Obscene pension and termination payments to former Irish senators

The disturbing revelation that 19 of 21 former senators are to receive lump sum payments over the next 13 months that average almost €229,000 per person is an outrageous affront to society. Eight of these were the nominees of the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern after some of them failed to win Dáil seats in the 2007 general election.

These payments to them are in addition to an annual pension pot of over a half million euro. The combined effect suggests that political patronage remains an extravagant gilt-edge gift that keeps on giving - irrespective of whether a politician is in, or out, of office. The impudent scale of them illustrates how immune and indifferent politicians are to the devastating impact of the economic collapse on everybody else and to the concept of affordability.

The 23^rd Seanad sat for less than 100 days each year so the role of a senator is part-time and intermittent. Apart from a salary provision of €4.25 million in 2011, there is also provision this year to pay our part-time senators €1.38 million for travel expenses to attend the august institution and almost €1.25 million in other allowances – equivalent to average annual payment of almost €115,000 for their part-time service. Yet, each senator also has full-time secretarial support for the 140 working days that they are absent from the House each year.

If the Government really want the public to live within the means of the State more fervent example ought to be clearly evident from all branches of the Oireachtas and the establishment.

Our nation cannot afford an extravagant Senate, with an ambivalent mandate, which civic society has no part in choosing and which is not answerable to the people. The sooner the issue of its future is put to the electorate in a Constitutional referendum the better.

Euro Remains King, despite growth in non-cash payments

When the €uro became the active currency of Ireland on 1 January 2003 the total value of the currency in circulation in the country was €2,897 million. Currency represented 3% of the nation’s money supply in 2003.  Cash in circulation throughout the Eurozone has grown about 11% per annum since 2002

Currency in circulation increased to €11,956 million at 31 December 2010 and represented 6.7% of the money supply in Ireland. The total value of Euro circulating throughout the 17 member Eurozone was €850 billion so the Irish share of this is 1.3%. Ireland’s GDP is roughly similar to that of Connecticut.

The makeup of the currency in circulation in Ireland is as follows:

Denomination	No. of Banknotes (Million)	Value €Million
€5	54	297
€10	50	502
€20	114	2,279
€50	174	8,681
€100	2	157
€200	-	6
€500	-	34
TOTAL	399	11,956

Ireland is one of the 14 jurisdictions which produce Euro banknotes. Under pooled production arrangements the Central Bank printed 127.5 million banknotes in the €10 denomination last year. This denomination was also produced in Germany, Greece, France, Italy and Austria. Total volume produced was 1,540.1 million units with a value of €15,401 million.

Ireland produced banknotes in the €20 denomination in 2009, 2008, 2007; in the €5 denomination in 2006; in the €10 denomination in 2005, 2004 and 2003. Ireland is producing some of the 1,714.8 million banknotes in the €5 denomination in 2011.

Despite the growth in non-cash payments throughout the world, cash remains the predominantly popular form of payment. It is quick and direct; freely available to users at point-of-use and cash is anonymous and non-discriminatory. Experts also say that cash is less prone to fraud than other payment methods.

The global use of payment methods, other than cash (direct debts, credit transfers, cards and cheques) has grown steadily – especially in China (+29%); Russia (+66%) and South Africa (+25%), while volumes grew more modestly in developed countries.  Non-cash payments in Ireland grew at a compound rate of 11% from 2001 to 2008.

Credit cards account for 40% in most countries and above 58% globally.

PayPal facilitated €51.3 billion in total payments in 2009 and is forecast to grow this business to €105.9 billion next year. Over 81 million people are active users of PayPal and these accounted for 6% of all global online payment transactions in 2009.

The life of a banknote is typically two years – somewhat less in the case of lower denomination notes. This year 6,017.9 million new banknotes in the Euro currency will be produced with a value of €171,274 million. Approximately 751,000 counterfeit banknotes with a value of €37,759 million were removed from circulation last year.  39,025 million banknotes were withdrawn on grounds of being unfit for use.

Barack Obama’s College Green speech

President Obama spoke to an audience of 30,000 in College Green Dublin last Monday evening.  It was a pleasant sunny evening and his remarks were greeted enthusiastically!  This is a transcript:

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you! (Applause.) Hello, Dublin! (Applause.) Hello, Ireland! (Applause.) My name is Barack Obama -- (applause -- of the Moneygall Obamas. (Applause.) And I've come home to find the apostrophe that we lost somewhere along the way. (Laughter and applause.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I've got it here!

THE PRESIDENT: Is that where it is? (Laughter.)

Some wise Irish man or woman once said that broken Irish is better than clever English. (Applause.) So here goes: Tá áthas orm bheith in Éirinn -- I am happy to be in Ireland! (Applause.) I'm happy to be with so many á cairde. (Applause.)

I want to thank my extraordinary hosts -- first of all, Taoiseach Kenny -- (applause) -- his lovely wife, Fionnuala -- (applause) -- President McAleese and her husband, Martin -- (applause) -- for welcoming me earlier today. Thank you, Lord Mayor Gerry Breen and the Gardai for allowing me to crash this celebration. (Applause.)

Let me also express my condolences on the recent passing of former Taoiseach Garrett Fitzgerald -- (applause) -- someone who believed in the power of education, someone who believed in the potential of youth, most of all, someone who believed in the potential of peace and who lived to see that peace realized.

And most of all, thank you to the citizens of Dublin and the people of Ireland for the warm and generous hospitality you’ve shown me and Michelle. (Applause.) It certainly feels like 100,000 welcomes. (Applause.) We feel very much at home. I feel even more at home after that pint that I had. (Laughter.) Feel even warmer. (Laughter.)

In return let me offer the hearty greetings of tens of millions of Irish Americans who proudly trace their heritage to this small island. (Applause.) They say hello.

Now, I knew that I had some roots across the Atlantic, but until recently I could not unequivocally claim that I was one of those Irish Americans. But now if you believe the Corrigan Brothers, there’s no one more Irish than me. (Laughter and applause.)

So I want to thank the genealogists who traced my family tree.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: -- right here!

THE PRESIDENT: Right here? Thank you. (Applause.) It turns out that people take a lot of interest in you when you're running for President. (Laughter.) They look into your past. They check out your place of birth. (Laughter.) Things like that. (Laughter.) Now, I do wish somebody had provided me all this evidence earlier because it would have come in handy back when I was first running in my hometown of Chicago -- (applause) -- because Chicago is the Irish capital of the Midwest. (Applause.) A city where it was once said you could stand on 79th Street and hear the brogue of every county in Ireland. (Applause.)

So naturally a politician like me craved a slot in the St. Patrick’s Day parade. The problem was not many people knew me or could even pronounce my name. I told them it was a Gaelic name. They didn’t believe me. (Laughter.)

So one year a few volunteers and I did make it into the parade, but we were literally the last marchers. After two hours, finally it was our turn. And while we rode the route and we smiled and we waved, the city workers were right behind us cleaning up the garbage. (Laughter.) It was a little depressing. But I’ll bet those parade organizers are watching TV today and feeling kind of bad -- (applause) -- because this is a pretty good parade right here. (Applause.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Go Bulls!

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Go Bulls -- I like that. (Laughter.) We got some Bulls fans here.

Now, of course, an American doesn’t really require Irish blood to understand that ours is a proud, enduring, centuries-old relationship; that we are bound by history and friendship and shared values. And that’s why I’ve come here today, as an American President, to reaffirm those bonds of affection. (Applause.)

Earlier today Michelle and I visited Moneygall where we saw my ancestral home and dropped by the local pub. (Applause.) And we received a very warm welcome from all the people there, including my long-lost eighth cousin, Henry. (Laughter.) Henry now is affectionately known as Henry VIII. (Laughter.) And it was remarkable to see the small town where a young shoemaker named Falmouth Kearney, my great-great-great grandfather, my grandfather’s grandfather, lived his early life. And I was the shown the records from the parish recording his birth. And we saw the home where he lived.

