GROW UP OR BE BLOWN UP?

=== === ===

April 26th 2017

Dear Everyone,

RE: THE JUNE 20th 2012 TO APRIL 8th 2017 PERIOD OF NO CHANGE IN
GOVERNMENTS' "CORRUPTION & IMPUNITY" POLICIES

The text in the sections below is from a FACEBOOK publication of earlier today (April 26th
2017), which was prompted -- in part -- by the following recent www RT publication titled:

"UK risks being wiped off the map with nuclear counterstrike Russian senator"

The full text of the RT article can be viewed at:

https://www.rt.com/news/386093-uk-nuclear-strike-russia/

The original of the April 26th 2017 associated FACEBOOK publication referred to above can
be viewed via the following www link:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/FirstMinisterArleneFosterMLA/26April2017/Gmail.html#FACE
BOOK

On 28 April in ulyanovsk hosted a ceremony of a member of the 31 separate gvardeyskoy air

assault brigade of the airborne forces advanced military equipment: Battalion sets of
contemporary bmd-4 M AND BTR-Mdm "Seashell"
In The Inaugural Event was attended by the deputy chairman of the committee of the council
of the federation on defence and security Franz Klintsevich, Governor Ulyanovsk Region
Sergey Morozov, Commander of the air carriers forces Colonel General Andrey Serdyukov,
Chief Federal Inspector for the ulyanovsk region Vladimir Kozin, personnel and veterans of the unit.
" it is the so-called flying armoured personnel carriers, demonstrated for the first time the general
public on the victory parade in Moscow in 2015 year. Totally unique cars, and from their prototypes
before their mass introduction of nothing - it's only been two years, the ceremony in ulyanovsk not like
grandstanding. Yeah, 31 Guards Air Assault Brigade is not uncommon unit, but today we can be
equipped with the latest equipment of all kinds of troops. I saw these guys got lit up eyes: they're all
professionals and understand exactly what equipment they must now be the case.
And, another moment draws attention to himself. I'm in parliament since 1999, and during this time of
the interaction of the armed forces, their leadership and legislators has undergone a qualitative change.
Today no serious event of a military nature, was not without our participation. We see the real needs of
the army and respond appropriately ".
Britain has stated on the right to preventive nuclear strike
Moscow, on 24 April. The UK ready to strike a preemptive nuclear strike, if necessary, leads
independent statement by the minister of defence of Britain's Michael Fallon, in an interview
with the BBC four.
" I think that the statement by the minister of defence of Britain's Michael Fallon deserve a
harsh response, and I'm not afraid to push him over the edge. At Best this statement should
be seen as a certain element of psychological warfare, which is in this context, in a particularly
nasty form. Otherwise, really bad, because the question: who uk ready preventively to use nuclear
weapons? If against nuclear power, the United Kingdom, with its not the greatest of the territories, will
literally erased from the face of the earth retaliatory strike.
But if it comes to the non-nuclear power, apparently, the English are not obsessed with Laurels USA,
sbrosivshikh defenceless atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
But the time has passed, as irretrievably and time of the ruins of the British Empire. As we say:
nowadays open and legs

The results of a hundred days: credit to the white house has called trump "the isolation of
Russia in un"
The President of the United States, after several years of failed diplomacy opposed to
countries that threaten national security, stated in the certificate of the white house
" of course, about any isolation not Russia and speech, and in the white house can't
understand that it's at all possible. In Essence, the credit for the new president of the United
States puts the different is that for the first hundred days in office he didn't do any real step to change
for the better of the Russian-American relations.
Today, at least we have, in Russia, no one asked: " who are you, Mr. Trump?, (question) which still
retain a certain degree of relevance in February, after thirty days after the inauguration of the president
of the United States. Then still had hope for joint actions of our two countries in the fight against
radical Islamic terrorism. But American missile strike on Syria dispelled them almost completely. The
situation in the middle east, as in the world as a whole, has become even more unpredictable.
Donald Trump not only failed to overcome antirossiyskiy trend of us foreign policy, a hard-won, he
inherited from the previous administration. He wasn't trying to do it. Now is not an exaggeration to call
him "Great Catholic than the Pope" - on the part of the anti-Russian sentiment Donald Trump will give
a head start even his predecessor.
My prediction for the future is not optimism: could be worse
Elections in France: the first tour-preliminary results
" the ex-Minister of economy of France Emmanuel Macron and the leader of the " National
front " Marine le pen the preliminary results came out in the second round of the presidential
election in France.
Elections in France, showing the latest range of views of the electorate, in general, have
shown that in many western countries, a trend which can be described as too fragmented
society. It's about a significant weakeningthe social, cultural and other integrators. In my opinion,
it's too early to argue that this trend is definitively established, having replaced the globalization, but
not to see her already can't.
It is obvious that the second round of makrona have more chance of winning than le pen. Now many
losers candidates called on its supporters to vote for him.
Nevertheless, macron is unlikely to become a president who will unite the France. Alas, time
ispolinskikh figures such as general Charles De Gaulle, looks like it's been in the west of the
permanently

Just apologize over Trident misfire coverup"

Jan 26, 2017
Tory MP Geoffrey Robinson believes that all Michael Fallon and David Cameron need to do is
apologize for covering up Trident misfire.

Like what you see? Please subscribe http://youtube.com/RTUKnews

FOLLOW ON TWITTER: http://twitter.com/RTUKnews
FOLLOW ON FACEBOOK: http://fb.com/RTUKnews
READ MORE http://rt.com/uk/
WATCH LIVE: http://rt.com/on-air/rt-uk-air/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXSn0i_A4Ec

I love the Navy & Trident doesn't represent it - whistleblower

Feb 26, 2016
'I've lost everything & the media made me out to be crazy and a traitor', William McNeilly
speaks to RT ahead of tomorrow's anti-Trident rally. READ
MORE https://youtu.be/czB3iHYANg0

Like what you see? Please subscribe http://youtube.com/RTUKnews

FOLLOW ON TWITTER: http://twitter.com/RTUKnews
FOLLOW ON FACEBOOK: http://fb.com/RTUKnews
READ MORE http://rt.com/uk/
WATCH LIVE: http://rt.com/on-air/rt-uk-air/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czB3iHYANg0

usk & Juncker hold press conference on #Brexit #Article50

https://scontent-frt3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t42.9040-
29/10000000_301820193605252_58466221569343488_n.mp4?efg=eyJybHIiOjgwMSwicm
xhIjo0MDk2LCJ2ZW5jb2RlX3RhZyI6Im1kX3NkIn0%3D&rl=801&vabr=445&oh=635983098e
c097dc833cda67f7188410&oe=59060BE2

Yours respectfully,

William Finnerty

WEB SITE: http://www.humanrightsireland.com/

=== === ===

JUNE 20th 2012

===

Dear Dr Jeffers,
Thank you for your letter dated June 7th 2012, which I received on June 13th.

I have placed a scanned copy of your June 7th 2012 letter to me at the following Internet
location:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/DrAnneJeffers/19May2012/RegisteredLetter.htm#Letter7June20
12

Thank you also for the appointment you have kindly arranged for June 25th 2012.

In connection with the meeting you had with Margie (my half-sister) and Gerald (my brother)
on June 6th 2012 I have placed some notes -- compiled (by me) and signed by Marjorie and
Gerald on June 10th 2012 -- at the following location:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/DrAnneJeffers/19May2012/RegisteredLetter.htm#Notes6June201
2

=========================

Provided you are happy to do so, the main issues I would like to discuss with you on June
25th 2012 are as follows:

1) Can you provide me with a supportive letter which will enable me to get legal
representation of the kind which recognises the factual existence of national and international
legislation based on the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and which is
willing to use such legislation on my behalf?

Please note that Gerald and Marjorie have informed me that they both think you will STILL
not be willing to try to provide me with help of this kind, based on statements apparently
made by you at the June 6th 2012 meeting which they have discussed with me, and as
related in the above-mentioned meeting notes which I compiled on June 10th 2012.

..........

2) Can you provide me with a supportive letter which will enable me to receive reparations in
connection with the C-PTSD (Complex-Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) injuries I have
received as a result of extremely serious crimes committed against me "at the hands of
individuals and bodies and public officials" (Dr Michael McCavert's words) -- with impunity
over a period of several years -- by the Republic of Ireland Government, and by the
Government of the United Kingdom & Northern Ireland, in connection with my ongoing efforts
to challenge unconstitutional activities (which include unconstitutional legislation) in the
Republic of Ireland, and in the Republic of the United States of America? Further information
relating to these extremely serious, and indeed treasonous matters, which involve a set-of-
five registered letters posted by me on April 25th 2008, and another very closely related set-
of-three registered letters posted by me on May 9th 2008, has been placed at the following
Internet locations marked a) and b) just below:

a) http://www.humanrightsireland.com/PrimeMinisterAhern/25April2008/Email.htm

b) http://www.humanrightsireland.com/PrimeMinisterCowen/9May2008/Email.htm

..........

3) Can you provide me with a supportive letter which will enable me to receive the backlog of
unpaid old age payments due to me since March 16th 2011, which at the present time, I
estimate to be approximately 14,300 Euros? I am also owed an additional 5,700 Euros
approximately in connection with "unpaid disability allowance" which fell due before I made
my March 16th 2011 pension application; which, like the old age pension payments, are
being withheld for absolutely no good reason whatsoever that I know of. Further information
relating to these issues can be found at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/SWSO/Longford/Letter16March2011.htm

Please note that unless I receive these two payments (totalling 20,000 Euros or thereabouts),
which are already long overdue for the most part, I can see no hope of I ever being able to
return to my now semi-derelict home in New Inn village. Please also note that the present
state of "semi-dereliction" I refer to here is the direct result of I having to spend two lengthy
periods of time (totalling approximately four and a half years) living in "forced exile" outside of
the Republic of Ireland jurisdiction: because that was the only way I could protect myself from
being corruptly criminalised (and possibly imprisoned) in connection with my efforts to
challenge unconstitutional legislation: in circumstances whereby I could not find any legal
representation of the kind referred to at 1) above.

..........

4) Margie and Gerald related to me that you expressed the view at the June 6th 2012
meeting that I was "paranoid" regarding the matter of I feeling unsafe about presenting myself
to a hospital consultant for the surgical procedure connected with the now long-overdue
prostate cancer screening test I should have had over four years ago. My lengthy research
suggests that it is hypervigilance (a common symptom of untreated, or unsatisfactorily
treated C-PTSD injuries) -- and not paranoia (a mental illness) -- connected with all of the
accumulating and unresolved problems I now have, as a result of the C-PTSD causing
injuries I have already suffered "at the hands of individuals and bodies and public officials"
(since 1998), and, the prospect (as I see things) of still more such injuries to follow if I am not
careful to do all I reasonably can to avoid hospital consultants of the Dr Thomas Foster kind:
who, once he discovered I was trying to defend myself against government crime, and as I
have already informed you, very recklessly added to my C-PTSD injuries by arranging to
have me suddenly thrown out of Tyrone and Fermanagh hospital: at a time when I was
suffering very badly with the C-PTSD injuries I had entered the hospital with some days
earlier: psychological injuries which were directly connected with the psychopathic Money
Power criminal activities of the kind referred to directly further down this e-mail text. Perhaps
we can briefly discuss this matter again? Further information relating to my research on the
paranoia/hypervigilance issue can be found in the e-mail text dated April 4th 2012 (which I
copied to you) at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/UnitedNations/4April2012/Email.htm

=========================

I feel I should mention that Northern Ireland Senior Social Worker Gerry Madden paid us
(myself, Marjorie, and Gerald that is) an unexpected visit on June 8th last. In the course of
conversation relating to the growing set of family difficulties that myself, Gerald, and Marjorie
are experiencing, the name of Declan Harney (Psychiatric Nurse) was mentioned; and, at
Gerry's request, Marjorie gave Declan's phone number to Gerry. My understanding is that
Gerry plans to contact Declan sometime this week. Further information relating to this set of
events can be found at the following location:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/GerardMadden/15June2012/Email.htm

As you may already know, and for the purpose of trying to keep you updated regarding my
situation in advance of the June 25th 2012 appointment you have arranged for me, I have
sent you a set of six e-mails since June 11th last (using the Health Service Executive e-mail
address). I have also placed copies of the six e-mails in question at locations 376, 377, 379,
380, 383 and 385 of the list at the following Internet location:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/IrishLegalProfessions/11August2011/Email.htm#Bottom_of_List
With reference to the most recent of the set of six e-mails referred to in the paragraph above,
the one dated June 18th 2012 that is (which is item number 385 on the list), please note that I
have very briefly attempted in that particular e-mail to outline my reasons for believing that it
is a group of "Money Power" psychopaths -- with vastly excessive, completely inappropriate
(from the viewpoint of genuine democracy), and highly dangerous amounts of "behind the
scenes invisible government" type political power, which enables them to commit an
extraordinarily wide range of extremely serious crimes against humanity as a whole,
throughout the whole of society (from top to bottom), and to do so with complete impunity --
who are primarily responsible for 1) the "financial weapons of mass destruction (i.e.
derivatives )" that are the root-cause of the present "global financial crisis", and 2) that are
behind the growing threat of a thermonuclear World War 3 starting up at any time now. The
main reason -- as I see things -- why both of these closely related developments (both of
them for the most part wholly avoidable in terms of existing constitutional and human rights
legislation), have grown so big and so threatening for so many (since 1948), is that the legal
professions of several nations, particularly the legal professions of those sovereign nation
states that have republican type "government of the people, by the people, for the people"
kinds of written constitutions, such as the Republic of Ireland for example, and especially the
Republic of the United States of America (still widely regarded by many as the most powerful
nation in the world), are failing to enforce national and international legislation closely
connected with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which I have
referred to earlier under point 1 above): in response to, and for the purpose of protecting
humanity generally against the wide-ranging and seriously criminal activities of the now
virtually all-powerful -- and unelected -- group of Money Power psychopaths in question, and
their many accomplices (some elected and some unelected) in our particular Republic of
Ireland Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial), and in many other governments
elsewhere all over the world.

Later today I will place a copy of this email at the following address:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/DrAnneJeffers/20June2012/Email.htm

Also, and as I am not sure if you are receiving the e-mails I have been sending to you since
my very public PSNI (Police Service of Northern Ireland) machine gun interview of Sunday
(lunchtime) August 31st 2008 in Greencastle (near Omagh), via the HSE (Health Service
Executive) e-mail address (info@hse.ie), I will send a printed copy of this e-mail to you, using
your Loughrea Health Centre (Barrack Street) address, through the registered post later
today.

In addition, and mostly on account of a) the very strong doubts Gerald and Margie have
related to me (as expressed in Section 1 above) about you still being unable apparently to try
to help me get legal representation of the kind I believe I need in order to recover from the C-
PTSD injuries, and, b) because of the very important (to me) paranoia/hypervigilance issue
(referred to in Section 4 above) relating to the "prostate cancer screening test", I will also
send a printed copy of this e-mail through the registered post today to Minister for Health Dr.
James Reilly TD.

Yours sincerely,

William Finnerty.

===

The text in the sections just above is from a letter sent through the registered post to
Consultant Psychiatrist Dr Anne Jeffers on June 20th 2012, the entire contents of which, for
all practical purposes, she appears to have completely ignored (as far as I am concerned at
least). The full text of the June 20th 2012 letter in question, which was copied -- also through
the registered post -- to the then Republic of Ireland Health Minister Dr. James Reilly TD, can
be viewed at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/DrAnneJeffers/20June2012/Email.htm

=== === ===

APRIL 8th 2017

A set of complaints, directly involving three professional Northern Irish lawyers, plus several
of their lawyer work-colleagues indirectly, and which is closely connected to the
"CORRUPTION & IMPUNITY" issues referred to above, has been sent to the Law Society of
Northern Ireland on April 8th 2017. For additional information on this set of complaints,
please see at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/NorthernIrelandLawSociety/8April2017/RegisteredLetter.htm

I am at present anxiously awaiting a "detailed" reply from The Law Society of Northern
Ireland to the registered letter referred to at the www address just above.

=== === ===

END OF FACEBOOK TEXT

=== === ===

RELATED APRIL 26th 2017 EMAIL TO FIRST MINISTER OF NORTHERN IRELAND

ARLENE FOSTER LL.B, MLA

RE: THE JUNE 20th 2012 TO APRIL 8th 2017 PERIOD OF NO CHANGE IN
GOVERNMENTS' "CORRUPTION & IMPUNITY" POLICIES:

A slightly edited version of the June 26th 2017 email to First Minister Arlene Foster LL.B.,
MLA is available for viewing at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/FirstMinisterArleneFosterMLA/26April2017/Gmail.html

An unedited "Gmail PDF" copy of June 26th 2017 email to First Minister Arlene Foster LL.B.,
MLA can also be viewed at:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/FirstMinisterArleneFosterMLA/26April2017/Gmail.pdf

The email referred to just above, was copied to several other people (using the same email);
and, the membership of the overall group included a small international selection of senior
lawyers, politicians, and religious leaders.

===

"Arlene Isabel Foster MLA PC (ne Kelly; born 3 July 1970) is a Northern Irish politician who
has been the leader of the Democratic Unionist Party since December 2015."

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlene_Foster

=== === ===

CLOSELY RELATED AND VARIED SET OF "GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION, CRIME,

AND IMPUNITY" ISSUES
Indymedia (Ireland) Publication:
Government Corruption, Crime, Cover-ups, Bullying, and Impunity:
http://www.humanrightsireland.com/IndyMediaIreland/7November2013/Post.htm

=== === ===

GROWING UP, AS IN "HUMANITY AS A WHOLE"

"Humanity as a whole" still has an ENORMOUS amount of "growing up" to do, it would
seem?

For more on this subject please see at:

http://www.humanrightsireland.com/PainLearningGrowth/1.htm

=== === ===

SYSTEMIC AND SYSTEMATIC CORRUPTION IN AND AROUND GOVERNMENTS,

HUMAN RIGHTS IRELAND, WILLIAM FINNERTY:
https://www.google.ie/?gws_rd=ssl#q=SYSTEMIC+AND+SYSTEMATIC+CORRUPTION+IN+AN
D+AROUND+GOVERNMENTS,+HUMAN+RIGHTS+IRELAND,+WILLIAM+FINNERTY:
Irish Water. Founded by liars
May 4, 2014
Brendan Howlin's election "Manifesto" (tissue of false promises) during Irish Labour party
election campaign.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdp2pGo4SeE
The nightmare of Jobstown.
Can I ask why all of a sudden you are so interested in protest at Burton's house?
The Jobstown protest took place in Nov 2014 while she was Tanaiste, Minister of Social protection and the leader of
Labour party. The dawn raids happened in Feb 2015 and charges were brought against us in Summer 2015.
Why didn't you protest her then or since?
Burton is giving evidence and is making a show of herself so leave her to it.
You say the jury is supposed to not take any media reports into account but they are only human and if they see her in the
media complaining of being harassed what do you think they will think.
On Thursday it was mentioned in court after lunch that anyone caught recording or taking photos would be dealt with
harshly because someone took photos of her.
Yesterday and today, local Labour Party councillor Genokey has been canvassing JOBSTOWN, no doubt desperate for
people to protest her so she can complain.

While out at a smoke break Burton tried to provoke activists by walking through the middle of them. They are hoping
someone does something so they can cry out in the media, court and Dail that we are all scum and you seem to want to
give them the power to do that. Why?
I really worry that certain people get recognition from some but seem to not have any common sense. That's dangerous.

Jobstown Not Guilty

26 April 17
Here's the rundown on what actually happened that day in Jobstown!
Initially 50 turned out to protest, but word quickly spread around the
community that Joan Burton was present and the crowd swelled to 500.
- Protesters were angry at Joan Burton and Labour's role in implementing
austerity, and sat behind the car in a sit-down protest.
- Garda numbers swelled - 120 officers and around twenty Garda vehicles
were in attendance when the supposed "false imprisonment" took place.
The Garda then manhandled the protesters, stripping Paul Murphy TD half
naked.
The protest got angry - but was always peaceful and disciplined. Chanting
and marching was organised and democratic votes were taken by the crowd
and discussions had with the Garda to agree on how the protest should be
conducted. There was never any threat to Joan Burton's safety.
- Joan Burton's car was then slow marched out of the community. There
were no major incidents at the protest, and it was nine months before anyone
was charged.
I thought Ireland was one of the most corrupt
countries, I was wrong
BYPAT FLANAGAN
28 APR 2017
Varadkar and Fine Gael are very dangerous. They despise the working class and will do everything to divide
people. They look at people as cheap Labour to be exploited for their sponsors neoliberal agenda. Profit is
everything to them. People just don't matter.

The Government wants us to inform on dole diddlers who steal millions while
they ignore the corporate criminals and tax cheats who cost us billions
IRISHMIRROR.IE

Have you ever seen a bus with a huge sign warning that corporate criminals and tax
cheats are cheating us all?

But you do know you are in seriously crooked state when the Government doctors
figures to exaggerate the amount of welfare fraud while turning a blind eye to massive
tax scams.

A Polish gentleman has accused me of being inaccurate when I claimed some weeks
back that Ireland is one of the most corrupt countries in the western world.

In his experience, he maintains this country IS the most corrupt country in the entire
world and after recent events, I have to admit hes right.
HIS EDUCATION AND BACKGROUND MAKES HIM FELL EMPOWERED TO WALK ON COMMON
PEOPLE WHO PAY HIS INFLATED AND DISHONEST WAGES. GET THE CREEP OUT

(Photo: Gareth Chaney Collins)

Name another State in the developed world where even
the official figures for fraud are fraudulent?
Now we find a State-owned financial institution may have
been the bank of choice for drug dealers and terrorists
who could launder their hot cash no questions asked and
not a peep out of the Government.
But AIB is a bank and we expect nothing better from
bodies where graft and fraud are as much a part of the
landscape as mortgages and car loans.
What we dont expect is for the Government to come up
with fraudulent figures, especially when a Minister is
attempting to highlight fraud.
Ireland is a tax cheats paradise and the vulture funds
flock here as they would to a rotting carcass but rather
than tackle corporate corruption the Government is going
after welfare cheats.
The threat from dole diddlers is such that there are adverts
breaking into the lunchtime news urging us to inform on
our neighbours if we suspect they are claiming a single-
parent allowance while living with someone.
Buses with huge signs emblazoned along their entire
length traverse the city warning people that welfare
cheats, cheats us all.
Although we have had to pay up to 100billion for dodgy
dealings of the banks, have you ever seen a campaign
warning the public of the dangers of corporate fraud or to
urge workers to inform on white collar crime? Me neither.

(Photo: Gareth Chaney Collins)

Launching his campaign, Social Protection Minister Leo
Varadkar claimed more than 500million was saved
through a range of anti-fraud and control measures.
Turns out if you take away the projections of fraud
imagined into the future the real figure is around
41million.... just 459million out.
But lets face it, equating people on welfare with criminal
behaviour is not new and has been part of the
establishments dirty tricks department for decades.
The subliminal message to overtaxed workers is that they
are all at it and the point of it all is to turn the public
against the poor.
It also deflects attention away from the fact the workers
would be paying much less if the corporate crooks werent
getting away with paying almost no tax.
While no one condones fraud, the amounts lost to fraud
are relatively small when the welfare budget is over
19billion annually.
An even bigger sum, 21billion to be exact, in taxpayers
money, was used to save Allied Irish Bank which this
week was fined 2.3million over money laundering and
failing to do enough to stop terrorists and gangsters
banking with them.
Are you listening Leo? The bank you own was laundering
money for terrorists and gangsters and youre fretting
about the boyfriend of a woman on Lone Parents
Allowance staying over the odd night.
Are you going to give us a number to ring if we suspect
the man in the big house with the big Merc is paying no
tax? Is there going to be a number provided for the 16,000
bank customers who were defrauded out of their tracker
mortgages by the robber banks?
Of course he wont... former banker turned whistleblower
Jonathan Sugarman blew the lid on massive corporate
corruption and no one wanted to know.

(Photo: Gareth Chaney Collins)

But we shouldnt be too hard on Leo as his rival for the
Fine Gael leadership Simon Coveney has also been
dealing with dodgy figures in recent days.
The Housing Minister (dont laugh) claims around 15,000
houses were built last year, but there is evidence to
suggest the real figure is closer to 3,000.
Great piece by Gene Kerrigan in today's Endapendent on Leo Varadkar's Fine Gael
leadership stunt - the hugely expensive advertising campaign encouraging people to snitch
on their neighbours. The 500 Million figure as Kerrigan points out is a LIE and he says the
campaign is really aimed at impressing Fine Gael supporters in the hope they will vote for
him in the party leadership contest. Gene Kerrigan described in the article how he went to
Welfare.ie and filled in a fake fraud report. I have just done the same and I would encourage you
dear friends to also log in and report the real fraudster Leo Varadkar. (unfortunately, I can't post the
complete article from the Sindo, because Dinny is now charging for content and I'll be fucked if I'm
paying for his propaganda paper. Read it for free in a coffee shop, he gives it to them for free to boost
sales figures)
Here is the link ... https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/secure/ReportFraud.aspx
Type of fraud being reported? Other

First name of the person you are reporting? Leo

Surname of the person you are reporting? Varadkar
What is the person's approximate age? 40 - 50
Address of the person you are reporting Line 1: Dil ireann
Address of the person you are reporting Line 2: Kildare Street
Address of the person you are reporting Line 3: Dublin 2
County of the person you are reporting: Dublin
What is their car registration (if known)? 017 D 99999
Gender: Male
Have you reported this person previously? Yes

If so when? (dd/mm/yyyy) 01/01/2017

Give all the detail you know about the suspected fraud:
Wasting taxpayers money on a false advertising campaign
Who and what number should we call If we need more information?
(01) 619 8444
Have you seen our new advertising campaign? Yes/No
No
.
http://www.independent.ie//do-it-for-leos-sake-rat-out-you
FG leadership race: Voters are
leaning towards Leo Varadkar
over Simon Coveney
A new poll shows Varadkar maintaining a lead.
April 30, 17

LEO VARADKAR WOULD be a more popular choice as

Taoiseach than Simon Coveney, according to a new opinion
poll.
The Red C poll published in todays Sunday Business Post
shows Varadkar on 40% to Coveneys 34% when voters are
asked who would make the best Taoiseach?.
Varadkar leads among Fine Gael, Labour, Sinn Fin and
Independent voters with Coveney only leading among
Fianna Fil voters.

The poll also pitted the two ministers against each other on
a range of specific questions.
Asked who was more trustworthy and fair, Varadkar
narrowly won by 42% to 40%.
Varadkar was also chosen by a large margin when asked
who would make Ireland to be more socially liberal?. In
that question, Varadkar was chosen over Coveney by a
margin of 53% to 25%.
Voters however appear to see Coveney as a more canny
negotiator. Asked who will be able to deliver the best Brexit
deal for Ireland?, Coveney is chosen over Varadkar by 38%
to 33%.
The two ministers are the two frontrunners to succeed Enda
Kenny as Fine Gael leader. The Taoiseach has not set a date
for his departure but a changing of the guard is seen as likely
over the summer.
http://www.thejournal.ie/leo-varadkar-simon-coveney-poll-3366467-
Apr2017/?utm_source=facebook_short

Dole cheats cheat us all. How many people/gombeens feel cheated by the system,
goverment, courts, education, health.banks, guards, society, church etc etc what a
brainwashed hypocrite gombeen society.
Voters wouldnt touch either of these planks. 24% of the national vote and
receding. Hardly a mandate for leadership. Two elites. No brains.

welfare cheats cheat us all, how about corporate tax cheats Leo?
Coveney will become the next leader simply on the basis that he has been
set up for it by his big business buddies. He attended a Bilderberg meeting a
while back which is usually a stepping stone for the right sort of person to
guide the plebs in the right direction. Peter Sutherland, Garret Fitzgerald
and Michael Noonan are all previous attendees. Coveney is seen as a safe
pair of hands for the continuing EU project of federalization and erosion of
national sovereignty while enabling big business and increased militarization
coveney only scraped in last election in his own constituency, thats not really
the bloke you want leading your party. But this is FG, coveney is the
bilderbergs man in the room, so the voting public wont be a priority
This is just clever self glorifying use of the media.
This plaqared will resonate with the squeezed middle Joe tax payer because
they are the ones who feel most hard done by.
Welfare fraud is wrong but at least all of the money is spent locally which in
turn helps funds jobs for local business.
If he really wanted to save the tax payer a few bob there are much bigger
issues like,

Insurnace companies charging what they like

Banks charging what they like
Namas secret deals
Corporate tax dodging.
The supposedly temporary USC.
Vehicle Tax.
Tax on Fuel.
Irish water.

I could go on.
Anyone else see the irony of a TD carrying a sign emblazoned with WELFARE
CHEATS? I imagine if Michael Collins was around today he would have them
all paraded outside their local churches in handcuffs with such signs draped
around their brass necks! #unvouched expenses!
Leo is shooting himself in the foot with his rat out the cheats campaign,
wanting us to report people who scam the system for a relatively small
amount of money, but ignoring the well off who equally scam the system
through tax loopholes that these same politicians put in their badly thought
out, laws of the land. (as reported by kerrigan in the indo today).
Tax evasion is illegal.
Then again, noonan failed spectacularly as FG leader in the 1980s and look
at him now. Hes not minister of finance on ability. Hes proven that with his
fiscal space eff ups and the like, and his leprechaun economy label. Hes
there because of hes long term friends with Kenny.
varadkar and coveney have been shown up to be weak within the fg party
that either havent made a heave against enda kenny yet with all the crap
thats gone down the last few months,enda will just tell everyone that brexit
is to important for him to stand down and as usual all the scandals are swept
under the carpet.

When theres a gaping hole in the welfare budget, just blame it on welfare cheats says
Leo Fat Greedy Lying FG Piggy

Blame the poor unfortunates on Social welfare for being cheats whilst
Bankers, Garda, TDs, HSE, Denis oBrien, Nama and Apple (to name some
of the cream of the crop), are all applauded from the sidelines by the same
Government. Hypocrites of the highest order!
Welfare cheats cheats us all, ok so what about overpaid useless politicians with massive expenses and more
time off then school kids? Or county council workers that go to work clock in and then go home for 2 hours?

I Wonder was Noira O Sullivan and Her Chiefs who

Dressed up in false beards and Make Up Claiming
Benefits as well as Top rank wages in the Garda head
Quarters, Garda, Politicians who are hired in Disguise as
Welfare Cheats,
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/pat-flangan-
ireland-worlds-most-10315361#ICID=sharebar_facebook

Report Suspected Social Welfare Fraud

You can report suspected social welfare fraud anonymously by completing this form. It is not
necessary to give your name or contact details. You can contact us by phone: (01) 6734545

Include as much detail as possible. We will not be able to tell you the result of our enquiries from
this report.

Mandatory fields to complete are indicated with an *

The Department requires a number of details in order to proceed with investigations into
suspected fraud. Your assistance in providing as much detail as possible in your report will greatly
assist in this process.

If you are reporting somebody for:

 Working and claiming - please tell us if they are employed or self-employed. If
employed, please tell us their employers name and address, when they started working,
the type of work and the days/hours worked, if known

Living with a partner and claiming One Parent Family Payment - please tell us their
address, their partners name, when they started co-habiting, the childrens names and
ages, and their employment details if relevant

Living abroad please tell us where the person is living now and their last address in
Ireland, when they left Ireland and how often they return or expected date of return, if
known

Employer not paying PRSI please tell us the name and address of the employer you
are reporting, their type of business, names of the employees concerned and any other
relevant information

Not declaring means please tell us what you think has not been reported (earnings,
savings, investments, maintenance, compensation, any other income)

Claiming benefit for a person who is deceased please tell us the name and address
of the deceased person and their date of death, if known. Please also tell us the name
and address of the person who is collecting the payment.

