Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
I seldom make comment on writers like Eoghan Harris or Kevin Myers simply because they occupy a place so far from reality that it seems unfair to criticise them.
For example, here’s how Harris sums up the Cowen Late Late Show interview (Sunday Independent).
By the end, and no thanks to Tubridy, the audience grasped that behind Brian Cowen’s gruff shell is a gentle person, but one grimly determined to do his duty. And the more he reveals himself, the more we respect him.
Robert Ballagh, a confirmed No voter, was on the Marian Finucane Show today and mentioned the dominance of Yes vote articles in yesterday’s Irish Times.
According to Ballagh he had an anit-treaty article rejected because of a lack of space.
Still the paper of record but the old balance is taking a bit of a knocking I would say.
The Late Late Show was somewhat more enjoyable this week probably because that contemptible man Cowen was nowhere to be seen.
The unsightly microphone cable crudely taped to the table leg has been sorted out but Tubridy’s head continues to be silhouetted against the set. A professional lighting technician should never allow that to happen.
But these are small things in comparison to Tubridy’s professional and very sensitive interview with RTE newsreader Michael Murphy.
Murphy spoke openly and courageously about physical and sexual abuse when he was a child, about cancer and about his sexuality – Powerful and inspiring stuff.
Just came across Jody Corcoran’s article in response to Tubridy’s interview of Cowen on the Late Late Show (Sunday Independent).
According to Corcoran Tubridy is a cowardly creeping Jesus who mugged the leader of the country.
The rest of the article is a sickening indulgence in self praise, self pity and obnoxious hero worship of an incompetent Taoiseach.
Corcoran ends by saying:
Ryan Tubridy makes my skin crawl.
This is from a journalist who believes the chancer and Mafioso Bertie Ahern is a great patriot.
Sarah Carey, late of the blogging community, has become a fully paid up member of the ‘established’ media sector.
Here’s what she had to say recently during a discussion on the challenge facing printed newspapers from online versions (Sunday Supplement, 9th August).
One thing I think newspapers should keep in mind is keep the content quality high because the whole blog thing has died off a little bit, that has plateaued and at the end of the day journalists and their sources and their writing is still the place where people need to go for authoritative content.
Blogging has plateaued? Seems to me it’s going from strength to strength and it’s the printed newspapers industry that’s struggling for survival. In fact, many newspapers, including the Irish Times have adopted the blogging practice of allowing readers make direct comments on content.
Ms. Carey’s Irish Times column is, effectively, a blog albeit with the distinct advantage of getting paid for her efforts.
As for authoritative content – Well, that’s a matter of opinion. I mean, could the mostly crazed writings of John Waters be called authoritative?
The O’Donoghue expenses scandal was discussed recently on Today FM’s Sunday Supplement (9th August) where columnists Fiona Looney, Sarah Carey and Hugh Linehan of the Irish Times ‘enlightened’ the nation on the matter.
To his credit, Hugh Linehan, got it just about right when he said that the expenses were hugely excessive and such abuses were properly still going on.
Sarah Carey and Fiona Looney, however, thought it was all a bit of a joke.
According to Looney this all happened a long time ago – between 2005 and 2007. We can take from this that Looney would regard 1997 as ancient history when, effectively, the present regime, came to power and began the process that has brought the country to the brink of ruin.
Expressing sympathy for O’Donaghue, Looney said that different rules applied then. Sadly, she didn’t enlighten listeners as to what exactly the ‘rules’ were at the time or how they have changed in the last two years.
Sarah Carey thought the whole thing was a bit of a side show but did express puzzlement about the silence from the Opposition on the matter. She suggested that perhaps they too may have abused their expense accounts when they were last in power and were afraid that this might be exposed if they complained too much.
Here’s the reality.
The greed and arrogance of John O’Donoghue is exactly what can be expected in a corrupt state. The ignorant and mealy mouthed analysis by journalists is exactly what is to be expected from a media operating in a corrupt state.
The silence from the Opposition is exactly what is to be expected in a corrupt state. The entire political expenses system in Ireland is corrupt to the core.
Millions are robbed from taxpayers every year by ruthless and greedy politicians operating within a system designed by politicians for the sole benefit of politicians.
The Opposition is keeping quiet because they also benefit enormously from the same corrupt system, not just when they’re in power as Ms. Carey suggests, but every day, even while in opposition.
One of the principal reasons that allows greedy and ruthless politicians like O’Donoghue to abuse the system with absolute impunity is that Ireland is blighted by a lazy, uninformed and largely captured media.
Recently, I tuned into the Wide Angle on Newstalk. Dick Roche was on the panel with a couple of journalists.
When the subject of Denis O’Brien and the Moriarty Tribunal came up the presenter informed listeners that the station was owned by O’Brien. There then followed a withering criticism of the tribunal by everybody including the presenter.
The usual attack, too expensive, going on too long, making unsubstantiated claims, should be closed down, not a word of criticism of O’Brien.
