The Privatisation of Irish Politics

Frightened Albanian wrote:

SKRIN market and corporate news

January 24, 2003
JSC "LPK Kipelovo" wood removal rose 9% to 284.6 thous cm for 2002

LENGTH: 82 words

JSC "LPK Kipelovo"
rose 9% wood removal for 2002 versus 2001 to 284.6 thous cm. About this
SKRIN was informed by the ZAO "National timber industrial company"
press-service. Assortment wood storage amounted to 272.7 thous cm for
2002 (growth 4%) for 2002, assortment removal - 284.6 thous cm (growth
of 9%). JSC "LPK "Kipelovo"
is one of the largest timber industrial enterprises in Vologodsky
Region , enters ZAO "National timber industrial company" owned by Group
"Sputnik".

The article is about the situation 6 years after Ganley had any interest in the company. What were the figures for other regions at the time when Ganley was actually involved in the industry? Who owned the other forestry companies? The devil is in the detail.

Quote :

Timber Trades Journal
October 11, 1997
Russian super-mill set to lead exports to UK

SECTION: Pg. 2

LENGTH: 310 words

BY JAY THOMPSON

The emerging markets investment company Ganley International has
revealed that a new mill complex in north-western Russia will start
production of lumber for UK and European markets next month, reaching a
kilned and value-added output of three million m3 by 2000.
Chairman Declan Ganley
said the mill operation - which cost 'tens of millions of dollars' to
set up - was 'the first time where the developed market buyer will have
a totally reliable, quality controlled source of supply from Russia'.


Ganley has a stake in Cyprus-registered Glenrock Holdings, the business
that controls Kipelova Forestry Enterprises in the Volgoda region. The
mill and forestry operation was set up using German development capital
and European expertise.
A controlling interest in
Glenrock was acquired by Sputnik Funds, part of Russia's largest
investment bank pounds renaissance Capital, with Mr Ganley remaining as
chairman.
Cash for the latest phases of the KFE
project, which will be overseen by 60 expatriate managers, was acquired
from a team led by Boris Jordan, who previously worked for CS First
Boston in Moscow. The Exim Bank is also involved.

Funds were sourced mainly from US institutions. A KFE share offer will
be floated on the Moscow stock exchange, possibly in 1999.

KFE's 'environmentally responsible' forestry controls were devised by
Prof Larry Klein of the US and Neil Tulip, an academic from Edinburgh
University who will oversee felling and regeneration. 'The old Soviet forest husbandry was flawed in some areas,' said Mr Ganley. 'We've revamped it.'

Ganley International, which also has interests in natural resource
operations in the Baltic States and south-eastern Europe, has been
approached by forest operators in other parts of Russia 'to go in and reorganise their forestry sectors'.Timber Trades Journal
.

Funny how a few years later Kipelovo did the same thing for 4 mil

Would Declan Ganley be a Cypriot tax resident then?

Indeed Glenrock Holdings etc, funny that Kipelovo are listed as owning 1% of National Timber and their address is Cyprus too.

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Indeed Glenrock Holdings etc, funny that Kipelovo are listed as owning 1% of National Timber and their address is Cyprus too.

What about the Cablenet related companies?

For anyone who missed it, a good account here of the RTE programme on Declan Ganley. Better than the programme really, as it leaves all the hype and "monster music" out.

http://amomentarymadness.blogspot.com/2008/11/who-is-declan-ganley.html

In one place there is a reference to Jack Straw. That should read Jack Shaw.

PPlus its Don de Marino rather than the name there
but like most right thinking people the writer notes his instinctive unease when confronted with Declan Ganley. Just in case you thought it was only you ...............................................

The silencing of free speech by spurious threat of legal action have People Korps quite exercised on his blog today

Libertas? Nein Danke! Blog

Quote :

Declan Ganley of Libertas silencing of free speech by spurious threat of legal action?







Ganley says he'll sue!all the time!

where are the actions?



Declan Ganley likes to talk about openness, democracy & transparency – but

does not always accept a central feature – the right to hold an

opinion that differs from his own.

Declan Ganley frequently threatens

litigation. In this he is travelling the same path as James Goldsmith

another rich Europhobe who used the threat of Court action to silence

opponents.


1. In the last week of November 2008, Ganley's solicitors issued

threats of legal action to Irish politicians, including Joe Costello

of the Labour Party. This follows comments by Costello regarding

Libertas funding. According to the Irish Times "Mr Ganley has

threatened to sue Mr Costello for substantial damages, following Mr

Costello's charge that the Libertas founder has "a subversive foreign

agenda".