And he left during the Great Hunger, as so many Irish did, to seek a new life in the New World. He traveled by ship to New York, where he entered himself into the records as a laborer. He married an American girl from Ohio. They settled in the Midwest. They started a family.

It’s a familiar story because it’s one lived and cherished by Americans of all backgrounds. It’s integral to our national identity. It’s who we are, a nation of immigrants from all around the world.

But standing there in Moneygall, I couldn’t help but think how heartbreaking it must have been for that great-great-great grandfather of mine, and so many others, to part. To watch Donegal coasts and Dingle cliffs recede. To leave behind all they knew in hopes that something better lay over the horizon.

When people like Falmouth boarded those ships, they often did so with no family, no friends, no money, nothing to sustain their journey but faith -- faith in the Almighty; faith in the idea of America; faith that it was a place where you could be prosperous, you could be free, you could think and talk and worship as you pleased, a place where you could make it if you tried.

And as they worked and struggled and sacrificed and sometimes experienced great discrimination, to build that better life for the next generation, they passed on that faith to their children and to their children’s children -- an inheritance that their great-great-great grandchildren like me still carry with them. We call it the America Dream. (Applause.)

It’s the dream that Falmouth Kearney was attracted to when he went to America. It’s the dream that drew my own father to America from a small village in Africa. It’s a dream that we’ve carried forward -- sometimes through stormy waters, sometimes at great cost -- for more than two centuries. And for my own sake, I’m grateful they made those journeys because if they hadn’t you’d be listening to somebody else speak right now. (Laughter.)

And for America’s sake, we’re grateful so many others from this land took that chance, as well. After all, never has a nation so small inspired so much in another. (Applause.)

Irish signatures are on our founding documents. Irish blood was spilled on our battlefields. Irish sweat built our great cities. Our spirit is eternally refreshed by Irish story and Irish song; our public life by the humor and heart and dedication of servants with names like Kennedy and Reagan, O’Neill and Moynihan. So you could say there’s always been a little green behind the red, white and blue. (Applause.)

When the father of our country, George Washington, needed an army, it was the fierce fighting of your sons that caused the British official to lament, “We have lost America through the Irish.” (Applause.) And as George Washington said himself, “When our friendless standards were first unfurled, who were the strangers who first mustered around our staff? And when it reeled in the light, who more brilliantly sustained it than Erin’s generous sons?”

When we strove to blot out the stain of slavery and advance the rights of man, we found common cause with your struggles against oppression. Frederick Douglass, an escaped slave and our great abolitionist, forged an unlikely friendship right here in Dublin with your great liberator, Daniel O’Connell. (Applause.) His time here, Frederick Douglass said, defined him not as a color but as a man. And it strengthened the non-violent campaign he would return home to wage.

Recently, some of their descendents met here in Dublin to commemorate and continue that friendship between Douglass and O’Connell.

When Abraham Lincoln struggled to preserve our young union, more than 100,000 Irish and Irish Americans joined the cause, with units like the Irish Brigade charging into battle -- green flags with gold harp waving alongside our star-spangled banner.

When depression gripped America, Ireland sent tens of thousands of packages of shamrocks to cheer up its countrymen, saying, “May the message of Erin shamrocks bring joy to those away.”

And when an Iron Curtain fell across this continent and our way of life was challenged, it was our first Irish President -- our first Catholic President, John F. Kennedy, who made us believe 50 years ago this week -- (applause) -- that mankind could do something big and bold and ambitious as walk on the moon. He made us dream again.

That is the story of America and Ireland. That’s the tale of our brawn and our blood, side by side, in making and remaking a nation, pulling it westward, pulling it skyward, moving it forward again and again and again. And that is our task again today.

I think we all realize that both of our nations have faced great trials in recent years, including recessions so severe that many of our people are still trying to fight their way out. And naturally our concern turns to our families, our friends and our neighbours. And some in this enormous audience are thinking about their own prospects and their own futures. Those of us who are parents wonder what it will mean for our children and young people like so many who are here today. Will you see the same progress we’ve seen since we were your age? Will you inherit futures as big and as bright as the ones that we inherited? Will your dreams remain alive in our time?

This nation has faced those questions before: When your land couldn’t feed those who tilled it; when the boats leaving these shores held some of your brightest minds; when brother fought against brother. Yours is a history frequently marked by the greatest of trials and the deepest of sorrow. But yours is also a history of proud and defiant endurance. Of a nation that kept alive the flame of knowledge in dark ages; that overcame occupation and outlived fallow fields; that triumphed over its Troubles –- of a resilient people who beat all the odds. (Applause.)

And, Ireland, as trying as these times are, I know our future is still as big and as bright as our children expect it to be. (Applause.) I know that because I know it is precisely in times like these –- in times of great challenge, in times of great change -– when we remember who we truly are. We’re people, the Irish and Americans, who never stop imagining a brighter future, even in bitter times. We’re people who make that future happen through hard work, and through sacrifice, through investing in those things that matter most, like family and community.
We remember, in the words made famous by one of your greatest poets that “in dreams begins responsibility.”
This is a nation that met that responsibility by choosing, like your ancestors did, to keep alight the flame of knowledge and invest in a world-class education for your young people. And today, Ireland’s youth, and those who’ve come back to build a new Ireland, are now among the best-educated, most entrepreneurial in the world. And I see those young people here today. And I know that Ireland will succeed. (Applause.)

This is a nation that met its responsibilities by choosing to apply the lessons of your own past to assume a heavier burden of responsibility on the world stage. And today, a people who once knew the pain of an empty stomach now feed those who hunger abroad. Ireland is working hand in hand with the United States to make sure that hungry mouths are fed around the world -- because we remember those times. We know what crippling poverty can be like, and we want to make sure we’re helping others.

You’re a people who modernized and can now stand up for those who can’t yet stand up for themselves. And this is a nation that met its responsibilities -– and inspired the entire world -– by choosing to see past the scars of violence and mistrust to forge a lasting peace on this island.

When President Clinton said on this very spot 15 years ago, waging peace is risky, I think those who were involved understood the risks they were taking. But you, the Irish people, persevered. And you cast your votes and you made your voices heard for that peace. (Applause.) And you responded heroically when it was challenged. And you did it because, as President McAleese has written, “For all the apparent intractability of our problems, the irrepressible human impulse to love kept nagging and nudging us towards reconciliation.”

Whenever peace is challenged, you will have to sustain that irrepressible impulse. And America will stand by you -- always. (Applause.) America will stand by you always in your pursuit of peace. (Applause.)

And, Ireland, you need to understand that you’ve already so surpassed the world’s highest hopes that what was notable about the Northern Ireland elections two weeks ago was that they came and went without much attention. It’s not because the world has forgotten. It’s because this once unlikely dream has become that most extraordinary thing of things: It has become real. A dream has turned to reality because of the work of this nation. (Applause.)

In dreams begin responsibility. And embracing that responsibility, working toward it, overcoming the cynics and the naysayers and those who say “you can’t” -- that’s what makes dreams real. That’s what Falmouth Kearney did when he got on that boat, and that’s what so many generations of Irish men and women have done here in this spectacular country. That is something we can point to and show our children, Irish and American alike. That is something we can teach them as they grow up together in a new century, side by side, as it has been since our beginnings.

This little country, that inspires the biggest things -- your best days are still ahead. (Applause.) Our greatest triumphs -- in America and Ireland alike -- are still to come. And, Ireland, if anyone ever says otherwise, if anybody ever tells you that your problems are too big, or your challenges are too great, that we can’t do something, that we shouldn’t even try -- think about all that we’ve done together. Remember that whatever hardships the winter may bring, springtime is always just around the corner. And if they keep on arguing with you, just respond with a simple creed: Is féidir linn. Yes, we can. Yes, we can. Is féidir linn. (Applause.)

For all you’ve contributed to the character of the United States of America and the spirit of the world, thank you. And may God bless the eternal friendship between our two great nations.

Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you, Dublin. Thank you, Ireland. (Applause.)

Queen Elizabeth’s speech in Dublin Castle

A Uachtaráin agus a chairde (President and friends).

Prince Philip and I are delighted to be here, and to experience at first hand Ireland’s world-famous hospitality.

Together we have much to celebrate: the ties between our people, the shared values, and the economic, business and cultural links that make us so much more than just neighbours, that make us firm friends and equal partners.

Madam President, speaking here in Dublin Castle it is impossible to ignore the weight of history, as it was yesterday when you and I laid wreaths at the Garden of Remembrance.

Indeed, so much of this visit reminds us of the complexity of our history, its many layers and traditions, but also the importance of forbearance and conciliation. Of being able to bow to the past, but not be bound by it.

Of course, the relationship has not always been straightforward; nor has the record over the centuries been entirely benign. It is a sad and regrettable reality that through history our islands have experienced more than their fair share of heartache, turbulence and loss.

These events have touched us all, many of us personally, and are a painful legacy. We can never forget those who have died or been injured, and their families. To all those who have suffered as a consequence of our troubled past I extend my sincere thoughts and deep sympathy. With the benefit of historical hindsight we can all see things which we would wish had been done differently or not at all. But it is also true that no-one who looked to the future over the past centuries could have imagined the strength of the bonds that are now in place between the governments and the people of our two nations, the spirit of partnership that we now enjoy, and the lasting rapport between us. No-one here this evening could doubt that heartfelt desire of our two nations.

Madam President, you have done a great deal to promote this understanding and reconciliation. You set out to build bridges. And I have seen at first hand your success in bringing together different communities and traditions on this island. You have also shed new light on the sacrifice of those who served in the First World War. Even as we jointly opened the Messines Peace Park in 1998, it was difficult to look ahead to the time when you and I would be standing together at Islandbridge as we were today.

That transformation is also evident in the establishment of a successful power-sharing Executive in Northern Ireland. A knot of history that was painstakingly loosened by the British and Irish Governments together with the strength, vision and determination of the political parties in Northern Ireland.

What were once only hopes for the future have now come to pass; it is almost exactly 13 years since the overwhelming majority of people in Ireland and Northern Ireland voted in favour of the agreement signed on Good Friday 1998, paving the way for Northern Ireland to become the exciting and inspirational place that it is today. I applaud the work of all those involved in the peace process, and of all those who support and nurture peace, including members of the police, the Gardaí, and the other emergency services, and those who work in the communities, the churches and charitable bodies like Co-operation Ireland. Taken together, their work not only serves as a basis for reconciliation between our people and communities, but it gives hope to other peacemakers across the world that through sustained effort, peace can and will prevail.

For the world moves on quickly. The challenges of the past have been replaced by new economic challenges which will demand the same imagination and courage. The lessons from the peace process are clear; whatever life throws at us, our individual responses will be all the stronger for working together and sharing the load.

There are other stories written daily across these islands which do not find their voice in solemn pages of history books, or newspaper headlines, but which are at the heart of our shared narrative. Many British families have members who live in this country, as many Irish families have close relatives in the United Kingdom.

These families share the two islands; they have visited each other and have come home to each other over the years. They are the ordinary people who yearned for the peace and understanding we now have between our two nations and between the communities within those two nations; a living testament to how much in common we have.

These ties of family, friendship and affection are our most precious resource. They are the lifeblood of the partnership across these islands, a golden thread that runs through all our joint successes so far, and all we will go on to achieve. They are a reminder that we have much to do together to build a future for all our grandchildren: the kind of future our grandparents could only dream of.

So we celebrate together the widespread spirit of goodwill and deep mutual understanding that has served to make the relationship more harmonious, close as good neighbours should always be.

Have Irish bishops ‘with the stroke of a pen really made themselves answerable’?

The title of an article by Breda O’Brien The Irish Times on Sat, May 21 that ‘With the stroke of a pen, bishops made themselves answerable’ strikes me as being disingenuous and misleading because it is simply not the case.   If readers were to accept this exclamation at face value they might reasonably construe that the much put-upon bishops’ have become accountable to something other than their own foggy shaving mirror, or someone other than the face that smiles at them from the contents of the whiskey glass held in their own hand from time to time.  But the incontrovertible evidence is that The Hierarchy have engaged for over two and a half years in yet another Machiavellian episode of cunning subversion intended to hoodwink the public with their own toxic blend of metal reservations and double entendre.

Shortly after the Safeguarding Board exposed two diabolical child sex abuse allegations in Cloyne Cardinal Brady stated that his friend of 50 years, Bishop John Magee, should not resign.   Brady also issued a statement on 2 January 2009 about the role of the Safeguarding Board in which he said that its role is to accomplish a ‘consistent child safeguarding policy throughout Ireland based on verifiable and accountable structures of best practice’.  Brady acknowledged that the handling (also referred to by Magee as a ‘lacuna’) of two child abuse allegations in Cloyne brought into question the efforts of all who implement policy on safeguarding and statutory guidelines.

“Everyone is entitled to be reassured that when commitments have been given to implement statutory guidelines and agreed policies for safeguarding children in the Church, these are reliable and trustworthy. The Board is in a unique position to provide such assurance. It must continue its work in cooperation with the statutory authorities and with the full support of everyone in the Catholic Church in Ireland”. It was also Brady who suggested in January 2009 that the Board might explore the possibility of conducting a review of current child safeguarding practices in every diocese across the island in cooperation with the relevant statutory authorities.  ‘The core principle of safeguarding policy is a Gospel value’, Brady added.

His counterparts met on 23 January 2009 and they unanimously requested the Safeguarding Board to review current practice and risk in the safeguarding of children within their dioceses.

When the Safeguarding Board issued its 2009 Annual Report two diocese, Clonfert and Ossory, had not even appointed child safeguarding representatives and according to the 2010 Annual Report it took all of 2009 to just agree the objectives of the proposed audit of child safeguarding practices in each diocese.

The 2010 Annual Report reveals that is was not until March 2011 that the ground rules for conducting these audits were agreed.  But the audits may only now proceed on the basis that the Board will not comment publicly on the findings of the review of each Church authority, nor will the Board comment on any recommendations in practice or procedure that they deems necessary.  Furthermore, the introduction of any information into the public domain is to be only possible with the consent of the implicated relevant Church authority.  Placing a muzzle on this Board is hardly a policy by bishops’ that could be remotely construed as making them answerable to anybody or to enhance their credibility.

This basis for beginning these diocesan reviews also ought to be considered  in the context that the Safeguarding Board has an approved and, what it describes, as a ‘top-rate data protection policy’ to which it fully adheres in all its operations and the Board is fully confident that it fully complies with data protection legislation as it exists in Ireland and Northern Ireland.  Access to relevant documentation when responding to safeguarding concerns had been specified in the listed objects of its company.

It is also pertinent to point out that the number of child abuse allegations continues to be alarmingly high, notwithstanding their longstanding history in many instances.  It is also deeply troubling that this Board has not been contemporaneously informed about allegations of child abuse when these have been reported to the civic authorities demonstrating again contempt for transparency, candour and directness.  What is this a symptom of?

The non-binding sex abuse policy issued on 17 May by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith seeks to reinforce bishops’ exclusive authority in dealing with abuse cases and states that lay review boards, such as the National Board for Safeguarding Children, ‘cannot substitute’ for bishops judgement and power. How can this be taken seriously in Ireland when not alone have bishops failed miserably in following their own guidelines and muzzling lay review boards to make them impotent ensuring that compliance is impossible.

The Chairman of the Safeguarding Board has highlighted the opinion that a cultural correction is required within the Irish Church in making the point that the work of the Board alone is not enough to ensure the adequate safeguarding of children and specifically cited inherent weaknesses in areas such as institutional management and governance in the Church.

