EDIT - tribune article appears to reference dates.

The point still stands about there being people with a serious motivation to skew things.

The ODCE should be able to get the original recordings.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

EDIT - tribune article appears to reference dates.

The point still stands about there being people with a serious motivation to skew things.

The ODCE should be able to get the original recordings.

How can exerts from a telephone conversation skew things?

It depends on whether the dates are correct, whether they are out of context and whether they are transcribed correctly. People could face jail over this. The stakes are not just high for the nation. They are high for individuals. Also, I note the Taoiseach's statment that he had no reason to believe the FR did not carry out its duties properly. That allows for the possibility that the FR failed to carry out duties properly but did so without the authority of the Minister for Finance.

Quote :

25/02/2009 - 19:30:05
There has been a significant development in investigations at Anglo Irish Bank.

The Financial Regulator is reported to have uncovered certain matters at the bank of such a serious nature that they merit referral to the Gardaí.

It is understood that gardaí have been called in to investigate allegations of market abuse.

I suppose this means that we need to stick to discussing what is already in the public realm ?
I wouldn't like to see any future case jeopardised.

I don't think there is any danger of MN prejudicing any trial unless we release inside info! We are not constrained in the same way as Gilmore or Cowen. However, we may want to avoid going down the FG rumour mill road of baseless allegations, innuendo and speculation designed to slander the economy.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I don't think there is any danger of MN prejudicing any trial unless we release inside info! We are not constrained in the same way as Gilmore or Cowen. However, we may want to avoid going down the FG rumour mill road of baseless allegations, innuendo and speculation designed to slander the economy.

That's harsh Zhou.
I don't buy this idea that Enda Kenny is talking us into a depression.
Fianna Fail's actions over the last 10 years have had a more ruinous effect on our economy than Kenny's comments over the last 10 days.

eoinmn wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I don't think there is any danger of MN prejudicing any trial unless we release inside info! We are not constrained in the same way as Gilmore or Cowen. However, we may want to avoid going down the FG rumour mill road of baseless allegations, innuendo and speculation designed to slander the economy.

That's harsh Zhou.
I don't buy this idea that Enda Kenny is talking us into a depression.
Fianna Fail's actions over the last 10 years have had a more ruinous effect on our economy than Kenny's comments over the last 10 days.

I agree FF have made mistakes that have contributed towards getting us to where we are. However, some people who are lying to link the Taoiseach and former Ministers to the Anglo 10 seem determined to finish the job and cause a sovereign default. Enda has been acting as the leader of that pack through his comments in the Dail.

Zhou, if you have a look around the boards internationally, they are saying the same thing everywhere about Ireland. The horse has bolted. The problem is not a spin problem, of talking something down or up, its a real predicament.

The international markets are not watching Kenny, they are watching the real economy and the Government.

Spot on CactusFlower.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I don't think there is any danger of MN prejudicing any trial unless we release inside info! We are not constrained in the same way as Gilmore or Cowen. However, we may want to avoid going down the FG rumour mill road of baseless allegations, innuendo and speculation designed to slander the economy.

All FG are doing is pointing out the reality of the situation we are in.
If anything they still haven't got across the seriousness of the situation and still under playing the depth of mess we are now in.

This notion that nobody would notice the state of the Irish economy if only the opposition didn't mention it is naive in the extreme.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

eoinmn wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I don't think there is any danger of MN prejudicing any trial unless we release inside info! We are not constrained in the same way as Gilmore or Cowen. However, we may want to avoid going down the FG rumour mill road of baseless allegations, innuendo and speculation designed to slander the economy.

That's harsh Zhou.
I don't buy this idea that Enda Kenny is talking us into a depression.
Fianna Fail's actions over the last 10 years have had a more ruinous effect on our economy than Kenny's comments over the last 10 days.

I agree FF have made mistakes that have contributed towards getting us to where we are. However, some people who are lying to link the Taoiseach and former Ministers to the Anglo 10 seem determined to finish the job and cause a sovereign default. Enda has been acting as the leader of that pack through his comments in the Dail.

Do you think it is wrong to mention these things because they are baseless or because if they turned out to be true it would be catastrophic for our reputation?

