A Thuggery of English forwards

Former England hooker Brian Moore now works as a commentator on rugby, and was working yesterday on the BBC match coverage of the EDF semi-finals.
As a player, he came across as arrogant, aggressive and generally unpleasant – he was everything you love to hate in an English forward.

So, during the commentary, his co-presenter (name unknown) mentioned that, before the match, Moore had bumped into his former England pack colleagues Wade Dooley and Paul Ackford. Not a trio to be messed with, he opined.

“What would be the collective noun for that group?” asked Moore.
“A thuggery”, came the immediate response.

In all fairness to Moore, he immediately acknowledged the quality of the wit and, for about 15-20 seconds, he could be heard chuckling in the background while his Wildean co-presenter continued with the match commentary.

Vegetables on Leinster Lawn

First Lady Michelle Obama plans to use part of the White House lawn to grow vegetables.

Could this be a direct result of the Taoiseach’s visit on St Patrick’s day?

Did Mr Cowen let it slip that Leinster lawn has, for the past decade, been dedicated exclusively to the accommodation of Irish vegetables?

Footnote: Published as a letter in the Irish Times, much to my surprise.

Shane Ross's IN&M & BOI dilemma

Shane Ross is on the horns of a dilemma

Picture the scene: Shane Ross in front of the wife’s full-length bedroom mirror, for the umpteenth time practising his impromptu and unrehearsed verbal assault planned for the Bank of Ireland board at the banks EGM at the end of this month.

His climactic finale is a call for the Governor, Richard Burrows, and the entire board to publicly offer an abject apology to shareholders as a preamble to tendering their collective resignations.

Then, on Morning Ireland, he hears the dreaded news:
Independent News & Media - O’Reilly out, O’Brien's people in.

What to do?
Denis O’Brien will, as a director, be sitting at that Bank of Ireland top table. Ross has already used his poison pen in the Sindo to besmirch the reputation of the new power behind the throne. Will he risk attacking O’Brien for his role in Bank of Ireland?

On the evidence to date, Ross will do a major rewrite of that Bank of Ireland address.

After all, Ross has self-serving history in this regard. He’s always brown-nosed Sir Anthony, regardless of his many business failure (e.g. Fitzwilton, WW, now IN&M in danger) or scandal (e.g. Rennicks payments featuring in tribunal).

Ross has never mentioned that IN&M share price has collapsed by over 95% since the peak about 2 years ago – almost as bad as a bank.

Never a critical word about the perennially loss-making London Independent, another expensive Sir Anthony vanity project.

For a man who’s always rabbiting on about the incestuous nature of Irish boardrooms, Ross has never commented critically on the IN&M boardroom, where for a long period Sir Anthony was both Chairman & Chief Executive, with a bloated board filled with O’Reilly family members and old and faithful retainers who were never likely to ask an awkward question.

So I’m betting that the valiant Senator will do a major rewrite of his speech, removing from it any implied criticism of the independent directors, which would include Denis O’Brien.
Any attack will be focused specifically on Governor Burrows and the Executive directors.

Frankly, I hope O’Brien fires Ross and gets someone who actually knows something business and economics to replace the populist tosser.

Cromwell spells it out for Fianna Fail

Wouldn’t those FFers just get on your wick!

Minister Noel Dempsey’s Ard Fheis annoyance at supposed comparisons being made between Fianna Fail and the bankers is greatly exceeded by the annoyance of the bankers I know, who feel they’ve had enough abuse heaped on them without having to endure the odium of this new charge.

In making his historical references, Minister Dempsey bravely took the risk of being reminded of Cromwell’s famous injunction to parliament: “You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!”

Now that seems quite appropriate for this Government.

Bruton loses the plot - proposes illegal bank split.

Richard Bruton’s proposal on Morning Ireland is clearly bonkers and almost certainly illegal.

He proposes that AIB & BOI each be split into two parts – a “new” bank with all the deposits and the loans which can be assessed as having value, split off from the “old” bank which would contain all the bad and doubtful lending. The latter would no longer actively operate as a bank, its task would be to manage down its loan book in order to achieve the best possible level of recovery. Almost inevitably, a fairly high proportion of those loans would ultimately have to be written off.