Claiming benefit for a person who is in prison please tell us the name, age and
address of the person in prison, when they entered prison, if known. Please also tell us
the name and address of the person who is collecting the payment.

Suspected identity fraud - i.e. somebody using another persons identity or a false
identity. Please give all details available, e.g. all names, address etc.

Any report that indicates a child or a vulnerable adult may be at risk, or another crime is
suspected, will be reported to the Tusla or An Garda Sochna as appropriate. The Department
reserves the right to share any report received with any other State agency where a crime or
misappropriation of public fund may be concerned.

https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/secure/ReportFraud.aspx
Do it for Leo's sake, rat
out your neighbour
If you're inventing a fraud problem, Leo,
you ought to at least get the technical bit
right

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/gene-
kerrigan/do-it-for-leos-sake-rat-out-your-neighbour-
35666823.html
Yes, he couldn't be more blatant could he, him and his ilk are still playing us for fools!
State aid: Ireland gave illegal tax benefits to Apple worth up
to 13 billion
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm

Why are The fuckers so Eager to Target the most Vulnerable Poor people and Not the Rich who refuse bluntly to pay
there taxes, State aid: Ireland gave illegal tax benefits to Apple worth up to 13 billion
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm

State aid: Ireland gave illegal tax benefits to Apple worth up

to 13 billion

Brussels, 30 August 2016

The European Commission has concluded that Ireland granted undue tax
benefits of up to 13 billion to Apple. This is illegal under EU state aid
rules, because it allowed Apple to pay substantially less tax than other
businesses. Ireland must now recover the illegal aid.
Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, in charge of competition policy, said: "Member States cannot give
tax benefits to selected companies this is illegal under EU state aid rules. The Commission's
investigation concluded that Ireland granted illegal tax benefits to Apple, which enabled it to pay
substantially less tax than other businesses over many years. In fact, this selective treatment allowed
Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005
per cent in 2014."
Following an in-depth state aid investigation launched in June 2014, the European Commission
has concluded that two tax rulings issued by Ireland to Apple have substantially and artificially
lowered the tax paid by Apple in Ireland since 1991. The rulings endorsed a way to establish the
taxable profits for two Irish incorporated companies of the Apple group (Apple Sales International and
Apple Operations Europe), which did not correspond to economic reality: almost all sales profits
recorded by the two companies were internally attributed to a "head office". The Commission's
assessment showed that these "head offices" existed only on paper and could not have generated such
profits. These profits allocated to the "head offices" were not subject to tax in any country under
specific provisions of the Irish tax law, which are no longer in force. As a result of the allocation
method endorsed in the tax rulings, Apple only paid an effective corporate tax rate that declined from
1% in 2003 to 0.005% in 2014 on the profits of Apple Sales International.
This selective tax treatment of Apple in Ireland is illegal under EU state aid rules, because it gives
Apple a significant advantage over other businesses that are subject to the same national taxation rules.
The Commission can order recovery of illegal state aid for a ten-year period preceding the
Commission's first request for information in 2013. Ireland must now recover the unpaid taxes in
Ireland from Apple for the years 2003 to 2014 of up to 13 billion, plus interest.
In fact, the tax treatment in Ireland enabled Apple to avoid taxation on almost all profits generated by
sales of Apple products in the entire EU Single Market. This is due to Apple's decision to record all
sales in Ireland rather than in the countries where the products were sold. This structure is however
outside the remit of EU state aid control. If other countries were to require Apple to pay more tax on
profits of the two companies over the same period under their national taxation rules, this would reduce
the amount to be recovered by Ireland.

Apple's tax structure in Europe

Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe are two Irish incorporated companies that
are fully-owned by the Apple group, ultimately controlled by the US parent, Apple Inc. They hold the
rights to use Apple's intellectual property to sell and manufacture Apple products outside North and
South America under a so-called 'cost-sharing agreement' with Apple Inc. Under this agreement, Apple
Sales International and Apple Operations Europe make yearly payments to Apple in the US to fund
research and development efforts conducted on behalf of the Irish companies in the US. These
payments amounted to about US$ 2 billion in 2011 and significantly increased in 2014. These
expenses, mainly borne by Apple Sales International, contributed to fund more than half of all research
efforts by the Apple group in the US to develop its intellectual property worldwide. These expenses are
deducted from the profits recorded by Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe in
Ireland each year, in line with applicable rules.
The taxable profits of Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe in Ireland are
determined by a tax ruling granted by Ireland in 1991, which in 2007 was replaced by a similar
second tax ruling. This tax ruling was terminated when Apple Sales International and Apple Operations
Europe changed their structures in 2015.
Apple Sales International
Apple Sales International is responsible for buying Apple products from equipment manufacturers
around the world and selling these products in Europe (as well as in the Middle East, Africa and India).
Apple set up their sales operations in Europe in such a way that customers were contractually buying
products from Apple Sales International in Ireland rather than from the shops that physically sold the
products to customers. In this way Apple recorded all sales, and the profits stemming from these sales,
directly in Ireland.
The two tax rulings issued by Ireland concerned the internal allocation of these profits within Apple
Sales International (rather than the wider set-up of Apple's sales operations in Europe). Specifically,
they endorsed a split of the profits for tax purposes in Ireland: Under the agreed method, most profits
were internally allocated away from Ireland to a "head office" within Apple Sales International. This
"head office" was not based in any country and did not have any employees or own premises. Its
activities consisted solely of occasional board meetings. Only a fraction of the profits of Apple Sales
International were allocated to its Irish branch and subject to tax in Ireland. The remaining vast
majority of profits were allocated to the "head office", where they remained untaxed.
Therefore, only a small percentage of Apple Sales International's profits were taxed in Ireland, and the
rest was taxed nowhere. In 2011, for example (according to figures released at US Senate public
hearings), Apple Sales International recorded profits of US$ 22 billion (c.a. 16 billion[1]) but under
the terms of the tax ruling only around 50 million were considered taxable in Ireland, leaving 15.95
billion of profits untaxed. As a result, Apple Sales International paid less than 10 million of corporate
tax in Ireland in 2011 an effective tax rate of about 0.05% on its overall annual profits. In subsequent
years, Apple Sales International's recorded profits continued to increase but the profits considered
taxable in Ireland under the terms of the tax ruling did not. Thus this effective tax rate decreased
further to only 0.005% in 2014.

Apple Operations Europe

On the basis of the same two tax rulings from 1991 and 2007, Apple Operations Europe benefitted
from a similar tax arrangement over the same period of time. The company was responsible for
manufacturing certain lines of computers for the Apple group. The majority of the profits of this
company were also allocated internally to its "head office" and not taxed anywhere.
Commission assessment
Tax rulings as such are perfectly legal. They are comfort letters issued by tax authorities to give a
company clarity on how its corporate tax will be calculated or on the use of special tax provisions.
The role of EU state aid control is to ensure Member States do not give selected companies a better tax
treatment than others, via tax rulings or otherwise. More specifically, profits must be allocated between
companies in a corporate group, and between different parts of the same company, in a way that
reflects economic reality. This means that the allocation should be in line with arrangements that take
place under commercial conditions between independent businesses (so-called "arm's length
principle").
In particular, the Commission's state aid investigation concerned two consecutive tax rulings issued by
Ireland, which endorsed a method to internally allocate profits within Apple Sales International and
Apple Operations Europe,two Irish incorporated companies. It assessed whether this endorsed method
to calculate the taxable profits of each company in Ireland gave Apple an undue advantage that is
illegal under EU state aid rules.
The Commission's investigation has shown that the tax rulings issued by Ireland endorsed an artificial
internal allocation of profits within Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe, which has
no factual or economic justification. As a result of the tax rulings, most sales profits of Apple Sales
International were allocated to its "head office" when this "head office" had no operating capacity to
handle and manage the distribution business, or any other substantive business for that matter. Only
the Irish branch of Apple Sales International had the capacity to generate any income from trading,
i.e. from the distribution of Apple products. Therefore, the sales profits of Apple Sales International
should have been recorded with the Irish branch and taxed there.
The "head office" did not have any employees or own premises. The only activities that can be
associated with the "head offices" are limited decisions taken by its directors (many of which were at
the same time working full-time as executives for Apple Inc.) on the distribution of dividends,
administrative arrangements and cash management. These activities generated profits in terms of
interest that, based on the Commission's assessment, are the only profits which can be attributed to the
"head offices".
Similarly, only the Irish branch of Apple Operations Europe had the capacity to generate any income
from trading, i.e. from the production of certain lines of computers for the Apple group. Therefore,
sales profits of Apple Operation Europe should have been recorded with the Irish branch and taxed
there.
On this basis, the Commission concluded that the tax rulings issued by Ireland endorsed an artificial
allocation of Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe's sales profits to their "head
offices", where they were not taxed. As a result, the tax rulings enabled Apple to pay substantially less
tax than other companies, which is illegal under EU state aid rules.
This decision does not call into question Ireland's general tax system or its corporate tax rate.
Furthermore, Apple's tax structure in Europe as such, and whether profits could have been recorded in
the countries where the sales effectively took place, are not issues covered by EU state aid rules. If
profits were recorded in other countries this could, however, affect the amount of recovery by Ireland
(see more details below)

Recovery
As a matter of principle, EU state aid rules require that incompatible state aid is
recovered in order to remove the distortion of competition created by the aid.
There are no fines under EU State aid rules and recovery does not penalise the
company in question. It simply restores equal treatment with other companies.
The Commission has set out in its decision the methodology to calculate the value
of the undue competitive advantage enjoyed by Apple. In particular, Ireland must
allocate to each branch all profits from sales previously indirectly allocated to the
"head office" of Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe,
respectively, and apply the normal corporation tax in Ireland on these re-
allocated profits. The decision does not ask for the reallocation of any interest
income of the two companies that can be associated with the activities of the
"head office".
The Commission can only order recovery of illegal state aid for a ten-year period
preceding the Commission's first request for information in this matter, which
dates back to 2013. Ireland must therefore recover from Apple the unpaid tax for
the period since 2003, which amounts to up to 13 billion, plus interest. Around
50 million in unpaid taxes relate to the undue allocation of profits to the "head
office" of Apple Operations Europe. The remainder results from the undue
allocation of profits to the "head office" of Apple Sales International. The recovery
period stops in 2014, as Apple changed its structure in Ireland as of 2015 and the
ruling of 2007 no longer applies.
The amount of unpaid taxes to be recovered by the Irish authorities would be
reduced if other countries were to require Apple to pay more taxes on the profits
recorded by Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe for this
period. This could be the case if they consider, in view of the information revealed
through the Commissions investigation, that Apple's commercial risks, sales and
other activities should have been recorded in their jurisdictions. This is because
the taxable profits of Apple Sales International in Ireland would be reduced if
profits were recorded and taxed in other countries instead of being recorded in
Ireland.
The amount of unpaid taxes to be recovered by the Irish authorities would also
be reduced if the US authorities were to require Apple to pay larger amounts of
money to their US parent company for this period to finance research and
development efforts. These are conducted by Apple in the US on behalf of Apple
Sales International and Apple Operations Europe, for which the two companies
already make annual payments.
Finally, all Commission decisions are subject to scrutiny by EU courts. If a
Member State decides to appeal a Commission decision, it must still recover the
illegal state aid but could, for example, place the recovered amount in an escrow
account pending the outcome of the EU court procedures.

Background
Since June 2013, the Commission has been investigating the tax ruling practices
of Member States. It extended this information inquiry to all Member States in
December 2014. In October 2015, the Commission concluded that Luxembourg
and the Netherlands had granted selective tax advantages to Fiat and Starbucks,
respectively. In January 2016, the Commission concluded that selective tax
advantages granted by Belgium to least 35 multinationals, mainly from the EU,
under its "excess profit" tax scheme are illegal under EU state aid rules. The
Commission also has two ongoing in-depth investigations into concerns that tax
rulings may give rise to state aid issues in Luxembourg, as
regards Amazon and McDonald's.
This Commission has pursued a far-reaching strategy towards fair taxation and
greater transparency and we have recently seen major progress. Following our
proposals on tax transparency of March 2015, Member States reached a political
agreementalready in October 2015 on automatic exchange of information on tax
rulings. This legislation will help to bring about a much greater degree of
transparency and deter from using tax rulings as an instrument for tax abuse. In
June 2015, we unveiled our Action Plan for fair and effective taxation: a series of
initiatives which aims to make the corporate tax environment in the EU fairer and
more efficient. Key actions included a framework to ensure effective taxation
where profits are generated and a strategy to re-launch the Common
Consolidated Corporate Tax Base for which a fresh proposal is expected later this
year. The Commission launched a further package of initiatives to combat
corporate tax avoidance within the EU and throughout the world on 27 January of
this year. As a direct result, Member States have already agreed to tackle the
most prevalent loopholes in national laws that allow tax avoidance to take place
and to extend their automatic exchange of information to country-by-country
reporting of tax-related financial information of multinationals. A proposal is also
on the table to make some of this information public. All of our work rests on the
simple principle that all companies, big and small, must pay tax where they make
their profits.
The non-confidential version of the decisions will be made available under the
case number SA.38373 in the State aid register on the DG Competition
website once any confidentiality issues have been resolved. The State Aid Weekly
e-News lists new publications of State aid decisions on the internet and in the EU
Official Journal.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm

State aid: Commission investigates transfer pricing

arrangements on corporate taxation of Apple (Ireland)
Starbucks (Netherlands) and Fiat Finance and Trade
(Luxembourg)
The European Commission has opened three in-depth investigations to examine whether
decisions by tax authorities in Ireland, The Netherlands and Luxembourg with regard to
the corporate income tax to be paid by Apple, Starbucks and Fiat Finance and Trade,
respectively, comply with the EU rules on state aid. The opening of an in-depth
investigation gives interested third parties, as well as the three Member States concerned,
an opportunity to submit comments. It does not prejudge the outcome of the
investigation.
Commission Vice President in charge of competition policy Joaqun Almunia said: "In the
current context of tight public budgets, it is particularly important that large multinationals pay their fair share of
taxes. Under the EU's state aid rules, national authorities cannot take measures allowing certain companies to
pay less tax than they should if the tax rules of the Member State were applied in a fair and non-discriminatory
way."
Algirdas emeta, Commissioner for Taxation, said: "Fair tax competition is essential for the
integrity of the Single Market, for the fiscal sustainability of our Member States, and for a level-playing field
between our businesses. Our social and economic model relies on it, so we must do all we can to defend it."
The Commission has been investigating under EU state aid rules certain tax practices in
several Member States following media reports alleging that some companies have
received significant tax reductions by way of "tax rulings" issued by national tax
authorities. Tax rulings as such are not problematic: they are comfort letters by tax
authorities giving a specific company clarity on how its corporate tax will be calculated or
on the use of special tax provisions. However, tax rulings may involve state aid within the
meaning of EU rules if they are used to provide selective advantages to a specific
company or group of companies.
According to Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
(TFEU), state aid which affects trade between Member States and threatens to distort
competition by favouring certain undertakings is in principle incompatible with the EU
Single Market. Selective tax advantages may amount to state aid. The Commission does
not call into question the general tax regimes of the three Member States concerned.
Tax rulings are used in particular to confirm transfer pricing arrangements. Transfer
pricing refers to the prices charged for commercial transactions between various parts of
the same group of companies, in particular prices set for goods sold or services provided
by one subsidiary of a corporate group to another subsidiary of the same group. Transfer
pricing influences the allocation of taxable profit between subsidiaries of a group located
in different countries.
If tax authorities, when accepting the calculation of the taxable basis proposed by a
company, insist on a remuneration of a subsidiary or a branch on market terms, reflecting
normal conditions of competition, this would exclude the presence of state aid. However,
if the calculation is not based on remuneration on market terms, it could imply a more
favourable treatment of the company compared to the treatment other taxpayers would
normally receive under the Member States' tax rules. This may constitute state aid.
The Commission will examine if the three transfer pricing arrangements validated in the
following tax rulings involve state aid to the benefit of the beneficiary companies:

the individual rulings issued by the Irish tax authorities on the calculation of the taxable profit allocated
to the Irish branches of Apple Sales International and of Apple Operations Europe;

the individual ruling issued by the Dutch tax authorities on the calculation of the taxable basis in the
Netherlands for manufacturing activities of Starbucks Manufacturing EMEA BV;

the individual ruling issued by the Luxembourgish tax authorities on the calculation of the taxable basis
in Luxembourg for the financing activities of Fiat Finance and Trade.
The Commission has reviewed the calculations used to set the taxable basis in those
rulings and, based on a preliminary analysis, has concerns that they could underestimate
the taxable profit and thereby grant an advantage to the respective companies by
allowing them to pay less tax. The Commission notes that the three rulings concern only
arrangements about the taxable basis; they do not relate to the applicable tax rate itself.
In parallel to these three formal investigations, the Commission will continue its wider
inquiry into tax rulings, which covers more Member States.
Luxembourg, contrary to The Netherlands and Ireland, only provided the Commission with a
limited sample of the information requested (see IP/14/309), which included the ruling for Fiat
Finance and Trade, but not the complete information demanded by the Commission. The Commission
has therefore initiated infringement proceedings against Luxembourg by issuing letters of formal
notice.
Background
The Commission is looking at the compliance with EU state aid rules of certain tax
practices in some Member States in the context of aggressive tax planning by
multinationals, with a view to ensure a level playing field. A number of multinational
companies are using tax planning strategies to reduce their global tax burden, by taking
advantage of the technicalities of tax systems, and substantially reducing their tax
liabilities. This aggressive tax planning practice erodes the tax bases of Member States,
which are already financially constrained.
Regarding tax rulings specifically, the preliminary enquiries have shown that the quality
and the consistency of the scrutiny by the tax authorities differ substantively across
Member States. In particular, the Commission notes that The Netherlands seem to generally
proceed with a thorough assessment based on comprehensive information required from
the tax payer. The Commission therefore does not expect to encounter systematic
irregularities in tax rulings. However, at this stage the Commission has concerns that the
tax ruling for Starbucks Manufacturing EMEA BV is providing that company with a
selective advantage, because there are doubts whether it is in line with a market-based
assessment of transfer pricing.
In the case of Ireland, the authorities have been fully cooperative in providing
comprehensive replies in response to Commission's requests. The Commission notes that
although the transfer pricing rules have been tightened over the years, the tax
administration had a significant degree of discretion in the past. The Commission has
concerns that such discretion has been used in the case of Apple to grant a selective
advantage to that company, reducing its tax burden below the level it should pay based
on a correct application of the tax rules. The Commission notes however that the number
of tax rulings issued in Ireland relating to transfer pricing arrangements is limited.
The opening of formal investigations allows Member States' authorities to further explain
their practices and the Commission to gather further information from interested parties.
The non-confidential versions of the decisions will be made available under the case
numbers SA.38373, SA.38374 and SA.38375 in the State Aid Register on the competition
website once any confidentiality issues have been resolved. New publications of state aid decisions on the internet
and in the Official Journal are listed in the State Aid Weekly e-News.
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-663_en.htm
State aid: Overview of decisions and on-going in-depth investigations of
Financial Institutions in Difficulty

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/recovery/banking_case_lis
t_public.pdf

State aid negative decisions pursuing Article 932 of the EC Treaty between 1969 and 1994

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/register/state_ai
d_negative_decisions_1969-1994_en.pdf

To whom it may concern

I am contacting you in your capacity as a democratically elected politician to make an inquiry.
Could you please confirm or deny a certain matter of concern which may be in the public tax payers interest.
Is there a number of new so called friendly Irish Vultures lining up now to buy out distressed mortgages of
family home owners, backed by private investors?
If so, could you, as a Public Representative, please furnish me with an open and valid dossier of who exactly
is involved in such operations by answering the questions as follows;
1. The name of any entity involved, to include their status i.e. are they non for profit, or a charitable trust etc.
2. The name of the private financial backers of such entities
3. Whether such entities have had access to personal data from distressed mortgage holders under false
criterias
4. Is it also true, that these new friendly vultures will lease such homes back to the local authorities, and if the
renters default, then the burden falls upon the tax payers, whilst the friendly vulture is devoid of all burden?
5. Is it true that the friendly vulture can then sell the portfolio on again, leaving the new RENTERS further at
risk?
Also, could you confirm or deny the following questions.
1. Are you as an independent, or as a member of a political party, aware of any party getting ready to roll out
a moratorium on repossessions in the near future in order to get people to hand over their homes to the
Mortgage to Rent Scheme?
2. If so, why is the Government not willing to use Compulsory Purchase Orders with 99 year leases and
succession rights to distressed mortgage holders?
3. Will you, as an independent please present this scenario to the Dail on behalf of all mortgage holders in
deep distress?
Kind regards

Chemifloc Announce 5 Million Investment in Shannon Foynes

Port for New Bulk Storage Facility

APRIL 21, 2017

Shannon headquartered company Chemifloc, the largest producer of water treatment

chemicals in Ireland, has completed a 5 million investment in new bulk liquid chemical
storage facilities at Shannon Foynes Port Companys largest port at Foynes, Co. Limerick.

Five new jobs will be created by Chemifloc, bringing total employment in the Shannon
headquartered company to over 40 people. This latest investment brings to over 10 million
Chemiflocs investment in Shannon Foynes Port since it established bulk storage facilities
there in 2005.
Chemiflocs facility at Foynes Port is now the most advanced in the country and positions the
company as it embarks on an expansion programme into new sectors including the
electronics, pharmaceutical, dairy and manufacturing industries.

Fergal Lawless, Executive Director of Chemifloc said, "Chemifloc is a wholly Irish owned
company specialising in water treatment systems to deliver drinking water to homes and
businesses throughout the island of Ireland. Chemifloc products are also used to protect the
environment by treating wastewater. We are now building on over 30 years of our specialist
experience in the water treatment sector to identify new markets for our products and
services. Expanding our capacity to handle bulk liquid materials is a natural evolution for us
and meets a growing need for companies across Ireland."

Mr. Lawless added that Chemifloc has recently expanded into the export market and is now
supplying customers in the UK and Eastern Europe with products manufactured at its
Smithstown facility. "We are ambitious to grow the company and we want to continue to
create new employment at our manufacturing site at Smithstown in Shannon and at our
facility in Shannon Foynes Port", he said.

Dr. Edwin Roycroft, Technical Director at Chemifloc said, "Our investment in a new bulk
storage facility in Shannon Foynes Port comes at a critical time. Many existing bulk storage
facilities for liquid industrial chemicals are nearing the end of their usable life and this
investment will ensure security of supply for liquid materials required by many of Ireland's
leading industries including in the dairy, pharmaceutical, electronics and manufacturing
sectors. With uncertainty created by Brexit it will benefit many companies to be able to access
our bulk storage facility in Limerick rather than trucking the product from facilities in the UK".

Pat Keating, CEO at Shannon Foynes Port Company (SFPC) welcomed the investment,
saying, "Chemiflocs significant investment at Foynes Port is another vote of confidence in
SFPC and the facilities we have to offer. The Port Authority facilitates 7.6bn of trade per
annum and we are positioning the port for further growth and large-scale inward investment.
The port is in strong growth-mode and during 2016 alone, throughputs grew by 11% at our
general cargo terminals. In order to facilitate this pace of growth and to enable investment like
that from Chemifloc, we are maintaining a strong investment programme and, to that end,
recently completed the 12m Phase 1 of our jetty expansion program at Foynes and
preliminaries have already commenced for the 25m second phase."

Chemifloc take our responsibility to our over 50 employees, our local community in Shannon
and the environment very seriously. A core pillar of our company philosophy is that
environmental stewardship is integral to every decision we make. Environmental stewardship
is especially important to us considering that we manufacture water and wastewater
treatment products, used in water and wastewater treatment plants across Ireland, which are
specifically developed and designed to protect the public health and receiving environment
from pollution.

It is reassuring that Ireland has implemented a transparent environmental regulatory system

based on EU Directives for over 20 years. This system supports the principles enshrined in
the Aarhus Convention whereby the public can access relevant information and participate in
decision making that affects the environment. Chemifloc is fully licensed by an Industrial
Emissions Licence (IEL) formerly known as an Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control
Licence (IPPCL) authorised and regulated by the EPA. The EPA are prohibited from
granting such a licence unless they are satisfied that the site meets the substantial
environmental requirements set out in legislation and that Best Available Technology is
utilised onsite. Further information regarding the licensing process and details regarding our
IEL are available on the EPA website (www.epa.ie).

Our policy is to maintain proactive and constructive interactions with all relevant regulatory
agencies in order to ensure we maintain compliance with all relevant statutory and regulatory
obligations. These interactions typically include: routine and annual reporting; changes in
practices and protocols; amendments to our IEL and; development onsite to reflect new,
updated or revised legislation and guidance.

In 2012, there was a regrettable accident onsite which resulted in the temporary
hospitalisation of eight employees, interruption to local businesses and uncontrolled release
of material to atmosphere. The incident was fully investigated by the company and all of the
relevant regulatory authorities. After the careful consideration of the results of the
investigation, significant changes to the relevant processes and practices onsite were
introduced to the satisfaction of the relevant agencies. The site is also now independently
accredited by the National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI) to the following
internationally-recognised and best practice certification schemes:

Occupational Health and Safety (OHSAS 18001)

Environmental Management (ISO 14001)

We are also system certified by NSAI for our Quality Management System (QMS ISO
9001). These certification schemes are independently audited and include regular site visits
and inspections by the accreditation bodies.

The independent certification process, coupled with site visits, inspections (including
unannounced inspections), audits and monitoring from regulatory agencies including the EPA
and HSA mean that since 2012 we have had 57 site visit and monitoring events by
independent agencies/bodies. The table below, outlines the breakdown of these events.

Year Health & Safety Authority Environmental Protection Agency National Standards Authority of Ireland National
Standards Authority of Ireland Clare County Council
(inc. Site Audits, Visits, Inspections & Site Monitoring) (Independent Health & Safety Site Visits) (Independent
Environmental Site Visits) (Continuous atmospheric odour assessment)
2012 1 9 - - -
2013 5 10 - 1 -
2014 2 4 - 1 -
2015 2 6 2 1 Continuous
2016 1 5 1 1 Continuous
2017 2 2 1 - Continuous
TOTAL 13 36 4 4 Continuous

Note that this table does not include the many phone and email communications we have
with these bodies or the substantial amount of daily, weekly and monthly self-monitoring
practices that are completed according to the site Environmental Management System and
under the direction of the dedicated Safety, Health, Environment and Quality team led by the
SHEQ Manager who is also part of the senior management team. We have also attached a
copy of our annually-reviewed Safety, Health, Environment and Quality (SHEQ) Policy for
your information.

As mentioned above and as reflected in our SHEQ Policy, environmental stewardship is

integral to all aspects of the business, therefore it is difficult to estimate a specific figure
exclusively attributable to environmental compliance as we would contend that every euro
spent onsite incorporates this philosophy.
 Scientific Analysis

BHP Laboratories provide a diverse range of

scientific analysis to Industrial & commercial
companies, environmental consultants,
Government bodies, Pharmaceutical
companies and local Authority customers
throughout Ireland. Our team has built up an
extensive knowledge of the scientific testing
market in Ireland and are on hand to offer
advice and guidance to our customers. Our
laboratory is equipped with the latest state of
the art equipment and our site team can offer
advice and testing services at any of our
customers sites throughout Ireland.
We hold a wide range of accreditation for our scientific testing service and are extending
the scope on a yearly basis. Our scientific testing service is broken up into three
segments; Environmental Testing, Product & Process Testing and Drug Testing.

Environmental Monitoring
Product & Process Testing
 Water & Waste Water Testing
Occupational Health Monitoring
Drug Testing

We hold a wide range of accreditation for our scientific testing service and are extending
the scope on a yearly basis. Our scientific testing service is broken up into three
segments; Environmental Testing, Product & Process Testing and Drug Testing.

http://www.chemifloc.ie/w/44/2/11/14801

Ferric Chloride (Waste water grade)

http://www.chemifloc.ie/w/44/2/11/14761

How many Journalists these days could ever step up to Justine McCarthy's plate? Who was this Politician we
wonder? There may be clues to the party within the text? List your suggestions if you are not worried about
kickbacks, this is a public page after all, but that is why we are staying dumb on the matter, ......for the
moment anyhow
Anyone that may think that we are just a protest group please know, that we are worried
about the whole environment and eco-system of the Shannon Estuary. We already have
Moneypoint burning 4,000 tonnes of coal a day on our shores, filling our air with CO2, We
have Aughinish Alumina stockpiling 50 million tonnes of Industrial waste on our shore,
constantly polluting our air with SO2 and Fluoride, now we have the proposed Gasification
plant in Gortadroma that is going to be burning 45 tonnes of tyres and 1000 tonnes of rubbish
per day if allowed!! On top of this, Irish Cement in Mungret, Co. Limerick, up river on the
Shannon are now trying to get a 90,000 tonne tyre and waste burning facility rammed
through planning. We have no hope in this area and may as well move out and let them turn
our region into the rubbish dump and power plant of Ireland that our local CoCo Exec wants it
to be. Stand with us and fight this! Our children deserve better, if we want them to remain with
us in this locality so fight for them, do not stay silent. Join us, like this page, share it, get in
touch and comment as it is for everyone with concerns and help us try and rescue the very
lifeblood of our country, the river Shannon!