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

eoinmn wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I don't think there is any danger of MN prejudicing any trial unless we release inside info! We are not constrained in the same way as Gilmore or Cowen. However, we may want to avoid going down the FG rumour mill road of baseless allegations, innuendo and speculation designed to slander the economy.

That's harsh Zhou.
I don't buy this idea that Enda Kenny is talking us into a depression.
Fianna Fail's actions over the last 10 years have had a more ruinous effect on our economy than Kenny's comments over the last 10 days.

I agree FF have made mistakes that have contributed towards getting us to where we are. However, some people who are lying to link the Taoiseach and former Ministers to the Anglo 10 seem determined to finish the job and cause a sovereign default. Enda has been acting as the leader of that pack through his comments in the Dail.

Do you think it is wrong to mention these things because they are baseless or because if they turned out to be true it would be catastrophic for our reputation?

I think it is wrong because they are baseless.
When you add the fact that such baseless allegations threaten the interests of the Irish people it becomes reckless and cavalier in the extreme.

If Enda did know something crucial and he brought that before the Dail then it would be hard to criticise him as it would be the action he would be revealing that would have done harm.

However, where he has no evidence to support his insinuations, and others spread lies to follow on from and support his insinuations, and the foreign press and markets accept such baseless allegations and insinuations, then it is Enda who is jeopardising all our futures for his own political gain. That is not good enough. Lies and calumny at Bertie's expense was one thing. Lies and calumny at the expense of the Irish people is another thing altogether.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

eoinmn wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I don't think there is any danger of MN prejudicing any trial unless we release inside info! We are not constrained in the same way as Gilmore or Cowen. However, we may want to avoid going down the FG rumour mill road of baseless allegations, innuendo and speculation designed to slander the economy.

That's harsh Zhou.
I don't buy this idea that Enda Kenny is talking us into a depression.
Fianna Fail's actions over the last 10 years have had a more ruinous effect on our economy than Kenny's comments over the last 10 days.

I agree FF have made mistakes that have contributed towards getting us to where we are. However, some people who are lying to link the Taoiseach and former Ministers to the Anglo 10 seem determined to finish the job and cause a sovereign default. Enda has been acting as the leader of that pack through his comments in the Dail.

Do you think it is wrong to mention these things because they are baseless or because if they turned out to be true it would be catastrophic for our reputation?

I think it is wrong because they are baseless.
When you add the fact that such baseless allegations threaten the interests of the Irish people it becomes reckless and cavalier in the extreme.

If Enda did know something crucial and he brought that before the Dail then it would be hard to criticise him as it would be the action he would be revealing that would have done harm.

However, where he has no evidence to support his insinuations, and others spread lies to follow on from and support his insinuations, and the foreign press and markets accept such baseless allegations and insinuations, then it is Enda who is jeopardising all our futures for his own political gain. That is not good enough. Lies and calumny at Bertie's expense was one thing. Lies and calumny at the expense of the Irish people is another thing altogether.

Exactly which allegations do you think are baseless?

The ones that I heard from friends in FG. The ones that Kerrynorth was PM'ing on the Pin. The one that JC Skinner said needed addressing. You know, all the allegations that followed on from Enda Kenny's ambush in the Dail suggesting that the Taoiseach needed to reveal the names to deal with suggestions to links of FF. did you miss all those lies, speculation and allegations??????

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

The ones that I heard from friends in FG. The ones that Kerrynorth was PM'ing on the Pin. The one that JC Skinner said needed addressing. You know, all the allegations that followed on from Enda Kenny's ambush in the Dail suggesting that the Taoiseach needed to reveal the names to deal with suggestions to links of FF. did you miss all those lies, speculation and allegations??????

I would call them uncomfortable truths.
Why did the government hide behind customer confidentially? Why could shareholders of a public limited company not be named?

However, the Anglo 10 is a side issue for me but I do think that the Brians and the Department of Finance knew about the deals long before they are letting on.

The real fraud is what officers in the Department of Finance, the Financial Regulator and Central Bank knew about the ILP and Anglo transactions.

cactus flower wrote:

Zhou, if you have a look around the boards internationally, they are saying the same thing everywhere about Ireland. The horse has bolted. The problem is not a spin problem, of talking something down or up, its a real predicament.

The international markets are not watching Kenny, they are watching the real economy and the Government.

