The impact of Sterling on NAMA’s UK assets

// September 30th, 2009 // 3 Comments » // Uncategorized

A good proportion of the assets that NAMA is going to be acquiring are based overseas, the largest location being the UK. Now some commentators are talking up the positive news that the UK housing market has shown signs in the last few months of stabilising. The not so slight problem with this angle is that Sterling has declined against the Euro. So those assets will need to gain back the drop in Sterling versus the Euro before they would even start on the road to breaking for us.

Sad but true.

My take on the Lisbon Treaty – part 1

// September 30th, 2009 // 2 Comments » // Uncategorized

In making any assessment on the merits of the Lisbon treaty we are encumbered rather than assisted by both the process leading up to the treaty signing and the process of the ratifying referendum itself. A referendum on an EU treaty marks the end of a long torturous process of trade-offs, horse trading, nuanced discussion, and negotiation. In suggesting as some have that we could renegotiate with Europe about aspects of the treaty we need to remember that it is a rather dull and messy compromise made by 27 elected governments.

Seeking to renegotiate aspects on which there is no settled national consensus goes beyond being merely complicated. The Socialist Party and Cóir, both of whom, like many others, seek to speak for those who voted No last time, would have an unbridgeable distance between them on say the issue of abortion, which isn’t even addressed in the treaty but which one of them believes is. For such groups the issues they and their forbearers raised first in the 70s have and will never go away you know. The arguments about a threat to Irish jobs was made by many on the left in the 1970s, others focused on neutrality or military non-engagement, an EU army, conscription, or abortion. All are issues that have been around since our accession debate. Despite repeating these claims in subsequent treaties, the day that our gay sons have been forced into EU armies for abortions while compelled to eat straight bananas has not come to pass.

The difficulty in addressing these concerns once they became the main focus of debate is that opposition groups, whether Sinn Fein, the Socialist Party and even Fine Gael and Labour amongst others, lost the battle to be directly involved in the detailed discussion about the treaty preparation when the general election of 2002 took place. Our democratic system requires that you win the elections leading up to the negotiations in order to for your people to be involved in the discussion. Part of the reason for this is that inherent to our system of representative democracy is the notion of putting your job on the line if you are wrong on the position you advocate.

Post the Nice Treaty debacle one of the core lessons the government should have learned was to never again come home from the EU fair with another Jack’s magic beans of a treaty. To facilitate this we need to look for a new more continuous form of public discourse and engagement that means fewer people are caught unawares of the process leading up to such treaties. And when it comes to the very detailed nuanced legal matters that form the basis of a treaty agreed by 27 participants we need to elect people to do a job of negotiating on our behalf and to trust them to do it. We pick those people via the electoral process and we should take considerably more care about it. That they turn out to be undeserving of our trust but are then re-elected is not their failing but ours.

It should be now evident that Ireland, and Europe more generally, is suffering from consultation fatigue. There is a strong argument to be made that the EU should have a moratorium on any more institutional changes for a decade or more. In his contribution to the Orange book, Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats spoke of the need for the EU to enjoy a period of stability with an absence of significant institutional change. A reformed system of public engagement prior to treaty agreements which in turns obviates the requirement for detailed debate after agreement has being reached and a period of stability in the EU institutions, for at least a decade or more, should be considered as priority lessons from the Lisbon process.

NB – there is a certain irony that the Zemanta thingy threw up an image of the signing of the Nice treaty one of its top options. So I stuck with it.

Lisbon Poll – How will you vote on October 2nd?

// September 28th, 2009 // 33 Comments » // Lisbon Treaty, Uncategorized

This is a poll to gauge public opinion on the Lisbon Treaty.

[polldaddy poll="2050534"]

It has been set up to block repeat voting by means of IP and cookies so may cause issues for some. PollDaddy are tracking that not me.

Why did we guarantee the bond holders?