However, part of Bruton’s stated rationale was that there’s c. €25bn in bonds issued by AIB & BOI which are not covered by the existing Govt guarantee and responsibility for repayment of these could be left with the “old” asset-stripped bank.

This idea that the assets of AIB and BOI could be split into “good” & “bad”, with a specific objective of leaving holders of €25bn in bonds, issued by those banks, without recourse to the good assets would undoubtedly be rejected in any court of law in Ireland or Europe.

It’s like Pat Kenny transferring all his assets to Cathy Kenny and then calling his bank manager to say “hey, remember that €2m you lent me to buy a quarry? Well come and sue me for it, but you’ll get nothing ‘cos I’ve no assets. Even the quarry is in the wife’s name.” The transfer of his assets would be deemed illegal by the courts and would be reversed.

Not only would Bruton’s proposal be deemed illegal, the mere act of the Govt even making the proposal would also tell international markets that investing in any Irish company is not for the faint hearted. The message would be that we have a cowboy Govt., no-one would want to do business in/with Ireland.

It might deter US multinationals from establishing, expanding or even maintaining operations in Ireland. Richard Bruton’s proposal would constitute nothing short of corporate fraud perpetrated by a sovereign Govt..

Is that the message he wishes to convey?

Footnote: I've emailed this to Richard Bruton.

Time for Bankers (& politicians) to go.

Media reports at the weekend that negotiations on recapitalisation between the government and the two main banks are ongoing but with a number of issues unresolved. One in particular seems to be the refusal of AIB Chief Executive Eugene Sheehy to step down, and he’s clearly got the support of the AIB board in this stance.

The reality is that it’s past time for Bank of Ireland Governor (chairman) Richard Burrowes to join his Chief Executive Brian Goggin in heading for the exit. AIB Chairman Dermot Gleeson and Chief Executive Eugene Sheehy should also be on their way.

The buck has to stop with them for the devastation of shareholder value in their companies, that’s what they’re paid the big money for. Indeed, the rest of the boards of AIB & BOI should also be actively considering their positions.

The issue is about the competence, or lack of it, displayed in the lending decisions of those banks and the consequences now for shareholders and, perhaps, for the very survival of the banks.

It is not a question of personal or business integrity, as has now arisen at Anglo Irish Bank. However, the longer these senior AIB & BOI bankers refuse to accept that the buck must stop with them and that there are inevitable consequences, the more it does raise the question of integrity.

I do have some sympathy with these bankers for having to endure the public hectoring of Government ministers. The sheer hypocrisy of these politicians, many of whom were directly responsible for the highly reckless fiscal policy which got us here, is particularly galling. For over a decade, every annual budget, presided over by a Fianna Fail minister, poured petrol on an already over-heating construction market.

The public are overdue a contrite apology from our political leaders, in particular Brian Cowen. Senior bankers must console themselves with the thought that they may well be joined in early retirement by senior politicians, when the public finally gets an opportunity to pass judgement at the ballot box.

New Government Structure

The Government has not inspired much confidence in its handling, to date, of the economic crisis.

In addition, there is a clear perception that the whole structure of Government and the supporting civil service is no longer “fit for purpose”.

The Constitution stipulates a minimum of 7 ministers, including the Taoiseach, and a maximum of 15 – which is, naturally, the number we currently have.

The following is a straw-man proposal for an entirely new Government structure, which is based on what a real business structure might look like.

The main objectives of the proposed structure are
(a) to reduce the number of individual ministerial and departmental silos and group them into more logical “business divisions”.
(b) to facilitate the proper prioritisation and allocation of resources – both financial, human and physical. Divisions would have an amalgamated annual budget, with prioritisation and allocation of resources within the division the responsibility of the relevant minister.
(c) to achieve economies and efficiencies through creation of shared interdepartmental support functions at a “head office” level.

For the purposes of simplicity, I’ve taken the existing Departmental titles and redistributed them, sometimes splitting out individual elements, into the new divisional structure.