Going after the little people, Corrupted shithole

10 days that shook the nation: how the Holles

Street mess unfolded
April 28th , 17 mess unfolded

BY ALISON BOUGH

Today sees the tenth day of extraordinary

chaos, political fallout, and public outcry
surrounding the ownership and governance of
the new 300 million National Maternity
Hospital building.
Following the latest resignation of Professor Chris
Fitzpatrick, in support of Dr Peter Boylan, we look back at
how the crisis has unfolded...
Tuesday, April 18th: News breaks that the Sisters of
Charity, a religious order who have (to date) failed to
provide its share of funds to a redress scheme for
institutional abuse victims, are to be given sole ownership
of the planned 300 million State-funded National
Maternity Hospital to be built on a site at Elm Park in south
county Dublin.
A spokesperson for the Department of Health tells media
outlets that the
"autonomy of the National Maternity Hospital board will be
underpinned by reserved powers to ensure clinical and
operational independence, and the Minister for Health will
hold the power to protect those reserved powers."
Throughout the day, opposition parties condemn the
decision to grant sole ownership of the new hospital to the
religious congregation. The Workers Party states that the
situation presents a 'nightmare scenario' for women.
Health Minister, Simon Harris, states that the hospital will
have full clinical, operational, financial and budgetary
independence.
Minister for Social Protection, Leo Varadkar, asks Minister
Harris to clarify the issue of ownership of the new hospital.
Dr Rhona Mahony, Master of the National Maternity
Hospital, releases a statement on the matter:
"The new National Maternity Hospital to be built on the St
Vincent's Healthcare campus will be dedicated solely to
providing maternity care for women and infants. It will be
operated by a new company with an independent board
and will be clinically and operationally entirely independent
in line with national maternity policy.
Over 9,000 infants are born at NMH every year. The
current facility is not fit for purpose. The co-location of this
hospital with an adult tertiary hospital will revolutionise
healthcare in Ireland for women and infants and we
continue to work with SVHG to make a dedicated state of
the art maternity hospital a reality as urgently as possible."
A petition, calling for the Sisters of Charity to be prevented
from becoming owners of the hospital, is launched by
Uplift and rapidly goes viral.
Wednesday, April 19th: The former chairman of the
Workplace Relations Commission, Kieran Mulvey,
tells RT radio that representatives of St Vincents
Healthcare Group, and not the Sisters of Charity, will sit on
the board of the new hospital.
Fianna Fil TD Billy Kelleher expresses concern that the
Sisters of Charity had not complied with the indemnity
agreement reached in 2002, but states that the hospital
project should not be delayed any further.
The Uplift petition has already been signed by almost
50,000 people, quickly exceeding its original target of
30,000 signatures.
Thursday, April 20th: Dr Peter Boylan, the former master
of the National Maternity Hospital, tells RTE Radio
1's Morning Ireland show that if IVF, sterilisation, abortion,
and gender reassignment were to be carried out at the
new National Maternity Hospital, it would be the only
hospital in the world owned and run by a Catholic order to
allow such procedures.
Sunday, April 23rd: As the row continues to dominate the
Sunday papers and morning radio shows, ex-master Peter
Boylan texts the current master of Holles Street (who is
also his sister-in-law) Dr Rhona Mahony, and Nicholas
Kearns (the deputy chairman of the hospital) writing:
"Im sorry it's come to this but I did try to warn you. The
way out for both of you is to make it clear that you were
misled by SVHG, you accepted their bona fides and
assurances. Both of you and the minister are inextricably
linked in this and you will either sink or swim together."
"The way to get the hospital is to insist on CPO of Elm
Park golf club land on periphery and establish links to SVH
via tunnels/corridors. Minimal design alterations needed,
Peter."
As a result of the text messages, Mahony and Kearns
calls on Boylan to resign his position from the board of
governors with immediate effect. Nicholas Kearns replies
to Boylan:
"Both the master and I have received and read your text
sent to us at 13.47 today. We are now asking for your
immediate resignation from the board of Holles Street -
both because of your public intervention to criticise and
oppose the overwhelming majority decision of the board
taken in November last to approve the agreement reached
with SVUH for the transfer of Holles Street to Elm Park - a
vote on which you abstained - and in addition because of
the content of your text sent today.
Its intimidatory tone is most regrettable. The board will
clearly require to be briefed on Wednesday as to the
contents of your text communication if your resignation as
sought is not forthcoming."
Tuesday, April 25th: Dr Boylan tells members of the
media that he will not resign from his position on the board
and will attend a board meeting the following night.
Wednesday, April 26th: Following a four-hour meeting,
plans to build the new hospital on the Elm Park site are re-
endorsed by the majority of the board of Holles Street,
despite strong public opposition and heated debate.
Dr Boylan is one of three board members, alongside
Dublin's Lord Mayor Brendan Carr and Sinn Fin
Councillor Michael Mac Donncha, to vote against re-
endorsement.
No motion is put forward calling for Dr Boylan's
resignation.
Thursday, April 27th: Peter Boylan resigns with
immediate effect from the executive board of the National
Maternity Hospital, stating the board are "blind to the
consequences" of transferring ownership of the hospital to
the religous-order-owned St Vincent's Healthcare Group.
Announcing his decision on Newstalk's Pat Kenny Show,
Dr Boylan says the board is "deaf to the concerns of the
public it serves."
Deputy chairman Nicholas Kearns responds to Dr
Boylan's resignation:
"Dear Peter,
Thank you for your letter received this morning by email.
Without accepting or engaging in any way with the
contentions contained in your letter, I wish to express on
behalf of the hospital its thanks to you for the many years
of excellent professional care and service you have
provided.
I am also saddened that your association with the hospital
has ended and wish you every success in the future."
Friday, April 28th: The former Master of the Coombe,
Professor Chris Fitzpatrick resigns from the project board
of the National Maternity Hospital, in support of Dr Boylan.
In his resignation letter, Professor Fitzpatrick states that
he shares Peter Boylan's concerns that the Sisters of
Charity will own the new 300m taxpayer-funded hospital.
Speaking on Newstalk Breakfast, the CEO of children's
charity Barnardos, Fergus Finlay, comments on the row:
"I didn't think we would ever have a row again about the
state consciously, deliberately deciding to build a
maternity hospital, and giving it to the Catholic Church.
I just cannot understand the basis behind the decision, the
logic behind the decision. You wouldn't build a university
and hand it over to the Catholic Church. It's inexplicable."
Former master of the Rotunda Hospital, Dr Sam Coulter
Smith, says that the new hospital can be autonomous if
current standards are followed:
"It must be very clear who's in charge, who's making the
decisions and how those decisions are made, and who
those decisions are reported to. There can't be any
interference from any outside body with any other interest.
That's what we have in the maternity hospitals at the
moment. We have a mastership system. We've got a
system that works."
Krysia Lynch, chairperson of the Association for the
Improvement of Maternity Services (AIMS) says it needs
clarity on whether abortions, IVF and sterilisations will be
permitted by the religious order:
"The women of Ireland, the childbearing women of Ireland,
they absolutely do not want to find that their bodies are
being controlled by religious ethos - or by anybody.
They want autonomy over their own bodies and at the
moment that is 100 percent not guaranteed."
A national march against the ownership of the National
Maternity Hospital is set to take place on Sunday, 7
May. Parents for Choice will march through Dublin
opposing the decision to grant ownership of the new
hospital to the Sisters of Charity. The march, themed "We
Own Our Hospitals", will gather at 2pm outside the Garden
of Remembrance and finish outside Leinster House.
https://www.her.ie/news/10-days-shook-nation-holles-
street-mess-unfolded-344545
Useful timeline of the disintegration of the plan to slip this filthy deal by us and then to send
us the bill.
Note: there is a march planned for 2 pm on May 7th, Garden of Remembrance to Leinster
House.
Green Environment Fucking Two Face Shitter s Party, Who destroy Ireland
Environment with Treason Economy Environment
April 30, 17
On the 13th of April the Examiner printed an 'interesting' article by Victoria
White. They haven't, as yet, published my right to reply so I'm putting it here.
I must really be upsetting some people with all this censorship.
In response to the article by Victoria White on Apr 13.
Once again i feel a burning desire to respond to Victoria White. I seldom
agree with the wife of Eamon Ryan, leader of the green party, but when I read
the headline, Water deal fiasco sells our children's future down the river, I
let out a sisterly smile and began to look forward to a read of her article. I
was terribly disappointed.
But first I want to thank Victoria, aka Mrs Eamon Ryan, for confirming
Ireland's exemption from charging for domestic water when she points out
..Bertie Ahern won us a derogation on our commitment to introduce
domestic water charges in 2000.
There is no obligation on Ireland to have domestic water charges.
I want to clarify a few things about the current Fianna Fail deal. It appears
that FF have replaced water charges with charges for water and I dont
want her to worry that the ration/allowance of 133 litres per person is fixed. I
am absolutely certain that those allowances will be reduced very quickly. The
final report of the committee looking at the future funding of water services is
a fiasco, she's right about that. Fianna Fail have dishonored their mandate to
abolish domestic water charges, have played 'Houdini' politics and their deal
with Fine Gael, does indeed, stink.
Ms White says, The pricing of our water use is meant to incentivize the
efficient use of water because that is whats good for the environment. Id
like to point out that generally people who dont use water because of
monetary reasons are not called conservationists, they are actually called
the poor. Unlike most of Europe, water poverty is an alien concept in Ireland
but if we tolerate any form of domestic water charging, as per the deal with
Fianna Fail and Fine Gael, water poverty is what we will get. Weather water
charges come in the front or back door, make no mistake, women, the
elderly, the sick, the poor and the working poor will be the ones to suffer.
These are the people who use food banks. Who languish on hospital waiting
lists. Human beings terrified to turn on the heating for fear of a bill that
cannot be paid. Families who sit in emergency accommodation or wait for
the sheriff to turf them out on the street. They are not conservationists, they
are the victims. The fruits of disastrous and cruel economic policies going
back to the bailout. And I ask Mrs Ryan, which tweedledumber politicians
sold our children's future down the river at that time?
The report recommends a referendum to protect the ownership and
management of our water and water services. This is not the first time a
referendum has been suggested. I'd like to draw your attention to an RTE
report from the 19th of Oct 2015 which states that, during the FF/Green
government, there was a recommendation to hold a referendum to protect
against the future privatization of our water. At that time, opposition came
from Ms White's own husband's department. Eamon Ryans department
objected because protecting water services from privatization "could prove
contentious and time-consuming". We will be watching very closely for any
attempts to manipulate or wiggle with this referendum wording. I think it's
worth adding that the Right2Water campaign is more than prepared, and has
the time, for contentious debate.
All of the Right2Water community groups, the Right2Water trade unions and
the Right2Water politicians, who made submissions to the water committee,
made excellent recommendations on water conservation. Public education,
incentivising water efficient appliances and changing building regulations
were just some of the suggestions. Creating a new type of poverty, putting
pressure on suffering families, does not protect our rivers and lakes from
pollution, stopping fouling them does! If Victoria wants a conversation about
the polluter pays principle, perhaps we could discuss industry and
agriculture and how we can collect a few bob from them.
The Fianna Fail/ Fine Gael deal on final report of the water committee opens
the floodgates to water charging. Insanely expensive water meters are still
being installed despite evidence that they save nothing, cause huge distress
and actually cause a substantial number of leaks. Water meters achieve
nothing, other than inflating the asset sheet of the company and work as a
tool to ration the weakest people in society.
Meanwhile, the resistance grows like a tsunami.
I know Victoria dislikes protest but she should know that, we will continue to
wave our placards and shout our chants and organise in our communities.
And we will certainly be continuing in our opposition to the commodification,
and privatization of our most precious resource, our water services.

Mostly, we will fight for ALL of our children, to ensure that there really is a socially just and
environmentally sustainable future for everyone.
When Katherine Zappone, the Independent TD for the area invited
the then Tanaiste Joan Burton to a graduation ceremony in
Tallaght in November 2014 the country was in a state of revolt. A
few years earlier the Fianna Fil Taoiseach Brian Cowan, who had
taken over from a corrupt and discredited Bertie Ahern wrote his
political epitaph in an alcohol fuelled interview on Morning Ireland
and in the ensuing General Election the Soldiers of Destiny were
trounced by the electorate. The country was in a mess, the Celtic
Tiger was a rotting carcase and the people were angry. So angry,
that a one legged turkey on steroids would have won the General
Election. Instead, Fine Gael did, with a leader who was only leader
because the alternatives didn't bear thinking about. So a Primary
School teacher from Mayo who inherited his Dad's Dil seat at the
age of 24 got to be Taoiseach. Even his own party were
sniggering. The Blueshirts won an avalanche of seats with even
their village idiot candidates making it into the Dil, but to give
themselves a bit more legitimacy they invited the forever
bridesmaids party the Labour Party to join them in forming a
coalition government. The Labour Party would be useful fall guys
if needed. The Labour Party are a strange hybrid their elected
representatives have since the 1970's been mostly well educated
liberals who started life as student protesters (like Michael D.
Higgins, Mary Robinson, Pat Rabbitte) and ended up as fat, rich,
right-wing establishment politicians, but selling themselves as left
wing socialists supposedly following in the footsteps of James
Connolly and Jim Larkin.
Kenny and his like-minded Labour Party couldn't believe their
luck. They were in power. And it felt good. The country was a
basket case but the Troika were in town making all the decisions
and the accidental Taoiseach and his Vichy government just
followed orders. Democracy was discarded and a Gang of Four
aka the Economic Management Council took over from the usual
cabinet that made government decisions. And so Ireland became
ruled by EU/IMF/World Bank who flew into Dublin airport and
gave orders to the Gang of Four, who administered their painful
medicine. The medicine was pure toxic. But Kenny, Noonan (a
failed Fine Gael leader) and their Labour Party accomplices
Gilmore and Howlin all willing sado-masochists enthusiastically
inflicted the pain. The Fine Gael and Labour leaders and their foot
soldiers were in heaven. They had power. And like those Nazi's in
the 1940'S it wasn't their fault that they had to punish the little
people, they were just following orders. And anyway wasn't it the
Fianna Fil crowd who drove the country over a cliff!
The Blueshirts and the Labour Party got stuck in and inflicted the
most brutal austerity on the people of Ireland. But not all the
people. The elites who were well connected, like Denis O'Brien
were not touched. In fact, the well connected elites made serious
money during this period thanks to their political connections.
As the austerity measures plunged families and communities into
utter hopelessness the political classes and their business
buddies, bankers and golf club pals continued to live as they
always did OK they cut a few token Euros off their salaries, but
that was no problem because the good old expenses were
unlimited anyway.
Environment Minister, Big fat Phil Hogan's water metering
programme - designed to fatten the cow for privatization got
under way. But suddenly and unexpectedly communities in Cork
and Edenmore in North Dublin started to resist. Ordinary people,
some who had never protested about anything in their lives got up
in the morning, got out on to the streets of their neighbourhoods
and physically stopped the meter installers. As resistance grew,
Hogan and his newly created quango Irish Water just laughed and
the arrogant Kilkenny Blueshirt boasted that those who didn't pay
his quango would see their water "reduced to a trickle".
A by-election in Tallaght in South Dublin was to bring about a
seismic change. The government parties were not too bothered
about losing a by-election after all they enjoyed a huge Dil
majority, but the favourites Sinn Fin were beaten into second
place by the Socialist candidate Paul Murphy and joined the
protesters. The people, who at this stage had taken to the streets
in mass resistance against austerity and the now rallying flag of
anti-water charges had won an important battle.
Against this backdrop, Joan Burton, now Labour Leader having
taken over from Gilmore after a disastrous European and Local
Government election for Labour went into the heart of Tallaght as
a government minister. Into Jobstown, an area she had inflicted
the most severe and brutal austerity upon. Did she seriously
expect a red carpet to be rolled out for her? Either she (and
Zappone) were extremely naive ... or ARROGANT in the extreme.
Probably both!
After her "kidnap" humiliation, Burton and Kenny and the
establishment wanted to get even. Denis O'Brien was also getting
angry. His meter installers were behind target. The privatization of
Irish Water was being delayed. So Kenny got the stakeholders
around the table. They needed to reassert themselves and regain
absolute power and put the peasantry back in their place. The
Garda Commissioner, the DPP, the judiciary, the political class
(Fine Gael, Fianna Fil, Labour) all rowed in. The forces of the
state were mobilized and no expense was spared to make
Jobstown pay. Hundreds of hours of police time, hundreds of
thousands of Euro, early morning arrests, media leaks, the
demonizing of a community ... They wanted blood.
And so the Show Trial.
WE just want democracy. WE. We are ALL Jobstown now!

Whats a 12,000 difference in the middle of a housing crisis? Simon Coveney.... hes
more like the Simon Community in reverse.
But lets not be too hard on Simon either, isnt he only following the example of the
cops who have taken the falsification of figures to new levels.

A million breath tests that never happened is certainly putting it up to the politicians
on an industrial scale, which puts Simple Simons exaggerations to shame. When
those charged with tackling fraud are at it, looks like our Polish friend was spot on.

'Official Ireland has destroyed the lives of every

single whistleblower'
Banking whistleblower Jonathan Sugarman says that his life was ruined after alerting
officials to liquidity breaches at UniCredit. Sugarman became t

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74v-rWOa00o

War is abating... Stay strong, and above all... Be vigilante!!!

So where have we come from?

And where are we going?
A metaphorical warfare was unleashed upon the nation over 10 years ago
The big troops were brought in, and the Generals up in Leinster House were charged to give the orders
Brown envelopes could no longer hold the amounts that would now exchange hands..This time next year boys, you
will be millionaires.
A message was sent to the Generals from America;
Let us commence OPERATION LANDGRAB
The soldiers were deployed in the form of black and tans (ahem sorry) traitor law firms, whose job It was to terrorise
the people out of their homes, farms and small businesses
The judiciary were called upon next.
The Generals handed over the plans, and Justice was to be avoided at all times.
The message was clear, as the pips went through to the Four Courts
At all times you are ordered to give comfort and clarity to the banks, be it vultures or others, the peasantry must be
streeped (ahem sorry!) stripped of all assets
The Irish nation, a compliant race of people, had no idea what had just happened.
But the carnage of war had begun.
Poverty soared behind closed doors.
Heat and electricity became luxuries.
Food banks began to pop up all over the country.
Relationships destroyed, childrens lives ruined as family life now under threat.
One in five children went to school hungry
Several thousand systematically and illegally escorted from their homes..
Living in refuges disguised as hotels and the like
Addictions soared, and main streets of cities became bedrooms by night
A sea of bodies in all weathers, survival of the fittest the only guarantee of life.
Hospital trolleys became death beds for the peasantry
And the rural areas became arid landscapes, systematically stripped of local businesses and vital transport services to say
the least
Suicide clusters made the job easier for the generals
Their coffers were filling up fast
And then of course there was the traitors
In every war there is an enemy that comes from within.
The Generals now called upon The Pickerooneys! the reject branch of the army
This group of misfits had circled the skies as home-grown vultures throughout the war, watching the carnage, and eying
up what they could pick over from the debris
Their aim was simple.
How to make a kill for themselves from desperation and fear
They systematically gathered information from the tortured, the maimed, the distressed and the sick.
Those brave men women and children who held fast to their homesteads were now facing a new threat Operation
come into my parlour said the spider to the fly.
War was abating, and many of the peasantry had not fallen.
They were still in their homes.
The resistance was gaining momentum.
The army was slowly withdrawing.
There was a new tactic required...
Operation Mortgage to Rent!
Troops were arriving from Europe with tales of EU rights, and these would assist all peasants
The Generals knew that the writing was on the wall the war was ending...
But greed being greed, and empires of dirt needing more dirt. They played along with the Pickerooneys.
After all, we have started, so we may as well finish, was the attitude of many!
The pickerooneys donned suits and flashed their white teeth, declaring themselves as saviours of the universe!!
Positioning themselves all over the country, they addressed the crowds at the parish pumps promising all sorts of
miraculous cures!
Roll up, Roll up, get your magic beans here folks was a chant heard in many a village of a Sunday afternoon
And they did roll up the wounded, the scarred, the traumatised and the desperate.
Desperate for assurance, comfort and an answer
Desperate to stay in their homes
The pickerooneys gathered the information for the Government (ahem sorry!) Generals, and others with vested
financial interests.. This was their job.
The peasantry were to be conned out of handing over personal information and data concerning themselves and their
properties which could be used later to purchase bonds and make some other people very very rich..but would
ultimately result in these poor homeowners effectively handing their property over, via the enemy within
The story will continue as war tales always do
Lets see where the story takes us next
And in the words of G.K. Chesterton, just remember.
The Bible tells us to love our neighbours, and also to love our enemies; probably because generally they are the same
people..
So thats where we came from, and where we are at.
There is help on the way.
Those that where strong enough to stay in their homes should take a bow.
You are the resistance.
And it is a resistance that is growing wings.
Stay strong.
Trust your gut instinct, and above all remain vigilante.
YOU ARE AMAZING!

April 30, 17
Dear Mr Kenny
I asked you to contact our family in the last days. We spoke to your assistant
in your office and told her how urgently we needed your assistance. We
asked for your immediate attention to be brought to our daughters situation.
Your Minister for Health outlined via email several weeks ago that there was
no further point in contacting him. So I ask you to contact me regarding Ava.
We are very well aware Enda that you know who we are as we met you in
Glanmire for just a couple of minutes. We are also aware that you have
mentioned that you dont approve of our direct action as we have been told
this. However Enda the point is that simply your HSE collegues have blocked
every avenue that we have suggested and every effort we have made has
been twarted. However we have new possiblities to help Ava. I would urge
you to allow us to meet. I would urge you to demand that Simon meets us as
he promised he would in the presence of Michael Martin Billy Kelleher
Jonothan O Brian Richard Boyd Barrett and Gino Kenny. None of us wanted
this situation Enda none of us wanted such a catostrophic impass to have
developed but this is our situation. Yours as well as Simons and ours. We
have a script we have the medication in our sights. We need your
cooperation Enda to achieve the necessary medication. We can resolve this
situation with your assistance. I would ask you again to contact us. We do
not need another email which is a verision of what has been sent before we
need to meet and sort this situation out once and for all. Im putting out my
hand to you again. I would ask that you do not ignore our situation as has
been going on now for a considetable time but instead meet us and deal with
the facts and resolve this situation as after all a little girls future is depending
now on you.
Sincerely,
Vera Twomey
How blowing the whistle on
the banks ruined Jonathan
Sugarman's life
The author of 'The Whistleblower' spoke to Sean Moncrieff
BUSINESS & TECH

Whistleblower Jonathan Sugarman arrives at Leinster House,

Dublin, 13-04-2017

27 Apr 2017
Fionnuala Jones

Jonathan Sugarman - a former risk manager at the Dublin

branch of Italian bank Unicredit - spoke to Sean
Moncrieff about how his life was "completely destroyed".
Speaking before the Oireachtas Finance Committee,
Sugarman said he had repeatedly warned the Financial
Regulator that the Irish banking system was facing a liquidity
crisis before the financial crash.
"A bank is supposed to know how much money it's lending to
people," he said on Moncrieff. "At the very minimum, your
liquidity had to be at 90%.
"I, for example, might be the proud owner of Stephen's Green
Shopping Centre, but if there's no one wiling to buy it off me,
that is an illiquid asset. So if I run a bank and I owe Sean
Moncrieff 5 million, but I can't get rid of the shopping centre, I
have no 5 million to give you back."
Whistleblowers - Jonathan Sugarman 15 11 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuAQO-jkjwM

Jonathan Sugarman on Banking and Financial Regulation in

Ireland.
Apr 16, 2017
Unicredit Whistleblower tells of liquidity breech in bank and the Financial Regulators inaction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le1wfSMIsUw

Prof. Richard Werner - Banking Industry Exposed & Solutions

Presented - Dublin April 2016
Nov 28, 2016
Detailed Index - Professor Richard Werners Talk:

1 - Why is banking so important for the economy, society and the sustainable development of
regions and communities?
2 - What causes the recurring boom-bust cycles and crises?
3 - What policies or banking systems have historically been most successful in avoiding these
cycles and crises?
4 - What kind of banking system and banking policy do we need?
5 - While we are at it, can we solve the major problems of our time with this?
6 - What are the policies which are being pushed that we need to oppose?

4:40 - Banks create the Money

7:00 - Where is your Money Safe?

8:50 - Trade Secrets of Banking Banks dont lend Money, Banks dont take Deposits!

10:40 - The bank doesnt pay-out, it will just record its debt to you, which is called a deposit
and we use it as Money.

12:45 - Credit Suisse & Barclays Bank Create their own Capital

16:25 - Cash & QE

17:35 - The money supply is created and allocated by Banks

22:30 - Colwyn Report 1918 nothings Changed!

22:40 - Bank Collusion

24:00 - Banking Market Concentration - The 'Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (H-HI)

26:30 - Number of financial institutions (Banks & Credit Unions) Debate

27:00 - H-H Index for Germany

29:00 - The Creation of Boom-Bust Cycles

30:50 - Credit for GDP transactions - financial circulation credit (Asset Credit Creation)

36:10 - The East Asian Economic Miracle Credit Guidance

40:30 - Abuse of Power by the Bank of Japan A warning to All

47:10 - The German Banking System

51:20 - Hampshire Community Bank Project - Local First CIC

56:40 - Dangers of Centralise Money creation & allocation (Central Banks)

58:00 - The Alternative to bailing out the Banks. Ireland - what the Central Bank could have
done

1:00:00 - Japanese Bank Restructuring 1945-47 and 1990s

1:06:00 - Iceland

1:06:50 - Activities of the ECB

1:07:00 - EU war on Community Banks

1:08:30 - Negative Interest Rate Policy of the ECB, favours speculators to the detriment of the
economy

1:10:25 - War on Cash

1:11:45 - Lower Interest Rates do not stimulate the economy

1:14:00 - Quantity of money not the price of money that drives the Economy Bank credit for
GDP transactions drives the economy

1:15:45 - Current Central Bank War on Cash

1:19:30 - Princes of the Yen, Central Bank Truth Documentary on YouTube (247,000 views,
Nov 2016) & Book plus other Publications.

Prof Werners Books on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Richard-Werner...

Princes of the Yen: Central Bank Truth Documentary https://youtu.be/p5Ac7ap_MAY

1:20:00 - Irish Government - Stop the issuance of Government Bonds - 12% Vs 4%

1:22:38 - END

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MechH0ebs_c
Official Ireland has destroyed
the lives of every person who's
come forward' - Banking
whistleblower testifies to
Oireachtas
Banking whistleblower Jonathan Sugarman is before the Oireachtas
Finance Committee today.
Apr 13th 2017,

BANKING WHISTLEBLOWER JONATHAN Sugarman says

that his life was ruined after alerting officials to liquidity
breaches at UniCredit.
Sugarman became the risk manager at the Italian banks
Dublin office in 2007, but resigned within months due to
liquidity breaches.
He has since claimed that he repeatedly alerted authorities
that Ireland was facing a liquidity crisis, a claim that was
ignored. He maintains that had he been listened to, the bank
guarantee and bailout could have been avoided.

Speaking today at the Oireachtas Committee on Finance,

Sugarman said that his life has been ruined by his
whistleblowing.
My life has been utterly destroyed simply because I did the
right thing.
I have been unemployable for the last ten years, he said, but
noted that no regulator had ever been prosecuted for the
failings that led to the multi-billion euro bailout.
Sugarman, citing the Grace, Mary Boyle and Garda
whistleblower cases, said that official Ireland had taken
steps to discredit them.
Official Ireland has absolutely and completely destroyed the
lives of every single whistleblower who has come forward,
from whatever walk of life theyve come.
Those with their hands on the levers of power are immune,
while those who do the right thing have their lives ruined.
He said that he had food to eat and a roof above my head
only because of the kindness of people across the world. He
said he had not been able to work for over a decade because
of the damage to his reputation.
Sugarman went on to say that he had turned himself in to
Rathmines Garda Station in 2009 and met with the Central
Bank, but no minutes were kept. He says minutes from that
meeting appeared in a newspaper weeks later but they bore
no reflection to reality.
Asked was he surprised by the Central Banks response to
his reporting he had broken the law, Sugarman laughed and
said:
Astonished.

http://www.thejournal.ie/whistleblower-jonathan-sugarman-
oireachtas-3338696-Apr2017/?utm_source=facebook_short
The man is absolutely correct. How many years of inactivity on the findings of
the Moriarity tribunal in which Lowry as a minister in a FG government was
adjudged to have taken a bribe from Dennis O Brien for the awarding of the
mobile phone license. Likewise Bertie of FF getting 1 million of a dig out, not
to mention the winnings from a horse he cant remember. Official Ireland is a
club that knows how to look after their own.

Shamefully they actually pat each other on the back while covering up.
Sugarman, citing the Grace, Mary Boyle and Garda whistle-blower cases,
said that official Ireland had taken steps to discredit them.
Official Ireland has absolutely and completely destroyed the lives of every
single whistle-blower who has come forward, from whatever walk of life
theyve come.
Those with their hands on the levers of power are immune, while those who
do the right thing have their lives ruined.

And the DPP sit back and let it happen. When do we wake up.
Official Ireland has destroyed the lives of lots of people around the country.
Kenny, Noonan, martin and their parties are a disgrace
And the so called sophisticated Irish electorate keep them in power. When
will they ever learn

Official Ireland has destroyed the lives of every single

whistleblower'
Apr 13, 2017
Banking whistleblower Jonathan Sugarman says that his life was ruined after alerting
officials to liquidity breaches at UniCredit.

Sugarman became the risk manager at the Italian banks Dublin office in 2007, but resigned
within months due to liquidity breaches.

He has since claimed that he repeatedly alerted authorities that Ireland was facing a liquidity
crisis, a claim that was ignored. He maintains that had he been listened to, the bank
guarantee and bailout could have been avoided http://jrnl.ie/3338696f

Speaking today at the Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Sugarman said that his life has
been ruined by his whistleblowing.

TheJournal.ie is an Irish news website that invites its users to shape the news agenda. Read,
share and shape the days stories as they happen, from Ireland, the world and the web.

Submit your clips to video@thejournal.ie

Stay up to date with all of the latest videos by subscribing to our

channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/thejourna...

Download our free iOS app: https://itunes.apple.com/ie/app/thejo...

Download our free Android app https://play.google.com/store/apps/de...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74v-rWOa00o

How it began
Within his first few weeks at Unicredit, he noticed the bank
were consistently missing the liquidity target. When he
brought the issue to his superiors, his concerns were
effectively dismissed.
"At first it was, 'oh it's just a computer error', or, 'actually we're
fine, sure it's grand. So I said, 'well how do you know that?'
And they said, 'You're just not in the bank long enough, you'll
understand our portfolio and our balance sheet better in a
couple of weeks time'."
At this point, Sugarman had been a risk manager for seven
years, at several different banks at home and abroad.
"Risk management is what I've done for most of my working
life," he said. "This is finance - a plus is a plus and a minus is
a minus."
Sugarman faced a prison sentence of up to five years
by signing for billions that do not exist.
Enough is enough
Before bringing in an independent body to review the books at
Unicredit, he essentially handed himself into the Central Bank.
"I walked in, in broad daylight, and said, 'I am in breach of
Irish law and this is the extent of the breach'," he said. "So I
expected the Central Bank to raid the bank that afternoon or
at the very latest the following morning, but all we got was an
acknowledgement."
Sugarman did not hear from the Central Bank following his
confession. Then, the results of the review came back - telling
him the breach was closer to 40%.
"I resigned the next day," he said.
Untouchable
Sugarman has attempted to regain employment within the
financial sector since coming out against Uncredit - to no
avail.
"I failed miserably," he said. "I am untouchable.
"I had this conversation with one of the leading financial
recruitment agencies in Amsterdam at the beginning of the
year. They said, 'Frankly, Jonathan, we regret even letting you
into the building because if any of our clients realised we were
in contact with you, we would be in trouble'."
Sugarman admitted he effectively ended his career, but did
not anticipate the situation he would find himself in. He told
Moncrieff that on numerous occasions, he has found himself
sleeping rough.