// September 17th, 2009 // 6 Comments » // Uncategorized

It occurs to me in reading the broader commentary about NAMA that we, as members of the public, might be missing a trick or two. Which is easy when we’re compelled to look in the wrong direction.

One of the reasons (possible) for the issuing of the guarantee that all would be under written by the Irish state was to ensure that the bond market is not so annoyed with the Irish government. But why you ask would hard headed people across the entirety of the bond market be annoyed at the losses of others in what were privately owned and operated commercial organisations for which we the Irish state had no responsibility?

One reason that occurs to me is that it reduces the likelihood that there will be too much kicking over of the traces on the very light regulatory environment that existed here, “the Wild West” as the Germans termed it, which the state was directly responsible for. And a light regulatory framework is one thing, not even policing and enforcing that framework is another problem that falls at the lap of the Irish government. And it would be for that reason that the bond market might be less than inclined to lend to Ireland Inc. if the feeling was that we as state couldn’t be trusted to run things properly.

NAMA is to some extent the Irish Chewbacca solution; it makes no sense. Except when you invert it all and think of it as a massive Derren Brown scale effort at distraction. (And No Derren Brown did not use the wisdom of crowds or the precision of eejits as it is otherwise known to guess the lottery numbers. He simply put it up there to distract you from other possible solutions). So the operations of NAMA doesn’t have to make sense, because it is the mere existence of NAMA that makes sense for the government as a topic of distraction.

So NAMA is not the only possible solution to our problems but it does appear to make sense for the government, if not for us, when you consider that we talk now about the workings of NAMA but not about what led to it, or what other things might be happening right now that we’re not looking at. After all with NAMA to talk about we’ve less time to talk about unemployment hitting half a million by the end of the year. Or that recruitment of school leavers and graduates has all but ground to a halt.

Letters to Madam – teachers will work for food+rent

// September 7th, 2009 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

I had rather neglected the Letters to Madam* feature over the last few years. Last week was particular fun in that a number of letters perked my interest in the Irish Times Letters pages.

Madam,–

Bernadine O’Sullivan, letters September 1st, makes an interesting comparison by stating that “When income tax, pension contributions, PRSI, income levies, health levies and the pension levies are deducted from salary, then the take-home pay is almost equal to what it costs the State to provide unemployment benefit, rent allowance and a medical card.”

Taking that statement to its logical conclusion it would seem she is saying that teachers in receipt of unemployment benefit, rent allowance and a medical card could be willing to teach full-time for no extra reward. After all according to her viewpoint it is all the same to the teachers. I wonder how the members of the teachers unions, including the ASTI of which she was once president, would react to such an offer. I doubt if they would be impressed or too eager to take up such an offer.

Or is her comparison simple hyperbole, the sort of exaggeration that undermines the genuine case that can be made for the retention of many teaching positions. It is past time for outrageous, over the top claims to end and common sense to reassert itself. I can only hope for all our sakes and those of our children that it is not maths or economics she is teaching.

Yours, etc,

*Part of what caused me to start this blog was to capture letters I wrote or started to write but never finished and other half completed thoughts I had about topical events of the day. The upside of a blog post is that you know it will be seen, the downside is that it will be seen by considerably fewer people. There again though you’ve no idea of how many will actually read a letter in the Times.

Letters to Madam – tax them all

// September 7th, 2009 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

Madam, –

In reply to Mrs Hazel Lidwill, August 31st, who suggests a levy on mobile calls and text messages, might I ask why stop at only mobile calls and messages? Why not see other forms of communication as sources of revenue? Let’s have a charge on all phone calls, increase the price of stamps, tax ink and the sale of quills and above all monetise our emails.

Given that many teenagers communicate through their appearance we could charge for loud clothing, short skirts, haircuts, make-up and piercings. We could charge parents who stand outside at their doors and yell for their children; noise made while playing would be a considerable and renewable source of revenue if only we’d had a summer to entice them outdoors. And of course, not forgetting those most basic of communication signals, the crying of babies and the laughter of children. Why the list is practically endless!