In my model we go to the minimum number i.e. 7. Each "division" to be headed up by a Minister. Within each divisional portfolio, key elements might be under a Junior Minister where deemed necessary - but they would have a serious and meaty job to do.

NEW DIVISIONAL Departmental STRUCTURE (7)

1. Taoiseach

2. External Relations (Dept)
- Foreign Affairs
- European Affairs (currently in Office of Taoiseach)

3. Finance (Dept)
- Finance

4. Enterprise (Dept)
- Enterprise Trade & Employment
- Communications, Energy & Natural Resources
- Agriculture, Fisheries & Food
- Tourism
- Transport

5. Environment (Dept)
- Environment, Heritage & Local Govt

6. Social (Dept)
- Health & Children
- Education & Science
- Social & Family Affairs
- Community, Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs
- Arts, Sport

7. Security (Dept)
- Defence
- Justice, Equality & Law reform

SHARED INTERDEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT FUNCTIONS (“Head Office”)

- IT
- HR/Training
- Payroll
- Finance/Accounting
- Purchasing/Procurement
- Communications/PR
- Legal
- Operations (planning, co-ordination & implementation)

Cowen wows the Dublin Chamber of Commerce

Taoiseach Brian Cowen is widely reported to have delivered a highly motivational speech as guest speaker at a Chamber dinner last night.

The best since Colonel Tim Collins, I’m told. And we all know how Iraq turned out.

Taoiseach Cowen calls for IMF to solve problems

One of the biggest problems facing Irish business is that the relative strength of the Euro, particularly with sterling, has made it very difficult to maintain exports and/or profit margins.

If Ireland still had the Punt as our currency, we could devalue to make our exports more competitively priced. As members, and very small ones at that, of the Eurozone, we have little say in the value of the currency and there’s no possibility that the currency will be devalued to suit our particular needs. After all, even in our pomp we were still only 1% of the wider EU economy.

However, a couple of months back something accidentally triggered a fall in the value of the Euro: a claim by a union leader that the Taoiseach had raised the spectre, during Social Partnership talks, of the IMF having to be called in.

So how could we engineer a repeat of this “accident”, without incurring the wrath of our EU and Eurozone partners?

Barack Obama swept into power on the back of a simple but very powerful and populist slogan: “Yes we can”.
Labour’s Eamon Gilmore nicked this at his party’s annual conference with his “is féider linn” call in the leader’s closing speech.
Now, in the Dáil, Taoiseach Brian Cowen has defiantly told the opposition that he’ll “do it my way” or, in the first official language “im modh féin”.

So Taoiseach Cowen should organise a series of open air rallies around the country to mobilise and motivate the populace, with local FF supporters primed to turn up with placards and rehearsed chants in supports of our leaders declared modus operandi.

To make it a bit snappier, any PR guru would advise that “im modh féin” be reduced to its appropriate TLA, that is, IMF.

Picture the sight beamed across the world by 24-hour TV channels - a belligerent Cowen roaring incoherently off a platform or the back of a truck, to a huge crowd chanting “IMF, IMF, IMF” and waving placards bearing those same initials.
That should be enough to send the Euro into freefall and take much of the pressure off our hard-pressed exporters.

Mike Soden - enjoying a cold dish!

The resignation of Mike Soden as Bank of Ireland (BOI) Group Chief executive was a surprise announcement on Saturday 29th May 2004. The market gave its judgement on Monday 31st May, the next working day, when BOI shares rose 4%.

Revenge, they say, is a dish best eaten cold and, almost 5 years later, Mike Soden is enjoying that dish and a new lease of life on RTE and other local media, where he is calling for the heads of the current bank CEOs and an amalgamation of AIB & BOI. Now where have I heard that proposal before?

Mike Soden succeeded Maurice Keane as BOI CEO in Feb 2002. Soden was an outsider, brought in from National Australia Bank, where he was Executive General Manager of Global Business and Personal Financial Services based in Melbourne, specifically to do the “transformational deal” which would take BOI from being a big fish in a very small pond in Ireland into a serious player on the European banking stage. It was felt that the internal contenders for the top job were all BOI “lifers” and lacked the experience, and possibly the imagination, to spot and execute such an opportunity.