It is hard to read minds. Perhaps you are right that Kenny's comments make no difference. I think they were important. It is one thing to have regulatory problem. It is another thing to have an in Government which is implicated in possible market manipulation by a bank. Whether you are right or I am right, Enda Kenny elected to make his comments without concern for their effect.

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

The ones that I heard from friends in FG. The ones that Kerrynorth was PM'ing on the Pin. The one that JC Skinner said needed addressing. You know, all the allegations that followed on from Enda Kenny's ambush in the Dail suggesting that the Taoiseach needed to reveal the names to deal with suggestions to links of FF. did you miss all those lies, speculation and allegations??????

I would call them uncomfortable truths.

What uncomfortable truths are you talking about? Are you aware of the lies that were being spread around the place?

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

Why did the government hide behind customer confidentially?

Because the Government did not want to break the law.
Because the Government did not want to prejudice any investigations or prosecutions.

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

Why could shareholders of a public limited company not be named?

Because the shares are held by nominees. I expect the names of nominees could be named but then they have a duty of confidentiality to their clients too.
Because it was the names of borrowers and not shareholders which would reveal the identity of the 10.

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

However, the Anglo 10 is a side issue for me but I do think that the Brians and the Department of Finance knew about the deals long before they are letting on.

The detail and financing of the deal was the problem. Where is your evidence that they knew about that? Is this just another baseless allegation?

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

The real fraud is what officers in the Department of Finance, the Financial Regulator and Central Bank knew about the ILP and Anglo transactions.

That is very serious if it is true. It will be a real scandal if the investigation finds that. Let's hope the investigation gets tot he bottom of it. It is to be noted that it is Eamonn Gilmore who has raised that and it does not form part of the original insinuations made by Enda.

Maybe it's not Enda Kenny but Eddie Hobbs in the Daily Star today (daily circulation 100,000+) who is "spreading innuendo" or did he pick it up from the Opposition ?

There would be less speculation if there was more information. Even given legal constraints, there is no sign of an awareness from Government that the drip feed of very limited information on the position of the banks is calculated to raise fears rather than assuage them.

Maybe the new FF website will address the information gap? I haven't looked, but does it include a 'Why we're not f*cked' section?

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

The ones that I heard from friends in FG. The ones that Kerrynorth was PM'ing on the Pin. The one that JC Skinner said needed addressing. You know, all the allegations that followed on from Enda Kenny's ambush in the Dail suggesting that the Taoiseach needed to reveal the names to deal with suggestions to links of FF. did you miss all those lies, speculation and allegations??????

I would call them uncomfortable truths.

What uncomfortable truths are you talking about? Are you aware of the lies that were being spread around the place?

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

Why did the government hide behind customer confidentially?

Because the Government did not want to break the law.
Because the Government did not want to prejudice any investigations or prosecutions.

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

Why could shareholders of a public limited company not be named?

Because the shares are held by nominees. I expect the names of nominees could be named but then they have a duty of confidentiality to their clients too.
Because it was the names of borrowers and not shareholders which would reveal the identity of the 10.

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

However, the Anglo 10 is a side issue for me but I do think that the Brians and the Department of Finance knew about the deals long before they are letting on.

The detail and financing of the deal was the problem. Where is your evidence that they knew about that? Is this just another baseless allegation?

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

The real fraud is what officers in the Department of Finance, the Financial Regulator and Central Bank knew about the ILP and Anglo transactions.

That is very serious if it is true. It will be a real scandal if the investigation finds that. Let's hope the investigation gets tot he bottom of it. It is to be noted that it is Eamonn Gilmore who has raised that and it does not form part of the original insinuations made by Enda.

I aware of what the rumors were and I think until we see the list of names the opposition is entilted to ask whatever questions they wish. The link between FF and developers is deep and well proven and at this stage the public has zero trust remaning to give FF the benefit of the doubt on these matters.

This customer confidentially is a complete bogus issue. Shareholders as a rule are not entitled to confidentially and identifying the shareholders would identify the Anglo 10.

The Department of Finance may claim they didn't know about the ILP Anglo transaction back in September but that just isn't credible. At the time of the guarantee Anglo was suffering a mini-run the Department of Finance SHOULD and WOULD have monitoring Anglos deposit base on a daily basis.
To claim now that they didn't question the source of a 15% increase Anglo's customer deposit base just make no sense. The only way the minister wouldn't have been informed is if he asked not to be informed.