Or is her motivation simply that she makes little use of her own mobile if she indeed possesses one and that she adheres to a belief that whatever else we do to right the public finances that people other than her must be the ones to pay.

Yours, etc,

How to guarantee a Yes vote for Lisbon

// September 3rd, 2009 // 1 Comment » // Uncategorized

If the Taoiseach was 100% committed to the notion of passing the Lisbon Treaty, he would offer the people something they want. A general election. He should make a solemn promise that if the people approve Lisbon that he will go to the country in the following weeks to seek an endorsement of NAMA and his government’s budgetary position. It would remove at a stroke the potential for people to against Lisbon in order to give him and his government a kicking.

Vote yes and get a general election, Vote No and you don’t get one.

FF Seanad Reform proposals

// September 3rd, 2009 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

So FF came out with their Seanad Reform proposals last week, and while I do have a number of concerns with the FF proposals which I will deal with in due course I do welcome their eventual appearance after all this time. I’ve attempted to get a fuller picture

Firstly we have the proposal to replace the existing six seats for a single constituency with 3 seats and then 1 seat each for TCD/NUI/Others. This strikes me as being dangerously close to a resurrection of a desire for the first past the post electoral system in FF combined with the desire for an avoidance of a single 6 seat panel. Which seems to me more about ensuring the dominance of the election by the larger political parties or people with considerable wealth or celebrity? Senator Cassidy is concerned with who might get that 6th seat. Perhaps he is worried the London born son of Irish emigrants from Kerry who graduated from UL might sneak in. OK, he probably wouldn’t pick me out of a line up but I reckon the Greens won’t be too keen on the avoidance of a larger constituency which would tend to favour the inclusion of minority opinion.

Again it is beyond me why we are so keen on preserving the over representation for TCD. Don’t get me wrong I know some lovely people who went to TCD but I can’t see why the Others and NUI both of whom have 3 times the number of graduates have the same single seat as TCD. There is also the fact that while the electorates may be divided by educational institution the candidates cannot be under the constitution. If we’re going to have an elitist system can we not at least try and be as egalitarian as we can about it?

Another massive problem with the dual elections is that it increases the cost of the overall process. And that is a problem no one has addressed that I’m aware of: 4/500,000 people in a single constituency spread across the world, I’m not sure even India deals too frequently with constituencies of that size.

I believe the reference to the low turnouts is a cheap shot given that the register is poorly resourced both in its maintenance for the addresses of graduates and also the addition of new graduates each year. Combine this with the archaic nature of the register which means it is very difficult for graduates to find out if they are on it, or their correct details are on it as is the case for the regular electoral register, nor does there exist any form of supplementary register. And “Copies of the Seanad Éireann Electoral Register are available in the libraries of the various institutions within the NUI and the National Library. The register is also available for examination in the reception of NUI offices, 49 Merrion Square, Dublin 2.” Not exactly the same as it being in the local post office, library or Garda station I’m sure you’d agree.

I do wonder if he is just being deliberately awkward just to ensure the whole thing is delayed again because no one is likely to agree with this and the intention was to find a consensus. What next, a suggestion for the time-sharing of seats over the lifetime of the Oireachtas?

I could say lots but for the moment I will content myself with the fact that according to his entry on the FF website he is “Spokesperson on the Taoiseach and Northern Ireland.”

http://www.fiannafail.ie/people/donie-cassidy/

When you say Seanad Reform a good number of people tend to say, “we should do this or that with the rest of the Seanad” and I would agree with many of them.

Yet it’s like starting a discussion about building an extension when you’ve got money for paint and no planning permission. So by all means let us apply for planning permission for larger changes to the Seanad by means of a referendum but in the mean time while the paint is here, can we paint the rooms we have by extension the franchise to the 20% of the population that we could do it to.