Soden’s first big idea was to merge BOI and AIB to create a “national champion” with sufficient scale to ward off predators and expand geographically. This champion would have sufficient capacity to stage takeovers of mid-sized local players in other countries.

This “big idea” fell at the first hurdles – AIB weren’t remotely interested and the competition implications of combining the two largest players, by some margin, in a relatively small market like Ireland were overwhelmingly negative. However, Soden persisted with the promulgation of this idea long past the point where it was dead in the water, showing a distinct lack of business and political judgement. This didn’t endear him to the analysts community or, indeed, to his board of directors and senior executive colleagues. His preoccupation with this proposal, and obvious lack of cop on when it was clearly a non-runner, became something of an annoyance and embarrassment to his BOI colleagues.

Soden’s next big idea was to take over the troubled Abbey National in the UK – an October 2002 proposal which was badly received by the markets and the BOI share price fell like a stone. That deal was rejected by Abbey National and, in due course, it fell through, causing the BOI share price to rise.

In 2003 BOI signed a 10-year deal with the British Post Office (BPO) to provide financial services across its network of post offices. This deal was largely sealed on the back of the relationship built up with First Direct, a BOI subsidiary which has provided all the BPOs foreign exchange services since the mid-90s (and had grown to be the largest provider of FX services in UK).

Despite his clear remit to do “the transformational deal”, the BPO was the nearest Soden ever got to it – and, 6 years on, it’s still relatively small beer in the overall scheme of things. Long before the end of 2003, Soden had “lost the dressing-room” of his executive management team and was failing to convince the analyst community that he had any vision for BOI worth listening to.

So when, in May 2004, Mike Soden’s visit to an escort agency web-site was leaked by disgruntled IT staff to a newspaper, the Court (board of directors) was happy enough to have the opportunity to wave him goodbye. The nature of the transgression was embarrassing to be sure, but if they had felt he was worth saving they could have done so. Instead, it was made clear to him that he was going and a generous severance package would grease his exit.

Now he’s back – at least in the media. And what’s he calling for? The amalgamation of AIB & BOI. And the heads of the CEOs of the banks.

I heard him on Pat Kenny today – and he offered the view that the new bank heads should not come from the next tier of management within those banks – anyone who is tainted with the current policy/strategy failures.

Now Soden may well be right on this “firing & succession” point, but it’s hard to imagine that he’s not getting pleasure from shafting some of the people he feels shafted him.

But I will offer one piece of advice – don’t let Mike Soden himself anywhere near the helm of an Irish bank.

Breakdown in Social Partnership talks.

It’s unfortunate that agreement could not be reached at the Social Partnership talks, but it hardly comes as a major surprise.

Several days appear to have been largely wasted as the Government’s initial input was so lacking in specifics as to be described as “a blancmange” by union participants.

This seems in line with the standard Govt approach to planning – evidenced by initiatives from the 2003 Decentralisation scam to the October 2008 budget. A “back of the envelope” approach to everything.

The second issue which always seemed likely to derail the talks was “Scope Creep”, where a weak "talks management process" allowed the talks agenda to become an ever lengthening wish list for all participants.

All the above simply raises further questions about the Taoiseach’s (and Govt’s) competence and ability to manage the economy out of its current distressed condition.

Footnote: Published as a letter in the Irish Times

Predicting Roy Keane's managerial demise.

You read it here first! While looking for an earlier post (on Dublin bus network), I trawled back to the start of this blog and found the following - my first post on 24th November 2005. Considering how things turned out at Sunderland, I don't think I was too far off the mark.

Roy Keane's latest bust-up 24/11/2005

Roy Keane seems to display some of the classic traits of a bully - he can hand it out but he can't take it.

Some media reports of the post-MUTV session with the manager & players say that, when reprimanded in front of the players by Alec Ferguson, Keane threw the "Rock of Gibraltar" affair back in his face.

If true, this clearly had nothing to do with the situation but was the petty, spiteful response to criticism that you might expect from a spoilt child.