Statement from the Central Bank

In a statement to Newstalk, the Central Bank said:
"In August 2007, the Central Bank of Ireland was notified by
Unicredit Ireland about an overnight breach of compliance
with a then recently introduced Central Bank requirements for
the management of liquidity risk.
"An inspection was undertaken by the Central Bank from
October 3rd to October 10th 2007. Upon investigation, the
bank was satisfied that the breach did not suggest a wider or
more systematic erosion of overall liquidity. The bank was
back in compliance within the limits within 24 hours. This
breach was not connected to any other bank operating in
Ireland.
"Following additional claims made in 2010 in the media and in
Seanad ireann that numerous breaches at the regulated firm
took place in the months following the introduction of the
requirements in 2007, a further investigation was undertaken
at the instruction of the Central Bank. This investigation did
not highlight any further breaches.
"The Central Bank has undertaken significant investigation of
the issues raised and is satisfied that the matter is closed.
______________ JONATHAN SUGARMAN - A BANKER SPEAKS OUT___________

In Sept. 2007, fourteen months before Ireland's bank bailout, I resigned from
my position as the Risk Manager of UniCredit Bank Ireland. I did that in order
not to incriminate myself. I have spent the last 4 years seeking justice. On Feb.
23rd., 2010, I was fortunate to have Senator David Norris raise the matter in
Seanad Eireann (the Irish Senate), and request a response from the Minister
of Finance, Mr. Brian Lenihan. Senator Norris concluded by stating that:
"...there is ministerial responsibility in this matter. This is a grossly serious
matter which has been reported to the Financial Regulator. A man has lost his
job as a result. He honourably resigned. The degree of breach was 40 times
the accepted margin. This is a disaster. If we are not prepared to face
the issue and investigate it when it has been laid before the House,
there is absolutely no hope for the financial system or its
reputation worldwide...How can the Financial Regulator
investigate himself? He was in breach of his responsibility."
http://debates.oireachtas.ie/seanad/2010/02/23/00012.asp
In Nov. 2011, Emma Alberici, Europe correspondent for ABC TV, told my
story as part of her documentary 'Going Rogue' which featured Nick Leeson
and Sir John Vickers among other interviewees. It is ironic that at a time when
the Irish tax-payer is bailing out un-secured bond holders, my story which
occurred in Dublin, is deemed of interest to the Australian TV license payer.
Please click on 'play video' on the following link:
http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2011/s3367080.htm
VRT, Belgian state-TV, aired this interview with me on March 6th.,
2013. My Interview begins in minute 27:
Het verdriet van Europa: Zeepbellen blazen (The sadness of Europe: Bursting
bubbles)
http://www.deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/videozone/programmas/hetverdriet
vaneuropa/2.27204
VRT, Belgian state-TV, released extra footage of my interview on March 8th.,
2013. (in English):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKmr2u2P4OE
Whistleblower.IRL@gmail.com

Thursday, 17 October 2013

EVIL and the Central Bank [of Ireland] - Village Magazine, Oct.-Nov. 2013





http://www.villagemagazine.ie/

Posted by Whistleblower IRL at Thursday, October 17, 2013

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
The finance manager who tried to play by the rules - Fintan O'Toole, Irish Times, 23
April 2010

I am 'James' in this article.

Posted by Whistleblower IRL at Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Sunday, 18 August 2013
Village magazine's open letter to the DPP, Claire Loftus. Cover page, Aug-Sept '13

Posted by Whistleblower IRL at Sunday, August 18, 2013
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Defying white-collar impunity - Village magazine editorial, Aug-Sept '13

FOR those of us who love this great little country, or are stuck here, it has been a
sorry third millennium. First, whatever Roddy Doyle thinks, we lost the run of
ourselves economically, socially, environmentally and culturally, becoming
bumptious, crude and greedy; then we imploded exposing a legacy of dust and a
citizenry bitter, beleaguered, rudderless and above all compliant. But through
the turmoil we never seem to
have stopped o to learn the big lessons like that our vision of the future needs
to be sustainable and compassionate.

Every page of this issue groans under the evidence of lessons unlearnt from
Frank Connolly on Frank Dunlop [p31] to Niall Crowley on philanthropy [p54] to
features on the Public Accounts Committees approach to the discredited Dublin
Docklands Development Authority [p18], planning malpratice [p33],
climate-change scepticism [p56], institutional abuse [p38] and nepotism in the
cultural sector [p64].

Nothing is being done properly. It says it all that the answer this country found
to Fianna Fil was Fine Gael. For never have two political parties been so
indistinguishable. The same deference to Big Finance and
multinational corporations prevails. For many the solution is a return to the past.
But more.

Villages conclusion is that we need to start over again. Normally it is good to
start with a clean page but the page in front of us is lthy. We have to clean it.If
there were any sign the authorities were serious about regulation we might let
bygones sit. But from the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to the nancial
regulator to the failure to appoint a planning regulator with teeth to the
eviscerated Human Rights and Equality Commission were not guarding against
the dangers of repeated recklessness.

This magazine feels in the particular circumstances of Ireland 2013, we cannot
move on until there has been justice for the perpetrators of the now-embedded
dysfunctionality. In a democracy the culture of impunity, especially white-collar
impunity, best evidenced in the failure to prosecute on foot of the planning and
payments tribunals and the banking delinquencies, cannot prevail. There must
be prosecutability and it must be seen by all.

It is a fundament of our criminal law, recently conrmed in the High Court, that
the public, acting as common informer may initiate criminal proceedings. If the
proceedings are treated summarily they proceed to verdict led by the common
informer; if on indictment, the DPP may take them over after the return for
trial.Village is asking the DPP to signal the initiation of prosecutions against
some of the most obvious potential defendants from the tribunals and banking
debacle. These include UniCredit Bank, John Bowes, Michael Fingleton, Michael
Lowry, and the protagonists in Monarch Properties found to be corrupt by the
Mahon Tribunal.

The oences that should be tried include oences under the Central Bank Acts,
detailed on page 30, deceit, fraud, corruption, bribery, perjury and obstruction of
tribunals.If the DPP signals no such intent,
Village and its protagonists will seek the issue of a summons in September. A
press conference
will be called outlining the stance. It will seek public support for other actions by
asking persons
with evidence to come forward, and perhaps engage in fundraising.

The ethos of the DPP must be changed. The lessons for accountability of the
allegedly corrupt over the last twenty years are that tribunals were run lazily
and proigately. The Planning Tribunal relied too much on the evidence of one
man and the Payments Tribunal ran into diculties about the culpability of civil
servants. The courts the criminal courts not the tribunals, is where these
matters should be settled. But clearly the Garda and its Fraud Squad, Criminal
Assets Bureau (CAB), the DPP, the Oce of the Director of Corporate
Enforcement (ODCE) and the Central Bank have failed in their solemn duties,
presumably for
internal cultural reasons. In those circumstances it falls to private citizens to
assert the democratic imperative of prosecutions in a state whose failure is
largely attributable to the machinations of a quantiable few.

Village is not looking for heads on sticks, it is not asserting the guilt of anyone (it
defends the central presumption of innocence), it is taking the clear position that
there appears to be enough evidence that people such as those cited above
should at least be prosecuted. Never have institutional minds needed more to be
concentrated.

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2013/08/actual-edl-aug-13.pdf
Posted by Whistleblower IRL at Sunday, August 18, 2013
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

When Irish people do what their government wont - GolemXIV, Aug '13
It has been clear for some time now that the ideal of equality before the law has been
buried.
The US. Department of Justice made it clear a few months ago, after it had declined
to press criminal charges against a string of banks (Citi, Wachovia and HSBC), that
Too Big To Fail meant while such institutions could be investigated and fined, they
could not ever be found criminally guilty, because that would endanger their
continued survival. Thus TBTF equals TBTP.
The list of G-SIFIs (Globally Systemically Important Financial Institutions
both banks andInsurers) is therefore a list of those financial institutions that are now
above the law. If it profits those institutions, and those who own and run them, to
disregard the law, they can and will because all they face is a fine. A fine is just
another marginal cost of doing business. A tax. And a small, discretionary one at that.
In Europe we have had no similarly outright admission by the State that TBTF means
TBTP. Instead the G-SIFI lists of banks and insurers have been published without
anyone in government caring to make it clear that the State has taken it upon itself to
raise the golden financial class above the law.
Of course there is one loophole just a tiny one and one that is easily ignored but
one nevertheless. And that is that if no Public Prosecutor will take a Bank to court
then it is still possible for an ordinary citizen to do so (Of course how easy or
impossible it is depends on the country). But In Ireland it is possible and one man,
Michael Smith, has decided to try.
Michael Smith is a former barrister and the owner and editor of The Village magazine
in Dubiln. He, like me and many others, has had a long interest in the on-going case
of the UniCredit whistleblower, Jonathan Sugarman, AKA WhisteblowerIRL. It was
Mr Smith who accompanied Mr Sugarman when he went to to talk to the Irish
authorities about what he knew. It was at that meeting that Mr Sugarman was told by
the authorities that they might well prosecute him if he told them about the crime over
which he had resigned from UniCredit, whereas they could not promise to prosecute
the bank.
For those of you who dont know, the crime in question is actually very
straightforward. Mr Sugarmans job as Risk Managere at UniCredit, was to make sure
the Bank was solvent at the end of each day to check its liquidity. Mr Sugarman
became alarmed when he found, at the height of the Bubble, that UniCredit was in
breach of its requirements. Not by just a little but by huge sums, and not on one rogue
day but regularly. The Irish Law is very clear. It was Mr Sugarmans job to tell his
bank and the regulator of the breach. This he did.
The bank told him to shut up. The regulator ignored him. Of the very few concrete
actions taken by the authorities perhaps the most symbolic was that they
removed from the Central banks web site the document in which the law can be seen.
You can however still see the law for yourself, here in sections 9.4 and 10.
Sickened by this attitude Mr Smith, in consultation with Mr Sugarman, has decided if
the Irish DPP will not insitute an investigation/prosecution against UniCredit Ireland
and several other Irish based banks such as Anglo, then The Village will.
In an open letter to the Irish DPP Mr SMith calls their bluff. Essentially he asks is
the Irish states legal aparatus whoring for the banks or does it still have a single grain
of honour left?
You can read the editorial here. The whole article is only available in the latest print
issue. You can read the two previous articles he has written about the
Sugarman/UniCredit affair here and here.
It comes to somthing when ordinary people have to uphold the laws because their
government refuse to. But that is where we are, not just in Ireland but in all of our
nations.
It remains to be seen what measures the banks and their friends in government will be
willing to take to close off from the people from any hope of legal and peaceful
redress.
I sincerely hope Mr Smith does file suit against Unicredit, Anglo and the others. I
hope people are able to support him. Perhaps we, in other countries, can hope to do
the same. Most fervently I hope the government in Ireland and the Trioka in Bruselles
do not close down this hope of redress.
http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2013/08/when-people-do-what-their-goverment-wont/

About Golem XIV:

My name is David Malone. I am a second generation documentary film-maker. My
father made The Ascent of Man with Bronowski, The Age of Uncertainy with
Galbraith and Cosmos with Sagan.
I learned my craft at the BBC science department where I worked for 9 years, ending
up on Horizon. Since then I have made films for C4, BBC2 and more recently BBC4.
http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/about-me/
Posted by Whistleblower IRL at Sunday, August 18, 2013
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Blowing the whistle so hard it hurts - Village magazine editorial, Nov-Dec '12

Nearly all Irelands banks breached liquidity requirements, leading to the lack
of liquidity that the government provided a guarantee against, and which
ultimately emerged as the insolvency that bankrupted the country and
immiserated the next generation. Failures at the Regulator and in the Central
Bank contributed as much as anything to this bankruptcy. The public is
entitled to know that these well-paid and cosseted functionaries have learnt
lessons and are now demonstrating the most stringent and scrupulous
standards. Its interesting then to know how they treated the most important
whistleblower in Irish banking history.
In December 2010 a risk-manager in the Irish unit of UniCredit, Italys largest
bank, described in Village how in 2007 the Financial Regulator failed to
intervene after he first alleged he falsified liquidity-ratio figures. The risk-
manager maintained he was specifically warned by senior personnel at the
Irish subsidiary not to report the matter to the Financial Regulator, even
though sound banking depends on maintenance of these liquidity ratios
which are crucial to the ability of the company to deal with losses of
confidence. The liquidity ratio should be no less than 90 per cent. At
UniCredit it was calculated at an extraordinary 50 per cent. A ratio of 89 per
cent would in normal circumstances be deemed problematic. In banking
terms this is like paying with a two-euro note.
Jonathan Sugarman blew the whistle on the massive repeated breaches. This
magazine received aggressive threats from McCann FitzGerald solicitors on
behalf of UniCredit not to publish the information.
The new poster-boy regulator, Matthew Elderfield, stated in response to
questions from the Sunday Business Post, and the Sddeutsche Zeitung, a
respected German newspaper, about statements made in the Seanad by
David Norris which backed up Sugarmans account, that our records do not
match the description of events given by Senator Norris nor did we receive
what might be described as a whistleblower letter. We can, however,
confirm that an overnight liquidity breach was reported by an institution
around the time in question. The matter was followed up with the institution
and rectified to the satisfaction of the Financial Regulator at the time.
For someone in whom so much public good-will has been invested, this is
remarkably disingenuous, though certainly true. The Regulators records
presumably do not match Senator Norriss because its agents didnt look
hard enough or take a proper record; and the Regulator did not receive a
whistleblower letter as the letter came from UniCredit itself, which limited its
declaration to one overnight breach. Notably, nothing the Regulator said
undermined the credibility of the risk-manager.
Largely as a result of the story in Village which named the bank, the Central
Bank said it would conduct a review of the case and invited parties with
information to share it: if any party has specific information they wish to
draw to our attention in this matter it will be treated on a confidential basis.
Things dragged out but in February 2012 the risk-manager attended a
meeting with the office of the regulator. Scandalously the banks offer of
confidentiality was revealed under pressure to be spurious when it insisted
that it wouldnt be enough to shield Sugarman against self-incrimination in
the event his own actions constituted criminal activity. The Central Bank
insisted it must forward information to the DPP if there were evidence of a
crime. This highlights the need for whistleblower legislation to protect
insiders who tell their truth and particularly that legislation should be
retrospective, so it would embrace cases like Mr Sugarmans.
In June, the Central bank informed Mr Sugarman, without giving reasons,
that the matter was closed and only after Mark Keenan raised the affair anew
in the Irish Independent in September, did the Central Bank finally furnished
minutes of the meeting it had had with Mr Sugarman. This was six months
after the original meeting. For some reason Mr Keenan is no longer writing
on these issues in the Irish Independent.
Matthew Elderfield and his office are doing no favours to EU banking
regulators, or to the worlds banking and economic system, in
being disingenuous about liquidity breaches at the elusive UniCredit. If there
is a desire not to frighten the horses just while our bailout is under review, it
is misplaced. The lesson of recent history for this country is scrupulousness
and openness.
There is a general official view that Irelands ethical delinquencies are in the
past. Deviant planning stopped when the tribunals started; and bad banking
regulation stopped with the demise of Pat Neary. In fact this is not so with
planning as we have seen with the kicking to touch of John Gormleys
reviews of planning in six counties. Scrutiny of what happened in banking
has been limited to two innocuous reports by Patrick Honohan, Peter Nyberg
and Klaus Regling. These notably failed to attribute blame or to deal with
how liquidity ratios were breached all over financial Dublin with no comment
from the usual over-paid auditors, and no sanction.
Inconveniently for a country that has started to see corruption and regulation
in black (then) and white (now) terms, the general view may not reflect the
reality. Without proper scrutiny we cannot be sure either way.
Like bad planning, bank under-regulation was a manifestation of this
countrys ineradicable tendency to pander to vested interests and to the
short term. It is time we got to the bottom of what happened in Irish
banking. Scrupulous investigation of Mr Sugarmans allegations would be a
symbolic good start.
http://www.villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2012/11/blowing-the-whistle-so-
hard-it-hurts/
Posted by Whistleblower IRL at Sunday, August 18, 2013
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Still waiting for the truth from the regulator (Village magazine, December 10)

UniCredit breached liquidity requirements in 2007. Matthew Elderfield

nods. The interconnectedness of banking dysfunctionality.
Michael Smith
There is a general official view that Irelands ethical delinquencies are in the
past. Corrupt planning stopped when the tribunals started; and bad bank-
regulation stopped with the demise of Pat Neary and the production of two
limited and innocuous reports by Patrick Honohan and Klaus Regling.
Inconveniently for a country that has started to see regulation in black (then)
and white (now) terms, the general view does not reflect the reality. Hold tight
for a mind-boggling trip through the complexity of banking dysfunctionality....
http://www.villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2013/04/still-waiting-for-the-truth-
from-the-regulator/

Matthew Elderfield, the departing Irish Financial Regulator

http://whistleblowerirl.blogspot.ie/

UniCredit breached liquidity requirements in 2007. Matthew Elderfield nods. The

interconnectedness of banking dysfunctionality.
Michael Smith

There is a general official view that Irelands ethical delinquencies are in the past. Corrupt planning
stopped when the tribunals started; and bad bank-regulation stopped with the demise of Pat Neary and
the production of two limited and innocuous reports by Patrick Honohan and Klaus Regling.
Inconveniently for a country that has started to see regulation in black (then) and white (now) terms,
the general view does not reflect the reality. Hold tight for a mind-boggling trip through the complexity
of banking dysfunctionality.

Liquidity is the short-term financing vital to ensure the banks still do their core job of funding the
economy. Somehow Ireland went from having liquid banks to having banks so illiquid that a bank
guarantee was offered by the government in September 2008. But there are staff in every bank legally
charged with ensuring banks do not become illiquid. There is an intricate and comprehensive system
in place to ensure they cannot become illiquid, bearing in mind their customer base. It involves
arrangements they must have in place if for some reason they become illiquid e.g. they can ask another
named financial institution to lend them money short-term. Every morning the banks have to produce
a report showing how they kept their liquidity up to the target the previous day. The measure used for
the target is the liquidity ratio.

In mid 2007 the financial regulator, Pat Neary following a six-month dry-run introduced a new
rule for the liquidity ratio implementing the latest Basel banking accord. It required that cash inflows
equalled at least 90 per cent of cash outflows forecast over the relevant period. This prudential system
was, and is, central to how banking is possible. The system was intended to be stringently monitored
by the financial regulator.
In fact Village has evidence that a failure of liquidity, that if it as may well have been the case was
typical to both Irish banks and foreign-owned subsidiaries, shows dysfunctionality on a scale that
should have prompted the financial regulator to advise the government to go out into the markets and
get funds for the banks immediately, was ignored by the regulator. Nor did auditors pick up on
it. Indeed it is highly likely that liquidity problems were dysfunctionally glossed over by auditors all
over Dublins financial world around this time. If such dysfunctionality had not occurred and been
ignored for so long after the collapse of Northern Rock, Ireland could have dealt with general bank
liquidity in a structured and gradual way and not purportedly needed the bank guarantee that has
finished up bankrupting the country and immiserating much of the population.

The people behind this dysfunctionality should be made to account for it. The new regulator, Matthew
Elderfield, should explain what went on on his predecessors watch so we can see what
happened. Instead it appears the new regulator is being disingenuous.

In late July or early August 2007, an experienced financial risk-manager, says he discovered his
employer bank the Irish subsidiary of the giant UniCredit Bank of Italy had been dramatically
breaching the liquidity ratio. The risk-manager maintains he was specifically warned by senior
personnel at the Irish subsidiary not to report the matter to the financial regulator in Ireland. On one
occasion he reported a ratio of only 70% to the regulator (and obtained a receipt). In fact he says I was
getting 75%, even 65%, not occasionally but day in, day out. Banks are obliged by law to maintain all
daily records for at least five years so there must be written evidence of this. At the time, I thought: Is
it my fault? Then I asked questions and I was told its a system error or a trader forgot to book a
deal or its complicated. Give it a bit more time and youll understand. It will be fine. In any
event, even if taken at face value, such failures would attract penalties under Sections 3.4 and 10 of the
regulators Requirements for Management of Liquidity Risk, 2006, which seem to impose fairly strict
liability. Ascertaining the liquidity ratio is a complex task and eventually the risk-manager turned to a
consulting company in London for help, affording it access to UniCredits systems. That company a
company which continues to provide such services for some of Irelands most well-known banks
calculated the liquidity ratio at an extraordinary 50% when a ratio of 89% would in normal
circumstances be deemed problematic. The risk-manager resigned, in part fearful of the draconian
penalties that applied for breach of the law.

A simple call to UniCredits Milan-based parent could have been expected to generate a transfer of
many billions of Euro within a few hours, so resolving the problem. But that would have undermined
the parent banks confidence in its Celtic subsidiary, and perhaps jeopardised bonuses against a
background where the previous years final accounts had anyway required substantial and
embarrassing revision to the tune of tens of millions of Euro.

Around two weeks later the financial regulator came in on a scheduled inspection. It appears all hell
then broke loose with the regulator effectively taking over the firm for two weeks. During this period
the arrangement with the expert London consulting company was terminated, so it may have proved
difficult for the regulator to ascertain the prevailing liquidity ratio. The risk-manager was warned by
his former employers that repeating his story to a third party would constitute grounds for a claim of
defamation which we would not hesitate to pursue. Solicitors McCann Fitzgerald wrote to him on
their behalf advising that his allegations were outrageous. They have claimed the same to Village.

What is surprising is the reluctance of Irish authorities, and indeed Irish politicians, government and
opposition alike, to make the running with this still unresolved issue. The honourable exception is
Senator David Norris who outlined the events described above and pushed the issue in the Seanad,
though without naming the bank except privately to the Minister.

The regulator
The new until-now poster-boy regulator, Matthew Elderfield, has stated in response to questions from
the Sunday Business Post, and the Sddeutsche Zeitung, a respected German newspaper, that our
records do not match the description of events given by Senator Norris; nor did we receive what might
be described as a whistleblower letter. We can, however, confirm that an overnight liquidity breach
was reported by an institution around the time in question. The matter was followed up with the
institution and rectified to the satisfaction of the Financial Regulator at the time. For a poster boy this
is in fact remarkably disingenuous, though certainly true. The regulators records presumably do not
match Senator Norriss because its agents didnt look hard enough or take a proper record; and they did
not receive a whistleblower letter as the letter came from UniCredit itself which limited its declaration
to one overnight breach. Notably, nothing the regulator said undermines the credibility of the risk-
manager.

It is impossible that there could be a flagrant breach without a systemic problem since the whole
prudential system is constructed with actuarial precision so it can deal with every contingency. That is
what makes it prudential. In prudential circles a 1% breach is taken very seriously. 20% or 40% is
calamitous. Impossible even. It is impossible that there would be an overnight move from compliance
(90%) to flagrant breach (70% or even 50%), when the maximum deviation allowed from 90% is 1%.
Unless perhaps there was a single extraordinary event, an unpredictable act of god. Anyone with any
knowledge of the dynamics of liquidity ratios, including particularly the regulator, would know
this. If there had indeed been such an extraordinary event, there would seem to be no reason why some
intimation of the nature of the problem would not have been provided by the regulator, when
questioned about the breach. In the absence of such an extraordinary explanation, seeing a breach of
20% or even 40% would necessarily alert the regulator to a systemic problem likely to be sustained
over a long period. It would appear almost certain that the scale of the breach had evolved
incrementally and continued for some time. Not just overnight. This would tend to corroborate the
risk-managers story.

Extraordinarily, the financial regulator did not then, and Matthew Elderfield who has been in office
since January 2010 still has failed to, interview the risk-manager about the matter. This is despite
the risk managers patently abrupt departure (and that of the London consultants) during this
controversial episode and an accelerating number of enquiries to the regulator about the matter. Nor
is it clear whether the regulator informed the Milan-based parent of UniCredit or, crucially, the Italian
and EU regulatory authorities.

In June 2009 the regulator issued a revision of regulations for liquidity ratios without making any
reference at all to the fact that the regulations had been revised to achieve precisely this new effect in
2006. This served deceptively to imply that the regulations had not been in force at the time of the
breaches by UniCredit (and by all the other banks whose liquidity imploded illegally, though without
media recognition of the illegality, around the time of the bank guarantee). The text of the 2006
document [section 9.4] which specified that the new requirements had taken effect on 1 July 2007
disappeared from the 2009 document.

The bank itself

The 2007 annual report of UniCredits Irish subsidiary is signed as chairman by Professor Brian
Hillery, one-time FF TD for Dun Laoghaire, current chairman of Independent Newspapers
and Director of the Central Bank. The auditors were KPMG who appear to have had some difficulties
with the accounts but to have swallowed their pride. They as usual state concerning the accounts
that to the fullest extent permitted by law we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other
than the company and the companys members as a body for the audit. The report states that, in the
light of pressures in the marketplace, we have maintained strong liquidity ratios since the middle of
2007. This must be highly controversial since the new legislation came into effect in the middle of
2007, and the risk-manager claims UniCredit was still not compliant in September, occasioning his
resignation. Interestingly, UniCredit in Milan has emphatically denied, to the Sddeutsche Zeitung and
more recently the Sunday Business Post, that it is the bank to which Norris was referring in the Seanad.
Perhaps it simply didnt know.

Department of Finance/Central Bank

Finance Minister, Brian Lenihan, has stated that the supervision of liquidity requirements for credit
institutions licensed and operating in ireland is primarily a matter for the Central Bank and the
Financial Regulator Breaches of liquidity requirements may be subject to proceedings under the
Financial Regulators administrative sanctions procedure or to prosecution. Elsewhere he has
emphasised that the Central Bank was subject to strict confidentiality requirements unless the issue
gives rise to some broader financial stability issue which did not arise in this instance. Nevertheless he
acknowledged that the Central Bank had been advised of an overnight breach around this time but
the institution rectified the position to the satisfaction of the Central Bank. The Central Bank
required an external review of the liquidity reports submitted to it but did not identify material issues
outside the single date highlighted. He claimed that appropriate steps necessary to prevent any
recurrence off this issue have now been taken by the institution concerned.

Opposition politicians
A prominent member of one of the opposition parties recently told the risk-manager, we cant afford
the consequence of revealing this story. We already have enough to deal with when we come to
power.

Joan Burton of the Labour Party was perhaps a little slow to move but, under a little pressure, diligently
raised the matter with Brian Lenihan and met Patrick Honohan. Burton had met Honohan previously
about the German bank, DEPFA, and been told that the regulators staff was not trained to monitor
IFSC activities and that by-and-large, the IFSC had been treated as some off-shore entity that did not
warrant strict supervision as most of its entities were subsidiaries of much larger overseas corporations,
and therefore someone elses head-ache. The Green Party Senator Mark Dearey and its Chairman,
Senator Dan Boyle, wrote to the regulator but did not receive a substantive reply. Sinn Fins Arthur
Morgan did not reply to correspondence from a senior academic friend of the risk-manager. Fine
Gaels then-Finance spokesperson, Richard Bruton, who met the risk-manager in his solicitors office,
has sat on the file and his successor Michael Noonan doesnt appear to know it exists. Former Fine
Gael Taoiseach John Bruton is the head of Dublins International Financial Services Centre, which
aims to attract financial companies to set up there, and is touting Irish the saleability of Irish banks to
Gulf sovereign funds.

An inadequate regulatory culture is alive. Lack of interest in the truth abounds. Figures just dont
matter. The blind wearing of the green jersey goes on.

The media
The Irish Times has been reluctant to pursue the story, though Fintan OToole did an extensive spread
on it. Others in the newspaper were keen that the risk-manager should go public before the paper
would pursue it further. No other media have covered the matter except the Sunday Business Post,
whose Kathleen Barrington has given it considerable space.

The New York Times famously alleged as long ago as 2006 that the IFSC was the Wild West of
banking. Around that time it was reported that General Res Irish subsidiary, Cologne Re, was seen as
an ideal location for a major fraud because Dublin did not report to anyone and so avoided the
North American problem of financial regulation. The simple truth is that one of Irelands few
genuine policy successes has been attracting major US-based multinationals like Google and Microsoft
on the back of a 12.5% Corporation Tax rate. Irish banks then assume a disproportionate importance to
the world economy because these corporations have an interest in channelling profits through Ireland,
so avoiding heavier tax rates elsewhere where the profits may in fact have been earned. This is one of
the reasons Irish banking was a flashpoint, certainly the European flashpoint following the collapse of
Lehmans. The clout of the multinationals conduced to a lax regulatory rgime for banking. It also
partly explains the governments deference to the banks (over the people) in policy terms including
perhaps some of the pressure the government was under to guarantee the banks, lest a run threaten the
billions of Euro in multinational profits resting in Irish accounts. Light regulation helped attract
multinationals but it was a gamble that, after a time and on a grand scale has stopped paying off for
Ireland. It stopped paying off because it led uniquely to liquidity problems across the ranges in a
nations banks and so to guarantees that have precipitated national insolvency. But the policy of light
regulation also risks major legal actions from those who have been victims of the dodgy, sometimes
illegal, laxity. It is surprising in this context that the bailout was not linked to higher standards. In late
November the Financial Times commented, An element of the bail-out should have been specifically
targeted at plugging the liquidity gap, if only to signal an acknowledgement of how crucial a role it has
played in undermining the global system in Ireland, just as it did during the big bank failures in the
UK (Northern Rock) and the US (Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns).

The reason the green jersey is in play apart from the obvious embarrassment of mishandled liquidity
issues which were so central to our mishandling of the bank guarantee is that if it can be shown that
the regulator systematically allowed breaches of liquidity ratios, indeed still does not recognise those
breaches, it could trigger litigation against Ireland by the likes of HRE (Hypo Real Estate).
HRE, was bailed out for 140bn in loans and guarantees in September 2008 by the German
government, after HRE had hastily bought heedless to its underlying liquidity problems IFSC-
based DEPFA. DEPFAs directors then included pillars of Irelands economic sector including Francis
Ruane, director of the ESRI, and Maurice OConnell, former governor of the Central Bank.

If HRE had not bought DEPFA, so transferring the relevant headquarters from Ireland to Germany,
Ireland would have been responsible for this colossal bailout. It is perhaps reflective of the lack of
seriousness of the debate here for so long that this lucky escape from the consequences of our
lackadaisical regulation, was not more widely recognised as far back as 2008. HRE is suing its former
chief executive Georg Funke for allegedly not briefing them properly on the liquidity problems. HRE
was, at the beginning of 2010 reported to be considering suing the entire former board of DEPFA too.
Crucially its litigation refers to faulty risk-management procedures and numerous breaches of Irish
banking regulatory law before, as with UniCredit, the bank went to the regulator who in the case of
DEPFA settled with its relevant subsidiary for a 250,000 fine without any public indication of the
number of breaches. It is implicit that the Irish regulatory authorities may have been delinquent in
monitoring breaches in a firm that the German regulator memorably described as a pigsty. An
extensive German parliamentary investigation into what was after all a bigger bailout than that
accorded to Ireland, found that the German regulator had behaved competently within the confines of
the legislation which included that HRE, as a holding company, entirely avoided the gaze attracted
by banks. An enraged German body politic believes Irelands regulatory rgime did not help. And
Ireland, perhaps myopically, refused requests from Germany for a contribution to the DEPFA bailout.

In a separate but analogous case Sachsen Landesbank had to receive over 17bn in emergency funding
from Germany following liquidity difficulties with its Irish subsidiary, Ormond Quay, and ultimately
was taken over by Landesbank Baden-Wrttemberg (LBBW Bank).

Unfortunately for Ireland the same smarting Germany, more than any other country, is responsible for
the penal bailout interest-rate that may scuttle Ireland and will take the determining stance on any
renegotiation of the deal.

UniCredit
UniCredit is Italys largest bank, a major international financial institution with strong roots in 22
European countries and an international network represented in approximately 50 markets, with 9578
branches and more than 162,000 employees. In the Centre and East of Europe, UniCredit operates the
largest international banking network with around 4,000 branches and outlets. UniCredits Irish branch
managed 27bn at the relevant time. UniCredit is said to be Italian-conservative in much of its
ethic. It was in the news when its renowned head Alessandro Profumo resigned in September 2010
arising out of a feud with UniCredits main shareholders who have been uncomfortable with the banks
growing need to raise capital, especially from Libya. The Libyan Investment Authority, a sovereign-
wealth fund, recently increased its holding in UniCredit by 0.5% to 2.6%, while the Central Bank of
Libya holds an almost 5% stake in the bank.

UniCredit operates on its own and through a labyrinth of subsidiaries.

