Questions and Answers - Heckle Here

tonys wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

The longer we put Lisbon off and the more we shoot down Ganley in the meantime, the more that anti-Lisbon fatigue that will set in. People will capitulate and vote Yes - we'll be too tired of economic disasters not to.

That was an unbelievably good show there tonight, wasn’t it.

How about this;
We cook up a problem with some important industry, a real pig of a problem, the EU take a very reasonable view where they might not, they allow this industry to continue to trade with the rest of Europe, where they could ban it and not only that but they dig deep and help to rescue our problem industry, whatever industry that might be you understand and then along with some reassurances we are asked to vote again.

Too far fetched?, yeah, you’re probably right.

Yep, you see where it went wrong there...

tonys wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

The longer we put Lisbon off and the more we shoot down Ganley in the meantime, the more that anti-Lisbon fatigue that will set in. People will capitulate and vote Yes - we'll be too tired of economic disasters not to.

That was an unbelievably good show there tonight, wasn’t it.

Do you know when the Box Set will be available ?

Auditor #9 wrote:

tonys wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

The longer we put Lisbon off and the more we shoot down Ganley in the meantime, the more that anti-Lisbon fatigue that will set in. People will capitulate and vote Yes - we'll be too tired of economic disasters not to.

That was an unbelievably good show there tonight, wasn’t it.

Do you know when the Box Set will be available ?

I’m waiting for the blue ray version, I wouldn’t want to miss a pixel of it.

toxic avenger wrote:

tonys wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

The longer we put Lisbon off and the more we shoot down Ganley in the meantime, the more that anti-Lisbon fatigue that will set in. People will capitulate and vote Yes - we'll be too tired of economic disasters not to.

That was an unbelievably good show there tonight, wasn’t it.

How about this;
We cook up a problem with some important industry, a real pig of a problem, the EU take a very reasonable view where they might not, they allow this industry to continue to trade with the rest of Europe, where they could ban it and not only that but they dig deep and help to rescue our problem industry, whatever industry that might be you understand and then along with some reassurances we are asked to vote again.

Too far fetched?, yeah, you’re probably right.

Yep, you see where it went wrong there...

They will this time, you can bet your last Euro on it.

Micheal Martin.
Eamon Gimore
Moore McDowell
Didn't hear who else.

Suzanne Kelly, who is a barrister I think.
Eamon Gilmore.

Is this a feeler out from Gilmore for a National Government?


Micheal Martin is deeply deeply hurt that there is any suggestion that Government has "looked after their friends".

Audience member is telling it how it is - the Guarantee was a disaster and all the manoeuvres of the Government since then have been forced on them as a result of the Guarantee. Damaged the reputation of Ireland in Europe - forced them to make guarantees that have been no use.

Two thirds of Anglos assets are outside this country.

M Martin seemed to be listening to him.

Next audience member
"A culture of greed and deceit in our Boards... cosy cartels"

Just chooned in. Micheál Martin is slick with that bank guy in the audience on the guarantee..

Susanne Kelly ... my God - what a patriotess ... Why isn't she president ??

What do we do with the toxic debt?

The two choices I thought were

1. pay it or
2. default.

The British insurance policy idea getting an airing.

The Yank says this is too big for pardee politics.

Moore McDowell says Labour Party was right to oppose the Guarantee.

Insurance policy is a better idea than a toxic bank for precisely the reasons the barrister lady highlighted.

johnfás wrote:

Insurance policy is a better idea than a toxic bank for precisely the reasons the barrister lady highlighted.

Makes sense to me. It is a bit less likely to result in default.

It also doesn't allow people off scott free. If you put all the bad debt in one bank and just park it there saying its ok lads you essentially invite all the big debtors of, for instance, Anglo to basically default and let us all pick up the pieces. An insurance regime only deals with bad debts as the debtors can't pay but it also sends the point to them that we expect them to pay their full liabilities back. Obviously there will be large sections of the debt which will never be paid back, but there will also be a significant percentage that will be.

This is it - do we not have enough laws to hang the Big Boys ???

Seems they'll regulate the bejesus out of the small business according to the audience member.

"There hasn't been a policy - a series of ad hoc measures, one after the other" Moore McD.

Chumminess and golden circles are not the flavour of the month. The shuffling around of a few people around the Boards and Institutions, all in each others pockets, is taking a hit.

Guy in audience says the Financial Regulator is heavy handed and nit picking on small brokers, and let the big banks run riot. No penalties on the banks, while small brokers closed down.

He is pretty much right.

johnfás wrote:

It also doesn't allow people off scott free. If you put all the bad debt in one bank and just park it there saying its ok lads you essentially invite all the big debtors of, for instance, Anglo to basically default and let us all pick up the pieces. An insurance regime only deals with bad debts as the debtors can't pay but it also sends the point to them that we expect them to pay their full liabilities back. Obviously there will be large sections of the debt which will never be paid back, but there will also be a significant percentage that will be.

It seems like the best of the various bad options. I suppose that means that Cowen and Lenihan will say on no account will they do it. Until eventually they have to, or it is too late.

Did Micheál Martin look nice and shifty there when Gilmore was starting to go over the history of financial debauchery that swept this place in the last ten years... ?

Vote Fianna Fáil if General Election called. They presided over the boom superbly I'm sure they're the ones qualified and experienced to preside over the bust.

What MM is saying is nonsense given the cost of doing business in Ireland - electricity, telecoms, wages and the rest.

The commitment to high end jobs is an interesting one. There are lots of ways to think about it. For instance, any of my friends who are graduates and can't get a job will emigrate to wherever in the world there is work. There will be work somewhere and they will get it, because they are high end graduates. What will they leave behind them? They'll leave the people who do not have skills who have no America or Britain to go to. Obviously we need to upskill the entire economy but there is always going to be a group which are less skilled than the rest of the economy. Those who can be employed by high end medical device companies will always be the minority. Where is the roadmap to employ the vast swathes of people who will never be qualified to do that kind of job? Obviously the answer is we need both, but we do need low(er) end jobs as much as we need high(er) end jobs.

Gilmore is embarrassing himself in a Pat Rabbitte way there now.

They'll end up giving a **** *** to FF in the end.

Auditor #9 wrote:

Gilmore is embarrassing himself in a Pat Rabbitte way there now.

They'll end up giving a **** *** to FF in the end.

It's impossible to answer the question though. They've tried it every way at this stage and nothing works. He's trying to spin the line that the Labour Party shouldn't always be subject to the third wheel question which is fair enough. He did make a bit of a tits of it though, it was rabbit in the headlights stuff.

Look at that young upstart who asked the question .

Joe Higgins on VB now. Discussion on banks ...