Author: Anthony

President of Cloud Cuckoo Land

I don’t like President McAleese – Here’s why.

Firstly, she’s an ultra conservative Catholic who, in the main, represents that world view both religiously and politically. I may be naive but I believe that a president should represent all sections of society.

Secondly, she’s a great admirer of the corrupt politician Charles Haughey. Again it may be naïve but I believe a president should, at least publicly, refrain from defending criminal politicians who have betrayed their country.

Thirdly, President McAleese is one of those people, and there are many in Ireland, who has an amazing ability to ignore reality and live quite happily in cloud cuckoo land.

On the surface this may seem harmless enough but people of influence who live in cloud cuckoo land can seriously distort the truth of an event and thus mislead others about a brutal reality that needs to be met head on if it is not to be repeated.

I speak, of course, about the President’s visit to Messines Ridge in Belgium where the 16th Irish and 36th Ulster divisions fought in an important battle against the Germans in 1917.

Here’s some of what she had to say on the occasion.

“We know they came from different traditions which had very different ambitions, and yet on these fields their different traditions were put to one side. They were human beings who had a common cause and, through each other, they worked for that cause and showed to each other a goodness, a graciousness, a kindness, a love, a cherishing of one another.”

Different traditions put to one side? Human beings with a common cause? Showed each other goodness, graciousness, love and kindness? Jesus wept, where did this woman learn her history?

Here’s the reality: Ireland was on the brink of what would have been a brutal civil war in the summer of 1914. So inevitable was this conflict that when war was declared many thought the announcement was referring to civil war in Ireland.

The brutality and hatred was put on hold when the British promised the Unionists continued union and the Nationalists Home Rule. So they didn’t go off in ‘kindness and love’, they went off with a promise that their respective agenda’s would be met. When those agenda’s weren’t met the brutality and hatred recommenced.

The President did touch on reality when she described as tragic and shameful the manner in which the Republic ignored all those Irishmen who fought in WW1. And this remark brings me back to her place in cloud cuckoo land.

These men were ignored for decades because of a disgraceful lack of leadership, courage and vision in the Republic. A situation largely created by narrow minded ultra conservative Catholics and a body politic that exploited hatred of the British as a means of covering up their own incompetence in constructing a modern and enlightened state.

Good of society v interests of individual

When all the razzmatazz is stripped from the Paris Hilton story we are left with a very simple situation. A citizen who broke probation for a relatively minor crime was given 45 days in jail. A sheriff decided to release her to house arrest after two days but the judge who sentenced her was having none of it and threw her back in jail.

The judge was right. Clearly, he believes that justice should be seen to be done, that people with influence are not given any special treatment. In other words, the judge sees law enforcement and respect for the law as more important than the needs of any individual citizen. The outcome is bad for the unfortunate citizen but good for American society.

In Ireland, the opposite is usually the case as the recent ODCE/NIB case clearly illustrated. Even though Mr. Curran was part of a major criminal conspiracy a judge decided that it would be ‘inappropriate’ to ban him from company management because it might damage his honesty and integrity. The outcome in this case is good for the individual but very bad for Irish society.

The American judge looks out and acts for the greater good of society, the Irish judge looks in and protects the interests of one dodgy individual thus seriously damaging the credibility of the Irish justice system.

Policeman? Where?

The Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement published its annual report yesterday. Here’s a little gem hidden away under the heading ‘Investigations Completed in 2006’

Previous ODCE Annual Reports dealt with certain historic problems with respect to AIB Investment Managers Ltd. which caused the Director to examine certain books and documents of the company.

Following consideration of the results of a detailed investigation of the same events by the Financial Regulator and the reported tax settlements in 2006 by a number of the beneficiaries involved, the Director determined that no further action was warranted by him under the Companies Acts.

Because of the secretive language used it’s difficult to be sure but I think this relates to the Allied Irish Banks foreign exchange overcharging and the infamous Faldor scam that benefited a number of AIB executives.

The so called Irish Financial Regulator concluded that the executives didn’t actually know they were part of the scam and therefore had no case to answer. Revenue did a confidential deal on taxes owed and left it at that and now the ODCE has ‘determined’ that no further action is necessary under the Companies Acts.

Ah yes, all nicely wrapped up and not a policeman in sight. Next please…

Damn them all

My heart goes out to poor Denis O’Brien. Beleaguered by a mob of begrudgers he is valiantly fighting for the rights of the small man.