UniCredits 96.35%-owned subsidiary, Bank Austria Austrias largest bank has a twenty-five
percent stake in another Austrian bank, Medici, which is in big trouble. In mid-December a complaint
against Ms Sonja Kohn was part of a fusillade of litigation filed in federal bankruptcy court in
Manhattan by Irving H Picard, the trustee trying to recover $40bn in assets for victims who sustained
cash losses in the enormous Ponzi pyramid fraud perpetrated by the worlds most famous fraudster,
Bernie Madoff. The trustee contends Bank Medici was nothing more than a conduit set up for the sole
purpose of funnelling money to Mr Madoff. It is alleged Sonja Kohn knowingly raised billions of
dollars in cash to sustain Mr Madoffs fraud in exchange for at least $62 million in secret kickbacks.
Bank Medici was 25-percent-owned by Bank Austria and the trustee claims in his complaint that it
was effectively a de facto branch of that bank. The association with Bank Austria gave Ms Kohn and
Bank Medici an imprimatur of legitimacy when recruiting investors, the trustee asserted.

Bank Austria, UniCredit, and its subsidiary Pioneer, are all named as defendants in the trustees
Madoff lawsuit which cites their ties to Ms Kohn. UniCredit said in a statement in mid-December
that its policy was not to comment on litigation but that it intended to vigorously defend itself against
the accusations made against it and its Bank Austria unit.
As if all this were not intricate enough, according to Roman prosecutors cited in the Austrian weekly
newspaper, Profil, in March 2010, banks in Austria including the Austrian branch of Anglo-Irish
banks, Anglo Austria, but also Bank Austria the UniCredit subsidiary cited in the Madoff
proceedings were used to launder about two-billion Euro for the Italian mafia between 2005 and
2007.

In 2008 Sen Fitzpatrick sold Anglo Austria to a private Swiss Bank, Valartis, a bank which tells no
secrets but has 4000 clients with funds of around 1.25bn.

Extraordinarily, FitzPatrick even funded a loan for Valartis of 24 out of the 141m purchase price
with the sale completing the day after FitzPatricks resignation from Anglo. It was a surprising move at
a time when Anglo had liquidity (i.e. cash) problems. Anglo Austria was a rich source of scarce
deposit cash, up to 600m according to the Sunday Business Posts Kathleen Barrington a cheaper
alternative to the contrived and fast-evaporating interbank borrowings that Anglo had come to depend
on, particularly welcome just around the time Anglo was performing its balance-sheet contortions with
Irish Life and Permanent. It is an issue of real concen that some of Irelands developers or even
bankers may have ploughed dodgy assets into this inscrutable repository away from the gaze of
NAMA, trustees in bankruptcy, the office of corporate enforcement and the rest. In another twist the
UniCredit subsidiary, Pioneer Investments, which has an office in Dublin, owns a large number of
Anglo-Irish bank bonds. Pioneers Dublin office seems to be a colourful operation. Village was told of
a meeting arranged for employees of Pioneer in Dublin with the papal nuncio to Ireland, at which it
appeared that a hierarchy, entirely unrelated to the separate hierarchy in the bank, determined the
sequence in which baciamani (kisses) were performed around the ecclesiastical ring.
On a more prosaic level, Italian media reports last year suggested Roman prosecutors suspected
certain Italian taxpayers of using the Vatican bank, the Instituto per le Opere die Religione (Institute
for Religious Works) as a cover for tax fraud and embezzlement. According to the well-respected
Italian newspaper, La Repubblica, investigators discerned years ago that the Vatican bank
administered several accounts at other banks including UniCredit. According to press releases, bank
investigations revealed that from 2006 to 2008 illegal transactions were carried out totalling about
180 million. In September 2009, the former President of the Vatican Bank, Angelo Caloia, resigned
after 20 years in office.

The last big scandal concerning the Vatican Bank was in 1982 when Banco Ambrosiano, in which it
was the major shareholder, went bankrupt. Banco Ambrosiano was implicated in multiple fraud and its
head, Roberto Calvi, was found hanging from Blackfriars Bridge in London, fuelling one of the
subplots in the movie Godfather III.

One thing is for certain in an age where the banking system is so interdependent and so fragile: the
silence of national regulators about dodgy banking practices is unsustainable and dangerous. European
regulators and their US counterparts need to know what is going on with UniCredit in Dublin and
elsewhere. Germany needed to know how DEPFA was being regulated in Ireland. Irish taxpayers need
to know who has funds in the former Anglo Austria, and we could all do with enlightenment about the
recurring dodginess of the papal bank. In a world where money can be transferred
instantaneously, banking systems are all interconnected. It is hopeless for national regulators to narrow
their horizons to protect their own banks. Matthew Elderfield is doing no favours to EU banking
regulators, or to the worlds banking and economic system, in being disingenuous about liquidity
breaches at the elusive UniCredit.

Blowing the whistle so hard it hurts
by Village 2 November, 2012,

Nearly all Irelands banks breached liquidity requirements, leading to the lack of liquidity that the
government provided a guarantee against, and which ultimately emerged as the insolvency that
bankrupted the country and immiserated the next generation. Failures at the Regulator and in the
Central Bank contributed as much as anything to this bankruptcy. The public is entitled to know that
these well-paid and cosseted functionaries have learnt lessons and are now demonstrating the most
stringent and scrupulous standards. Its interesting then to know how they treated the most important
whistleblower in Irish banking history.

In December 2010 a risk-manager in the Irish unit of UniCredit, Italys largest bank, described in
Village how in 2007 the Financial Regulator failed to intervene after he first alleged he falsified
liquidity-ratio figures. The risk-manager maintained he was specifically warned by senior personnel at
the Irish subsidiary not to report the matter to the Financial Regulator, even though sound banking
depends on maintenance of these liquidity ratios which are crucial to the ability of the company to
deal with losses of confidence. The liquidity ratio should be no less than 90 per cent. At UniCredit it
was calculated at an extraordinary 50 per cent. A ratio of 89 per cent would in normal circumstances be
deemed problematic. In banking terms this is like paying with a two-euro note.

Jonathan Sugarman blew the whistle on the massive repeated breaches. This magazine received
aggressive threats from McCann FitzGerald solicitors on behalf of UniCredit not to publish the
information.

The new poster-boy regulator, Matthew Elderfield, stated in response to questions from the Sunday
Business Post, and the Sddeutsche Zeitung, a respected German newspaper, about statements made in
the Seanad by David Norris which backed up Sugarmans account, that our records do not match the
description of events given by Senator Norris nor did we receive what might be described as a
whistleblower letter. We can, however, confirm that an overnight liquidity breach was reported by an
institution around the time in question. The matter was followed up with the institution and rectified to
the satisfaction of the Financial Regulator at the time.

For someone in whom so much public good-will has been invested, this is remarkably disingenuous,
though certainly true. The Regulators records presumably do not match Senator Norriss because its
agents didnt look hard enough or take a proper record; and the Regulator did not receive a
whistleblower letter as the letter came from UniCredit itself, which limited its declaration to one
overnight breach. Notably, nothing the Regulator said undermined the credibility of the risk-manager.

Largely as a result of the story in Village which named the bank, the Central Bank said it would
conduct a review of the case and invited parties with information to share it: if any party has specific
information they wish to draw to our attention in this matter it will be treated on a confidential basis.
Things dragged out but in February 2012 the risk-manager attended a meeting with the office of the
regulator. Scandalously the banks offer of confidentiality was revealed under pressure to be
spurious when it insisted that it wouldnt be enough to shield Sugarman against self-incrimination in
the event his own actions constituted criminal activity. The Central Bank insisted it must forward
information to the DPP if there were evidence of a crime. This highlights the need for whistleblower
legislation to protect insiders who tell their truth and particularly that legislation should be
retrospective, so it would embrace cases like Mr Sugarmans.

In June, the Central bank informed Mr Sugarman, without giving reasons, that the matter was closed
and only after Mark Keenan raised the affair anew in the Irish Independent in September, did the
Central Bank finally furnished minutes of the meeting it had had with Mr Sugarman. This was six
months after the original meeting. For some reason Mr Keenan is no longer writing on these issues in
the Irish Independent.
Matthew Elderfield and his office are doing no favours to EU banking regulators, or to the worlds
banking and economic system, in being disingenuous about liquidity breaches at the elusive
UniCredit. If there is a desire not to frighten the horses just while our bailout is under review, it is
misplaced. The lesson of recent history for this country is scrupulousness and openness.

There is a general official view that Irelands ethical delinquencies are in the past. Deviant planning
stopped when the tribunals started; and bad banking regulation stopped with the demise of Pat Neary.
In fact this is not so with planning as we have seen with the kicking to touch of John Gormleys
reviews of planning in six counties. Scrutiny of what happened in banking has been limited to two
innocuous reports by Patrick Honohan, Peter Nyberg and Klaus Regling. These notably failed to
attribute blame or to deal with how liquidity ratios were breached all over financial Dublin with no
comment from the usual over-paid auditors, and no sanction.

Inconveniently for a country that has started to see corruption and regulation in black (then) and white
(now) terms, the general view may not reflect the reality. Without proper scrutiny we cannot be sure
either way.

Like bad planning, bank under-regulation was a manifestation of this countrys ineradicable tendency
to pander to vested interests and to the short term. It is time we got to the bottom of what happened in
Irish banking. Scrupulous investigation of Mr Sugarmans allegations would be a symbolic good start.

When Irish people do what their government wont

By Golem XIV on August 15, 2013 in latest

It has been clear for some time now that the ideal of equality before the law has been buried.

The US. Department of Justice made it clear a few months ago, after it had declined to press criminal
charges against a string of banks (Citi, Wachovia and HSBC), that Too Big To Fail meant while such
institutions could be investigated and fined, they could not ever be found criminally guilty, because
that would endanger their continued survival. Thus TBTF equals TBTP.

The list of G-SIFIs (Globally Systemically Important Financial Institutions both banks and Insurers)
is therefore a list of those financial institutions that are now above the law. If it profits those
institutions, and those who own and run them, to disregard the law, they can and will because all they
face is a fine. A fine is just another marginal cost of doing business. A tax. And a small, discretionary
one at that.

In Europe we have had no similarly outright admission by the State that TBTF means TBTP. Instead
the G-SIFI lists of banks and insurers have been published without anyone in government caring to
make it clear that the State has taken it upon itself to raise the golden financial class above the law.

Of course there is one loophole just a tiny one and one that is easily ignored but one nevertheless.
And that is that if no Public Prosecutor will take a Bank to court then it is still possible for an ordinary
citizen to do so (Of course how easy or impossible it is depends on the country). But In Ireland it is
possible and one man, Michael Smith, has decided to try.

Michael Smith is a former barrister and the owner and editor of The Village magazine in Dubiln. He,
like me and many others, has had a long interest in the on-going case of the UniCredit whistleblower,
Jonathan Sugarman, AKA WhisteblowerIRL. It was Mr Smith who accompanied Mr Sugarman when
he went to to talk to the Irish authorities about what he knew. It was at that meeting that Mr Sugarman
was told by the authorities that they might well prosecute him if he told them about the crime over
which he had resigned from UniCredit, whereas they could not promise to prosecute the bank.

For those of you who dont know, the crime in question is actually very straightforward. Mr
Sugarmans job as Risk Managere at UniCredit, was to make sure the Bank was solvent at the end of
each day to check its liquidity. Mr Sugarman became alarmed when he found, at the height of the
Bubble, that UniCredit was in breach of its requirements. Not by just a little but by huge sums, and not
on one rogue day but regularly. The Irish Law is very clear. It was Mr Sugarmans job to tell his bank
and the regulator of the breach. This he did.

The bank told him to shut up. The regulator ignored him. Of the very few concrete actions taken by the
authorities perhaps the most symbolic was that they removed from the Central banks web site the
document in which the law can be seen. You can however still see the law for yourself, here in sections
9.4 and 10.

Sickened by this attitude Mr Smith, in consultation with Mr Sugarman, has decided if the Irish DPP
will not insitute an investigation/prosecution against UniCredit Ireland and several other Irish based
banks such as Anglo, then The Village will.
 In an open letter to the Irish DPP Mr SMith calls their bluff. Essentially he asks is the Irish states
legal aparatus whoring for the banks or does it still have a single grain of honour left?

You can read the editorial here. The whole article is only available in the latest print issue. You can
read the two previous articles he has written about the Sugarman/UniCredit affair here and here.

It comes to somthing when ordinary people have to uphold the laws because their government refuse
to. But that is where we are, not just in Ireland but in all of our nations.

It remains to be seen what measures the banks and their friends in government will be willing to take to
close off from the people from any hope of legal and peaceful redress.
I sincerely hope Mr Smith does file suit against Unicredit, Anglo and the others. I hope people are able
to support him. Perhaps we, in other countries, can hope to do the same. Most fervently I hope the
government in Ireland and the Trioka in Bruselles do not close down this hope of redress.

Twilight of Justice
By Golem XIV on March 26, 2013 in latest

Back in December of 2012, when it was proved in U.S. court that billions of dollars of drug money had
been laundered through HSBC and yet somehow it was also found that HSBC was NOT guilty of
laundering and neither was anyone in the bank, there was an outcry.

In America Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, when she was grilling federal bank regulators at
a Senate Banking Committee hearing, said

No one individual went to trial, no individual was banned from banking and there was no hearing to
consider shutting down HSBCs activities here in the United States.

Which did seem outrageous at the time given that, for example, according to Senate and Justice
department reports, HSBC had,

failed to monitor over $670 billion in wire transfers and over $9.4 billion in purchases of physical
US dollars from HSBC Mexico from at least 2006 to 2009.

And that,

HSBCs Mexico bank had a branch in the Cayman Islands that had no offices or staff, but held 50,000
client accounts and $2.1 billion in 2008.

Who in the bank knew about this? Evidence uncovered by investigations into HSBCs activities
revealed,

senior bank officials were complicit in the illegal activity.

The Question

No wonder then, that Senator Warren was driven to ask,

So what does it take? How many billions of dollars do you have to launder for drug lords and how
many economic sanctions do you have to violate before someone will consider shutting down a
financial institution like this?

What indeed.

In the UK it was noted that during the time the laundering was going on, the chief executive of HSBC
in 2003 who then became its chairman in 2006, was Lord Green, who is now the UK trade minister. So
obviously no great concern to get to any truth about HSBC, in the hierarchy of the UK establishment.

Warrens question, What does it take? was finally answered by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in
March 2013, when he told the U.S. Judiciary Committee that the Justice department had decided not to
pursue any criminal prosecution of HSBC because ,

I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become
difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if you do prosecute, if you do
bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the
world economy,
The U.S. Justice Department felt it could not criminally prosecute the bank because a criminal
conviction would mean the bank would lose its license to bank in the US which would kill it and a
whole range of other institutions, which the bank relies on to buy its debts and its investment products
would be prohibited from doing so as soon as the bank was deemed to be criminal.

So the official answer to Senator Warrens question, according to the mighty U.S. Justice Department,
is that ,yes, HSBC had laundered, but it was simply too big to prosecute. The bank and its senior staff
were and are untouchable. They could be fined but not criminally prosecuted. The real answer to
Senator Warrens question, What does it take? is that she asked the wrong question.

This isnt about lack of proof or the complexities of financial crimes or showing who knew or proving
actual intent. It is not about proof or criminality at all. It is about there being a new category
of financial entity which our law makers and prosecutors have decided for us, is above the law. They
are called G-SIFIs, Globally, Systemically Important Financial Institutions or G-SIBs, Globally
Systemically Important Banks.

I think we have not yet thought through the immense consequences of the decision that has been made
for us, that G-SIFIs are above the law. But I think we need to make a start.

The List

We all know the HSBC isnt the only bank too large to prosecute. There is in fact a list.
 The list is decided upon by the FSB. It is updated every
year.

The FBS (Financial Stability Board) is a new international body. It is made of representatives from the
central bank, financial regulator and Treasury from each of the 25 member nations plus representatives
from:

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the ECB, the European Commission, the IMF, OECD
and World Bank, plus representatives from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (part of the
BIS), the Committee on the Global Financial System (another part of the BIS), the Committee on
Payment and Settlement Systems (another part of the BIS), the International Association of Insurance
Supervisors, the International Accounting Standards Board, and the International Organization of
Securities Commissions.
Guess which institutions provide the membership for ALL of the above international bodies? Yes, you
got it the big banks. And how many Central banks can you think of that are staffed or even headed by
people formerly from one of the Big Banks?

You tell me who is really staffs the FSB and whose world view and interests the FSB actually
represents?

Then consider, they are the ones who decided who is above the law.

28 banks are officially above the law and WILL NOT be criminally prosecuted no matter what they do.
Remember thats not me saying this. It is the U.S. Department of Justice saying it.

Not only 28 banks but all their senior executives, chairman/woman and board members. It would be
very difficult to find a senior person in a bank to be criminally guilty but yet not find the institution
guilty. So we could compile a list of people who are now, at least as concerns any financial and
professional actions, also above the law. They can do things you would go to goal for. How does that
feel?

Oh, by the way, this year, in April, we will see the announcement of another list, this time of Globally
Systemically Important Insurers (G-SIIs). They too will be above the Law.

Assets Above the Law

When we say a bank is above the law, not only should we remember that this means specific people are
above the law (at least in how they make money) but we should also remember that this also means the
assets in those banks are above the law. This means if a banks does things which are illegal but
lucrative such as laundering money in order to get the use of those laundered billions to then use
them as, lets say, capital to underpin loans or for speculating, for example, and by doing those illegal
things it makes out sized profits for its shareholders and staff, that money, those profits are also above
the law.

Since the bank and its senior staff are above the law and breaking the law is profitable, a) no one has an
interest to say no, b) shareholders and staff will directly benefit from breaking the law. They will make
more money by participating in law breaking or by investing in a bank which is law breaking. They
will, in fact have an interest making sure it continues.

Two questions. Whose wealth are we talking about and how much?

Second question first. Is this a big problem?

There are many ways of measuring how much wealth we are talking about as being above the law. Not
all are publicly available and not all banks quote things in the same way. So by necessity the figures I
have are not a perfect or even direct measure but they are a good indicator of the scale of the assets
which are essentially above the law (they can be used for illegal purposes and the bank will not be
punished nor the profits severely harmed even if the bank gets fined)

http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs207.pdf

Here is the above list with the banks total assets. The figures are mostly from the Bankers Almanac
with a couple added from Wiki. This give a good idea of how much wealth is above the law by virtue
of being in banks which are above the law.

Bank Total Assets

Citi $ 1.2 T
Deutsche $2.8 T

HSBC $1.2 T

JP Morgan Chase $1.8 T

Barclays $2.4 T

BNP Paribas $2.5 T

Bank of America $1.45 T

Bank of NY Mellon $1.4 T ( this is not Total Assets but Assets under management)

Credit Suisse $1.08 T

Goldman Sachs $0.92 T

Mitsubishi IFJ FG $1.9T

Morgan Stanley $0.74T

RBS $2.2T

UBS $1.5T

Bank of China $1.87T

BBVA $0.77T

Group BPCE $1.4T

Credit Agricole $2.23T

ING Bank $1.2T

Mizuho Bank $0.91T

Nordea $0.92T

Santander $1.6T

Soc Gen. $1.53T

Standard Chartered $0.599T

State Street $2.01T ( Assets Under Management)

Sumitomo Mitsui $1.68T

UniCredit $1.2T

Wells Fargo $1.16T

______________________

Total $42.169T

http://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/r_121031ac.pdf?page_moved=1

I know these figures are only an indicator but when you get to $42 T I think the indication is clear.

What you will notice is that there are quite a number of banks not on this G-SIFI list which are larger
than some on it. What does this mean? Two things I think. First some banks are on not because they
are the biggest but because they have vast assets under their management. Other are there, such as
Goldman, because they are counter-party to vast swathes of other peoples derivatives. And some are
not on because their country does not have the clout to have above a certain number of banks on the
list.

What this last point tells us is that there are other banks that if it came to it would be treated as too big
to fail/prosecute but are not on the list. A whole category of such banks are those which are not
globally systemically important but which are vital to the country they are incorporated in or do
business in. There are a number of banks in Europe, not on the G-SIFI list but which their national
governments would never allow to go down or be criminally prosecuted. These banks to are therefore,
also above the law even if theyre not on the list.

But for the moment lets just stick with our total of $42 Trillion and change currently in banks which
operate above the law (Yes I know they can be fined but the fines are a wrist slap compared to the
money they make by breaking the law).

You might at this point object that these banks contain deposits from all sorts of people, many of them
ordinary. True. but the bulk of that $42 trillion is not the savings of widows and orphans nor charities
and churches. It is the money of the top 1% or 10%.

In the UK, for example, 40% of the wealth is held by the top 10%. While in the USA the top 10% hold
between 81% and 94% of all the wealth. Which means the bulk of the money in those banks, available
for use in illegal but lucrative schemes, belongs to the wealthiest 10%. And they also happen to be the
people who run the banks, sit on the board of the FSB (there are no representatives from anti crime
NGOs for example and certainly no one representing the 3.5 billion people in the world who earn less
than $2/day) and decide who and what is now above the law. So very neat and tidy.

No dissent allowed

The concept of the G-SIFI also does violence to international law and sovereignty. Lets imagine some
small rogue country, one which still believes in equality before the law, gets a rush of blood to the
Judiciary and they file criminal proceedings against a G-SIFI for crimes committed in their country.
Lets imagine the bank is HSBC. Now the U.S Justice Department has already declared this bank is too
important to convict. Would the US stand by, would the UK stand by, and allow some tin-pot country
run by foreigners to imperil what the US has already said MUST NOT be imperiled?

Would they allow it to happen? Or would they bring pressure to bear? Would they find a way to stop a
prosecution they felt could imperil US interests and the stability of their economy? You decide what
they would not be willing to do.

Lets just say that somehow it happens anyway. We would then be in a situation where countries would
have to start to pull apart the entire system of international entente. Fellow UN members would have to
start saying other countrys legal decisions and courts were meaningless and would not be recognized.
Imagine the fall out from that.
One country would prosecute and provide evidence of criminal conduct and the other countries would
have to not only instruct their own Judiciary to ignore it, but would have to say to its citizens and its
press you too must ignore what you might read or hear, even if you can see it is the truth. Even though
the evidence might be crystal clear and indisputable, those hanging on to the G-SIFI list and
concept would have to insist everyone ignore the evidence on pain of legal action for libel and
defamation, and refuse to allow the foreign evidence to be used as the basis of a court action. Can
you imagine the chaos? So we can conclude that no country would be allowed to pursue a criminal
case whose conclusions might create such a disastrous mess. What would be left of sovereignty?

It would be the reverse of what happens now. At the moment courts and national regulators are used to
shut the door to prosecutions which might implicarte one of their banks, by either simply refusing to
investigate or going ahead and investigating and saying that their banks involvement was not a
crime. Thus insulating their bank from any accusations in future. This has happened in three European
countries in cases I have become aware of.

Sorry this has been such a long article. But the G-SIFI is here to stay and is already corrupting our
judicial system. That corruption will only grow if we do not take notice of it now.

Fear And Loathing in Dublin

By Golem XIV on April 11, 2017 in latest

Once again, my friend Jonathan Sugarman, the Irish/UniCredit whistleblower, is to appear before a
public body and attempt to put on the record what those in power and their friends in the banks have
tried for a decade to suppress.

On Thursday Jonathan is to testify before The Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform,
and Taoiseach. Jonathan was invited to testify some weeks ago. Now I obviously dont know any of
the confidential story. How could I? But what I do know from Jonathan, is that it was and still is, his
hope and intention to tell the committee exactly what he knew of what led to the Irish banking
collapse. If I know Jonathan he would have been very clear with those who arranged the invitation that
he would not be censored nor deflected into talking of other safer topics. He would have been very
clear he would testify with his first hand knowledge of 1) what happened at Unicredit, 2) How this was
an example of unwise or illegal activities within the broader banking sector. I know Jonathan has
always felt it was imperative that what he knew should be on the public record since what he could
testify to, lay at the root of the general banking collapse, shed valuable light upon why the government
suddenly and against professional financial advice paid the notorious blanket, overnight bank
guarantee and how this led to the crippling public debt that was its direct result.

All Jonathan wants to do on Thursday is to tell the truth. Too many in the major parties, the Central
Bank and the Banking community have worked and continue to work very hard to keep him and a few
others like him firmly shut up behind a wall of legal and financial threats.

Jonathan has tried before to get things on the record in Ireland. From the beginning he has had dealings
with all the major parties telling them what he knew. Every one of them listened, made promises and
later disowned him. Some even claiming they had never met him. Such is the immense fear and
pressure to keep what really went on, buried.

And I fear it is happening again. The invitation was to talk about banking and its regulation things of
importance for the future of every man and woman in Ireland. But in the last days when the Central
Bank and the large private so called Pillar Banks, of Ireland have testified the central bank
particularly has chosen to talk exclusively about such pressing topics as tracker mortgages and car
insurance. So, a committee wanting to investigate banking and its regulation, calls in the Irish Central
bank the key banking regulator which then decides it will talk about tracker mortgages? In my
opinion, the banks with the help of the Central Bank are trying to limit the agenda before Jonathan
even arrives. I think they are trying to make sure that nothing of import is covered and there is nothing
that could lead to any difficult questions for anyone to report or to follow up.
Why would the big private banks and the Central bank be so concerned to restrict the whole thing to set
such limited agenda? Lets take the example of Mr Richie Boucher. He is the CEO of Bank of Ireland.
He is about to step down. You might think he might have a great store of vital, interesting and relevant
things to talk about. He was, after all in the room with Lenihan and Cowan on the night the Bank
Guarantee was agreed. As was, I have been told by two separate people who claim to have knowledge
but have never had it officially confirmed a certain Peter Sutherland father of the WTO and head
cheerleader for globalism in general, and who was, on the night of the guarantee, chairman of
Goldman Sachs International (A post he held from 1995 and didnt give up till 2015). So you might
have thought the committee would love to ask and be told by Mr Boucher what happened that night
and what events led up to that most fateful of decisions, taken so quickly and so irrevocably by a group
of men behind closed doors. But no. If you want to give yourself a headache go read his dozens of
pages of testimony and I challenge you to find a single thing of vital interest to anyone wanting to
understand banking regulation, or the lack of it, in Ireland.

The government can have as much shiny banking regulation as it can find paper to print it on. And
shout about how wonderful their regulations are. The fact of the matter is any idiot can have paper
regulation but if they chose not to ever enforce them then it is naught but a store- house of toilet paper
for the banks and bankers to use.

The decision to bail out all the banks and the decisions to ignore all the warnings they were given by
Jonathan and others, which led to the most momentous and far reaching decision of recent times, that
has effected then lives of every person in Ireland, is still shrouded in secrecy. Do you know why the
decision was taken? Would you like to know how Ireland got to the point that such a decision was ever
needed? Why are those like Mr Boucher not being forced to tell on oath what they know? Do the
people of Ireland not have a clear right to know?

If Jonathan is told he can only talk about the irrelevant topics the banks and central bank have chosen
to restrict themselves to, then they will have silenced Jonathan yet again. This must not be allowed to
happen.

I can tell them it wont work. Too many people are watching. Too many are aware of what went on and
whose necks are at risk. And not least, Jonathan, despite being hounded relentlessly, is not one to back
down. He has kept his powder dry and what a store of powder it is.

Jonathan already, a few weeks ago, bearded Draghi in his den.

You can see Jonathan testify in the Eu parliament here

And hear the question that skewered Draghi here

And here is the list of Bond holders that Jonathan and I tried twice, through the good offices of Senator
Norris, to get read in the parliament both times being prevented. These are some of the bond holders
the Irish government was so determined to bail out that it decided it would crush a generation of its
own people with crippling austerity.

When will the People of Ireland make their voices heard and demand that the truth and the whole truth
be told, and damn those who have profited from its suppression?

Whistleblowers Testify in EU Parliament

By Golem XIV on November 17, 2016 in latest

Yesterday a very high-powered panel of international banking whistleblowers met and told their
stories in the European parliament. The questions raised were important. Among them was the Irish
Whistleblower, Jonathan Sugarman, who when UniCredit Ireland was breaking the law in very serious
ways reported it to the Irish regulator.
He related how he was not only ignored by his bank, the Irish regulator but also all the major political
parties. He then pointed out that the Irish regulator claims that it always and it is the law after all
informs the regulator of the home country of banks which have subsidiaries in Ireland, about any
serious problems. In the case of UniCredit that would mean the Italian Central bank would have been
told that Italys largest Bank was in serious breach of Irish law in ways that could endanger the whole
banking system. The head of the Italian Central Bank at the time was a certain Mr Mario Draghi. Mr
Sugarman suggested Mr Draghi should be asked point-blank of he did or if he did not know. If he did
not then the Irish regulator was at least incompetent, and may have lied, misled and perhaps even
broken Irish laws. If he was told and did know, then Mr Draghi has serious questions to answer
regarding his own dereliction of duty.

Surely not I hear you say. Well perhaps someone might ask him? Or is he above the law?

http://www.guengl.eu/news/article/whistleblower-protection-what-must-be-done


I'd ask him but, his bodyguard ,er I mean ECON chairman @gualtierieurope
wont let it happen.
https://twitter.com/lukeming

Here you are, on regulatory capture. Ireland turned that into a selling-point,
soliciting for more trade.

Dispute Settlement Becomes Speculative Financial Asset

omo Kwame Sundaram

Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and free trade
agreements (FTAs) have effectively created a powerful and privileged system of protections for foreign
investors that undermines national law and institutions.

ISDS allows foreign corporations to sue host governments for supposedly causing them losses due to
policy or regulatory changes that reduce the expected profitability of their investments. Very
significantly, ISDS provisions have been and can be invoked, even when rules are non-discriminatory,
or profits come from causing public harm. ISDS will thus strengthen perverse incentives for foreign
investors at the expense of local businesses and the public interest.

New opportunity for speculation

In recent years, ISDS provisions of investment treaties, free trade and other agreements have
increasingly provided an investment opportunity to make money by speculating on lawsuits, winning
huge awards and forcing foreign governments, and taxpayers, to pay. Financial speculators have
increasingly purchased corporations deemed capable of profitably bringing winnable ISDS claims,
sometimes using shell companies.

Some hedge funds and private equity firms even finance ISDS cases as third parties, with ISDS itself
the raison detre for such investments. Such third-party funding of ISDS claims has been expanding
quickly as financing such claims has proven to be very lucrative.

Third-party financing reduces litigation costs to the corporations themselves, making it easier, and thus
encouraging them to sue. Foreign corporations typically do not have to declare receiving third-party
funding for an ISDS case. Not surprisingly then, the ISDS claims-financing industry is booming as
different types of investors have been attracted by and drawn into financing lawsuits, treating ISDS
claims as speculative assets.

The International Council for Commercial Arbitration estimates that at least three fifths of those
considering ISDS claims have inquired about possible third-party financing before pursuing them.
Financing firms provide clients with litigation packages from the outset, advising on what treaties to
exploit and which law firms to hire, even recommending arbitrators.

While bondholders do not actually develop productive capacities or sell services in a host country, they
too can resort to ISDS arbitration to maximize returns to their debt purchases. Thus, bond-holders who
have lost value can use the ISDS back door to sue countries for compensation, thus encouraging a new
speculative investment option for vultures. Hence, ISDS allows investors with little connection to the
aggrieved initial investment to benefit financially as well.

Ripe for the picking

ISDS advocates claim that case outcomes remain uncertain, with foreign corporations only winning
about a quarter of the cases they initiate. But this proportion does not include settlements agreed to
before arbitration proceedings are concluded when the foreign corporations secure huge gains. ISDS
arbitration is very attractive, even tempting to foreign investors who would otherwise not pursue claims
in national courts against host governments.

Recent ISDS arbitrations have seen much greater delegation of authority to arbitrators in interpreting
and applying agreements, without any option to appeal or otherwise challenge the arbitrators
decisions. There is no way to ensure that arbitration tribunals will interpret and apply treaty provisions
in ways consistent with governments understandings of what treaty obligations imply.