A fundamental issue at this stage is whether the bishops trust, or do not trust, their own Safeguarding Board – an entity conceived by them; populated by them, overseen by them and remunerated by them.  The leadership of the Board has demonstrated tenacity, fortitude, independence and candour which is a crucial foundation to winning and maintaining public confidence.  The purpose of these reviews of safeguarding practice is to mitigate risk to children and that has to be accomplished without jeopardizing public confidence in the Board, including dealing with personal data in an appropriate manner.

The bishops’ have severely strained public confidence and credibility.  They are led by an individual who concealed the vile criminality of Brendan Smyth from the civic authorities for 19 years before it was exposed in a television documentary and who refused to regard this as a resigning issue as the pews continue to empty

How can the public trust bishops’ and the notion that they can muzzle a so-called independent review body answerable only to themselves is derisory and contemptuous.  Perhaps this facets of their attitude to accountability might be discussed in another article as the public are likely to be agitated about this issue once again when the report on allegations against 19 priests in the Diocese of Cloyne, a diocese with just 46 parishes, is published.

Garda Overtime Pared

While the State Visit of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and the official visit of President Obama to Ireland this month will generate Garda overtime, data published in respect of the past five years show a reduction in overtime.

 

2005	€77,683,097
2006	€102,653,111
2007	€135,386,904
2008	€112,476,173
2009	€77,812,239
2010	€76,596,828

           

Child safeguarding initiatives lacking transparency

The Head of the Catholic Church in Ireland, Cardinal Brady stated on 2 January 2009 that the mandate of the National Board for Safeguarding Children (NBSC) had his full support and that the Board intended to obtain the support of his fellow bishops’, in writing, to implement policy agreed by the Bishops’ Conference. He also stated, unequivocally, that the welfare of children is a Gospel value. He recognised that verifiable and accountable structures, based on best practice, are critically important to safeguarding children and sustaining public confidence in the Church.

The most important initiative of the NBSC in 2009 was to undertake an audit of child safeguarding practices in all dioceses. That was to have been completed by the end of 2009 and the benefit of risk mitigation that would be reasonably expected to ensue from this should have been well rooted by early 2010.

But it took all of 2009 for the bishops’ to merely agree the objectives of these reviews and by April 2010 two dioceses, Clonfert and Ossory, did not even have a single parish safeguarding representative in place in the 66 parishes administered by these dioceses.

The 2011 annual report of the NBSC contains the appalling disclosure that the conduct of the review of dioceses has been systematically thwarted by what are described as ‘unresolved (and unspecified) data protection issues’  which fundamentally stymies the mandate of this Board – notwithstanding that the NBSC has comprehensive data protection procedures which comply with all statutory obligations . The bishops’ response is therefore self-serving, egregious, outrageous and indefensible.

The Statement issued on 11 May by the Bishops’ Conference reduces the audit review, that was set in the context of a Gospel value in January 2009, to being a generic and inchoate ‘important area of challenge that has yet to be completely resolved’. The 2011 Annual Report indicates that any information gleaned in the audit will only be disclosed to the public with the consent of the head of the relevant authority. The authoritarian muzzle to be applied to this process after a protracted delay to date will now supplement the reporting deficits of 2010 whereby the number of sexual abuse episodes disclosed far exceeded those previously communicated to the NBSC by a factor of 300%. The Chief Executive of the Board described the impact of inaccurate reporting as ‘problematic’. It actually corrupts the basic integrity of a monitoring process.

The behaviour of the bishops continues to be lamentably typical of the leadership that has reduced the Catholic Church in Ireland to a toxic cocktail based on a blend of double entendre and mental reservations. The impact of the NBSC, which has earned public trust and estimable esteem, is being reduced to that of a posse of passive plane-spotters, who monitor international best practice elsewhere, but are faced with impossible inertia and cultural impediments in introducing best practice into Ireland - based on adequate reference points and candour. Change never occurs in a leadership vacuum but decay and curmudgeonly connivance thrives in such circumstances.

The ‘full support’ of a credible leader means that the leader can be relied on to deliver an outcome within an agreed timeframe, particularly with respect to a primary objective, especially when the scale of reported sexual abuse continues to be as alarmingly high as it is.

Brady has failed to ensure that these reviews are promptly facilitated with the same blind, thoughtless, stubborn intransigence that you chose not to report the Brendan Smyth saga to the civil authorities for 19 years until it was independently exposed by a television journalist.

The Chairman of the NBSC has drawn attention to inherent weaknesses in area such as institutional management and governance. You and your pathetic colleagues have chosen to recruit a partisan lawyer rather than ensure that this Board swiftly obtains the statistics and other pertinent data to safeguard the children of Ireland. It is not good enough to publish claptrap about ‘continuing to work with the Board’ when it is abundantly clear that you will use concocted legal excuses to avoid doing so.

Thus impasse ought to be a resigning issue not just for Brady – but for each bishop whose talents, energy, outlook and disposition are incapable of leading change or inspiring public confidence.

The investigation of allegations in the Diocese of Cloyne commenced with a review of two cases in 2008 but the Report of the Commission of Investigation subsequently examined allegations against 19 priests in that relatively small diocese of 46 parishes. None of these are likely to have emerged into the public domain if such a blanket embargo existed.

Public confidence in the proposed audit of safeguarding practices by the Board will not be enhanced if the findings are to be muzzled by the Church authorities. Tardiness with respect to critical communications neither serve the interests of children, the Church or the Catholic community as a whole.

Fianna Fáil clumsy angling for the winner’s enclosure at the next Irish Presidential Election

Micheál Martin has given Fianna Fáil councillors free rein to vote as they wish with respect to the selection of candidates to contest the Presidential election.

But such a disposition towards something as important as the next presidential election, the first in 14 years is pathetic and self-serving. The Presidency is an office that has performed so flawlessly and is so deeply esteemed that the least Fianna Fáil could have done is to set out the qualities, ideals, and characteristics that Martin believes are a prerequisite for a credible candidate before declaring that their councillors have a free vote.

Those characteristics ought to include, for example, personal stature, evidence of a capacity to safeguard the dignity of the Office while capably promoting our national reputation with a style, elegance, energy and impact that is commendable; skills in social leadership and an ability to relate to all facets of society in Ireland and elsewhere; a thorough understanding of the Constitutional position of the Presidency and a perspective on how the Presidency could be further developed to build on the legacy accomplished.

The choosing of candidates for this election is therefore not a similar exercise to that of a bull-run, where a cohort of the sartorially challenged and politically spontaneous presenting themselves as independent candidates for Dáil Éireann or Seanad Éireann with an alternative outlook on the universe that is adapted and scripted by them on the hoof.

Several individuals have indicated a desire to seek a nomination to contest the presidential election but none of them have really spelled why they are sufficiently distinguished and accomplished to prompt the electorate to vote for them.

Finally, the Office of President has become something of a family enterprise with the President’s family, especially the spouse, playing a crucial role in the success of a presidential term. None of the prospective candidates have indicated if they have any back-up of this nature to support what has become a very complex and personally demanding role requiring an incumbent of exceptional talent and ability.

Fianna Fáil would need to extend their commitment to the process of qualifying candidates beyond a desire to be in the winners enclosure next November, whether the winner is, or is not, a Fianna Fáil devotee.

Tom Elliott’s outburst does him no credit

Shortly after Tom Elliott became leader of the Ulster Unionist Party last September he declared that he would not attend GAA matches. I felt that this simplistic, ham-fisted declaration was short-sighted and naïve on his part and it certainly didn’t deliver extra votes last week. Attendance at the odd match and engagement with the GAA would have allowed him to demonstrate that there would be an expansive and innovative dimension to the character of his leadership; that the future he sought to foster would not be impaled by inertia, or diminished by the closed mind-set of a political hermit.

Despite the painstaking pace of vote counting last week, both the outcome of the Assembly election and the conduct of leading politicians, especially in the course of the past year, indicates that they are capable of making gestures and statements that move the political narrative forward in a manner that reflects the sentiment and disposition of the electorate.