It's sad that a footballer of his undisputed class has such an immature personality. It's hard to imagine him succeeding in team management where player motivation would be a key requirement.

Instead of fond memories of his exploits for Manchester United and Ireland, he'll probably be remembered for the sour taste of his departures from both camps.

A dog's life?

There's a good , if somewhat poncey, restaurant called La Petite Maison in Nice.

We ate there and the wife was horrified when the "madame", who directs the action like a circus ringmaster, actually kissed the little pooch carried by a regular customer.

The following day, I spotted on the outside corner of the premises this charming little feature - a "dogs-bar". So at least the fondness for dogs appears to be long-standing and genuine.

Reviewers differ and diners scratch their heads.

Today’s Irish Times restaurant review by Tom Doorley features Corrigan’s Mayfair, Richard Corrigan’s new restaurant in London, which was also reviewed by the Sunday Times last December.

I was amused by the following glaring contradiction in their experiences. Reviewers differ and diners scratch their heads.

“linguini cooked in red wine with bone marrow and pecorino, fabulously intense, sharp, salty, savoury, rich, weird but wonderful.”
Tom Doorley Irish Times 31st January 2009.


“Corrigan has occasional moments where the enthusiasm gets the better of him, and there was a fashion disaster. This was the linguine cooked in red wine, pecorino and bone marrow. It looked, smelt and tasted not a little like, not a bit like, not almost like, but precisely and exactly like drunk’s puke. I didn’t finish it. I didn’t want to meet it twice.”
AA Gill, Sunday Times 14th December 2008

I prefer Gill’s prose style – shades of Helen Lucy Burke at her most acerbic.

Footnote: I emailed the above observation to Tom Doorley and got the following reply:

Hi Mollox
Gill is a great writer and can tell you a lot about the overall quality of a restaurant. But his interest in food is limited...
Curiously, Jay Rayner of The Observer adored the linguini but described them in such a way as I wouldn't recognise it.
Yes, indeed. Critics differ and I suppose life would be very dull if we didn't!
Many thanks for letting me have that quote - I see Gill's stuff from time to time. I adore his description of vegetarians as "people who take pleasure in not eating things" (even if it's unfair to a few of them).
AAG, I was told last week by a colleague of his, is paid €1m p.a. I wouldn't mind swapping columns for a few weeks!

Every good wish
Tom

Social Partnership process - will we get real reform?

The current social partnership process is important as a means of reassuring both ourselves and international markets that the country is working constructively to find a way out of the current economic mess.

However, the Social Partnership model is also responsible for many of the compromises which have left us with the burden of an overpaid, oversized and under-delivering public sector and political system. What confidence can we have that the current process will not repeat the mistakes of the past and deliver fudged, temporary solutions which fail to deliver the fundamental long-term reforms required to terms of employment, work practices and organisational structures? This reform challenge applies just as much to the Oireachtas as it does to the wider public sector.

As someone who remembers (and paid) the very high personal tax rates of the 1980s, the prospect of paying more tax now is unwelcome; but it can be endured, if there is equity in how it is applied and if it is coupled with a transparent process which delivers meaningful reform in terms of efficiency, effectiveness and value for money. I do not wish to pay higher taxes simply to maintain the status quo.

This raises the question: who is representing the interests of ordinary taxpayers in the current process? They are not represented by employers, unions or politicians, who all have the agenda of their own vested interests foremost in their minds.

While the Government would claim to represent taxpayers’ interests, the reality is that the primary concern of most politicians is retaining power and preserving political careers. These same politicians have created their own bubble, enjoying high salaries, bizarre pension arrangements and an over-generous suite of tax-free, unvouched perks. And all the while TDs tell us how hard they work, regarding many activities which are solely aimed at their own re-election as the legitimate employment for which they are paid.

Therefore, we must see, within the "Framework for Economic Renewal" currently under discussion by the social partners, the clear commitment of the Government and the public sector unions to meaningful reform and a robust process to get us there.

If we can’t get commitment to fundamental change in the heat of the current crisis, we’ll never get it.