Those investing in ISDS cases recognize that the most vulnerable governments for investors to sue are
typically those already in some trouble. For example, when a country resorts to emergency economic
measures to protect its citizens, investors can easily claim that these undermine earlier understandings
of international agreements. Ensuing lawsuits typically hurt the countrys credit rating, raising capital
costs and undermining its ability to attract investment.

Originally published by Inter Press Service.

http://triplecrisis.com/dispute-settlement-becomes-speculative-financial-asset/

Barings Bank had survived all that more than two centuries had thrown at it. The Industrial Revolution,
World Wars, even the Great Depression. Then along came one audacious 20-something called Nick
Leeson and the whole venerable, rock-solid British financial institution came tumbling down.

I didnt know that the bank was going to collapse. I didnt know what the capital base of the bank
was. I wasnt really interested as long as the money kept coming I knew the effect of my actions would
be dramatic. I didnt really understand they would be quite as catastrophic as they were. NICK
LEESON Rogue Trader

Trading futures in Singapore, Leeson blew more than a billion dollars. Barings closed its doors and
Leeson went to jail. All these years on, with super-sophisticated systems monitoring the traders and
their every deal, what are the chances of it happening again? If youd asked Nick Leeson in recent
years he would have told you extremely remote.
And yet just a couple of months ago, as Europe rocked and reeled in a financial crisis thats also
shaking the rest of the world, another rogue trader was nabbed. Kweku Adoboli a trader at the giant
European bank UBS was arrested and accused of burning 2.3 billion dollars.

How could it possibly happen?

Europe Correspondent Emma Alberici has assembled a stellar cast of famous and infamous financial
luminaries to investigate if rogue traders are really reckless loners or simply individuals pushed to
extremes by a reckless and unruly financial sector. What can their behavior tell us about Wall St
Investment Banking and the Global Financial Crisis, the crises and collapses in Ireland, Iceland and
elsewhere.

Emma Alberici meets a former insider who speaking for the first time - alleges major criminal
activity in some of Europes top banks and who says the regulators are asleep at the wheel.

We also hear from a trader-turned-neuro scientist whose research reveals that testosterone is a major
motivator of extreme financial plays and levels of the hormone can make a millions dollars difference
to annual salaries and bonuses.

__________________________________

Transcript

ALBERICI: Theyre the bad boys of high finance, burning millions, sometimes billions of dollars. But
given the recklessness of banks, and their central role in the economic crisis gripping Europe and
sending shockwaves around the world, are rogue traders maverick loners, or just a product of a high
rolling culture out of control?

So much of what happens on Wall Street is felt across the globe. Investors take their lead from this
financial hub, now people angry about banks and bankers are doing the same. The Occupy movement
has spread to London, to Rome and here to downtown Dublin.

Jonathan Sugarman isnt the kind of person you expect to meet at a rally against economic inequality.
After all he was a big city banker, the very breed of 21st century capitalist whos brought thousands of
people onto the streets all over the world. But this insider is now as appalled as anyone here about a
system thats making the poor pay for the mistakes of the rich.

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: You have hospital wards shutting down, you have schools shutting
down, you have public services that are now being curtailed because theres no money. The moneys
gone to the banks. Your money, my money everyones money has gone to the banks. What we need
is for the regulation that exists to be enforced.

ALBERICI: Jonathan Sugarman has never spoken publicly about his experiences until now. In 2007 he
became a very senior executive at UniCredit, Italys biggest bank one of the top five banks in Europe.
He was the head of risk management in Ireland.

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: At the bank we have a license to operate as a bank which is very much
like a driving license. It says this is the speed you can go, this is what you can do and you have to
operate within these limits and it was my job to make sure that that was done every day.

ALBERICI: Jonathan Sugarman monitored the back office, the people responsible for checking the
trades and the traders out front. He soon realised the numbers werent adding up. He suspected his
bank was breaching strict rules over how much cash and assets its required to hold in reserve.

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: And I insisted that we notify the regulator immediately which is
precisely what we are required under the terms of our license and under Irish law to do.
ALBERICI: How certain are you that UniCredit broke the law while you were there?

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: A hundred per cent certain and to use the Irish expression, to be sure, to
be sure that is why I brought in this London based IT company which had a very good reputation in
Dublin and the result was pretty horrific because whereas the breach that Id reported to the regulator
was a breach of twenty per cent, whereas the permissible deviation was one per cent, they rang me up
one evening soon after they tied into our systems, linked into our systems and said your breach is
actually forty per cent.

ALBERICI: When he raised the alarm with his chief executive, the response was dismissive. It was a
systems error. The risk manager was instructed to continue approving the deals. Jonathan Sugarman
was in the thick of a reckless banking culture that was on a collision course with disaster.

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: Well on the days that the system threw up these figures that I was told
were incorrect we would sign to say oh this is a system error and were confident that everythings all
right, and just carry on as we did before. Never notified anyone. So when you think of the fact that
when Nick Leeson brought down Barings Bank, it collapsed over eight hundred million pounds, I was
signing over five billion every day that we didnt have.

NICK LEESON: Understanding the dictionary definition of the word and the fact that I spent four and
a half years in prison I am a criminal. I always knew what I was doing was wrong and did I think it was
criminal from inception? Absolutely not.

ALBERICI: Its been sixteen years since Nick Leeson single-handedly brought down Britains oldest
bank, Barings. It was such a spectacular, audacious outrageous act of financial skulduggery,
Hollywood made a movie about it.

ICK LEESON: I mean success was the thing that I always wanted and you know conversely my
biggest fear was to feel a failure and the fear of failure was probably the one thing that I couldnt
countenance so putting my hand up and saying look theres this error that I should have closed
yesterday but I ran it into another day and therefore made the problem even worse, was the thing that I
couldnt do.

ALBERICI: The bank was two hundred and thirty three years old. It had survived wars and the Great
Depression, yet it took just one upstart twenty-five year old futures trader to knock it over.

NICK LEESON: Firstly I didnt know that the bank was going to collapse. I didnt know what the
capital base of the bank was and wasnt really interested as long as the money kept coming and so you
know I knew the effect of my actions would be dramatic, I didnt really understand they would be quite
as catastrophic as they were.

ALBERICI: Before Leeson became a trader for Barings in Singapore, he was a back room bookkeeper
in London. He knew how to work the system, keeping his losses out of sight in a secret fund. He was
so good at covering his tracks, Barings thought he was making them millions and sent him more and
more money to play with. It took the bank three years to wake up. By then it was way too late.

NICK LEESON: I didnt enjoy a moment of it .You know there was always the fear that what was
happening was going to be exposed and that was always my greatest fear because that would have
highlighted my incompetence and negligence and failure to everybody around me and that was the one
thing that I didnt want to happen.

ALBERICI: Did you ever stop in that time to think that actually some one individual or bunch of
individuals were actually losing that money that you were hiding in that account? That that was
someone or some institutions money?
NICK LEESON: Um no I dont think you do.

ALBERICI: Nick Leeson was convicted of fraud and spent four years in a Singaporean gaol. He was
released in 1999 and returned to make a new life for himself in Ireland.

NICK LEESON: When I first came back from Singapore in 1999 I used to... I was regularly asked
you know do you think this can happen again and I know my answer was always no and the reason
why it was no was... I know how incompetent and negligent I was. I know how incompetent and
negligent the bank was. I know how bad the auditors were. I know how bad the regulators were. I know
how bad the central bank was at the time and I just believed that if you tried to build the probability of
all that happening together at the same time in the future, the possibilities were extremely remote.

NEWS REPORT: [September 16, 2011] London police have arrested a potential rogue trader who
could have cost the Swiss Banking Group UBS an estimated two billion dollars.

ALBERICI: The possibilities of it happening again were not so remote at all. Just months ago, thirty-
one year old Kweku Adoboli became the latest trader accused of being a rogue. Based in London at the
giant Swiss Bank UBS, he was in charge of the Delta 1 desk which traded complex financial products.

OLIVER METZNER: I dont think there are rogue traders without rogue banks. That is to say, its
only possible if the banks want it to be possible.

ALBERICI: Despite the technological advances since Nick Leesons days in Singapore, sophisticated
systems monitoring traders and their activities and claims by the banks themselves that theyre vigilant,
its alleged Kweku Adoboli did them blind. His so-called rogue trading started in 2008 at the height of
the global financial crisis and around the same time the Swiss taxpayer was forking out six billion
dollars to rescue UBS from the brink of bankruptcy.

OLIVER METZNER: The crisis of 2007-2008 led to conferences and debates where we said wed do
this and that, and nothings been done nothings been done.

ALBERICI: Oliver Metzner is one of the worlds most sought after criminal defence lawyers. His
client Jerome Kerviel is appealing a conviction for rogue trading at French Bank, Socit Gnrale.
Hes said to have gambled away six and a half billion dollars the biggest trading loss in history. Just
like the UBS scandal, Kerviel was working on the Delta 1 desk where he invented buyers and sellers
and created phantom deals to hide his losses.

OLIVER METZNER: Is it normal that banks bosses who lead their banks to bankruptcy dont get
punished for it? There are real problems and indeed it is difficult for the average French person to
understand why sometimes we focus on a Jerome Kerviel a Nick Leeson and not on the banks
themselves.

ALBERICI: Here at the Palace of Justice in Paris, Jerome Kerviel admitted that hed made big
mistakes that almost brought down one of Frances biggest banks. But he wasnt about to take all the
blame for what his legal team described as a rotten culture that encouraged excessive risk taking,
celebrating traders when the markets were up, only to isolate them when their bets turned bad. In this
courtroom drama, calling Jerome Kerviel a rogue trader allowed the bank to cast itself as the victim.

EROME KERVIEL: I take my share of responsibility. I wish that the others take theirs. Its the
system, not me that set it up. Everyone took advantage, and I dont want to take full blame. Everything
was checked and seen in the Socit Gnrale computer system.

ALBERICI: Like Nick Leeson, before becoming a player himself, Jerome Kerviel spent years in the
banks back office, recording trades and monitoring the traders.
HUGUES LE BRET: Because he did spend a lot of time in control teams so he did know very well the
controls so he knew well how to avoid the controls and to hide the position and to lie to people from
controls when they ask questions.

ALBERICI: Hugues Le Bret was an executive director at Socit Gnrale when Jerome Kerviel was
caught.

Was it the culture within the bank that inspired, encouraged excessive risk taking?

HUGUES LE BRET: Thats what Kerviels saying. I dont think the culture was to take excessive
risks but I think the culture was to make more and more money in this.....

ALBERICI: By taking more and more risk?

HUGUES LE BRET: By taking more positions, inventing new products, developing new activities
the activity of Kerviel was quite new, it was invented a few years ago, a few years before, so we
certainly have in trading rooms, a greed culture.

ALBERICI: Greed?

HUGUES LE BRET: Greed, yeah where people want to make more money, to have higher bonuses.

JOHN COATES: I think the biggest bonus I heard of in the banking system was about.... I think it was
close to two hundred million.

ALBERICI: For one years work?

JOHN COATES: Yeah.

ALBERICI: Theres very little in the way of reliable science behind what money market traders do but
science might help explain how they behave.

JOHN COATES: During the dot com bubble I noticed the behaviour of traders change, it changed
very noticeably. Theyre normally quite a prudent lot, you know yuppies with a family, but during the
dot com bubble a lot of them, both on the trading floor and all along Wall Street became euphoric,
delusional.... they had racing thoughts, diminished need for sleep. They were taking far more risk than
they used to. The risk was... had terrible risk reward trade offs and they seemed hornier than usual
given the amount of pornography on their computer screen back in the days when you could have porn
on your computer screens. I was only later to find out that these were clinical symptoms of mania.

ALBERICI: John Coates spent twelve years on Wall Street, running his own derivatives trading desks
at Goldman Sacks and at Deutsche Bank. He gave it all up to pursue a PhD at Cambridge. His
speciality? Neuro economics.

JOHN COATES: The other thing I noticed at the time was that women were relatively immune to the
behaviour I was seeing in the traders so I was seeing this irrational exuberance. I thought it was
chemical. It wasnt really happening with women so there was sort of an obvious candidate for what
that chemical may be and thats how I began doing research on testosterone.

ALBERICI: In the first study of its kind in the world, John Coates took salvia samples in a dealing
room, matching the change in a traders natural steroids with their profit and loss profile. His research
took into account the risks they were taking and volatility in the market.

JOHN COATES: What we found was that when the traders testosterone levels were high in the
morning, they made a lot more money in the afternoon then they did on days when their testosterone
levels were low in the morning. And it was a very powerful effect. This was huge. I mean this was, this
effect if you annualised it, would have added up to about a million pounds difference in their pocket at
the end of the year.

ALBERICI: It may be just one factor among many driving traders but what we do know from recent
and current crises, the culture of risk within banks and by banks is a very powerful and very destructive
force and no one seemed to know when risk becomes recklessness.

JOHN COATES: What turned out during the housing bubble was that everybody was just taking huge
risk. Everybody looked like a hero and then when it blew up, everybody lost more money than theyd
made in the past five years but they didnt have to give back their bonuses. If theyd been assessed over
a five year period I dont think they would have been taking as much risk as they were.

SIR JOHN VICKERS: If you do have a situation where people believe theres no way the bank can go
under - maybe because the government taxpayers standing behind it - that encourages... its almost a
license... for all sorts of risk taking which ought to be properly disciplined by the market place.

ALBERICI: In Britain Sir John Vickers has been trying to figure out how to protect the wider
community from the rack and ruin of mischievous banking practices. Sir John is the warden of All
Souls College at Oxford University. He was the former Chief Economist at the Bank of England and
recently headed up an independent government review that recommended separating prudent
traditional banking from the risky business of investment banking.

SIR JOHN VICKERS: The principles behind that in a way are to say the simple deposit taking,
lending to individuals and small businesses through overdrafts and other ways, that happens in the ring
fenced bank. If people want to do the sophisticated stuff, the complicated things, the international
things, thats fine, thats up to them - but weve got to have a structure where theres no way that the
taxpayer can be dragged into back stopping that if the risks go bad.

ALBERICI: But over in Ireland whistleblowers like Jonathan Sugarman dont have a lot of faith in
regulators and their rules.

Why did you leave Uni Credit?

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: Because we were breaking the law and it was my name on the reports
day in, day out. So under the eyes of the law, Im the person responsible to make sure that we kept
within our speed limit. And we went way beyond our speed limits on several occasions and the law is
very clear, I could face five years in prison for doing that. And I just didnt want to go to prison.

ALBERICI: He rang the alarm that his bank was in serious breach of liquidity rules but the reaction has
been painfully slow and inconclusive. Theres been outrage in parliament.... but four years on, even
after Ireland was taken to the wall by aggressive, unsustainable banking, the Irish Central Bank says
its still looking into Sugarmans claims.

And what did the police, the financial regulator, what did they do?

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: Effectively nothing, nothing at all. That is like walking into a police
station with a knife with blood on it and saying Ive just killed on someone and you expect the police
to say well wheres the body, wheres the person, what have you done? And they just say, fine, just
dont do it again. And that left me dumbfounded.

ALBERICI: Even one of historys most reckless operators has been astonished by the behaviour of
banks. Nick Leeson questions their willingness to learn from their mistakes.

NICK LEESON: Yeah I got myself back on the electoral roll in the UK. The first mail I got was credit
card companies offering me credit cards. You know I have an injunction against me for a hundred
million, Id lost eight hundred and sixty million of an English banks money and people were willing to
offer me credit cards, immediately on return. So it shows you straight away that the, you know the
controls and systems arent in place that they need.

ALBERICI: Leeson is no longer allowed to work in banking but he found a way of taking money from
international banks anyway. He advises them on how to guard against the kind of behaviour he got
away with at Barings. You have to wonder if theyre listening.

NICK LEESON: The weakness is in those risk management compliance and control areas. Always
has been, still is and probably always will be.

ALBERICI: While the rogue trader has reinvented himself as banking consultant, the whistle blower is
struggling.

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: It took me a while to pick myself up and then when I started looking for
other positions as a risk manager, I found a lot of shut doors and it turned out that telling the truth
doesnt really pay.

ALBERICI: Over the past twelve months Jonathan Sugarman has been writing an anonymous blog
detailing his experiences at UniCredit. This is the first time he has revealed his identity and as he
continues to look for work, he can only wonder if the bank that one day takes him is playing fast and
loose in a rogue system or has a rogue trader lurking in its ranks.

JONATHAN SUGARMAN: I mean here we are in 2011 with the cost of billions to UBF because a
trader who had come from the back office and was familiar with the systems knew how to get around
them. Because of his insider knowledge of the system, much like Nick Leeson twenty years ago, he
knew how to get around that and that is what we the taxpayers pay the regulators, the policemen of the
banks to make sure cannot happen and does not happen. And here we are twenty years later and its
still happening.

ALBERICI: Remarkably the rogue traders didnt actually pocket any of the money they punted on the
markets. Its the rest of us who are still paying the bill for their bad behaviour and for the selective
blindness of their bosses.

http://www.jonathansugarman.com/video.html

Unicredit and the trouble with Dublins Cayman-on-the-Liffey

February 10th, 2013
 In September 2007,
a year before Irelands banks went belly up, Jonathan Sugarman, a risk manager at Unicredit
Bank Ireland, alerted his bosses and regulators at the Central Bank of Ireland to the fact that
Unicredit was in massive breach of liquidity requirements. The law was clear: liquidity cover was
allowed to fall to 89 per cent but any lower and a report had to be filed with the regulator and
the bank faced a hefty fine. Sugarman identified that Unicredit was operating with cover of just
70 per cent, twenty times less than allowed. But his superiors at the bank and the regulators were
intensely relaxed about the law-breaking. After six weeks of being stonewalled, Sugarman
decided he had no choice other than to resign, as he did not wish to incriminate himself. Now a
whistleblower, he has spent five years seeking to raise awareness of the failures of both the Irish
central bank and Unicredit. He was interviewed by Kathimerini, a Greek affiliate of the New
York Times.

Recently you have given a few public lectures in Greece, on the issue of the banking system. Why are
you interested in our country?

To be completely frank, it was the Greeks who showed interest in me. Perhaps some people saw that I
worked as a risk manager, that my job was effectively to count the money held by a bank. [These
people] approached me because they did not know anybody else who might publicly declare that this
was his job. In June 2011 somebody offered to translate my blog into Greek, and since then I have had
many contacts with Greeks from all walks of life, concerned citizens and academics.

Can you please tell us in simple words what a risk managers job is?

I will give you a simple image here. If the bank were a car, then the risk manager would be the driver,
and the Central Bank would be the road police. A cars driver is not supposed to drive beyond the
speed limit. If the speed limit is 100 kilometres per hour, and the driver goes at 120 kilometres per
hour, then he risks a fine. Similarly, a banks risk manager is responsible for keeping minimum
liquidity. In other words, he must ensure that some amounts of money come in deposits for example,
and other amounts of money go out in the form of loans or other banking products. In every country,
the Central Bank defines the minimum liquidity that banks must always keep. In Irelands case, this
minimum was 90 per cent. If a bank were to go under this [minimum] limit, then the bank is to be fined
by law. In addition, the risk manager and the managing director could be sentenced to five years in
prison.

When did you discover Unicredit Bank Irelands liquidity problem?

 In the first
weeks that I was employed at the bank I already saw a chaotic situation. Some days we operated within
the law, while on other days we went entirely off limits. Initially, the managing director and other
managers ignored my concerns. They mentioned technical problems in our information systems and
that there was not a real problem with our liquidity. They claimed that because I was new in the job, I
could not understand these problems. On the days that we were off limits, we explained in our daily
report that this had happened because of technical problems, and of course we never informed the
Regulator, as we should have done. After repeated breaches of the limit, I announced to the managing
Director that I did not intend to pretend that I was blind, and that we should send an official report to
the Central Bank of Ireland. This actually happened at the end of July, when I personally delivered an
official notification of a liquidity breach, to the office of the financial regulator.

So did the bank face any sanctions?

There was no reaction whatsoever. And this happened when we had gone as low as 20 per cent below
the required minimum liquidity, while Irish law required us to immediately report a breach of 1 per
cent! In other words, I confessed to the banks police that I had broken the law, and they, instead of
sending immediately their officers to thoroughly investigate what was happening in the bank, [the
regulator] sent us a letter that essentially told us that since you confirmed to us that the the crime had
stopped, we are satisfied!

So what did you do then?

Then I tried to find out what these technical problems were. A banks information system is its Bible.
A bank does not keep its accounts on loose pieces of note paper. If we could not trust the information
systems results, then we would be unable to know whether we really had sufficient liquidity, or not.
As a result, I called in a company that specialised in [banking] information systems.

And what was the result of their checking?

They called me at my home one night, in September 2007, and said You complained to us that you
were anxious about your liquidity falling to 70 per cent, they told me. In fact, your liquidity is 50 per
cent! The next morning I went to the managing director and handed in my resignation letter.

But what was the cause of low liquidity?

I suspect that our activities were not being accounted for correctly. Some days we accounted them
correctly, on other days we did not.

But if the cause really was a technical problem, and not some fraud or some high risk transactions,
then why did you not solve the problem yourself, instead of resigning?

The existence of such a problem shows how amenable to fraud is the whole system. Recent scandals
with non-authorised deals by traders in the London offices of the Swiss bank UBS, or in Socit
Gnrale in France, prove exactly this fact. If the bank had failed next day, I would have been held
responsible for it, and according to the law I would go to prison for five years. Put very simply, I did
not want to go to prison.

Why do you believe that you were the only one to have been afraid of this?
 Banks act with impunity. As we have seen
since, the upper echelons in banks can be confident they will never be held responsible for anything.
This does not necessarily mean anything, but Unicredit Bank Irelands chairman, Dr Brian Hillery
(pictured left), is an ex-member of the Irish parliament, and is from Fianna Fil, the political party that
was in power at the time. Later on, after I handed in my resignation, Hillery became a director of
Central Bank of Ireland. I wonder how can the Central Bank impartially investigate a bank whose
chairman now sits on the board of the Central Bank?

At the time, Ireland was labelled the Wild West of European Finance by the New York Times. Was
this fair?

Ireland was a very attractive place for banks and multinational corporations because of its extremely
low tax rate, which was 10 per cent. Banks could establish subsidiaries that would be controlled (or
rather, as it was later proved, would be not controlled) by the Central Bank of Ireland. In theory, we all
had our daddy and mummy, who were the big European or US banks. Whenever we run out of cash,
we could phone our daddy in Frankfurt, or our mummy in Rome, to send us some. Everything looked
perfect! Moreover, daddy and mummy had sent an official letter to the Central Bank of Ireland when
they created their subsidiary, saying that they would take care of their child should it ever misbehave.
So, the Central Bank was not too strict with us, children.

So why did your bank not pick up the phone to daddy and mummy, when it was obvious that you were
out of cash?

If the managing director had called his friend in Milan and told him that he had run out of money, then
the first question he would have to answer would be Why? Dont you know how to manage your
bank? Obviously then no one was going to call their parents and tell them they had misbehaved. In
theory, a liquidity problem could be solved in five minutes. But how was he going to justify that he
arrived at a liquidity level below 70 per cent when the law demanded at least 90 per cent? Obviously, if
anyone were to admit something like this, they would instantly lose their bonus!

And what was the reaction of the parent company when you resigned?

There was no reaction whatsoever. Three years later Senator David Norris presented my issue in the
Senate. Subsequently, Unicredits headquarters in Milan were contacted [by journalists]. [Unicredit
headquarters] Told them they had nothing to do with it all. Either they were pretending, or they really
did not know what was going on. So, I wonder Is it that your child in Dublin did not tell you what
really happened? Or, even worse, did the Central Bank of Ireland not tell Banca dItalia the central
bank of Italy, what had happened?

So is your opinion that the central bank of Italy knew about this?

I cannot answer this question. If you want an answer, you might ask Mario Draghi, who at the time was
governor of the Banca dItalia. This is a very simple question: While you were Governor of Italys
central bank, did you know that the biggest bank in your country did not know what its Irish child was
doing? And if you were not informed about it, how do you explain that?
Do you believe that the Irish banks failed for similar reasons?

A year after my resignation, within a single night, Irelands government had to guarantee all of its
banks. Perhaps they did not all face exactly the same problems, but finally they arrived at the same
point. Of course, I wonder where all the risk managers of these banks are now?

Really, where are they?

They are at a silent moment in time.

And why is all this happening, in your opinion?

It is all part of the big lie which we are all living through. No one wants to be the first one to admit
the problem. Even if we leave aside the performance of any particular risk manager, the banking
system still has a set of other controls. These include auditing companies that co-sign the the annual
financial reports and the regulating authorities, the central banks.

So you say that it is not only the banks fault?

It simply cannot be that it is no bankers fault. There are people who are responsible for signing that
everything complies with the law. Every bank has at least one risk manager; every bank has at least one
chartered accountant; every bank has an external auditing company. Every country has a central bank,
just as Ireland has the Central Bank of Ireland. Therefore, there are specific people who are responsible
for the fact that the banks in Ireland needed to be re-capitalised, and these people have a name and
surname. We cannot say, It just happened! or Daddy, the toy broke! Who broke it? I dont know, it
broke by itself!

But why isnt your story better known?

It is a story that brings discomfort to many people in key positions at various places.

Can I suppose then that the Central Bank of Ireland did not ask you what had happened, even after the
banks had requested to be bailed-out?

No, in fact they did call me, twice. The first time, in the month

of May 2011. They invited

anyone with information to come forward and offered confidentiality to anyone who would. But this
meeting was a fiasco. Essentially, the confidentiality clause referred only to my anonymity. As they
clarified at the meeting, they would be obliged to report everything that I told them to the states public
prosecution, which meant that everything I might say could be used against me by the authorities.
Naturally, I refused to talk then. The second time was in February, 2012. Even though there was no
further clarity by then regarding the confidentiality, I was prepared to share some of what I knew. At
this second meeting the Central Bank officials admitted that they had had sight of further irregularities
at the bank. But my initial enthusiasm over this admission, soon proved to be misplaced. In June, 2012,
they declared the case closed. In August of 2012 they gave to the press something that they claimed
passed as minutes of our meeting. However, it bore no reflection to what had been said.

And what are your relations with the bank today?

I have no relationship whatsoever with the bank. I demanded damages for constructive dismissal. Their
reply was that I would receive nothing, and that I would have to face a legal battle should I ever reveal
any information to third persons. I assure you that it is scary enough to be threatened by a trillion Euro
bank! They even used data from my personal life to allege that I cannot know what I am talking about
because I am psychologically disturbed!

So you have initiated court proceedings against the bank?

It was impossible, even for financial reasons, to initiate private legal proceedings against the bank.
What is even more important, is that before I could ever challenge a trillion euro bank, the police must
first declare that a crime had occurred. When the police claim no crime happened, how can you
prosecute the criminal? In order to prove that the state authority itself has buried the evidence, I will
have to present my case to some European-wide authority. So I am waiting for the European Banking
Authority to find some teeth.

And are you eager to do something like this?

Eager I certainly am. Whether I will do it or not, I will decide when the time comes.

But even if you yourself have not been vindicated, do you believe that in the wake of the banking crisis,
the banking system has been properly strengthened? Or perhaps the effectiveness of the regulatory
authorities?

No. While the banks and their managers do not get punished, why should anything change? Soon we
will have a new regulatory framework for the banking market, the so called Basel III agreement. But as
long as we do not intend to impose the law, we can agree as many Basels as we want.

According to your experience, is it possible that the system that you have been describing here could be
changed for the better by the appearance of more whistleblowers?

Yes. But, if I judge from my own case, I do not think that there will be many more whistleblowers.
There is no protection by the state at all. I have been supported only by my friends, or by people who
simply heard about my story.

And has your value system changed through your experience?

Now I have greater faith in humanity, and much less faith in the established authorities, be they
politicians, judges, or functionaries. We, common people, take too seriously all those people who do
nothing to protect small investors or the small tax payers. They only care for saving the banks.

You sound like a disappointed golden boy who has turned against a capitalist system that once fed
him.

I am not going to enter into this discussion. Whether I am for capitalism, socialism, or the Left, has
nothing to do with the discussion we are having now. Nineteenth century ideologies cannot be used to
face a twenty-first century crisis. In Ireland at this moment we have a socialist government that is safe-
guarding the monetary interests of the capitalist bondholders. While in Austria, it was the extreme
Right wing party that brought my case to the parliament. Do you see any ideology here?

So you are against the financial system?

This is an interesting question if we wanted [this interview] to be a philosophical discussion; but this
question is not relevant at the moment. We might barter a kilo of olive oil with a television set, actually
I have seen this with my own eyes and it functions. However, at the end of the day, if you want a
smartphone, you cannot simply barter for it with olive oil. Therefore, we must have a common
currency. We return then to the starting point of this discussion. You either have rules and abide by
them, or you have no rules, and everybody does whatever they want. If the latter is the case, then it
would be better if we all knew that.

So what might help create a sound financial system, in your opinion?

To abide by the law. And enforce the law when it is broken.

Do you remember the day that you handed in your resignation?

I hardly slept the night before. Perhaps we have lost the sense of what a billion Euro means by now, but
up to that day I used to sign for amounts like that; only in reality they did not exist! I was sad, and at
the same time I felt relieved that I had stopped participating in a crime. The managing director tried to
make me change my mind, but I would not go back. Also he faced huge pressure from the dealing
room, so at the end the story it became a case of Either me or them.

And how was your career after that?

A short while after I left, I started looking for a new job. But the banking world is ultimately a small
world. I was told that a person with my C.V. would be unable to find a job at another bank, having left
Unicredit after just six months; and as a whistleblower on top of that. I was trapped.

And how did the people who were close to you feel about all this?

There are a few friends who have stood by me all this time. In 2007 no one could predict how things
would turn out, and most people did not believe me. Only after they heard [and saw] on television that
the banks had to be bailed out, did they understand that I was not lying.

And how do you make your living today?

With a little help from my friends as the Beatles song goes (laughs). I give consulting services to my
friends, and I give lectures. I have also been approached to write a book. Life will show.

I imagine that you can not have the life that you had before.

do not want to enter into details about my personal life and the psychological hardships that I have
endured. My financial situation is difficult now. As I told you, I would not be here today without my
friends help. Today I am giving you this interview and enjoying my coffee at the exceptional King
George Palace hotel, on Syntagma Square. A few years ago I used to come to this hotel for my
vacations. There are very few places where I would be able to stay today [probably] at a Bed &
Breakfast, at best.

Do you ever regret having been shut out of the world of banking?

I used to earn good money according by Irish standards. I had a beautiful home, a nice life. I had
dinners at expensive restaurants. I travelled a lot. But I would never trade my beliefs for a life of
luxury. Unfortunately, it seems these days that many people are willing, if not even eager, to sacrifice
their childrens future for a fragile present of luxury. I cannot do that.

Is something haunting you now?

The laziness of the educated middle class is the thing haunting me. Rich bankers see what is
happening, and laugh all the way to the bank, while the middle class works to serve their interests. Risk
managers, lawyers, chartered accountants, all these people pretend that they are working hard, while in
truth they are lazy morally and intellectually. The same holds true for the university professors of law
and of economics. Where is constructive criticism today? This laziness has become so widespread, that
very few can see it for what it is.