The thing going around in my head is that I read last week that the FR had told the MOF back in July that the Anglo share issue (Quinns 10%) was resolved.

What's bothering me is that it seems the Minister never thought to ask how it was resolved.

The insider appointment of Sir Richie Boucher as head of the BoI is being widely seen as an indication that Government (2 reps on the Board) has no notion of reform, or of adressing our now appalling image. This is not a judgement on the individual, just on the lost opportunity of making a clear break and bringing in an unbiased outsider.

Having said that in July last Boucher gave evidence to the Oireachtas that the BoI was in good nick, and made the outrageous claim that our regulation was much tighter than that in the UK.

There was no outside independent regulation. The Regulator accepted "on trust" anything fed to him by the banks, as a matter of policy.
http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0225//index.html

This appointment will sadly do more to damage Ireland's reputation than six months of handbag swinging by Enda Kenny.

cactus flower wrote:

The insider appointment of Sir Richie Boucher as head of the BoI is being widely seen as an indication that Government (2 reps on the Board) has no notion of reform, or of adressing our now appalling image. This is not a judgement on the individual, just on the lost opportunity of making a clear break and bringing in an unbiased outsider.

Having said that in July last Boucher gave evidence to the Oireachtas that the BoI was in good nick, and made the outrageous claim that our regulation was much tighter than that in the UK.

There was no outside independent regulation. The Regulator accepted "on trust" anything fed to him by the banks, as a matter of policy.
http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0225//index.html

This appointment will sadly do more to damage Ireland's reputation than six months of handbag swinging by Enda Kenny.

Precisely, our reputation isn't being tarnished by the opposition questioning of the government. It is being tarnished by a government that seems to take incompetence and downright fraud as something to be brushed over until it was forced by public outrage to act.

There seems to be no desire within the government to get ahead of this mess and it is as if it is just reacting to a drip drip feed of bad news as it comes out.

Dreaded_Estate wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

The insider appointment of Sir Richie Boucher as head of the BoI is being widely seen as an indication that Government (2 reps on the Board) has no notion of reform, or of adressing our now appalling image. This is not a judgement on the individual, just on the lost opportunity of making a clear break and bringing in an unbiased outsider.

Having said that in July last Boucher gave evidence to the Oireachtas that the BoI was in good nick, and made the outrageous claim that our regulation was much tighter than that in the UK.

There was no outside independent regulation. The Regulator accepted "on trust" anything fed to him by the banks, as a matter of policy.
http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0225//index.html

This appointment will sadly do more to damage Ireland's reputation than six months of handbag swinging by Enda Kenny.

Precisely, our reputation isn't being tarnished by the opposition questioning of the government. It is being tarnished by a government that seems to take incompetence and downright fraud as something to be brushed over until it was forced by public outrage to act.

There seems to be no desire within the government to get ahead of this mess and it is as if it is just reacting to a drip drip feed of bad news as it comes out.

On the Quinn 10% issue, if the Bank said it had been resolved and shares had been bought then there is nothing particularly wrong with the dept accepting that, and if the regulator asked the relevant questions and got satisfactory answers then that is fine too. If the regulator did not get the right answers or did not ask the right questions then they may have been negligent. It is a long way from there to collusion or wilfull ignorance.

On the IL&P transaction, there are serious questions to be answered. However, the Guarantee had been put in place. You are making a lot of assumptions about what the Government and the Department did or didn't know. You are hearing what you want to hear before the investigation is complete.

On the issue of revealing shareholders names being within the power of the Government I have one question: Do you not understand the concept of nominee shareholders? With that said, it is within the purview of the board to reveal the names of nominees or otherwise. why ask the Government to circumvent the board? Do you not have faith in Alan Dukes et al?

Lastly, I have already made the point that Enda's comments may not be themain cause of reputational damage but he did set about putting the icing on the cake. He did that knowing it could cause further damage to our reputation. To be honest, I don't see how it could not do additional damage. Like I said before, if had actually identified a shareholder or provided information to the Dail one could forgive him. I can't imagine Richard Bruton behaving in the same way.