Footnote: Published as a letter in the Irish Times.

Should Queen Elizabeth visit Ireland?

Yesterday’s “Head to Head” in the Irish Times was on the topic of “Should Queen Elizabeth visit Ireland?”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0126/1232474680314.html

Making the “Yes” case was Mary Kenny, while Charles Lysaght took the “No” side.

I found much of Lysaght’s argument to be indicative of someone caught in a time-warp. Here’s a couple of extracts:

“I have grave misgivings about Queen Elizabeth paying us a State visit, with all its panoply of parades and speeches.”

“A parade by the queen through our streets would provide an occasion for displays of enthusiasm by some who are all too likely to provoke the hostility of others.”

“The queen would doubtless be expected to apologise for British misdeeds, including the Famine, but not allowed to mention benefits we derived from the British connection.
She would probably not be allowed to voice British gratitude to the many Irish who served the empire, including those who in Churchill’s memorable words, “hastened to the battlefront to prove their ancient valour” in the second World War.
She would have to walk the tightrope of praising the achievements of modern Ireland without sounding patronising.”

It seems to me that Charles Lysaght envisages such a royal visit as something one would have seen in an old Pathe News black & white newsreel, reporting on the visit of the monarch to the grateful natives of a loyal colony in the 1920s or 1930s.

Can’t you see it - the Queen in a gilded open-top horse-drawn carriage, Prince Philip beside her in full dress naval uniform, chest covered in decorations and topped with a feathered admirals hat. Escorted by household cavalry outriders, all gleaming breastplates & helmets, long leather boots and drawn sabres, with her majesty waving to the happy flag-waving natives. Our Army No. 1 band, in their new Ruritanian uniforms, playing God save the Queen at every opportunity.
Royal Speech: “My husband and I are happy to be here in Eire among our contented former subjects blah blah blah”

If the queen does come, I imagine that it would be kept relatively low-key diplomatic affair with few banquets and set speeches (and none by John Bruton after his cringe-making tribute to Prince Charles). I can’t imagine her apologising for the famine or, indeed, making much reference to our shared history.

I think we should just get it over with.

Footnote: An abbreviated (by me)version published as a letter in the Irish Times.

Gormley finally sees the light on bulbs.

In his “Carbon Budget” on December 6th 2007, Minister John Gormley announced new legislation banning the sale of the normal incandescent light-bulbs from January, 2009.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gormley-lights-the-way-with-ban-on-bulbs-1240074.html

This caused consternation among manufacturers, builders, householders and retailers.

Light-bulb manufacturers would have to change their equipment and processes as well as manage stock levels and the transition from old to new bulbs. When they sought detailed guidelines it transpired that it was only a light-bulb in the Ministers head, nothing had been planned and he’d be holding a consultation process.

Builders with unfinished houses/apartment blocks were faced with a dilemma. Should they continue to install the downlighters, dimmers etc., or should they change the lighting design altogether – given that no suitable non-incandescent replacements were then available. It’s worth remembering that downlighters and “mood lighting” involving dimmer switches have become popular among the

Householders with existing fittings – dimmer switches, downlighters etc. were worried that, in 12 months time, they would be unable to get replacement bulbs.

Now we’re doing it the way it should have been done from the start – on an EU-wide basis, with a reasonable lead-in time for all interested parties.

The Gormley approach illustrates the extreme danger to the economy posed by allowing the Greens too much influence. The ideas are often worthy, but they are thrown out in a top-of-head way which causes confusion among those who make their living in the real economy. They haven’t been thought through in sufficient detail – which is a clear responsibility of those making Government policy.

The change in the VRT/Road tax regime last year was another good example. By introducing it in mid-year, the initiative effectively killed the motor trade in the first half of the year – when they traditionally achieve over 80% of new car sales.

Spare a thought for the poor bankers.

Out of curiosity, I looked up the last published accounts of the 3 main banks AIB, Anglo & BOI to see how the main men involved there might be suffering financially from the catastrophic collapse of the share prices of their banks.