2. Ganley also threatened to sue Jim Higgins


3. Ganley has issued several threats to take on journalists incl the

RTE team that produced the Prime Time special


>4
Irish Times journalist and long time reporter on Declan Ganley's
strange affairs Colm Keena has been threatened with legal action.


5. In May 1999 he threatened to sue the Irish state on being told that the

the
representitives of the Irish government would not continue discussions
on Ganleys purchase of a fertilizer plant IFI in Co. Wicklow. When told
that the state

was not interested in further discussions on his plans for IFI Ganley

got very pissed off and said siad he would go to the Courts for redress. Told by a director at IBFI, that "… that the shareholders had jointly decided to stop

discussions with Grande Portage and that they were reassessing the

options available to them. "[Ganley] replied by saying, 'It was going

to get interesting and this was not good enough.' He said he would

pass on the matter to his solicitors and he was not going to sit back

and let this all happen.' Ganley added 'I will take legal action and

this will end up somewhere in the High Court.' Ganley never sued. See

Fertiliser bomb ignited Ganley's anger, Sunday Tribune 19 January

2009. reproduced below


6. He did commence an action against the state on the mobile phone

license – his bid was the lowest scoring in the contest – the case was

ultimately thrown out.


7. Action has even been threatened against people posting messages on

Politics.ie, a website controlled by one of his associates david Cochrane

an employee of Libertas who owns and runs the site with Ganley

promotion in mind.

Sunday Tribune Fertiliser bomb ignited Ganley's anger

and the UKIP hate libertas which they call Fibertas and LiebertasP.ie for UKIP

Cookie keeps asking "What has that got to do with the privatisation of Irish politics?"

The Standards in Public Office Commission regulates the line between public and private in Ireland. It controls how much private influence can be exerted on public decisions. Each citizen has a right to vote, but they do not have a right to buy other people's votes, or to buy a public official, in order to gain private advantage. Giving a public official one million euros, for instance, to run a county council campaign, and then applying for planning permission once the councillor is elected, might throw up some alarm bells, particularly if that donation is not disclosed, and then is claimed to be a 'loan'.

This kind of carry-on has been going on for as long as there has been politics. However, here in Ireland, in the 21st century, the best example of private money being used to affect public decisions, has been Libertas. In this case, one private individual decided he wanted to affect a public decision. He created a company, to represent his interests, hired employees and put a lot of money into a campaign. SIPO'S jury is out, so we don't need to go any further - but the point is that they are examining the transactions and conduct at a critical juncture; the cross-roads between public and private life.

Now, the next strategic move into public life, by this private individual, has been to form another company or two, and call it a political party. But, since there are no elected officials within the party, no candidates and no policy documents, the reality is that nothing has changed. There is no party. There is still one individual, piling a lot of money, into a vehicle for his own opinions - or perhaps even a vehicle that will express any given opinion, as long as it provides private access to public decisions, and he has control over it.

This possibility does not seem outlandish, since Ganley is a privatisation expert. Almost every single business model he has ever put into place has involved lobbying public officials in order to gain access to, or ownership of public resources.

Cookie says the privatisation of politics is:

Quote :

"Something which, by the way, I don't see a s possible. In a democracy the power rests with the people. Regardless of how much money an organisation has it's nigh on impossible for politics (by which I mean the political institutions) to be bought in party structure. You don't like what is on offer you don't give your vote."

So, there should be no regulation of political donations, I take it. Anyone should be able to give as much as they want to any politician. Any amount of private money should be able to be spent on public campaigns. And should there be openness and accountability in this process I wonder?

And the 'party structure' prevents it from being bought does it? How so?

What is the party structure of Libertas Party? Has anyone even been elected within the 'organisation'? Or is it simply like a good episode of The Office every day?

How does the 'Libertas Party' prevent itself being bought by Declan Ganley (who paid for it)?

As it turns out, today\'s papers have two pieces, right on topic. First, the Irish Times has a story called Czech Libertas recruit has conviction for evading duty:

Quote :

BUSINESSMAN DECLAN Ganley has recruited a Czech MEP and former media mogul, Vladimir Zelezny, to help set up a Libertas branch in the Czech Republic in advance of the European elections. The appointment is the first significant announcement made by Libertas in central and eastern Europe, where Mr Ganley hopes to win scores of seats in the June elections. Mr Zelezny is a colourful and controversial character. He is currently being investigated by the Czech authorities for tax fraud and abuse of creditors. He is co-founder of the state’s first commercial television station, Nova TV, which became the Czech Republic’s most popular channel by broadcasting popular US imports such as Baywatch and featuring naked women reading the weather forecast.