Mr Elliott’s outburst in Omagh about the Irish flag being ‘foreign’ betrays a fundamental ignorance of the symbolism of the flag – which is to recognise the different traditions on the island of Ireland and, by implication, the Constitutional safeguards afforded to those traditions. The Irish flag is therefore not a foreign symbol in the Anglo-Irish context because it recognises the cardinal principle of personal choice with respect to the definition of the nation.

I share his agitation when any national flag is displayed disrespectfully or where protocol is disregarded. A national flag is not a piece of carnival bunting intended to propagate narrow vested interests.

However, the interests of society are also not well served when a political leader uses condescending shibboleths, such as the descriptor ‘scum’, because these simply pander to vacuous subversive vanity that is not connected to elected politics. The political mainstream should function at a higher level of sophistication and that means that Mr Elliott will need to have one footprint in the promising future, aligned with those who have something positive to contribute to society, if the Ulster Unionists are to be an integral and effective part of that process.

Grounds for a review of Irish judicial salaries are overwhelming

The Journal of Legal Analysis, a Harvard publication, in its Winter 2009 issue, published a transnational comparison of the salaries of High Court judges in 28 OECD jurisdictions - Mexico and Switzerland being the omissions. Chile, Estonia, Israel, Slovenia are not included as they joined the OECD last year.

Rank	Country	Salary US$	Salary €
		2004-05	2004-05
1	United Kingdom	331,738	€224,147
2	Ireland	248,678	€168,026
3	Australia	241,498	€163,174
4	New Zealand	211,900	€143,176
5	United States	203,000	€137,162
6	France	198,201	€133,920
7	Japan	172,346	€116,450
8	Canada	166,800	€112,703
9	Iceland	156,250	€105,574
10	Luxembourg	141,606	€95,680
11	Netherlands	137,500	€92,905
12	Spain	135,686	€91,680
13	Finland	131,250	€88,682
14	Austria	125,225	€84,611
15	Belgium	117,073	€79,103
16	Denmark	115,568	€78,086
17	Sweden	110,520	€74,676
18	Germany	108,098	€73,039
19	Portugal	96,979	€65,526
20	Norway	94,000	€63,514
21	Greece	70,500	€47,635
22	Italy	58,245	€39,355
23	Poland	46,521	€31,433
24	Hungary	43,033	€29,076
25	Czech Republic	37,464	€25,314
26	Turkey	33,948	€22,938
27	Korea	33,600	€22,703
28	Slovak Republic	11,856	€8,011

The data relates to 2004/2005 and showed Ireland’s judges to be the second highest paid, next to their British counterparts.

Between 2004/2005 and 2011 the salary of a British High Court judge increased by 11.1% from £155,404 to £172,753 (€196,310)

The salary of an Irish High Court judge increased during this six-year period by 36.6% from €184,889 to €252,720 – the probability now being that Irish judges are the highest paid in the world.

This development a surge in interest by those wishing to become judges.  During the 2004-09 period the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board advertised for a total of 51 vacancies in the Supreme, High, Circuit and District Courts,  There were 1,916 applicants.

Apart from the High Court, there are other features of the Irish judicial reward system which gives Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, plenty of grounds to conduct a Constitutional Referendum to reform judges pay and not to capitulate on their reported request that the tax burden on pension funds in excess of €2.3 million.

The Irish Constitution, Bunreacht na hÉireann, exists to define our nation, defend its institutions and not to provide privileged refuges for the well-connected to escape their civic obligations and contribution to social solidarity, especially at a time of unprecedented crisis and widespread severe hardship.

Public Sector Pension Levy

It was reported by the Revenue Commissioners at the end of 2010 that 22 of the nation’s 147 judges failed to make a voluntary contribution to the Revenue Commissioners last year in lieu of this levy and that the cumulative payments of those judges who did make a voluntary contribution amounted to €1,246,787. If all of them had met the statutory obligations that public sector workers are obliged to honour the Exchequer could have received €2,374,180 from the judiciary last year.

Despite the leadership endeavours of the Chief Justice and the President of the High Court, there is effectively a deficit in Exchequer receipts of €1,358,915 that someone else must compensate – the scale of which would require the pension levy of over 5,400 public sector workers earning €20,000 per annum.

The defence based on Article 35.5 of The Constitution that ‘the remuneration of a judge shall not be reduced during his continuance in office’ has never been tested so the underlying decision is therefore based on political and administrative considerations. This levy is a deduction from gross earnings of public sector workers. It is not a reduction in gross earnings.
Has the levy been applied to judges appointed after the Financial Emergency measures in the Public Interest Act 2009 became law on the 20^th December that year?

Remuneration

Our 147 judges were paid €27,759,194 in 2009. That included a State pension of €72,983 paid to the Chief Justice in respect of service in another Constitutional Office – that of Attorney General from March 1987 to September 1991.

Their counterparts in Great Britain and Northern Ireland are paid 24% less. This difference costs that Irish Exchequer €5,343,770 - which equates to 67% of the total receipts from pension-related deductions on public service remuneration last year in your own Department. Why is Ireland borrowing from the IMF/EU/HM Treasury to pay this premium so that our judges continue to be the highest paid in the world?

It is perfectly reasonable to compare pay rates in Ireland with those in the neighbouring Common Law jurisdiction because, unlike France and Germany, judges in the UK are recruited from the ranks of experienced lawyers, some of who earn more than £500,000 per year at the Bar but populate the ranks of the 140-strong High Court bench at a salary of £172,753, 27% less than the 36-member Irish High Court. The British rates are also broadly comparable to those prevailing in Australia and Canada. Furthermore, the same arguments with respect to work-load and complexity, impact and sensitivity of decisions, court craft and out-of-court administration, management and leadership responsibilities apply in all of these jurisdictions.

Public Sector Pay Reductions / 2010

The Irish Exchequer is losing €2,485,924 as a consequence of the judiciary being exempted from the reductions imposed on the public service from 1 January 2010. I have read that judges are also exempted from PRSI. If this is the case, the loss to the insolvent Social Insurance Fund is €1,107,488. The combined impact of this loss would pay the annual wages at minimum tariff of over 200 workers.

Has the reduction and pension levy been imposed on all judges appointed since 1 January 2010?

Pay Parity

The salary of the Chief Justice exceeded that of the Taoiseach from the foundation of the State until 1968 when pay parity was established on the grounds that the Head of the Judiciary and the Head of the Executive would enjoy similar remuneration. The differential between the pay of Enda Kenny and the Chief Justice is now 54%. If the arguments for pay parity were solid when rates were rising by 110%, which was the case between 2000 and 2009, how do you intend to choreograph the restoration of this long-standing relationship when the Constitutional impediment has not been tested and judges have responded to the national financial crisis with blinding self-interest?

Flat-Rate Expenses

At present, judges receive unvouched, non-pensionable and non-taxable expense allowances the cumulative annual value of which is €508,856. It seems to me that these are also not ‘remuneration’ within the definition of Article 35.5 of Bunreacht na hÉireann. Did you Department impose the 8% reduction (amounting to €40,708) that applied to all qualifying public service workers since 1 January 2010?

Government car and Garda Driver(s)

The State is to continue to provide the Chief Justice with a Garda driven car at an average annual cost of €280,000 to commute to the outer suburbs.

The total cost of the four official cars used by the British Ministry of Justice in the year ended 31 March 2010 was £320,429 (€368,309), or €92,077 per vehicle and €47,600 is attributable to the use of the British Government’s Green Car Service by all judges.

The total cost of operating two official cars at the Northern Ireland Office in the year ended 31 march 2010 was under €90,000.

Official car usage in Britain is restricted to official business and from home to office journeys within a reasonable distance, on the understanding that users would normally be bearing classified documents on which they would be working, - as well as security and other relevant considerations.