Kathimerini thanked the management of the King George Palace hotel for hosting the interview.
You can read more about Sugarmans campaign in Villages Blowing the whistle so hard it
hurts. Sugarmans website is at WhistleblowerIrl.blogpost.com

http://www.ianfraser.org/unicredit-and-irelands-dark-heart-of-finance/

UniCredit Bank Ireland p.l.c. is a wholly owned subsidiary of UniCredit S.p.A., based in the
International Financial Services Centre in Dublin.
The principal business areas are credit and structured finance (loans, bonds, securitisations, other forms
of asset financing), treasury activities (money market, repos, eonia and other interest rate swaps,
foreign exchange, futures), issue of certificates of deposit
and structured notes.

UniCredit Bank Ireland p.l.c. does not operate accounts for individuals and does not offer personal
loans.

Unaudited Half Yearly Financial Statements (June 2016)

To view a copy of the 2016 Unaudited Half Yearly Financial Statements

http://www.unicreditbank.ie/Half_Year_Report_June2016.pdf

60,000,000,000 Euro Medium Term Note Programme

On 15th June 2016, UniCredit S.p.A., UniCredit Bank Ireland p.l.c. and UniCredit International Bank
(Luxembourg) S.A. updated their Euro Medium Term Note Programme (the "Programme") with a
value of 60,000,000,000 under which notes may be issued from time to time, denominated in any
currency agreed between the relevant issuer and the relevant dealer.

Notes issued under the Programme can be listed on the official list of the Luxembourg Stock Exchange
and admitted to trading on the Luxembourg Stock Exchange's regulated market (as contemplated by
Directive 2004/39/EC) upon approval of the Luxembourg Stock Exchange.

The notes under the Programme may be offered both to retail and institutional investors and may be
issued on a continuing basis to one or more of the dealers specified below and any additional dealer
appointed under the Programme from time to time by any of the issuers, which appointment may be for
a specific issue or on an ongoing basis.

Arranger: UBS Investment Bank

Co-Arranger: UniCredit Bank

Dealers: Dealers: Barclays, BNP Paribas, BofA Merrill Lynch, Crdit Agricole CIB, Credit Suisse,
Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs International, J.P. Morgan, Mediobanca, Morgan Stanley, The Royal
Bank of Scotland, Socit Gnrale Corporate & Investment Banking, UBS Investment Bank,
UniCredit Bank

To view a copy of the Prospectus (in PDF format) please click here.

http://www.unicreditbank.ie/First_Supplement%20EMTN%202016.pdf

To view the retail issues please click here

http://www.unicreditbank.ie/Second_Supplement%20EMTN%202016.pdf

To view the EMTN supplements please select from the below:

Minister for Finance inaugurates our new home

The Central Banks new Dockland Campus was inaugurated on 24 April 2017 by the Minister for
Finance.

Michael Noonan TD joined Governor Philip R. Lane, members of the Central Banks senior team and
staff at a ceremony in North Wall Quay.

On a tour of the building, the Minister saw how its design helped to maximise opportunities for
collaboration amongst staff. He also learned about the North Wall Quays green credentials. It is the
first office building in Ireland to achieve the Building Research Establishment's Environmental
Assessment Method (BREEAM) "Outstanding" rating at design stage and has been shortlisted for a
number of awards, including the Green Awards 2017 and Sustainable Energy Awards 2016.
The inauguration ceremony was attended by Central Banks neighbours from the local Docklands
community. These included schoolchildren who had taken part in projects such as the Early Learning
Initiative and Junior Achievement Ireland which involved Central Bank staff. Other guests included
representatives from architects HJ Lyons, construction company Walls and Dublin City Council.

https://www.centralbank.ie/events/past-events/dockland-campus-inauguration

Inauguration of the Dockland Campus Governor Philip R.

Lane
24 Apr 2017 Speech

Minister, former Governor Honohan, distinguished guests,

I am delighted to welcome you to the inauguration of the Central Bank of Irelands Dockland Campus.

Today marks an important step for the future of the Central Bank, as we adapt to fulfil our increasingly
complex mandate in a more interconnected and challenging global environment.

There is also a nice parallel with the past.

In 1927, when deciding on the first permanent premises of the Currency Commission the precursor to
the Central Bank members of the Commission emphasised the importance of placing it in close
proximity to the Shareholding Banks, and Foster Place was chosen.1

In the same vein, our Dockland Campus, incorporating North Wall Quay and Spencer Dock, again
places us firmly at the centre of Irelands international financial district.2

***

The Central Bank is a vital institution of the State. When the Currency Commission was dissolved in
1943, the Central Bank was established with an enhanced role, the most important of which was
safeguarding the integrity of the currency and, echoing a phrase from Article 45 of the Constitution,
ensuring that in what pertains to the control of credit, the constant and predominant aim shall be the
welfare of the people as a whole.3
In the years since its establishment, both the domestic mandate of the Central Bank and our European
roles have expanded. Our European role is critically important and the Bank is recognised as a strong
contributor to the work of the European System of Central Banks and European System of Financial
Supervision.

But while our mandate has expanded and our staff has doubled in recent years, what has not changed is
our core mission of protecting the public interest, and public service is central to the ethos and culture
of the Bank.

The fact that this site was originally intended to host the new headquarters for Anglo-Irish Bank has
invited much commentary. In one sense, history is again repeating itself. Foster Place was leased in
perpetuity from Bank of Ireland. Commercial Buildings on Dame Street as the name suggests was
formerly occupied by members of the Chamber of Commerce, the Stock Exchange, merchants offices
and brokers.

My own view is that this juxtaposition is quite fitting in serving as an ongoing reminder of the severe
economic and social damage caused by financial crises a reminder to the Bank and our staff (as much
as to the public) of our mission and the critical need to remain ever vigilant.

I hope that our new building can serve as a symbol to the people of Ireland of the importance of our
work to fulfil our mission of safeguarding stability, protecting consumers.

***

I am especially grateful to Minister Noonan for agreeing to open the building today. The Central Bank
and the Department of Finance have a close working relationship on many fronts, while recognising the
independence of the Central Bank in implementing its mandate. Moreover, a major lesson from the
crisis is that the Central Bank and the Department of Finance both have vital roles to play in
maintaining financial stability, which is supported by the joint work of the Financial Stability
Group. In addition, it is always important to keep in mind that the net surplus income from the Central
Bank is an important component in the overall revenue stream accruing to the Government. This was to
the forefront of our minds in ensuring that our new headquarters was delivered in a timely and cost-
effective manner.

***

The Bank set a number of objectives for the design of the building: to establish a productive workplace
for our city centre staff; to ensure that the building is environmentally sustainable, with a high energy
rating; and to recognise that the new headquarters would be a major city landmark for the decades
ahead. Accordingly, while the shell of the building was already in place, there was considerable effort
to adapt the design to reflect the One Bank culture we seek to foster in the organisation.

I wish to pay particular tribute to former Governor Honohan and members of the Commission for your
vision and commitment to this project, which was initiated in 2011 and moved to the implementation
phase with the purchase of the site in 2013. At the outset, you recognised that this move would provide
an opportunity to help us work in different and more effective ways, supported by the adoption of new
technologies.

Today, the Dockland Campus brings all our city centre staff previously located in five city offices into
one city centre location. Collectively, we have been here just a few weeks, but already this is a vibrant
campus with our staff embracing our new facilities and new ways of working. It is already evident that
the new environment is enhancing collaboration and teamwork within the Bank and helping us to
deliver our mandate in a more effective manner. As you move through the building you will see visual
representations of Crann an ir, which remains the symbol of the Bank.

The realised design you see today is also a testament to the commitment of our design team, led by our
architect Peter McGovern of HJ Lyons, and to our main contractor, Walls Construction, who in turn
worked with many suppliers and craftspeople to design, construct and deliver the new headquarters.
The list of people to thank is too numerous to mention, but the outcome of your efforts is very clear.
The team fully embraced the Banks vision for the premises and this building can take pride of place
here on the river front, which already is home to so many distinguished city landmarks.

I am also pleased that we are joined today by members of Dublin City Council, our neighbours from
the Docklands area, the winners of our national schools competition Generation uro 2017, and local
schoolchildren who have engaged with the Central Bank through a number of initiatives including the
Early Learning Initiative. The new building will facilitate our ongoing commitment to our outreach and
community programmes, both to our new local community and in the broader national community.

The new building is the first office building in Ireland to achieve the Building Research
Establishment's Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) Outstanding rating at design stage.
The building energy rating (BER) is targeted at A2, and will be one of the first commercial projects in
the State to achieve such a rating.

As an employer, we value our work as a knowledge-based, transparent public service organisation,

offering a variety of career choices. Recognising the importance of knowledge in the Central Bank, the
top floor is dedicated to learning with a new staff library and a learning and development centre, while
our public space here on the ground floor encompasses a visitor centre and a new archive facility open
to the public.

I hope you have had a moment to move through our visitor centre, which will enable us to meet with
the public, explain what we do and why we do it.

Our two opening exhibitions are complementary. The first is the Euro Exhibition, which was created
by the European Central Bank. This examines the development of euro currency and includes sections
on euro banknotes and their security features, euro coinage and the history of money. To bring a
uniquely Irish focus, we also have created another exhibition, celebrating the 90th anniversary of the
Currency Commission, which I mentioned earlier.

These exhibitions are part of a broad programme of activities aimed at increasing transparency and
understanding about the role and work of the Central Bank, in line with our Strategic Plan. We are
pleased to see local schools represented here today and look forward to welcoming you to the visitor
centre.

***

To conclude, I am delighted to share the inauguration of our new campus with so many who have been
integral to getting us to this juncture.

I would like finally to thank Chief Operating Officer Gerry Quinn and Director of Facilities Paul
Molumby, who led the programme from inception to conclusion, with the help of many others who put
in extraordinary time and effort over the past four years.

I hope that you enjoy visiting our new headquarters today, and I look forward to our new campus
enabling us to continue to deliver effectively on our mission.

1
Moynihan, Maurice (1975), Currency and Central Banking in Ireland 1922-60, Central Bank of
Ireland and Gill and Macmillan

2
While the Dockland Campus places the Central Bank firmly at the centre of Irelands international
financial district, the Currency Centre, which will remain located in Sandyford, continues to be critical
to the work of the Bank.
3
A Chronology of Main Developments in the Central Bank of Ireland 1943 -2013. Available here.

A Chronology of Main Developments in the

Central Bank of Ireland
1943 - 2013
https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/publications/tns-1-0-the-history-of-the-central-bank-
1943-2013.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Central Bank Publishes Update Report on Continuing

Examination of Tracker Mortgage Issues
23 Mar 2017 Press Release

Report sets out progress being made by lenders in completing review.

Details on Examination Framework, Principles for Redress and the
Appeals Process published.
At end February, 9,900 impacted customer accounts identified by lenders.
Of this, approximately 78m has been paid out in redress and
compensation to approximately 2,600 accounts to date.
Lenders are expected to identify all impacted accounts by end September
2017.
Enforcement activity set out one investigation has concluded with two
others ongoing.

The Central Bank of Ireland has published a report providing a further update on the Examination of
Tracker Mortgage Related Issues. The report is the latest in a series of status updates since the
Examination commenced and sets out the progress being made by lenders in completing the review. As
at end February 2017 lenders reviews had identified approximately 9,900 impacted customer accounts.
The report also sets out information on the Central Banks enforcement powers and activity in response
to the tracker mortgage issues identified to date. The Examination Framework, the Principles for
Redress and the Appeals Process set out by the Central Bank have also been published, in conjunction
with the report.

The immediate focus of the Examination is to ensure that the interests of impacted customers are
protected and that lenders prioritise the identification of impacted customers. Under the Principles for
Redress lenders must stop further harm to impacted customers at the earliest possible time and must put
in place a redress and compensation programme to fully address the impact their actions have had on
impacted customers. The Principles for Redress also set out the Central Banks expectations for lenders
to provide, amongst other things, additional payments to allow impacted customers to seek independent
professional advice. Some lenders have already commenced redress and compensation payments. At
the end of February approximately 78m had been paid out in redress and compensation to
approximately 2,600 accounts identified as part of the Examination.

The Tracker Examination is a priority for the Central Bank and it has set specific timelines for lenders
to complete Phase 2 of the Examination which identifies impacted customers, the last of which will be
completed no later than end September 2017.

The Central Bank will take appropriate supervisory action, up to and including enforcement action
where necessary, in order to ensure lenders deliver fair outcomes for impacted customers. Enforcement
activity will be influenced by the outcome of the reviews currently being conducted as part of the
Examination.

In line with the process to date, the Central Bank will continue to provide updates throughout the
Examination. A further update will be published by the Central Bank in Autumn 2017 and a final
report will also be published after the conclusion of the Examination.

Framework for Conducting the Tracker Mortgage Examination

https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/consumer-hub-
library/tracker-issues/appendix1-framework-conducting-tracker-mortgage-
examination.pdf?sfvrsn=4
Tracker Mortgage Examination
CLARIFICATION OF ISSUES RAISED BY LENDERS
5 May 2016
https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/consumer-hub-
library/tracker-issues/tracker-mortgage-examination-clarifications-
5may2016.pdf?sfvrsn=4
PRINCIPLES FOR LENDERS WHEN TRACKER
MORTGAGE RELATED ISSUES
IDENTIFIED FOR REDRESS
(PRINCIPLES FOR REDRESS)
https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/consumer-hub-
library/tracker-issues/appendix3-tracker-mortgage-examination-redress-
principles.pdf?sfvrsn=4


UPDATE ON THE CENTRAL BANK OF
IRELANDS EXAMINATION OF TRACKER
MORTGAGE-RELATED ISSUES
https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-
source/consumer-hub-library/tracker-
issues/report-tracker-related-mortgage-
issues.pdf?sfvrsn=6
Settlement Agreement between the Central Bank of Ireland and Allied Irish
Bank s, p . l . c. Allied Irish Bank s , p.l.c. fined 2, 275 ,000 by the Central Bank
of Ireland in respect of a nti - m oney l aundering and terrorist financing
compliance failures
https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/news-and-media/legal-
notices/settlement-agreements/public-statement-relating-to-settlement-
agreement-between-central-bank-of-ireland-and-allied-irish-
bank.pdf?sfvrsn=12

Motor insurance data published in latest Consumer Protection

Bulletin
20 Apr 2017 Press Release

Majority of personal motor insurance policies (62%) are provided by

companies incorporated in Ireland and prudentially regulated by the
Central Bank of Ireland.
28% of policies are provided by companies operating in Ireland on a
branch basis, with firms operating on a Freedom of Services basis
accounting for 10%.
 11,502 complaints were reported in H2 2016 from firms currently
providing motor insurance, which account for 0.5% of live policies. Half of
all complaints related to pricing issues.

The Central Bank of Ireland today publishes its fifth Consumer Protection Bulletin, which is focused
on the motor insurance sector. The information was compiled from data submitted by 24 motor
insurance companies providing insurance to Irish personal consumers in 2016.

This bulletin provides a high level overview of the number and value of personal motor insurance
policies written, as well as information on the location of the companies writing these policies and their
regulation. The bulletin also includes data on complaints.

The key data includes:

The total number of motor insurance policies as of 31 December 2016

was 2,134,553 with related total premiums of 1.020bn.
Of the 24 motor insurance companies, nine are incorporated in Ireland
and prudentially regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland; four are
incorporated in the UK and have branches in Ireland and the remaining
eleven provide insurance in Ireland on a Freedom of Services basis.
By number of policies, 62% are provided by companies prudentially
regulated by the Central Bank, 28% by companies operating here on a
branch basis and the remaining 10% by companies here on a Freedom of
Services basis1.
In H2 20162, the reporting motor insurance companies received a total of
11,502 complaints, representing 0.5% of live policies.
Around half of all these complaints (52.2%) related to pricing; 20%
related to customer service and 12.7% related to voiding/decline of
policy/terms and conditions.
6.2% of the complaints were made by consumers in relation to motor
insurance claims.
99% of the motor insurance complaints were resolved within 40 business
days3.
Total redress of 9,834 was paid in H2 2016 in respect of 44 motor
insurance claim complaint cases.

Notes

1. This is the Central Banks fifth Consumer Protection Bulletin covering

different aspects of the Irish financial services market. The Consumer
Protection Bulletins have been developed as part of a commitment (first
outlined in the Consumer Protection Outlook Report 2015) to gather and
monitor market intelligence and data returns from regulated firms.
Further bulletins will be published periodically.
2. A personal consumer means a consumer who is a natural person acting
outside his or her business, trade or profession.
3. Insurance undertakings can write business in Ireland from another
European Economic Area (EEA) state by either establishing a branch
(Freedom of Establishment) or by writing business directly without a
branch in the State (Freedom of Services).
 4. The Central Bank published the outcome of a thematic review specifically
focused on the handling of motor insurance claims on 28 February 2017.

-----------------------------------------

1
Under financial services legislation insurance companies must inform consumers of the name of the
competent authority from which they obtained an authorisation and name of the country where they
have their head office.

2
H2 refers to the second half of the year i.e. 1 July until 31 December.

3
This is the timeframe prescribed by the Consumer Protection Code 2012 within which a complaint
must be resolved or, if not resolved, the complainant must be informed of the anticipated timeframe for
resolution.

Update on Enterprise Insurance Company plc

19 Apr 2017 Press Release

Update 19 April 2017

The Gibraltar Financial Services Commission announced the appointment of independent inspectors to
investigate the insolvency of Enterprise Insurance Company plc (Enterprise) and the conduct of its
directors and auditors. Read the update.

Update 4 November 2016

The Gibraltar Financial Services Commission has today published the report of the Provisional
Liquidator on Enterprise Insurance Company plc. Read the full report.

Update 26 October 2016

On 26 October, the Gibraltar Financial Services Commission (GFSC) announced an investigation into
Enterprise Insurance Company plc (Enterprise) and its board of directors. The GFSC has stated that it
has reason to believe that it may have been significantly and consistently misled about Enterprises true
financial position. Click here to read the full announcement.

Additionally, the Supreme Court in Gibraltar (the Court) today appointed Mr Freddie White of Grant
Thornton as Liquidator to Enterprise Insurance. The full statement from the GFSC can be read here.

The Court also confirmed that Enterprise motor insurance policies are no longer valid as and from the
appointment of the Liquidator on 26 October 2016.

The Central Bank strongly recommends that affected consumers (i.e. those who held an Enterprise
Policy up to 26 October and have not arranged alternative motor insurance) immediately contact their
insurance broker or an insurer directly to seek an alternative insurance cover.

These Policyholders can no longer rely on their Enterprise motor insurance policies and will be
considered as driving without insurance from midnight tonight.

Q & A update for consumers

Update 30 September 2016

The Provisional Liquidator for Enterprise Insurance Company plc (Enterprise) has today notified all
brokers that he will present his report to the Supreme Court in Gibraltar on 26 October 2016, when he
will recommend that a liquidator be appointed to Enterprise. The full statement can be accessed here.

The Provisional Liquidator has also indicated that all motor insurance policies will no longer be valid
as and from 26 October 2016. While policies will remain in effect until that date, the Central Bank
strongly recommends that Enterprise policyholders immediately contact their insurance broker or an
insurer directly to seek alternative insurance cover.

Update 12 August 2016

The Gibraltar Financial Services Commission (the GFSC) has issued a warning to the public regarding
the website enterpriseinsuranceclaim.com. The full warning statement may be viewed here.

Additional information and contact details are available from the Gibraltar Financial Services
Commission.

Update 27 July 2016

The Central Bank has today contacted 323 insurance brokers who have sold Enterprise products to
consumers requiring them to immediately contact any policyholder who holds a current Enterprise
motor insurance policy and inform them of the urgency to make alternative motor insurance
arrangements. This urgency stems from the fact that any claim made by policyholders who hold active
policies with Enterprise, may not be fully covered irrespective of the policy remaining in force. It is
noted by the Central Bank that Wrightway Underwriting Limited has agreed to make an ex gratia
payment equal to the value of the premiums from now until the end of the contract term, in respect of
any policyholder who holds a current Enterprise motor insurance policy. Policyholders and brokers can
now access further information and contact details through the Enterprise website. You can contact
Enterprise Insurance at Email: info@eigplc.com or at 00350 200 50150.

Update 25 July 2016

The Supreme Court of Gibraltar has today appointed Mr. Frederick David John White of Grant
Thornton (Gibraltar) Limited as Provisional Liquidator of Enterprise Insurance Company Plc.

The Central Bank is continuing to engage with the regulator in Gibraltar regarding the interests of Irish
consumers. If you are a customer of Enterprise you should contact, as soon as possible, the broker
from whom you bought the policy regarding arranging alternative cover.

22 July 2016

Enterprise Insurance Company plc (Enterprise) is a Gibraltar incorporated company subject to

prudential supervision in Gibraltar by the Gibraltar Financial Services Commission (the GFSC).
Enterprise was selling motor insurance in a number of European countries including Ireland on a
freedom of services basis. Its financial position is not supervised by the Central Bank of Ireland and the
Central Bank has no role in that regard.

The Central Bank was notified by the GFSC today (22 July) that it is now taking steps, with the
cooperation of Enterprise, to petition for the winding up of the Company. The GFSC is taking this
action as Enterprise has told the GFSC the company is insolvent and has not been able to secure
additional funding.
The GFSC is notifying the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA), and the
relevant financial services regulators and compensation schemes in France, Greece, Italy, Norway,
Ireland and the UK, where Enterprise has written business.

The Central Bank will work closely with the GFSC to ensure all Irish motor policyholders are
identified and are communicated with directly.

Motor insurance policyholders in Ireland, who bought insurance through the broker network, may be
affected. Any policy holder who has concerns about their policy should contact their broker in the first
instance.

The following contact information has been provided by Enterprise for policy holders

1. If you are a policy holder and you have any questions, you can contact the
GFSC on 00 350 200 40284 or email
Email: enterprisepolicyholders@fsc.gi.
2. You can also contact Enterprise on telephone number 00 350 200 50150.
3. For urgent press enquiries please call 00 350 200 43502.

Further information is available from the Gibraltar Financial Services Commission.

https://www.centralbank.ie/news/article/update-on-enterprise-insurance-company-plc

Gibraltar Financial Services Commission: Corporate Information

http://www.fsc.gi/uploads/annual-reports/files/annualreport2016.pdf

Certificate of Deposit (CD) Issued

On 25th September 2003, UniCredit Bank Ireland p.l.c. signed a CD Programme

http://www.unicreditbank.ie/UniCreditgroup_CD_Programme_Information_Me
morandum.pdf

A note on Deutsche Bank

By Golem XIV on September 20, 2016 in latest

Deutsche Bank, one of Europes behemoths, is in very deep trouble having lost 90% 0f its share price
value since 2007, has been falling sharply all this last year (48% loss this year) and, with its $42
Trillion in Derivatives exposure was singled out by the IMF, as the bank which ,

appears to be the most important net contributor to systemic risks

Of course Deutsche agues the standard derivatives-arent-a-problem line, that this 42 trillion all nets
out and their real exposure is a fraction of that vast figure. Which is fine as long as you think that in the
event of Deutsche coming unstuck, 42 trillions-worth of derivatives contracts can be held in abeyance
for the time it would take for all those contracts to be netted out. As Ive said before netting out is akin
to getting a rowing boat full of people to all change places without the boat overturning.
And now Deutsche has been threatened by the US DoJ with a $14 billion fine for its crimes for selling
knowingly over-valued RMBS (Residential Mortgage Backed Securities) in the build up to the
financial crash of 2007.

Deutsche cannot pay $14 billion without raising a great deal of cash. Deutsche has put aside $5.5
billion for paying fines. A mere 9 billion short. So could Deutsche go down? Financially yes it could.
But politically, I doubt it. And its the tension between these two answers, between the parlous
financial state and the huge political significance of Deutsche, that I find interesting.

Deutsche is Germanys only G-SIB (Global Systemically Important Bank). Deutsche is Germanys
financial flag carrier. It stands at the centre of Germanys long held desire to have Frankfurt eclipse
London as Europes financial centre. Although Germany also has Allianz as a G-SII (Global
systemically Important Insurer), without Deutsche Bank Germany ceases to be a globally significant
financial nation (G-SFN OK I made that one up). Without Deutsche Germany would not sit at the top
table of global finance. France would. France has three G-SIBs. The balance between France and
Germany within Europe would shift. Maintaining that balance between France and Germany, at the
heart of Europe, has been critical in European affairs since WWI.

Could Germany ever allow Deutsche Bank to go under?

Officially the global framework for G-SIFI resolution in bankruptcy has been laid down by the FSB
and agreed by all. And interestingly, though they are touted as the result of new thinking since the
financial crisis, they are not. I recently received an EU document marked Secret, entitled Overview
of Financial Stability Resolution Issues and dated Feb 2008 which describes pretty much what the
FSB has now settled upon now. I mention this because almost every word in it was completely ignored
once the crisis hit and each country viewed the imminent demise of their major, flag-carrying banks.
Which leads me to wonder why I should believe it would be any different next time? I think this
question is particularly critical to Germany because Deutsche is its only G-SIB. In the next massive
implosion of debts, France could afford to let one of its G-SIBs go down and still have two seats at the
top table. England could do the same.

How will G_SIBs be wound down?

The not-so-new rules for how a G-SIB should be wound down begin by stating that,

Resolution should be initiated when a firm is no longer viable or likely to be no longer viable, and has
no reasonable prospect of becoming so.

But no one has wanted to state exactly what the trigger is, for deciding that a bank is no longer viable.
Except to say the global regulators will leave it to national regulatory authorities to decide. So
Germany will decide when Deutsche is no longer viable. Sure, thatll be grand.

Should an authority take the fatal stop of admitting one of their G-SIBs is no longer viable then things
are supposed to move with wonderful efficiency. Resolution of netting out is to be speedily concluded
(in as little as two days!) No sniggering please. And then as the gruesome business of sorting the living
from the dead parts of the bank gets going the authorities must definitely NOT rely

on public solvency support and not create an expectation that such support will be available;

Instead the dead parts will inflict losses first on share holders and then on bond holders in the time
honoured order of unsecured first. And then those parts which are not completely dead and might be
cut away to live again in a different body, are to be sold off by means of sale or merger.

1. As a last resort and for the overarching purpose of maintaining financial

stability, some countries may decide to have a power to place the firm
under temporary public ownership and control in order to continue
 critical operations, while seeking to arrange a permanent solution such as
a sale or merger with a commercial private sector purchaser.

So public bail outs are supposed to be strictly temporary. No holding 80% of RBS for most of a
decade. Really? But thats not the point which is important for Deutsche Bank. The important point is
that in any sale of the viable parts of Germanys only G-SIB, the brutal fact of the matter is that there is
no other German financial institution that could afford to buy any of it. Commerzbank? Allianz?
Letting an insurer buy a bank? So imagine the situation for Germany. They lose their seat at the top
table and then they watch as France, England, American or perhaps China buy the crown of German
financial might.

So I dont think it will ever happen. Or at least it will only happen when Germany is truly out of any
other options.

So if Deutsche is not going to be declared no longer viable what are the alternatives?

http://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/2015-update-of-list-of-global-systemically-important-banks-G-
SIBs.pdf

Deutsche Bank AG, which runs Europes biggest investment bank, may be the biggest contributor to
systemic risk among the largest lenders, according to the International Monetary Fund.

Deutsche Bank appears to be the most important net contributor to systemic risks among global
systemically important banks, or G-SIBs, the Washington-based IMF said in a report Wednesday.
HSBC Holdings Plc and Credit Suisse Group AG are next in the ranking, according to the IMF.

Global regulators have sought to avoid a repeat of the taxpayer-funded bank bailouts of the 2008
financial crisis by holding lenders to stricter capital requirements that encourage them to become
smaller and less complex. Concern over Frankfurt-based Deutsche Banks financial strength has
weighed on the companys stock and make it the worst-valued global lender.

The relative importance of Deutsche Bank underscores the importance of risk management, intense
supervision of G-SIBs and the close monitoring of their cross-border exposures, as well as rapidly
completing capacity to implement the new resolution regime, the IMF said in the report.

Deutsche Bank currently exceeds its capital requirements and is shrinking its balance sheet to comply
with regulations as they become stricter.

"In particular, Germany, France, the U.K. and the U.S. have the highest degree of outward spillovers as
measured by the average percentage of capital loss of other banking systems due to banking sector
shock in the source country," the IMF said.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-30/deutsche-bank-may-be-top-contributor-to-
systemic-risk-imf-says

One option is the UniCredit route. UniCredit was a trillion euro bank. It was Italys flag carrier. It had
bought Bavarias banks and some of Austrias as well. And yet its share price was
always paltry. Just 7.6 Euros at the market top in May 07. And since then it has been a hollow and
enfeebled giant. Lumbering and ineffectual. It has been the laughing stock of European banks. But Italy
doesnt seem to mind. They seem content to let UniCredit be the quintessential Zombie bank. Would
Germany be as sanguine to leave Deutsche to go the same way? This would, I suggest, be almost as
injurious to German pride and industrial policy as letting Deutsche go down completely.

But if Germany decided it could not face the financial consequences of obeying the letter of the
resolution law nor leave the bank to be a bloated and useless zombie then the alternatives bring in their
train even greater political upheavals. Imagine the German government decides that not bailing out
Deutsche just inflicts too much damage on Germany potentially reducing Germany from the front
rank of globally significant nations to something lesser. It becomes a matter of national pride if not of
survival.

So Germany ignores all the FSB rules and regulations and bails Deutsche bringing it into government
ownership/protection call it what you like. In so doing it demolishes the entirety of European policy
regarding bail outs, government debts and austerity. Where then all the German insistence on fiscal
discipline it has forced upon Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Italy? The Bundesbank, Berlin and
the ECB would have no authority at all. Every country would have a green light to do the same for
their flag carriers.

It would be the end the European experiment. Or the European system would have to try to continue
without Germany. And that could only happen if all debts to Germany were repudiated.

I realise all this is speculation. But Deutsche has lost 90% of its value. Only RBS has lost
more. Deutsche has 7000 legal cases against it. Frau Merkel is losing her grip, Brexit rocked the
complacent rulers of Euroland and Madame Marine Le Pen would like to push France to do the same.

And on top of it all NOTHING has been fixed financially at all. There is more debt more leverage,
more and more liquidity achieving less and less, interest rates are negative, pensions are going
nowhere, insurers are grasping for risk even as they fear what it will do to them when the next crisis
hits and governments are all, every one of them, preparing their armed forces for widespread civil
unrest.

http://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/r_111104cc.pdf


Accounting procedures flatter UniCredit Irelands performance

17 April 2011, By Kathleen Barrington

If I asked how much your house was worth, you probably couldnt tell me for sure.

You might guess it is worth half what it was worth at the peak of the boom.

Or you might fear it is worth even less, as there is a house on the road quoting half the peak price and it
still hasnt found a buyer.

There is no reliable indicator of what the market price of houses currently is.

The Permanent/ TSB ESRI index is based on too small a sample, while data protection laws prevent
estate agents from disclosing transaction prices even if they were minded to do so, although Fridays
distressed sale auction by Allsops has partially helped fill the information gap.

Things arent much different in the world of high finance. Many bankers dont really have a clue what
once-valuable assets are now worth, as the assets rarely trade (and when they do, the prices they fetch
arent necessarily disclosed on a stock exchange).

Bankers may also fear trading those assets as the price they would achieve might be so low as to do
damage to their balance sheets and force them to raise new capital.

This is the case with asset backed securities, particularly those securities backed by mortgages of
doubtful quality. It is also true of sovereign bonds issued by countries with big deficits as well as
corporate bonds issued by institutions that are under stress.