O’Brien must be proud that ‘his’ presenter, the journalists and the politician are all in full agreement with him that the tribunal is conducting a personal vendetta against him to justify their existence.
The discussion then turned to the O’Donoghue expenses scandal and among the usual waffle surrounding this scandal we heard what has now become the standard excuse mouthed by dishonest politicians and lazy journalists – It was a different time, different rules (apparently) applied then.
Effectively, we are being told that when there’s lots of money sloshing around it’s perfectly ok for our politicians to spend as if they were royalty.
One of the more bizarre aspects of Irish writing in the 1980s was a tendency by journalists to write long, detailed and very, very boring accounts of their holiday experiences. At the time I wondered why this was so and came to three conclusions.
Nothing much else happening in the country/world.
Lazy and/or incompetent journalism.
A misguided sense of journalistic self importance stemming from the bizarre notion that readers might actually be interested in the equivalent of being forced to look at hundreds of aunt Martha’s holiday snaps.
The first conclusion is, of course, never true but unfortunately the last two always are and while the practice seemed to have abated during the boom years it is now back with a (depressing) bang.
Recently, Sunday Independent columnist Jody Corcoran, ‘treated’ readers to a long drawn out account of a sleazy holiday he took with a pal in Marbella.
Corcoran wanted to impress his readers by his heroism in taking a holiday when he wasn’t feeling the best, wanted to impress them with his machismo in dealing with prostitutes, wanted to impress them by casually mentioning that he partied with millionaire and former Formula I boss Eddie Jordan on his yacht anchored off Marbella port.
Corcoran tells us about the prostitutes on the yacht (I wonder how Jordan feels about that) and how their ‘Madam’ pulled up alongside the yacht in her flash car for a few words with her ‘staff’. Regretfully, Corcoran failed to provide readers with the technical details of a car that can drive out to a yacht at anchor.
But perhaps it’s not a return to 1980s style writing, maybe it’s just Corcoran, maybe he’s feeling down because he has nothing else to write about since his great hero the chancer Bertie Ahern was forced off the political stage – yes, I think that’s the answer.
Vincent Browne has an interesting article in today’s Irish Times where he asks some searching questions about Denis O’Brien’s media empire and how The Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI) could possibly conclude that:
The media holdings of Denis O’Brien do not constitute dominance in terms of his ability to influence opinion forming power in any of these franchise areas.
Browne makes the connection between O’Brien’s media empire and the soon to be published Moriarty Tribunal Report.
Last weekend two of the newspapers that he now controls, the Sunday Tribune and the Sunday Independent, published two self-serving interviews with him, intended to take the “sting” from the anticipated final findings of the Moriarty tribunal on the award to him of the mobile phone licence in 1996.
He goes on:
If his own version of the Moriarty tribunal findings prove correct, they would be a devastating indictment of himself, along with the then minister for communications Michael Lowry, and of civil servants involved in awarding the licence.
If his version is true, he will be accused of the most spectacular piece of corruption ever in this State, with the possible exception of the Irish Hospital Sweepstake scam.
And, it will seem, if what he says is true, that he has built his vast personal fortune on the basis of a criminal act.
A letter writer to the Irish Times also has his say about O’Brien’s media spinning.
Madam,
I was embarrassed last weekend to read the coverage of Denis O’Brien’s tribunal troubles in the Sunday Times . A front page article took leaked information about the Moriarty tribunal’s conclusions (not very positive it must be said) and managed to portray Mr O’Brien as some sort of hero, who was battling the tribunal to save the State money on legal fees.
Further on in the paper, there was a full-page spread on the excessive costs of the tribunal and yet further on, Mr O’Brien adorned the front page of the Business section about some triviality or other.
What could have been the spur to such embarrassing spin? Perhaps the Sunday Times is in awe of Mr O’Brien’s recent ascent to control of IN&M?
Yet another example of the need for The Irish Times to issue a Sunday version, thus sparing the public from the brainrot of the Sunday press.
Yours, etc,
TOMMY TIGHE,
Grove Park,
Dublin 6.
The Financial Regulator’s annual report, published last Tuesday, contains one very clear message that, depressingly, went completely unnoticed by the media.
That message is – Absolutely nothing has changed; the old regime is still in place; the old attitudes are still dominant; the interests of the people and the country will continue to take second place ahead of the interests of a ruthless and deeply corrupt financial sector.
Dodgy financial institutions will continue to enjoy full protection under a mountain of bureaucratic waffle and strict secrecy laws enthusiastically enforced by FR staff.
Jim Farrell is the public face of this disgraced and discredited Financial Regulatory regime. In an interview on RTE (5th report) he claimed that:
the way the country’s banks are now regulated is fundamentally and forever changed.
It is reasonable to assume from this statement that all is well at the Financial Regulator, that major reforms have been put in place which will protect consumers forever into the future and bring to account the corrupt vermin that have infested the Irish financial sector for decades.