Now, wouldn\'t that brighten up the 6 O\'Clock news? It's good to see them calling him a 'businessman' rather than a politician or party leader, because there is absolutely no proof anywhere that there is a party, or that he has been elected the leader. The story concludes:

Quote :

Mr Zelezny entered politics in 2002, when he was elected to the Czech senate and in 2004 he won a seat in the European Parliament. He set up his own political party, the Independent Democrats, in 2005, which Czech sources describe as a one-man operation. He unsuccessfully sought re-election in the June 2006 Czech elections. His motivation in joining Libertas may be to bolster his chances of retaining his seat as an MEP. In the Czech Republic it is necessary to attract 5 per cent of the vote to be assured of winning a seat. In 2005 the European Parliament stripped Mr Zelezny of immunity following a request by the Czech judiciary.

The Irish Independent has a letter:

Quote :

- Last year, while Lisbon was the hot topic on everybody\'s lips, we were overexposed to the wisdom of Declan Ganley and his Libertas organisation. Every day, Libertas would tell the nation why we should vote \'No\' to Lisbon and how, if we trusted their philosophy, we could maintain our independence and still compete as a strong European country.

Libertas managed to persuade the country. But now that the excrement has hit the ventilation machine and the country needs serious thinking and positive ideas to get us out of this hole, has anybody seen Declan?

Caroline Williams
Dublin 18

The Times story shows that Ganley has managed to hook up with another \'privateer\' businessman, who made a lot of money after procuring a State license, in this case for a TV station. This character has all the trademarks of the \'corrupt elite\' our Declan is protecting our freedom from. They really must be scraping the bottom of the barrel, if this is the best they can do.

The letter is right on point, as it shows how after causing havoc here in Ireland, how ironic it is that Ganley and cookie, now claim that they have no interest in Irish politics.

Of course he has no interest in Irish politics - they wouldn't be elected.

As a pan European project Libertas is circling the drain

A better title might have been "The Americanisation of Irish Politics".

ibis wrote:

A better title might have been "The Americanisation of Irish Politics".

Agreed, and even more so, the Americanisation of European Politics: if you look at Ganley in the context of the arrival on the scene of neoliberal heads of state/politicians with US backgrounds in Eastern Europe and the movement of France towards NATO, he looks less like an anomaly and more like part of a trend.

Does anyone, whether pro or anti, not believe that the political landscape will change dramatically? We're not talking about pot holes in Skibbereen nor a bit of motorway in Meath anymore. A motorway is parochial stuff when you're talking about making laws that are supposed to govern an continent. Throwing stones at a person or party who already recognises that the political landscape of Europe is going to change irrevocably is a tad bit disingenuous.

cookiemonster wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

What the hell is this thread about anyway, or is it nothing but yet another get Ganley thread, albeit bad disgusied.

It must seem that everyone is out to "get Ganley". The right wing don't like him (well, some of them) because he's treading on their turf, the left wing don't like him because he's right wing. Then there are the centrists who don't like him because they perceive Libertas as undemocratic and corporate in character ...

What has that got to do with the privatisation of Irish politics? Something which, by the way, I don't see a s possible. In a democracy the power rests with the people. Regardless of how much money an organisation has it's nigh on impossible for politics (by which I mean the political institutions) to be bought in party structure. You don't like what is on offer you don't give your vote.
Precicely why Ganley and Libertas are the sole and exclusive topic of this thread (putting aside the fact that this IS yet another "Get Ganley" thread) is beyond me as Libertas's stated aim and goal is pan-European and also not focused on national politics.

You're also, again, mixing up two things, Cactus flower, that is Ganley and Libertas are different. They are not the same and they do not equal eachother. But even putting that aside for a moment, it is perfectly possible and concievable that Libertas candidates will get lots of support despite your concieved universla dislike of Ganley. Just take a look at national parliaments around the globe, all politics is local as they say and if there is a good candidate on offer they are a good candidate regardless of who leads their party.

But of course I don't believe that will be an issue at all. All this amateurish, storm in a tea cup, build-your-own-right-wing-monster, nonsense is localised to a margin of ineffective nutjobs with their own benign political aims who will be dismissed by all but the most irrational tinfoil hat hearing numpties.