Besieged behind his solid gold barricade Denis stands four-square with Bertie to stem the onslaught of those nosey judges and their greedy barristers.

Damn those who accuse the blonde billionaire of avoiding tax, of legging it out of the country with his €290 million Esat Telecom profit, damn them.

But now he’s back, back to fight the good fight. Yes, millions have already been wasted on tribunals but the golden boy has now joined forces with Bertie and on behalf of all the peasant taxpayers of the green and pleasant land of Ireland he is going to stop them, stop them in their tracks.

Damn them I tell you, damn them all.

An innocent among the sharks

There was a great moment on last Friday’s Today with Pat Kenny.

A panel was discussing the latest shenanigans at the Mahon Tribunal and in particular the unreliability of Tom Gilmartin as a witness.

Caroline Kennedy of Kennedy PR thought Tom was a bit paranoid in claiming that somebody in AIB had tipped off Liam Lawlor about a meeting.

“It’s highly unlikely a bank official would do that I would have thought.”

Pat, astonished at her naivety, quickly informed her that banks will always do what’s best for business (Something every ripped off customer knows only too well)

Caroline should have changed the subject at that point but she continued to dig.

“Surely a bank would be bound by a confidentiality arrangement with its client, why would it tip one client off against another.”

Fionnan Sheahan, political correspondent for the Irish Independent came to her rescue this time, telling her that banks are mainly bound by profit maximization only.

What astonishes me is how Ms. Kennedy managed to build a top class PR company without apparently being aware of the widespread criminality within Irish banking.

Civil Service secrecy speak

PJ Howell, Director, Environment Section, Fingal County Council (Whew! There’s a title) was interviewed on Morning Ireland (4th item) about the requirement to remove election posters.

After confirming that fines had been imposed in the past he was asked to name the political parties involved. He immediately reverted to what I call ‘Civil Service secrecy speak’.

“We wouldn’t want to say that now.”

This reaction is instinctive; it’s bred into all Irish public/civil servants. If a question is asked that even hints of actually informing the public, the shutters come down.

Like his colleagues ‘across the border’, (See below) Mr. Howell seems to be more interested in protecting the law breakers than naming and shaming them as an example of good law enforcement.

Still waiting for answers from Dublin City Council

On April 22nd last I wrote about my attempts to get information from Dublin City Council regarding the illegal erection of posters by Minister of State Pat the Cope Gallagher.

My question was, and still is, very simple. “Was the minister fined and if so, by how much?”

My last contact with DCC on that occasion was with Mr. Pat Cronin, head of waste management. He refused to answer my question, insisting that I put my case in writing and he would deal with it further.

On 24th April I wrote to Mr. Cronin by registered post. Despite several phone calls since I have not even being able to confirm if Mr. Cronin received my letter.

However, on the 22nd of May I did have another conversation with the public servant who first refused to divulge information on the matter. The conversation is worth posting as it gives a good idea of how things are done in our banana republic.

Me: I want to know, was the minister fined?

Public Servant: Why him in particular?

Me: Because he’s a government minister who deliberately set out to break the law

PS: How do you know he deliberately set out to break the law?

Me: Because you confirmed it to me when I last spoke to you and through the media

PS: I didn’t, I never used that word, let’s get something clear here; I never said to you that he deliberately set out to break the law

Me: OK, he has said himself that he did it, it’s in the papers

PS: No, he didn’t say he deliberately set out to break the law, he did put up the posters

Me: And the posters were illegal, so, did he put them up accidentally?

PS: Yes,

Me: Did he? (In astonishment)

PS: Yes, he didn’t know that they don’t have the strict regulations in Donegal that we have here

Me: (Still astonished) Hold on, are you telling me, are you confirming to me that the minister didn’t know he was breaking the law?

PS: That’s right, I am

Me: Did he tell you that?

PS: Yes, I was talking to him. He apologised profusely (“I honestly, genuinely did not know that I was breaking the law”). You see, you cannot put up posters in Dublin city but if you go across the road to Fingal, you know, when you cross the border, you can put up the posters

Me: No, you’re probably not familiar with the Litter Pollution Act, 1997, but I am

PS: Excuse me, I am, I work on it

Me: Ok, you should know so that’s it’s illegal to put up posters without permission, full stop, the LPA 1997 covers the whole country

PS: I understand, yes

Me: But what you’re saying is that it applies in some places

PS: I said, other local authorities are not as strict as we are

Me: I’m not concerned about strict or not strict. I’m concerned about breaking the law, especially when a government minister breaks the law

PS: I’m not defending Pat the Cope Gallagher, it’s not my job; he’s well able to do it himself.