In other words, it is reasonable to assume that Mr. Farrell has announced a virtual revolution in Irish regulatory methods and that from now on his organization will act in the interests of Ireland and its citizens rather than the interests of (dodgy) financial institutions.
The (revolutionary) measures announced by Mr. Farrell are as follows:
Extra staff with additional skills.
A more questioning and forensic approach to regulation.
Staff from the Financial Regulator are now on site in banks that are covered by the Government guarantee scheme. These people are full time and are monitoring the activities of banks.
The first two measures can be dismissed for the waffle that they are but the third measure is interesting.
My understanding of the presence of FR staff in the banks is that they are there in a temporary capacity as a result of the economic collapse and subsequent scandals.
I assumed, obviously wrongly, that once the crisis was over and banks were returned to private ownership that FR staff would also withdraw.
My understanding now, as a result of Mr. Farrell’s announcement, is that FR staff will become a permanent fixture on the staff not just of those banks under government guarantee but of all financial institutions to ensure that no such scandals could possibly recur.
To confirm this I contacted the Financial Regulator and spoke to the Senior Press Officer, Gill Forde.
Ms. Forde confirmed that it was official policy to have FR staff permanently on site in the covered institutions.
What about other financial institutions?
We are currently recruiting and enhancing our expertise in all of these areas and that’s the only detail I have for now.
My understanding from what Mr. Farrell said is that the banks covered by the Government guarantee are now going to have full time staff from the FR on a permanent basis.
Yes.
Even when they’re returned to private ownership?
He said the approach has changed and he was referring to principles based supervision.
What I’m inquiring about is the entire financial sector. Is it the policy of the FR to put their staff in all banks on a permanent basis?
The FR as you will be aware, there’s new legislation being brought forward by the Government forming a Central Bank Commission and I don’t have any more information.
I’m just going on exactly what Mr. Farrell said – The country’s banks are now regulated fundamentally and forever changed and one of the measures he has taken is to put people on site full time in those banks covered by the government guarantee.
Correct.
My question is – Is that a permanent policy, that FR staff will continue to monitor those banks forever and not just until the crisis is over?
I don’t have any information further than to say that that is our regulatory approach to supervising the banks.
So really what you’re saying is you don’t know.
I’m not saying that, I’m just saying that it’s a regulatory approach to supervising the banks.
Could you refer me to somebody who could answer the question?
That is our response.
I don’t understand your response; Mr. Farrell is saying that full time staff has been put on the banks
Exactly and that’s because the principles based approach no longer applies.
Are you saying that the placing of full time staff in the banks is a replacement for the principles based approach.
Yes, I am.
But it only applies to financial institutions under government guarantee and not to the entire financial sector?
The Regulator has been realigning with the new provisions and we are recruiting additional staff across the organization with the focus on risk, governance and enforcement
I tried to press the matter but Ms. Forde said she had to go and hung up.
Here’s my summary.
Mr. Farrell was being dishonest in suggesting that the temporary arrangement of placing FR staff in the banks was a major, industry wide and permanent reform.
(I say ‘temporary’ because nobody seriously believes that the banks would allow the Regulator to closely monitor their activities on a permanent basis)
In my opinion Mr. Farrell was just talking rubbish, just mouthing meaningless words to dishonestly convey the impression that substantial change had occurred that would, for the first time in Irish history, see genuine financial regulation.
Ms. Forde’s arrogant and dismissive reaction to my questions is exactly what I have come to expect from FR staff over the years. The attitude is still the same – Bureaucratic waffle, refusal to answer even the simplest questions and always the big stick of state secrecy laws.
Ms. Forde’s claim, for example, that the placement of FR staff in banks is a replacement for the principles based approach to regulating banks is, in my opinion, insulting waffle.
If such a major policy shift was in operation I wouldn’t be hearing it from a FR press officer, I wouldn’t even be hearing it from the chairman of the Financial Regulator on RTE News. I would be hearing it from a Government press conference chaired by the Minister for Finance as he announced to the world that Ireland had finally decided to take financial regulation seriously.
A much more disturbing aspect of this situation is the reaction or, more accurately, the non reaction of the media.
The publication of this year’s annual report by the Financial Regulator is arguably the most important event in Irish financial regulatory history.
It is the first annual report following the collapse of the economy which exposed the Financial Regulator as an incompetent toothless tiger unable or unwilling to reign in rogue elements in the banking sector.
This incompetence by the FR played a major role in the destruction of the economy and by extension is at least partly responsible for the massive financial and social damage to the people of Ireland.
Despite this, the media and in particular RTE effectively ignored the report and the fantasy (dishonest) claims made by Mr. Farrell.
This ignorance of what is really going on within the financial regulatory system and other so called regulatory agencies is a major contributing factor to the financial catastrophe now facing this country.
Copy to:
Financial Regulator
Financial Regulator (Press Office)
RTE