You can duck and weave through threads all you want, bouncing off the Google wonderboy fabricating Monster Ganley and his evil right wing party all you want but it reprensents nothing but a pathetic attempt to smear and damage a good man with no other basis than your rigid unfounded irrational fear of anything but your own opinions. If you want to remain that blinkered, biased and parochial in your politics then so be it, but don't expect me or anybody else with half a brain to put up with that nonsense, regardless of what your, frightened Albanian, Anticoalition or whoever tries to dress it up as. The very fact that you lot feel the need to shroud your pathetic smears in some veil of legitimacy speaks volumes for you character.

You're making two points: the first is that democracy is all down to one man one vote, and that money doesn't make any difference. If that is the case, why are there regulations about funding campaigns? Why did Ganley go to the trouble of passing over a very substantial sum for the Libertas campaign? Why did he make great play of his image as a powerful and successful businessman with substantial financial resources? The source of Fianna Fail's money is focus of much more attention than Ganley's, again because it is rightly assumed to be influential on their decision making. The issue of the OP however is that one business minded individual, very much using a corporate model, is setting out to use his private resources to recruit "attractive/good local candidates", who will collectively form Libertas as an EU based political party. This is of interest both in Ireland and across the EU and a lot of people have written about it. Why should we not discuss it here?

Your second point is that Ganley and Libertas are not the same thing. Until we see a policy and programme for Libertas, adopted by Libertas's membership in the normal way, there is no evidence of this.

The ducking and weaving is being done by Ganley, as he wends his way throught the right and far right parties of Europe trying to piece together a movement that is pro EU and anti-Lisbon. The only element of the No vote that was pro EU and anti Lisbon was essentially a protest vote, and trying to build a party on something so ephemeral looks to me to be a very risky business.

The rest of your post is ad hominem.

rockyracoon wrote:

Does anyone, whether pro or anti, not believe that the political landscape will change dramatically? We're not talking about pot holes in Skibbereen nor a bit of motorway in Meath anymore. A motorway is parochial stuff when you're talking about making laws that are supposed to govern an continent. Throwing stones at a person or party who already recognises that the political landscape of Europe is going to change irrevocably is a tad bit disingenuous.

Personally, I don't believe that the political landscape - either in Ireland or in the EU as a whole - will change dramatically. Most of the major ideological groups we are likely to have are already present in the various Parliaments around Europe (whether the Dail or its equivalent or the EP). The current economic turmoil might result in some changes but I am not sure a domestic election which replaced a FF led coalition with a FG led coalition or an EP election which replaced an EPP led coalition with a PES led coalition really constitutes dramatic change.

rockyracoon wrote:

Throwing stones at a person or party who already recognises that the political landscape of Europe is going to change irrevocably is a tad bit disingenuous.

Please explain in detail? and you can give your definition of "political landscape" just so we are clear.

Paul R wrote:

rockyracoon wrote:

Does anyone, whether pro or anti, not believe that the political landscape will change dramatically? We're not talking about pot holes in Skibbereen nor a bit of motorway in Meath anymore. A motorway is parochial stuff when you're talking about making laws that are supposed to govern an continent. Throwing stones at a person or party who already recognises that the political landscape of Europe is going to change irrevocably is a tad bit disingenuous.

Personally, I don't believe that the political landscape - either in Ireland or in the EU as a whole - will change dramatically. Most of the major ideological groups we are likely to have are already present in the various Parliaments around Europe (whether the Dail or its equivalent or the EP). The current economic turmoil might result in some changes but I am not sure a domestic election which replaced a FF led coalition with a FG led coalition or an EP election which replaced an EPP led coalition with a PES led coalition really constitutes dramatic change.

I spent part of my childhood in a town vast swathes of which had been flattened by German bombing, some of it still being rebuilt in the seventies. Images of Belsen were probably seen there more than here. The far right is much stronger across eastern europe, German and Austria than you may be aware and the BNP and other right wing groups and parties are stronger in the UK that would have been imagined possible ten years ago. Ganley and Libertas could disappear in a puff of smoke, but the far right in Europe won't go away and are toxic and dangerous, from the point of view of anyone who values democracy and the prospect of a peaceful life. Ganley has been reported to have been meeting Polish groups last week including groups with a record of anti-semitic and homophobic street violence. I don't believe in letting these people get traction before there is awareness of who they are.

cactus flower wrote:

ibis wrote:

A better title might have been "The Americanisation of Irish Politics".

