +5, the only survivor of the trio is Harrington (+2), with Johnson (+10) and Cabrera (+11) both eliminated.
Among the other former Major winners to miss the cut were Ben Curtis, Jim Furyk, Vijay Singh, Justin Leonard, Michael Campbell and Jose Maria Olazabal.
Small consolation perhaps to Colin Montgomerie, (once described as the best golfer never to win a major, but no longer playing well enough for that title) who just made the +5 score and survives to compete in the final two rounds.
But wouldn’t you think that two men who’ve actually won majors in the current season could at least make the cut? Sort of confirms that this “winning a Major” lark is actually a bit of a lottery, particularly when looking at those players who’ve only done it once.
One of the interesting practices of the USPGA is to put the winners of the previous three majors of that season into the same three-ball, so Padraig Harrington (British Open), Zach Johnson (Masters) and Angel Cabrera (US Open) played together for the first two rounds.
After the first two rounds, the cut came at +5, the only survivor of the trio is Harrington (+2), with Johnson (+10) and Cabrera (+11) both eliminated.
Among the other former Major winners to miss the cut were Ben Curtis, Jim Furyk, Vijay Singh, Justin Leonard, Michael Campbell and Jose Maria Olazabal.
Small consolation perhaps to Colin Montgomerie, (once described as the best golfer never to win a major, but no longer playing well enough for that title) who just made the +5 score and survives to compete in the final two rounds.
But wouldn’t you think that two men who’ve actually won majors in the current season could at least make the cut? Sort of confirms that this “winning a Major” lark is actually a bit of a lottery, particularly when looking at those players who’ve only done it once.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)