Gravy train for top echelons in Irish State companies

UCD economist Colm McCarthy published a review of the Irish commercial State companies this week as a prelude to the Government considering their possible sale.  The media have been commenting on the high level level of pay at the top of these organisations.  The average employee remuneration in all of them is €54,600 but I thought it would be interesting to set out the the average pay in each of them and the multiple of that average which the chief executive receives.  The data relates to 2009.

Entity	CEO Remuneration in 2009 €	Average Employee Remuneration in 2009 €	Multiple of employee average received by CEO
CIE	251,160	49,100	5.1
ESB	752,568	75,500	9.9
Bord Gais	394,000	67,300	5.8
EirGrid	407,000	83,400	4.8
Bord na Móna	392,000	44,800	8.7
Coilte	417,000	54,267	7.6
Dublin Airport Authority	568,100	49,300	11.5
Irish Aviation Authority	324,000	95,600	3.3
Dublin Port	317,000	67,900	4.6
RTÉ	326,000	59,700	5.4
An Post	500,000	43,300	11.5

The Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan,  announced in his Budget speech last December that ‘there should be a maximum salary rate of €250,000 in the public sector and that the position of the Minister for Finance as a shareholder or the statutory shareholder can be used to enforce the objective of the maximum salary within a reasonable timeframe’.

Lenihan’s ‘capacity to enforce’ was not apparent when the former managing director when he demanded the resignation of the former managing director of AIB just weeks earlier and he departed having pocketed benefits worth €3 million after one year in that role

Pay Day at AIB

When the Covered Institutions Remuneration Oversight Committee reported to the Finance Minister in February 2009 they stated that ‘pension arrangements for senior executives in banks should be at least broadly similar to those applicable to the generality of the staff of the institution’ This Report also recognised that the top management of banks make little or no contribution for their pensions and recommended an appropriate balance between personal employee contributions and the employer contributions and the extent to which they employee contribution may need to be increased needed to be immediately reviewed

Why did the Department of Finance tolerate an agreement nine months later, in November 2009, to facilitate the payment to Colm Doherty, the former managing director of AIB, a cash payment of €2 million in lieu of a contribution to his pension? Given the trading results for 2010 and the overall circumstances of AIB, how is it possible, for this nationalised bank, to fully discharge such extravagant payments to a departing managing director - while thousands of AIB employees are facing the loss of their jobs and great uncertainty about their termination packages?

During his 1-year tenure from mid November 2009 AIB lost €10.2 billion and total assets decreased from €174 billion on 31 December 2009 to €145 billion at the end of last year. It was obliged to take a 54% haircut on the €18 billion of property loans taken over by the State. It lost its listing on the Irish and London Stock Exchanges and a taxpayer investment of €7 billion means that with 92% of the equity owned by the State it is effectively nationalised. Its shares now trade on the Enterprise Securities Market alongside the mom and pop operation.

Loans outstanding are €94 billion, of which €56.8 billion are either in residential mortgages or property and construction and almost 30% of them are wither vulnerable, impaired or under scrutiny. Customer accounts have dropped from €84 billion to €63 billion in a year and the Irish banks are generally unable to tap funding markets.

Former United States Presidents retirement packages

Outgoing Irish TD’s from the last Dáil received more than €13 million in pension lump sums and termination payments and on top of these outgoing TD’s aged 50 and over will receive more than €4 million annually in pension payments. Seven ministers of state shared close to €250,000 in severance payments, including three who were returned to the Dáil – (McGuinness €25,276, Browne €24,952 and Micheál Kitt, now Leas Ceann Comhairle €25,276)

Former US Presidents

Former Presidents of the United States have only qualified for a pension since 1958. The current value of a former President’s pension is €138,366 and it is aligned to the salary of the Head of an Executive Department (e.g. Cabinet Secretary / Secretary of State, Secretary of Commerce etc.)

Former Presidents retiring before 1958 often pursued various occupations in retirement and received no federal assistance. The industrialist, Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919), who created US Steel announced a plan in 1912 to offer $25,000 annual pensions to former Presidents but many Members of Congress considered it inappropriate that such a pension should be provided by a private citizen. Legislation was passed to create a presidential pension but it was not enacted until 1955 when the 33rd President, Harry S. Truman (1884-1972), experienced financial limitations in recruiting an office staff.

Today, transition funding is available to former Presidents and Vice Presidents for seven months to facilitate their return to private life. These funds are used to provide suitable office space, staff remuneration, communication services, printing and postage associated with the transition.

The maximum annual rate of remuneration for an individual staff member of a former President cannot exceed the pay of a Level II appointee to the Executive Schedule (e.g. Deputy Secretary of a Federal Government department) and the current rate is just under €120,000. A former President supplements staff remuneration costs with private funds.

A total of €2.6 million is provided for former Presidents, their offices and Presidents widow in the 2010 Budget. This comprises €360,000 for Jimmy Carter, €576,000 for George Bush Snr, €756,000 for Bill Clinton, €907,000 for George H W Bush. The sum of €9 is provided for postage used by widows.

The aforementioned sum covers pension compensation, office rental, travel supplies and equipment.

State Funeral

United States Presidents are also entitled to other benefits. These include a State Funeral at the request of the surviving family. The sitting President officially announces the death of a former President and commander-in-chief by presidential proclamation and offers the nation’s condolences to the former President’s immediate family. Suitable honours are rendered by units of the armed forces under orders from the Secretary of Defence and the Secretary of the Army as his personal representative. In turn, the Secretary of the Army delegates to the Commanding Officer of the US Military District of Washington the overall authority for planning and implementing funeral arrangements for former Presidents. Each living former President has also prepared a formal funeral request which is kept by the MDW. There is a long standing tradition that an officer escorts the immediate family of a deceased military member until burial and the in case of former President’s that duty falls on the commanding general of the Military District of Washington.

Each branch of the armed forces provides personnel and support to a State funeral and, as a former commander-in-chief, each former President is entitled to be buried in the National Cemetery at Arlington Virginia.

Congress honours a former President by allowing his coffin lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda for a State ceremony followed by public viewing of the closed coffin.

Medical Expenses

Former Presidents and their spouses, widows and minor children are entitled to treatment in military hospitals.

Secret Service Protection

The Secret Service provides lifetime protection for former Presidents who entered office before 1 January 1997. Surviving spouses receive lifetime protection until remarriage. Those entering office after 1 January 1997 and their spouses receive protection for 10 years. Protection for the spouse ends upon divorce or remarriage. The widow of a President receives protection for a year following the death of a President. Temporary protection can be authorised at any time. Protection for a former President’s children is available to them until they reach 16 years of age, or for a period not exceeding ten years, whichever occurs first.

Presidential Libraries

With the exception of Richard Nixon, every former President since Herbert Hoover (1874-1964), the 31^st President, has had a presidential library managed by the National Archives and Records Administration established in his name.

The process of establishing a presidential library may begin with the establishment of a presidential library foundation – a private organization under the leadership of friends of the President. This usually enjoys tax exempt status and is allowed to receive donations and contributions which are used to purchase a site and construct a library building, that is deeded to the US Government. The Archivist deposits the President’s official records and papers in it and assumes management of the library.

Savings on Irish ministerial transport not as great as suggested

The new Irish Government tell us that substantial savings will be made on Official Cars from 16 June 2011 and on ministerial air transport.

The total cost of providing official transport to 27 Irish Office Holders in 2009 was €31,946,650. This includes €7,500,000 for 27 Garda-driven cars; the two aircraft assigned to ministerial use and four helicopters.

Last month Alan Shatter, Minister for Justice, Equality & Defence announced new arrangements for ministerial transport in place of the prevailing arrangements which consisted of 27 vehicles and 54 Garda drivers.

The new arrangement will mean that only the President, the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste the Chief Justice, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Minister for Justice, Equality & Defence will continue to be provided with Garda transport and drivers for security reasons. The fleet of 27 vehicles will be reduced to 7. Cabinet ministers will be required to provide their own cars but will the professional drivers they recruit will be paid by the State. Former Taoisigh will not longer qualify official cars on a full-time basis.