Agreed, and even more so, the Americanisation of European Politics: if you look at Ganley in the context of the arrival on the scene of neoliberal heads of state/politicians with US backgrounds in Eastern Europe and the movement of France towards NATO, he looks less like an anomaly and more like part of a trend.

In that sense, I don't think he is at all. The neoliberal wave in European politics is at least 20 years old. I really meant the combination of business money being used to enter politics, the high-profile media-friendly campaign, the attack ads, the photo-opping, the prominence of the campaign and the campaign team as opposed to the party itself.

ibis wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

ibis wrote:

A better title might have been "The Americanisation of Irish Politics".

Agreed, and even more so, the Americanisation of European Politics: if you look at Ganley in the context of the arrival on the scene of neoliberal heads of state/politicians with US backgrounds in Eastern Europe and the movement of France towards NATO, he looks less like an anomaly and more like part of a trend.

In that sense, I don't think he is at all. The neoliberal wave in European politics is at least 20 years old. I really meant the combination of business money being used to enter politics, the high-profile media-friendly campaign, the attack ads, the photo-opping, the prominence of the campaign and the campaign team as opposed to the party itself.

I don't see any contradiction between the two.

rockyracoon wrote:

Does anyone, whether pro or anti, not believe that the political landscape will change dramatically?

We're not talking about pot holes in Skibbereen nor a bit of motorway in Meath anymore. A motorway is parochial stuff when you're talking about making laws that are supposed to govern an continent.

What laws do you think are governing the construction of the M3, the longest motorway ever built in Ireland?

Of course the Lisbon Treaty is very important, which is why it is important that those campaigning on the issue are very informed, and behave in an open and democratic manner.

rockyracoon wrote:

Throwing stones at a person or party who already recognises that the political landscape of Europe is going to change irrevocably is a tad bit disingenuous.

Mr. Ganley is not an EU law expert. He does not even have a third level degree. Now, that's not fatal, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. But, what EU law experts did Libertas employ to analyse the treaty? Mr. Ganley certainly does not behave in an open and accountable manner, and neither does Libertas. In fact, I would still go as far as to say that aside from Mr. Ganley's opinions, and the paid opinions of some of his employees, Libertas does not exist. Please explain what makes Libertas a party? I don't see any platform, elected officals, or even candidates.

Of course the political landscape of Europe is changing. That is the nature of a political landscape; to be in constant change. Bland sweeping statements like that are what Ganley and co thrive on. It means nothing. What we are focusing here on is how the Irish political landscape is changing, as a result of private funding of political campaigns. That applies to Europe too. So what is your problem with our observations?

And why are you trying to equate the M3 and Lisbon campaigns? They are both important issues, but this thread has to do with the privatisation of Irish politics.

Paul R wrote:

rockyracoon wrote:

Does anyone, whether pro or anti, not believe that the political landscape will change dramatically? We're not talking about pot holes in Skibbereen nor a bit of motorway in Meath anymore. A motorway is parochial stuff when you're talking about making laws that are supposed to govern an continent. Throwing stones at a person or party who already recognises that the political landscape of Europe is going to change irrevocably is a tad bit disingenuous.

Personally, I don't believe that the political landscape - either in Ireland or in the EU as a whole - will change dramatically. Most of the major ideological groups we are likely to have are already present in the various Parliaments around Europe (whether the Dail or its equivalent or the EP). The current economic turmoil might result in some changes but I am not sure a domestic election which replaced a FF led coalition with a FG led coalition or an EP election which replaced an EPP led coalition with a PES led coalition really constitutes dramatic change.

Does rockyracoon mean that Ganley is on the nail in looking to engage in EU rather than National politics? No one on this thread that I''m aware of has been criticising him for that. So far as I'm concerned, its the colour of his politics, somewhere between right wing of the Tories (they are very keen apparently to get his endorsement) and the right wing thugs on the streets of Poland, that is the problem. Its precisely the danger of a strengthening of the far right across Europe that keeps me following Ganley/Libertas''s progress. What's not to throw stones at?

A great little thread on the Shamrock Rovers Forum: these guys know their EU and their Ganley

www.srfcultrasforum.com/forum/showthread.php%3Fp%3D134536+Ganley+Madrid+2009&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=ie" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:7dnYtqYzKTQJ:www.srfcultrasforum.com/forum/showthread.php%3Fp%3D134536+Ganley+Madrid+2009&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=ie