Anglo - only issued preliminary accounts for y/e 30/9/08, the last published full set of Annual Accounts was for the year ended 30th September 2007
At that date, Chairman Sean Fitzpatrick owned 4.5m shares, which would have been worth €75m+ at their peak price.
Chief Executive David Drumm owned 511k shares, worth €8.5m+ at peak, and had 1.2m share options.
All the above are probably worthless now.

AIB – last published accounts are for year ended 31st December 2007.
At that date, Chief Exec Eugene Sheehy owned 256k shares, worth c. €6m at their peak price. Today they’re worth about €250k.
In addition, Sheehy had 120k share options and a further 251k in a Long Term Incentive Plan scheme – all of these are presumably so far under water that they’re worthless.

BOI – last published accounts are for year ended 31st March 2008.
At that date, Chief Exec Brian Goggin owned 600k shares, worth c. €11m at their peak price. Today they’re worth c. €360k.
In addition, Goggin had 398k share options and a further 402k shares in a Long Term Incentive Plan scheme. All these are now probably worthless.

None of these guys will be on the breadline, but at least they will all have taken a very serious hit to their personal wealth, never mind their reputations.

It’s appropriate that they should be sharing our financial pain.
It may make you feel a little better.

David Bellamy - Global warming debunker

David Bellamy was on RTE’s Late Late show on Friday night vehemently debutting the threat of global warming. His views were broadly those expressed in this Sunday Express article.

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/73486

It’s always confusing for those of us in the middle when long-standing and credible environmentalists like David Bellamy are so publicly and trenchantly opposed to the growing scientific and public consensus on global warning.

Ditto when you hear James Lovelock, creator of the Gaia Hypothesis, advocating nuclear energy – an energy source which is anathema to many Greens, particularly the Irish variety.

I’m sure most people would agree that programmes such as recycling, reduction in energy consumption, improving our living environment etc etc are all good and worth doing. Even if Global Warming was scientifically debunked, we should continue to implement such programmes.

What I worry about is a growing bunch of tree-huggers taking us back to an economic stone-age with their zeal for the new green religion. The process of transition to a new model must be achieved without destroying the economy.

The challenge is this: if it is necessary to change the tyres, we have to do it without stopping the car. (How unGreen is that analogy!)

Reform of Oireachtas allowance/expense regime.

The news from the Green Party conference today is typical Green populist posturing – they’ve heard public reaction on talk radio and they’re leading from the rear. Anything to try to grab back a bit of the high moral ground, having already compromised all their core principles to death.

Now here’s what the new expense regime should really look like.

1. Rev. Comm rules should apply to politicians in exactly the same way as they apply to ordinary Joe Citizen – e.g. BIK, receipts, limits etc etc..
2. State transport should only be supplied for state business – not for personal or party business. No garda drivers – if security deemed necessary for any minister, provide it in an appropriate manner. That should only apply to 2-3 key personnel. State cars subject to the same laws as ordinary motorists – e.g. speed limits, red lights, bus lanes etc etc.
3. No daily allowance, currently €60 per day, for attending at Dail Eireann – what other worker gets paid extra simply for turning up? It’s a bloody disgrace.
4. No overnight allowances – the Board of Works to supply hostel accommodation at a convenient location. Take it or leave it. Much of this hostel accommodation (might be split over several locations) can be let to tourists during the overlong summer recess, to offset some of the costs.
5. Travel Allowance – whatever the appropriate bus or train fare might be. Mileage allowance is only to the nearest train station or bus stop, whichever is appropriate. This should help familiarise our public representatives with the quality of our public transport systems.
6. No additional salary/allowances for work on Dail Committees, other than any genuine, vouched out-of-pocket expenses.
7. Constitutional limit on number of junior ministers (currently 20) e.g. maximum 15, as currently applies for full ministers. Others may be appointed if deemed essential, but with title only – no additional pay, perks or pension rights.
8. Dail to sit during normal office hours e.g. 9-5. This will be a more family friendly regime and might encourage more women to participate in politics. It will also allow our TDs to personally experience rush-hour traffic and might incentivise them to do something about it.

What would you like to add?