The Garda Office Holders Fleet cost €7.5 million to operate in 2010. The average cost of a Garda-driven official vehicle at almost €280,000 per annum is high. The average cost to the State of a vehicle provided by an Office Holder but driven by a professional driver paid by the State is €120,200. The estimated savings would therefore be €4 million per annum to this budget but the cost of the drivers will remain with the Garda Siochaná.

That maybe the case with respect to direct cost of operating the Office Holders fleet. But the 44 Gardaí who are being transferred from official driving duties will, naturally, remain on the State payroll. They will presumably lose the additional allowance of €17,936 payable to this category of driver – a total saving of €394,592.

The cost of fuel for these vehicles was €183,493; the cost of maintenance was €147,339 and the cost of depreciation was €541,045 in 2009. The salary costs associated with this fleet was €4.2 million in 2009, or average annual earnings per driver was well north of €77,778. The top rate for a Garda in 2009 was €48,695 and those on the ministerial pool qualified for an additional allowance of 40% of basic pay (€17,936) per annum making a grand personal total of €66,631.

This ia an awful lot of money, especially considering that 17 of the 27 users of these vehicles in 2009 were domiciled in Dublin. That cost can also be seen in the context of the Garda Training College in Templemore being effectively mothballed to save the cost of paying recruits. The number of retired members has, incidentally, increased from under 6,000 in 2007 to an estimated 9,750 retirees in 2011.

No vehicles have been added to the Office Holders fleet since 2008 when €509,765 was spent on new cars. 14 of the 27 cars have travelled over 200,000 kilometres and two of them have broke the 300,000 kilometre barrier.

Ministerial Air Transport

Apart from ground transport the cost to the Aer Corps of providing air transport to Office Holder in 2009 was €24.44 million (€17.39 M for the Gulfstream IV and €7.05 M for the Learjet 45). The average direct cost of the Gulfstream IV – maintenance, fuel, support, catering, cleaning and airport handling costs is €4,050 while the remaining costs – mainly depreciation and personnel bring the average total hourly cost of this aircraft per hour to €7,890. The comparable hourly costs for the Learjet 45 are €1,270 and €2,950.

There are also four helicopters available for ministers’ use at a total cost per hour ranging from €1,590 to €3,130 – depending on model.

Comparison with British Government Car Fleet

The British Government operated 78 vehicles in the year ended 31 March 2010 at a total cost of €7,744,889, or slightly less than an average cost of €100,000 per vehicle. The four vehicles used by the Cabinet Office, for example cost a total of €417,000, or €104,250 per vehicle and that particular fleet includes several Jaguar and Land Rover models. The Northern Ireland Office operates two official vehicles at a total cost in 2009/10 of €329,000, or an average of €164,480 per vehicle – that is €120,000 less than the Irish counterpart.

Britain’s Government Car & Despatch Agency employs 177 persons on the official government fleet. The Director of the Government fleet is paid an annual salary of €62,849 - €15,000 less than the typical salary of a Garda driver assigned to an Irish Office Holder. The average staffing cost of individuals assigned to the Government fleet is €59,275.

Conclusion

The foregoing illustrates how much Irish costs are out of line with comparators elsewhere.

The EU and IMF are ‘deeply unimpressed’ with Irish public sector pay levels

The EU and the IMF are reported to be ‘deeply unimpressed’ at the disparity with counterparts elsewhere.

The salary structures at NTMA remained a deep and profound secret since it was established 21 years ago until details were disclosed to the Public Accounts Committee on 7 January 2011 - after exhaustive probing. No less than six secretaries-general of the Department of Finance tolerated this secrecy despite it conflicting with their own Code of Practice for the Governance of State Bodies.

These revealed that:

1. The chief executive of NTMA is paid a basic salary €490,000, with provision for a bonus of up to 80% of salary, bringing potential annual remuneration to €882,000 (51 times the Irish minimum wage). The incumbent and his predecessor is the beneficiary of non-standard enhanced pension arrangements.
   
2. The chief executive of NAMA is paid €430,000 with provision for a bonus of up to 60% of salary bringing potential annual remuneration to €688,000 – (40 times the Irish minimum wage).
   
3. The chief executive of NDFA is paid €330,000 with provision for a bonus of up to 60% of salary bringing potential annual remuneration to €528,000 (30 times the Irish minimum wage).
   
4. No less than 16 individuals are being paid more than the Taoiseach now earns - €200,000+
   
5. 103 of the 305 staff in NTMA and its offshoots are paid salaries over €100,000 so, from the perspective of the economically disadvantaged, NTMA is a goldmine that can function with clandestine opacity, immune to overall Government policy on public sector remuneration and completely insulated from trends endured by the majority of citizens.

The grading and pay rates of the  Civil Service Regulations Act 1956 may not apply to NTMA but the National Treasury Management Act 1990 does not confer any privileges with respect to secrecy or derogations from the norms of public accountability.

The salaries of chief executives of counterpart major national debt agencies in 2009, who were trawling for funding from the same sources as Ireland when our authorities raised €35 billion, were as follows:

• The Chief Executive of the Australian Office of Financial Management was paid €250,000 and no bonus to raise debt amounting to €39 billion in 2009 – (remuneration 11 times the minimum wage in Canberra).
• The Commissioner of Public Debt in the United States Bureau of Debt oversees of staff of almost 2,000 people and a departmental budget of €125 million. He was paid less than €120,000 in 2009.
  The Commissioner’s remuneration was 9 times the annualised minimum wage in Washington DC. No US Federal employee earns more than President Obama - €290,000 per annum.
• The Chief Executive of the UK Debt Management Office raised debt of €267 billion in 2009 – over 7 times the debt level raised for Ireland that year. He was paid €188,000, equivalent to 38% of the basic salary of his Irish counterpart. He did not receive a bonus. The Chief Executives remuneration was 14 times the British minimum wage.

The salaries of the chief officers of those institutions providing the resources to bailout Ireland are: President of the IMF €320,275; President of the EU Commission €293,064; President of the ECB €367,863; Permanent Secretary of HM Treasury €207,000.

Is it any wonder they are ‘deeply unimpressed’?

Irish financial regulation–two contrasting perspectives

Two contrasting perspectives have been offered on Irish banking regulation in the past week. A Blueprint for Ireland’s Recovery was the culmination of several months dialogue among 17 ‘Influential Persons’ that included several former board members of AIB and Bank of Ireland prior to the onset of the September 2008 financial crisis and the massive commitment of resources to bailout these banks. They argue that what Ireland needs is ‘an appropriate and proportionate regulatory environment’ but ‘we’ must ensure that ‘over regulation is not a deterrent to foreign direct investment’.

The Moriarty Tribunal Report published on 22 March makes recommendations with respect to banking regulation. It states that most of the information upon which the Central Bank, as regulator, should have acted was available to the Bank, or ought, on reasonable enquiry, to have been available to it when it supervised Guinness & Mahon.

The Moriarty Tribunal investigated  Guinness & Mahon in connection with off-shore subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands and the Channel Islands from 1976 to 1982. It was concerned with Central Bank’s concern that Guinness & Mahon was operating a tax avoidance scheme that was tantamount to facilitating tax evasion. Following special investigation by the Revenue Commissioners, prompted by the Tribunal investigation, the Ansbacher scandal subsequently yielded a cumulative €107.3 million in tax and penalty payments from 139 taxpayers by the end of 2009.

Moriarty states that the reason the Central Bank did not act was a culture ‘characterised by a marked degree of unwarranted institutional and regulatory timidity on its part and by a high degree of unacceptable commercial defiance’, on the part of those subject to regulation. Allied to these considerations and underlying these attitudes and approaches was the conviction and culture of all concerned that the attachment of publicity to improper banking behaviour , or the generation of controversy in respect of banking practices and banking standards in Ireland, might lead to the undermining of the Irish banking system. It was not that the Central Bank at the time lacked any requisite power to enable it to suppress the shamelessly improper operation of the Ansbacher accounts, but rather that it failed to use its ample regulatory powers.