Me: A couple of days after the minister ‘accidentally’ broke the law, he was given back the posters intact and he put them up again in Donegal. He broke the law again in Donegal. Now, we have to assume that he knew he was breaking the law in Donegal

PS: I’m not commentating on that

Me: There’s another thing I need to find out. You and Pat Cronin have refused to tell me if you have taken action against the minister.

PS: We don’t discuss anybody’s business

Me: But what I want to know is; are you basing your refusal on legislation/regulation?

PS: I’m basing it on office policy

Me: I don’t accept that. I’m a member of the public; this is a government minister who has broken the law. I have a right to know, you’re telling me I don’t have a right to know.

PS: I’m not telling you that, I’m telling you I’m not telling you.

Me: Are you entitled to refuse me the information

PS: Yes,

Me: By what law/regulation?

PS: On the grounds that I’m the manager of this office and I do not discuss anybody’s business with anybody else

Me: Are you absolutely sure, on a personal basis, that you’re not breaking any public service regulations by refusing me the information?

PS: I am quite happy in not giving out information, I never give out information. If Pat Cronin wants to answer you he’s quite entitled to. I’m happy in the decision I’ve made, that’s my answer to you.

I am in the process of taking further action regarding the refusal of DCC staff to answer my questions and I will post on the matter as things develop.

In the meantime I have taken the following actions regarding Gallagher’s illegal activities:

Submitted a formal complaint to DCC regarding Gallagher’s breach of the Litter Pollution Act, 1997.

Submitted a formal complaint to Donegal County Council regarding Gallagher’s breach of the Litter Pollution Act, 1997, in that part of the country. I will be writing on this particular saga soon.

Submitted an official complaint to the Standards in Public Office Commission regarding Gallagher’s breach of the Litter Pollution Act, 1997.

My complaint to SIPO is made on the basis that the minister is in serious breach of the Code of Conduct for Office Holders as outlined by the Standards in Office Commission (Office Holders) Sections:

1.3 Requirement to observe the Code of Conduct.
1.4 Principles of Ethical Conduct.
1.5 Highest ethical standards to be applied at all times.

Haughey, corruption and denial

Vincent Browne does not know what corruption is and he has no idea whatsoever of the very serious consequences that follow from the disease. This was very clear from a discussion on last Monday’s Tonight with Vincent Browne.

In an acrimonious exchange with Colm Mac hEochaidh, barrister and member of Fine Gael, Browne defined political corruption as the taking of money in return for favours.

Here’s the relevant exchanges:

Mac hEochaidh:

Charles Haughey, Liam Lawlor and Ray Burke were people who occupied very high positions in Fianna Fail and who self evidently not only exercised low standards but were profoundly corrupt men.

Browne:

There’s no proof that Charles Haughey ever did anything in return for monies he got which seems to me the definition of corruption.

Mac hEochaidh:

No, that is not the definition of corruption. First of all there is no definition of corruption but if you have any political standards at all…

Browne:

The word corruption, what’s the understanding of that in terms of politics. That a politician receives money in return for giving a favour and therefore in order to prove corruption or to use the word intelligently with regard to a particular politician you’ve got to show that a politician received money and in return he did a favour and I’m just simply pointing out there’s no evidence that Charles Haughey did any favours for anybody he got money from.

Cleary, Vincent Browne, who for decades questioned the dodgy activities of Haughey but eventually came to see him as a heroic figure has now entered the final phase of Haughey worship – Total denial.

By Browne’s narrow definition the following events do not constitute corruption. The theft of millions through tax evasion by a citizen/politician/Prime Minister; the acceptance of millions from rich businessmen while holding public office; the theft of large amounts of money from the Party Leaders Fund and most tellingly the plundering of a fund set up to save the life of Brian Lenihan.

The world is safe

All those who despair about the serious problems facing mankind in the 21st century can take heart that the Polish government is doing its bit to improve the lot of humanity.

It is reported that an investigation is underway in Poland to establish whether the Teletubbie, Tinky Winky, is gay.