The function of the regulator is the ‘regulate’ and the balance had swung toward under rather than over regulation. Strong action, not amounting to over regulation, on the part of the regulators, should be valued as a key element rather than a retardant, in the promotion of a healthy financial sector. It is extremely difficult to frame recommendations where what is proposed is a change of attitudes on the part of the relevant authorities and indeed in the overall commercial culture in which those authorities are bound to act. As recent events have shown, regulation if the key to the survival of the banking sector, so vital to the national economy

A culture where forthright regulation is valued, not merely at a time of financial stringency, but at a time when it might be thought to be an unnecessary brake on commercial activity.  Such a change can of attitude can best be encouraged by increased vigilance on the part of elected representatives.  These issues were addressed in the Tribunals first report published in December 2006 – but without apparent consequence, according to Moriarty.

The Messiah’s Message from the political orphans

So 17 self-righteous messiahs, many of whom clung with a vice-like grip to the skirt hems of the Haughey, Ahern and Cowen administrations, have formed themselves into a rump to ‘advise’ the new Government on creating jobs, reforming the public sector, rebuilding international confidence and re-engineering the banking system. Economic salvation can be achieved, they argue in A Blueprint for Ireland’s Recovery, through manufacturing, tourism, agriculture, life sciences and ICT.

No vested interest, apart from their own, is ignored to flatter their dreams and aspirations. Is it not inspiring to observe individuals’, some of quite moderate ability, but who were cute and wily enough in taking care of their personal interests, to earn humongous sums, from the public purse in many instances, to focus their ‘advice’ on the mutilation of the public sector and the ‘reform’ of the welfare system?  Does this blueprint also mean that tax exiles are now purporting to advise on economic recovery?

‘To restore confidence and Ireland’s reputation, an investor relations strategy should be developed to attract overseas investment. Among the targets suggested, is that 20% of FDI should be sourced in South East Asia by 2015’. Are they aware of Horizon 2020, of did they see no reference in it when they regularly read the The Beano, The Dandy and The Hotspur?

Personal banking trends in Ireland

The amount of consumer credit outstanding in Ireland at the end of January 2011 was €18,609 million which has declined from €23,711 million a year earlier. Of this €2,722 million (15%) is attributable to personal credit cards held by 2,068,000 personal credit card holders.

Among those with current credit card/store card debts the amount owed varies considerably. One-fifth of households with such debt owe less than €571, a further fifth owe between €571 and €1,400, while 10% of these households owe more than €5,700 on their credit card. Approximately 56% of Irish households had a credit card in 2008 compared to 26.1% in 1995.

According to a recently published by the ESRI study ‘Financial Exclusion and Over-indebtedness in Irish Households’, 20% of Irish households in 2008 did not have a bank current account – that is over 290,000 households. 31% of households do not have any form of credit so the €18,609 million is actually spread among 1,008,000 households the average debt burden with an average burden per household of €18,440 (excluding mortgage debt)

This number without a bank account includes 36% of those ‘at risk of poverty’ and 60% of those ‘living in consistently poor households’. The preference for dealing exclusively in cash is most prevalent among those in the older age group, those with no educational qualifications and those in the bottom income quartile.

The survey also found in the case of households did not have any form of credit. 63% of these did not need to borrow; 22% did not have credit because they could not repay debt; 7% borrowed from family or friends and did not need commercial debt and a further 7% believed that they would not be granted a loan.

Deposits held by Irish households in January 2011 amounted to €93,957 million representing 56% of total Irish private sector deposits.

Public Outrage at Bank of Ireland extravagant bonuses

Last Saturday I spent a pleasant few hours with fellow hill walkers strolling along the 14KM stretch along the banks of the River Dodder. The controversial topic of Bank of Ireland bonus payments got an airing. These men and women of the world walking with me were aghast at what emerged in a Department of Finance Report on the matter as this Bank gave the Irish public the V sign.

A parliamentary question sought information in November 2010 on bonus payments to staff made by banks since the commencement of the Irish Government guarantee in September 2008. The Bank of Ireland advised the Department of Finance that “no performance-related bonuses were paid with respect to the financial year to March 2009 and December 2009”.

The statement added “a small number of people at middle management level received payments which reflected either guarantees which were agreed on their joining the Group or deferred payments where the historic performance criteria had been achieved and the payment was deferred over several years. For commercial reasons Bank of Ireland do not disclose the amount of such payments. The Bank advises that it had not legal discretion in these matters”

The loss at Bank of Ireland for the 9 months ended 31 December 2009 had risen to €1,813 million compared to €23 million for the year ended 31 March 2008. Impairment charges in this period reached €4,055 million compared to €1,435 in the year ended 31 March 2009. The Irish Government was forced to invest €3.5 billion in preference stock so as to bolster its capital base.

It transpired that the information provided by Bank of Ireland was incorrect and that bonus and quasi bonus payments from September 2008 to December 2010 amounted to a staggering €66.37 million – all linked to performance.

A patina of legal legitimacy is not an indication that any transaction is ethical, moral or affordable.

The hill walkers are utterly mesmerised that Bank of Ireland could be so utterly undermined in the Bank by duplicity, betrayal, self-serving slovenliness and skulduggery. These characteristics are evident not just in grotesque scale of bonus payments, which the Bank (and the public) cannot afford and untruthful answers to parliamentary questions, but there is now also evidence of incomplete and misleading information in the due diligence process prior to the public subscription for shares, in the attempted enhancement of the Group Chief Executives pension terms last year and the tardiness by the Bank in relation to the subsequent impeded and delayed investigation into the November 2010 misrepresentations to Dáil Éireann.

1. These bonuses, especially in the prevailing circumstances, amount to the barefaced looting of society – on a scale commonly seen in Russia, Africa and Asia.
   
2. The explanation that bonuses are ‘open to different interpretations’ and the comment by Arthur Cox that Bank of Ireland “used a restrictive and uncommon interpretation of what constituted a performance bonus” describes a crazy mentality of a type not untypical of occupants of padded cells in a lunatic asylum, whose capacity to communicate in vernacular English is very limited; who have ‘no intention to mislead’ and are likely to recognise this in lucid moments to avoid personal embarrassment.
3. The implication that the Irish people, who have been fleeced of €3.5 billion by Bank of Ireland, can now be bought for €2 million paid by Bank of Ireland to the Exchequer ‘to recognise the difficulties cased by the way the Bank handled the matter’  will simply  create a veneer of indulgence and camouflage to enable them to be further fleeced of, not just €66.37 million, but an additional €21 million in respect of bonuses and commissions in 2011 and other amounts in 2012 is outrageous and abominable.
4. The suggestion that any future parliamentary questions in relation to personnel or other important matters be authorised by the Group Chief Executive beggars belief on grounds of credibility. The Report indicates that overall payments totalling €1.2 million were not disclosed in the due diligence process prior to the public bailout.
5. The Sunday Tribune on 30 January 2011 that the Group Chief Executive of Bank of Ireland directly intervened with the planning authorities in October 2007 in connection with the proposed Sean Dunne development that would have cloned Jurys/Berkeley Court Ballsbridge hotel sites with Calcutta, had it been heeded?

The text of the letter from Richie Boucher to Dublin City Council planning authorities read:

“Dear Sir

Re Jurys / Berkeley Court Site

I refer to the above and write to confirm my strong support for this landmark proposal which I believe will significantly benefit the City of Dublin and its citizens through helping enhance the concept of a living city and providing buildings of significant architectural merit befitting Ireland of the 21^st century. Yours faithfully, Richie Boucher, Chief Executive Retail Financial Services Ireland.”

Dublin City Council granted partial permission for the Ballsbridge development but it disallowed Dunne’s application to build a 37-floor skyscraper.