Many European financial institutions still carry these troubled assets on their books.
That is why, three and a half years into the credit crunch, many banks are still struggling with the
legacy of the collapse in market confidence which began in August 2007.

Take, for example, the accounts of UniCredit Bank Ireland plc, a subsidiary of Italys largest bank,
UniCredit.

UniCredits Irish operations are pretty substantial with total assets of 23.7 billion at the end of 2010.

Many of those assets include the complex financial instruments that have proven difficult to value ever
since the credit crunch hit.

UniCredit Bank Ireland has, by its own admission, endured a difficult period for liquidity, and was
among the banks that availed of emergency amendments to accounting rules introduced in October
2008 at the height of the financial crisis.

The Irish subsidiary, which is based at the International Financial Services Centre (IFSC) in Dublin,
reclassified about 3 billion of assets in 2008.This meant that those assets did not have to be valued at
market prices which were then in turmoil.

UniCredit Ireland continued to avail of this accounting treatment in subsequent reporting periods.

The bank did it again in 2009 and then also in the 2010 accounts, which were filed in the Companies
Office in recent weeks.

Writing in the annual report, chairman Ronan Molony said the significant turmoil experienced in 2008
and 2009 continued in 2010, culminating in Ireland accepting the bailout in November.

This had a negative affect on UniCredit Bank Irelands funding costs.

However, Molony reckoned the bank had produced a satisfactory result for the year, taking into
account the considerable market headwinds, recording a net profit after tax of 89 million compared
with a net profit after tax of 131 million the previous year.

But the notes to the accounts reveal that the continued use of the emergency accounting treatment
flattered the companys reported profit figure by 63 million in 2010.

The reclassification is permissible under the emergency accounting rules which were introduced at the
height of the crisis. In the case of UniCredit Bank Ireland, the reclassified assets are now described as
loans and receivables, whereas previously they were described as held for trading.

If they were still described as held for trading they would have to be written down to their current
market value, which would dent the reported profitability of the Irish subsidiary.

Elsewhere, the accounts show that there was a 344 million reduction in the value of certain assets
which were available for sale during2 010.However, this reduction has been written off against
shareholders equity rather than to the profit and loss account, a move which accountants say is entirely
legitimate, but which also flatters headline performance.

It is true that UniCredits performance at group level continues to appear stellar when compared with
the performance of our own Irish banks.

In March, UniCredit reported fourth quarter net income of 321 million, down from 371 million a
year earlier after provisions more than doubled to 472 million.

The bank generated full year profit of 1.3 billion, down 22 per cent from a year earlier.

But there are concerns that the banks expansion into eastern Europe, and elsewhere, may lead to
greater loan losses in future, which would require the bank to raise new capital. This has been reflected
in a fall in UniCredits share price over the last few years.
The shares closed at 1.71 last week, compared with 5.06 in August 2007 when the credit crunch
began.

UniCredit has been under particular pressure ever since the banking foundation Cari Verona, one of its
largest shareholders, declined to take part in a rights issue at the height of the credit crunch in 2008.

UniCredit then controversially accepted funding from the Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafis Libyan
Investment Authority.

The decision to accept those funds contributed to the loss of shareholder confidence in UniCredit chief
executive Alessandro Profumo, who was ousted last year. It has proven even more embarrassing now
that Gaddafis own people are in open revolt against his rule.

There have been repeated suggestions that UniCredit may be forced to raise new capital either through
asset disposals or fundraising.

Among the assets that might be disposed of is Pioneer Investments, its IFSC-based fund management
division.

It just goes to show that in this global financial crisis, a road that leads to Rome may well also lead
back home.


Unicredit 1900% liquidity breach affair:

blogpost;A BANKER SPEAKS OUT

'Dear Minister Noonan,

Now that we have officially been told by Moody's that our banks are junk, is there
any chance that you might break with the tradition of your predecessors in office
and start telling us THE TRUTH?

Frankly, we, the Irish people who are struggling to make ends meet, would like to
know once and for all what the REAL situation is. We are sick and tired of relying
on foreign entities like Moody's, S&P, ECB & IMF in order to discover what goes on
in our own back yard.

Further to my posting below from last Thursday, I would like to share some more
correspondence with you. This might serve to refresh your memory and that of your
senior colleagues. It is rather surprising that you had chosen to completely deny
that I had had any dealings with Fine Gael.'

Been following news on Unicredit and taking note of the murmurs that Unicredit
may be looking to offload Pioneer Investments in Dublin presumably in order to
drum up cash after its travails with losing money in Pioneer Global (its 'wealth
management' arm) to the Madoff Scandal which is doubly embarrassing as
Unicredit is part owner of Medici Bank which Sonja Kohn, Bernie Madoff's
erstwhile business colleague runs.

Other than that Unicredit seem to be moving even more heavily into Eastern
Europe with a note out on Bloomberg today that Unicredit is in the market for
heavily laden Hungarian sovereign debt.

A strange move for a bank which has suffered knocks in Libya, Kazakhstan and
one wonders at its Italian investors' appetite for Eastern Europe business.


IFSC whistleblowers reporting on firms -
Sunday Business Post, 12 June 2011, By Jon Ihle

Several employees of IFSC banks have come forward to report to the Central Bank possible
undisclosed breaches of liquidity requirements at their institutions, The Sunday Business Post has
learned.

Senior officials at the Central Bank, which issued an invitation Via The Sunday Business Post last
January for whistleblowers to come forward in confidence, have met with the employees and taken
statements from them. No investigations are underway at this stage, but it is understood regulators are
still assessing the information.

The news comes just days after the Financial Regulator fined Scotia Bank Ireland, an IFSC-based
bank, 600,000 for allowing its funding to fall below minimum levels without permission, and for
failing to provide accurate information in its regulatory returns.

We have not closed our books on liquidity ratios at IFSC banks," said Peter Oakes, the Central
Banks director of enforcement. Scotia Banks breaches were inadvertent, and the bank brought the
matter to the Central Banks attention voluntarily, although its initial failure to comply with the
requirement meant that the bank allowed its funding ratios to fall below the minimum permitted level.

It is understood that the bank faced a fine of as much as 1 million, but that its high levels of
cooperation in reaching a settlement agreement with the regulator were taken into account.

The request for information on liquidity breaches came after a whistleblower alleged persistent
violations at Unicredit Ireland in 2007.

The Central Bank said its investigation only confirmed an earlier inquiry, which found that the bank
had fallen below minimum funding limits just once.

Whistling into a gale -

Village magazine, June-August 2011, Miscellany, page 32

Nearly all Ireland's banks breached liquidity requirements, leading to the lack of liquidity that the
government provided a guarantee against, and which ultimately emerged as the insolvency that has
bankrupted the country and immiserated the next generation. It's important then to know what
happened. In last December's Village a risk-manager whistleblower in the Irish unit of UniCredit,
Italy's biggest bank, described how the Financial Regulator failed to intervene when he well... blew the
whistle on massive repeated breaches, but no action followed. Shortly afterwards, largely as a result of
the story, the Central Bank said it would conduct a review of the case and invited parties with
information to share it. Things dragged out, but last month the risk-manager attended a meeting with
the office of the regulator. The only thing is the Bank's offer of 'confidentiality' clearly was not enough
to safeguard our hero's privilege against self incrimination. The [Central] Bank insists it must forward
information to the DPP [Director of Public Prosecutions] if there is evidence of a crime. There the issue
rests - for the moment.
When Enda Kenny steps down from his position as Taoiseach in the coming weeks, it comes as little
surprise that finance minister, Michael Noonan, another great survivor of Irish politics, will depart with
him, or not long after.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is believed to be critical of a decision Noonan made not to
intervene in the sale of Project Eagle, in April 2014, even though he had been made aware of a 15m
fixer fee arrangement connected to the sale of NAMAs Northern Ireland property portfolio. This has
done a lot of damage to his reputation.

That he met with the winning bidder, Cerberus, along with department officials, on the day before the
tender was awarded to the US fund, is expected to raise further questions that can only be properly
dealt with by a Commission of Investigation.

It is understood that Noonan has objected to what he believes is an adverse finding against him in the
PAC report, but the majority of committee members are of the view that it merely states the obvious
which is that the perception of a meeting between the finance minister responsible for overseeing
NAMA and the executives of the company on the day before it won the lucrative tender raises
uncomfortable questions.

The PAC is also expected to support the thrust of the report by the Comptroller and Auditor General
who concluded that the amount paid by Cerberus was over 220m less than could have been obtained,
and that NAMA failed to deal with apparent conflicts of interest involving Frank Cushnahan, a member
of its Northern Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC), when they first emerged in 2012.

In March 2014, the favoured bidder, PIMCO, informed NAMA executives about fee arrangements
involving payments to solicitors Brown Rudnick, Belfast solicitors Tughans and Cushnahan, and its
decision to withdraw its tender on the advice of its legal advisors. Noonan then had a chance to call a
halt to the sale. He failed to do so.

Indeed he met with executives from Cerberus, on the day before it secured the portfolio of properties
across the North and in the UK for 1.24bn, far less than its original value of in excess of 4.6bn.

Noonan can be expected to defend his approach, on the grounds that he did not discuss any
commercially sensitive issues with the Cerberus team, and while there are no publicly available
minutes of the meeting it beggars belief that the biggest single sale of Irish public assets did not come
up during the conversation.

Noonan has weathered many political storms before, and only last year managed to escape any serious
fallout when he was caught out by Sinn Fin finance spokesman, Pearse Doherty, during the general
election campaign, massaging the budget figures.

He has also managed to give the impression of gravitas and, as a master of the jaundiced soundbite,
displays an apparent sagacity and knowledge of economic and financial affairs while rarely saying
anything of consequence.

It was his mantra about keeping the recovery going, adopted by Fine Gael disastrously as its main
election slogan which contributed to its loss of a bucket full of seats in the February 2016 election and
which has left his party at the mercy of Fianna Fil in the current shambolic confidence and supply
arrangement.

He spends much of his time rubbing shoulders with the architects of an EU austerity programme which
threatens to bring down the Euro and the entire post war European project as millions of working
people flock to the embrace of right wing xenophobic nationalist movements across the continent.

In 2012 he was accused of ignorance when he commented that: Apart from holidaying on its islands, I
think most Irish people dont have a lot of connections with Greece. If you go into the shops here, apart
from feta cheese, how many Greek items do you put in your basket?. This may have gone down well
with Wolfgang Schauble and his mates in Berlin, Brussels and Frankfurt but it did little to show any
empathy with an entire people being subjected to a viciously enforced austerity programme.

His recent speech to the Irish Taxation Institute confirms his position as an old-style financial
conservative pursuing a tax-cutting agenda while public services in health, education, transport and
housing are in dire need of investment and state support.

Approaching 74, and a TD since he entered the Dil for Limerick East in 1981, after a BA in
Economics and English in UCD and a few years teaching English, Economics, and Geography in the
Crescent Secondary School in Limerick (where his son John now works). Noonan is a political
survivor who has tasted victory and defeat in their many guises over the past 35 years in politics.

Following a general election in 1982, after which Garret FitzGerald was forced out of office, Noonan
found himself on the Fine Gael front bench as a spokesperson for education, presumably due to his
teaching experience.

Noonan, 1982

After the second general election in 1982, and just eighteen months as a TD, the Limerick man was
appointed to a senior cabinet position as Minister for Justice at a time of intense political turmoil and
upheaval and just a year after the republican hunger strikes which had undermined the preceding
Haughey administration.

He was only a few weeks in office when he disclosed the sensational details of how the previous FF
government had tapped the telephones of journalists including Bruce Arnold, Geraldine Kennedy and,
later it transpired, Vincent Browne. He was the minister who introduced the wording for the 1983
referendum on abortion which ever since has forced tens of thousands of women to leave the country to
secure a termination of their pregnancy.

In 1986, he was made Minister for Industry and Commerce and the following year Minster for Energy
after the Labour Party left the then coalition government and before an election that saw Charles
Haughey return as Taoiseach. Around this time he came to national attention on Scrap Saturday as a
no-nonsense Limerick bruiser who pronounced only one I in million.

His term as health minister in the 1994 Rainbow coalition government was marked by the Hepatitis C
scandal when it emerged that the Blood Transfusion Service Board (BTSB) had given contaminated
blood to thousands of women and brought Noonan into direct conflict with Bridget McCole one of
those affected.

His decision to fight her claim for compensation arising from the States role in causing her fatal illness
resulted in severe and long-lasting criticism for Noonan who emerged from the debacle as a heartless
creature immune to the suffering of a dying mother of 12 children.
Under his watch, the State opposed Mrs McColes claims for damages in the High Court contrary to
the advice of the Attorney General who informed the government in 1995 that the BTSB was liable.
Just two weeks before she died, the BTSB admitted liability and negligence and apologised for
infecting her but threatened that if she was to proceed with a claim against them and not succeed it
would pursue her for costs. He admitted that at the time he listened to legal advice which said the
Government should let the BTSB pursue the case.

He has admitted: In retrospect I should have interfered and taken a political decision to get involved.

His involvement in another scandal during his term in health in the mid 1990s is about to become the
subject of another major inquiry following the release of two reports into the treatment of a vulnerable
and severely disabled young woman named Grace who was abused by her foster father in a home in the
south-east while under the care of the health service.
A decision to remove her from the home in 1996 was overturned after Noonan received
communications from the foster father, and she remained there until 2009. According to department
sources, representations were made to Noonan and his minister of state, Austin Currie, but these were
passed on to the South-Eastern Health Board, the organisation with statutory responsibility at that time.

It was revealed in consultant Conal Devines thorough report (suppressed by the State since 2012) that
a local school principal also wrote to Noonan in August 1996 asking that Grace be allowed to remain in
the foster home. This letter was passed by the Department of Health to the health board. The following
month, the Health Board told the principal that the request would be taken into account. Devine
discovered that Grace never attended the school in question, or any other school for that matter.

Noonan went on to become party leader in February 2001 after John Bruton resigned. He vainly tried
to introduce quality of life issues into the 2002 election campaign with the slogan Vision With
Purpose. He had also promised a huge tax giveaway, worth 2bn. However, the biggest campaign
event was when he was struck in the face with a custard pie in Boyle, Co. Roscommon.

He was unceremoniously replaced by Enda Kenny after a disastrous general election performance by
Fine Gael in June 2002. Kenny left him off his front bench.

His come-back followed his clever decision to back Kenny in the failed leadership coup by Richard
Bruton in 2010, and he remained on the opposition front bench until his return to cabinet as finance
minister after the 2011 implosion of FF in the wake of the economic and financial collapse and the
arrival in town of the EU/ECB/IMF with their bailout programme. The ultimate safe pair of hands,
Noonan had served as a minister in every Fine Gael-led government since 1982 but had never achieved
his ambition to lead a government. Now he was the second most powerful force in a Cabinet dominated
by the powerful Cabinet economic sub-committee, the Economic Management Council (EMC)
comprising Taoiseach Enda Kenny, Tnaiste Joan Burton, Brendan Howlin and Noonan.

Plagued by a series of illnesses and the drawn-out death of his wife Florence in 2012, Noonan
doggedly pursued the role of restoring the public finances along with public expenditure and reform
minister, Brendan Howlin, in the national government formed with Labour in March 2011.

Although ostensibly a partnership government, Labour obtained only one third of cabinet positions,
including those most associated with austerity measures, and Noonans centre-right economic views
influenced the shape of the budgets as the government successfully sought to get out from under the
yoke of the Troika.

In this regard, Noonan claimed credit for his success in ensuring that Ireland would not be forced into a
second bailout and a reduction of the interest rates payable on its huge debt mountain. He oversaw two
budgets which embraced the introduction of property tax and water charges but managed to escape
much of the public anger which was directed primarily at his Labour colleagues in cabinet.

Meanwhile, any talk of burning bondholders, unsecured or otherwise, was dropped by Noonan who
continued to spend much of his time at European finance meetings in negotiations with the ECB over
debt relief.

As Irelands unemployment rate began to fall and growth figures improved and after he secured a deal
on the Anglo-Irish Bank promissory note in early 2013, Noonan basked in the glory of achieving an
exit from the bailout programme and a return to the bond markets, leading to him being named as the
best Finance Minister in Europe by the Financial Times-owned Banker magazine for 2013.

This, however, did not butter many parsnips at home as the FG-led government hit several hurdles, not
least in the water charges controversy and the intensifying housing and health-service crises.

Then came the Project Eagle scandal and the extent Noonans role in failing to stop the process when it
emerged that it was seriously compromised by alleged financial backhanders to some of those
involved.

Indeed, Noonan and the Secretary General of the Department of Finance, John Moran, a fellow
Limerick man he appointed in 2012, aggressively pushed NAMA to offload assets at the fastest pace
possible, adding to the potential loss to the public purse as property prices improved.
He only introduced measures to force the vulture funds who were swooping on Irish property assets to
pay some tax on their exorbitant profits after it emerged that they were using loopholes such as Section
110 of the finance act to avoid their revenue obligations.

His arrogant and televised description of vultures as a necessary function of the eco system may have
impressed the board rooms of Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street and global funds but will surely
come back to haunt him when the full extent of his culpability in the Project Eagle debacle comes into
view. His decision to retire along with Kenny is opportune to say the least.

In a telling interview with the Limerick Leader before the 2016 election, Noonan revealed that if Fine
Gael could not form a government he would have preferred to see a Fianna Fil-led government than
any other combination of parties.

In terms of having a view of the country going forward, I would like a country where the alternative to
Fine Gael-led governments are Fianna Fil-led governments, he said.

As he heads into the winter of his political career, Noonan has probably ensured that the centre-right
will hold power for the foreseeable future, no matter what the cost in human misery.

Minister Coveneys lies and False Hope

How did public policy go off the rails? Indeed how was policy always so skewed? For Village, equality
of outcome, sustainability of the environment and accountability are political imperatives but whether
or not this radical agenda appeals at a minimum Public Policy should be evidence-based and serve
the public interest, conducing to improvements in the quality of life of the people.

Yet such an approach is anathema to the voguish politicians of our age: from the goldfish-attention-
spanned Mr Trump to the economics and history-illiterate stormtroopers of Brexit to the foreigner-
blamers in France, the Netherlands, Poland, Hungary and beyond.

In Ireland too we eschew good policy. We lead this edition of Village with the failure of the
Department of the Environment under Simon Coveney to treat seriously what his government describes
as its number one priority, housing: they cant even compile useful statistics on housing completions.
As Mel Reynolds first pointed out on these pages, housing-completion figures for last year were at
absolute best 7300, not the claimed 15,000. How can you make policy when you dont even know the
scale of the problem youre addressing; when you have to lie about it?

Of course Minister Coveney is not alone. The Minister for Justice and the Garda Commissioner remain
rooted in office, though the Garda recorded a million breath tests more than the actual number carried
out, probably because someones promotion, or salary, would benefit from an indicator of
commitment. The Garda also seem to have concocted the crime figures, at least on domestic violence
and murders but lets face it probably on everything else too.

Clearly the problems are not of oversight or strategy but of culture. Conor Lenihan outlines in this
months magazine a history of delinquency. But were not serious about reform: sure it might wreck
everyones head. Weve looked into the Garda enough. From Morris to Smithwick to Fennelly to
ONeill investigations have uncovered bits and pieces but rarely the whole picture, and clearly the
follow-ups have been nugatory.

Moreover, from the Beef tribunal report, which was tailored to advance its judicial authors career, to
the Moriarty Tribunals defanged findings on Denis OBrien, to the vastly discredited Planning tribunal
our major non-Garda investigations too have often got diverted and have characteristically been
undefinitive and unreforming, though they often attracted media approbation.

While many countries have their political weak spots in these fascist-tickling post-truth times,
unserious Ireland runs a particularly fragile regime when it comes to impropriety. This magazine
considers that the political process has abjured action on the biggest corruption issues of our time.

If we cared about Policy and Reform wed have some clue why our health services are in disarray and
disimproving.

The central plans of health policy were supposed to be universal insurance and the elimination of fees
for primary care ie GPs. A White Paper on Universal Health Insurance was published in 2014. The
debate was always too much about the cost of this rather than on how a focus on insurance might
actually serve the presumed goal of universal healthcare. In the end then Health Minister Leo Varadkar
suspended it, likening universal health insurance to Irish Water. He claimed it would have been
impossible to impose the extra fees without a backlash from struggling families. While denying the
Coalition had performed a U-turn on its central health policy, he was unable to give any specific year
as to when a new version will be introduced.

Varadkar also confirmed before the 2016 election was called that Fine Gael could not commit to the
introduction of universal care in the next Dil term due to a shortage of GPs. Free GP care for children
under 6 and for persons aged 70 and over were implemented but of course, these changes prejudice
needy patients, as opposed to ones who come within the age strictures, and anecdote suggests there has
been a big increase in visits to GPs by under-sixes.

If we were serious about Policy, wed have ensured that the religious congregations paid compensation
commensurate to their abuses , wed ensure that educational standards improve year on year, wed be
less concerned about water charges than VAT, income tax and capital taxes which yield far greater
dividends. If we cared about policy wed have dumped Michael Healy Rae and his clan; and Fianna
Fil, Fine Gael and their allies in confused non-ideological centrist pragmatism: the swamp out of
which emerges policy-based evidence making, and jobs for the boys.

We dont even as a country have any idea of the goal of national policy. If it is quality of life then that
should be measured. In default, because it is the default measure of our success as a society, well
continue to pursue an economic agenda of GDP maximisation even though it plunders the
environment. An oil-slick-and-cleanup registers as an increase in economic activity/GDP and does not
necessarily increase the happiness of the citizenry. We should measure quality of life across dozens of
indicators from equality (the Gini Coefficient etc) to crime and unemployment rates, water and air
quality, commuting times and even peoples perceptions of their happiness.
If we dont compile the evidence, there is no chance, if we ever decide to get serious about Vision and
Policy, that well be able to act on it.

Bought this by mistake. Glorified palm oil! @Dairygold_IE seriously damaged
your brand. Wouldn't feed it to the dog.

The long-term well-being of Irish Credit Unions turning

aspiration into reality
22 Apr 2017 Press Release
 Resilience, strength and importance of the sector recognised
Central Bank remains committed to engaging with the sector to achieve
long-term well-being
Sector urged to focus energy on pressing business challenges
Called for greater leadership, a clearer vision to lead change and for
well-thought through, credible and implementable proposals

Ed Sibley, Director of Credit Institutions Supervision, addressed the Irish League of Credit
Unions today (22 April 2017) at its AGM in Citywest. His comments focused on his
perspectives on the Credit Union sector, the critical importance of business model
development for the sector, and on regulatory engagement and requirements.

Mr Sibley began by recognising the importance of the sector and praising the work that had
been done to reduce risks across the sector, highlighting the significant restructuring
completed. Among other positive developments, he referenced that loan arrears are falling
and that progress has been made in meeting regulatory requirements, albeit that more
needed to be done.

He emphasised that Credit Unions need to continue to develop and enhance their business
models to secure the well-being of the sector into the long-term. He highlighted that this
comes at a time when all credit institutions are adapting to changing competitive dynamics
driven by digitisation, new business models, new entrants, disaggregation of traditional
delivery systems and changing consumer expectations. He noted that greater leadership and
a clearer shared vision was required to deliver the necessary development.

He also urged Credit Unions, collectively and individually, to focus on real and pressing
business challenges, which are common across the sector, and what can be done to meet
them, rather than being distracted by over-emphasising the regulatory constraints.

In relation to investment in social housing, Mr Sibley stated that the Central Bank will shortly
be consulting on changes to eligible investments for Credit Unions, including social housing.
He also noted that the Central Bank was engaging with sector representatives on longer term
lending (including mortgages). He said that no credible, well-thought through cross sector
proposal had been submitted to the Central Bank for its consideration on this topic to date.
Changes to the asset side of Credit Unions balance sheets (loans and investments) need to
accommodate associated balance sheet transformation and risks, addressing funding, asset-
liability matching and liquidity risks, which had been lacking to date.

Mr Sibley concluded by saying Credit Unions are an important part of the Irish financial
sector and we share a common objective of ensuring sound Credit Unions that protect
members funds and can thrive into the future, serving communities, households and
businesses in the best spirit of the Credit Union movement.

Ed Sibley was appointed Director of Credit Institutions Supervision in April

2016. He is responsible for overseeing the Central Bank's supervisory work
for all banks and credit unions operating in Ireland and is the Central Bank's
Member of the Supervisory Board of the Single Supervisory Mechanism
(SSM)

PAC has vindicated C&AG

by Frank Connolly 6 March, 2017

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has criticised finance minister, Michael Noonan, over his
dealings with Cerberus, the US fund which controversially purchased the property assets held by
NAMA in Northern Ireland in April 2014.

Following public hearings late last year into the detailed analysis report of the Comptroller and Auditor
General (C&AG) on the sale of Project Eagle for 1.24bn to Cerberus, the PAC has signed off on its
report which is said to be critical of Noonan and a number of senior officials in the Department of
Finance.

Village has learned that the final PAC report will defend the C&AG investigation as thorough and
robust and support its finding that the portfolio of assets mainly in Northern Ireland, but also in the UK,
was sold too cheaply by NAMA leaving the public purse short by over 220m.

Although restricted by its terms of reference to investigating the C&AGs value for money report it is
understood that the PAC has also raised questions over various conflicts of interest that arose in the
sale of Project Eagle, and in particular those involving Frank Cushnahan, a former member of the
Northern Ireland Advisory Committee of NAMA.

When the C&AG, Samus McCarthy, launched his report into Project Eagle last Autumn, it was
heavily criticised by NAMA executives who suggested that the C&AG was not equipped to assess the
sale of such a massive property portfolio and disagreed with his conclusions on a number of issues,
including the discount rate applied to the transaction.
The PAC has concluded that because there were no up to date property valuations at the time of the
sale it was impossible to calculate the exact value of the portfolio. There was no mention in the board
minutes of NAMA detailing the 10% discount rate to be applied in the sale leading to the probable loss,
according to the PAC report.

However, McCarthy and his team have now been vindicated by the PAC and the spotlight has turned
on the failure of NAMA properly to supervise the sale of its single largest asset portfolio which had an
estimated value of 4.6bn when the loans associated with over 800 properties across the North and in
the UK were transferred to the agency.
The PAC has identified a series of meetings where Cushnahan was involved with global investment
funds, Northern Ireland politicians and other businessmen with an interest in the property portfolio
which took place as far back as 2012 without the knowledge of senior NAMA executives, chief
executive officer, Brendan McDonagh and chairman, Frank Daly.

Serious conflicts of interest were disclosed by Cushnahan to the NAMA executives when he informed
the agency that he represented a number of business people and property developers whose loans,
representing almost 50% of the entire Project Eagle portfolio, were under the control of the agency.

Meetings took place in 2013 between Cushnahan, Ian Coulter a senior partner with Tughans
Solicitors in Belfast, former finance minister, Sammy Wilson and first minister, Peter Robinson, at
which the sale was discussed. From the outset, a representative from Brown Rudnick, an international
law firm with offices in New York, London and Dublin, was closely involved in the discussions
surrounding the sale and that represenative first invited the giant US investment fund, Pimco, to make
an offer.

In mid-2013 Pimco suggested that it would make a bid for the portfolio if it was granted an exclusive
right to tender and its interest was relayed by Wilson to his counterpart in Dublin, Michael Noonan.
Noonan referred the letter of interest to NAMA who engaged with Pimco in relation to the sale but
NAMAs board resisted the idea of an exclusive-bid or single-tender arrangement.

However, it did provide Pimco with access to the virtual data room which set out in detail the content
of the portfolio, the level of indebtedness of each distressed borrower and the likely current market
value of the properties involved.

Pimco remained as the favoured bidder almost to the end of the process when it disclosed that it had
agreed to pay a finders fee of 15m to be divided between Brown Rudnick, Tughans and Cushnahan
if it was successful in acquiring the portfolio. On the advice of its legal compliance team in New York,
who argued that the fee arrangements could be in breach of US law, Pimco withdrew from the bidding
process in March 2014.

Noonan was informed by the NAMA executives of this startling development in relation to the
purchase of Project Eagle but accepted assurances that the process remained competitive as other
tenders were on the table from Cerberus and another US fund, Fortress.

The PAC, however, questions why Noonan and some department officials agreed to meet with
executives of Cerberus just the day before the fund won the sensitive tender given the perception that it
might be interpreted as an expression of support for Cerberus or of providing inappropriate access to
the minister while the tender process was still underway.

According to committee sources, Noonan has objected to the suggestion that he may have acted
inappropriately or that he in anyway interfered with the bidding process and has written to the PAC to
complain that he is the victim of an adverse finding against him.

However, the Committee has rejected this complaint and has insisted that it has merely reported the
facts as presented to it from the various parties that appeared during it public hearings last year or in
written correspondence.
The PAC has also questioned how Cerberus, which entered the bidding race in early 2014 ended up
with the same solicitors, Brown Rudnick and Tughans, who had helped prepare the Pimco bid and who
also promised a 15m finders fee to the solicitors and to Cushnahan.

It has also concluded that the criticisms of the C&AG in relation to the price paid by Cerberus are
justified and has raised concerns, not least in respect of the conflicts of interest involving Cushnahan
and others.

The PAC has found the Project Eagle sales process was flawed and that it was compromised from as
far back 2012 at the various meetings between Cushnahan and the two law firms when they sought and
agreed a success fee among themselves of 5 million each. This is confirmed by correspondence seen
by the PAC, Village has learned.

Peter Robinson

Separately, it has emerged that the BBC Spotlight programme has been been forced to hold back
another sensational report into the Project Eagle saga due to legal threats from some of those under
investigation by the UK National Crime Agency (NCA).

In a series of broadcasts last year, Spotlight replayed secret tapes made by developer, John Miskelly,
whose distressed loans were taken over by NAMA, and in which he recorded Cushnahan accepting a
40,000 cash payment in return for promised assistance in negotiations with the agency.

On one tape, Cushnahan refers to the help he is getting from a senior executive within NAMA in his
efforts on behalf of a number of his clients in the North. On tapes made in 2012, he named Ronnie
Hanna the Head of Asset Recovery with NAMA until he left the agency in October 2014 as a key
figure in ensuring that certain developers in Northern Ireland would be looked after.

Cushnahan, Hanna and Ian Coulter have been questioned by the NCA in relation to the affair and to a
sum of 7m placed in an Isle of Man account by Coulter following the closure of the sale to Cerberus.

Former Northern Ireland first minister, Peter Robinson, and a number of other Belfast businessmen,
including accountant David Watters and Andrew Creighton were also named at the Stormont finance
committee as the intended recipients of some of these monies. Robinsons son Gareth, was also
described as an important source of assistance by Cushnahan, in the secret recordings.

The PAC report was unable to investigate many of the other revelations which have emerged in the
public domain including new claims made to Mick Wallace TD by a businessman based in the Far
East, who has said that he was in contact with Cushnahan as far back as 2010 in relation to the
Northern Ireland property portfolio.

Barry Lloyd has said that he introduced Cushnahan to a number of potential investors, including
Japanese bank, Nomura, before he was pushed aside. Later it emerged that Nomura provided a
substantial amount of the monies to Cerberus for its successful bid.

A visit by the chairman of Cerberus, former US vice-president, Dan Quayle, in early 2014, during
which he met Robinson and others connected to the bidding process in Belfast and Dublin sparked a
separate inquiry by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). A division of the US
Department of Justice, the SEC is investigating alleged payments to non-US nationals in the Project
Eagle sale process.

The prospect of a Commission of Investigation into the sale by NAMA of its Northern Ireland property
portfolio to US vulture fund, Cereberus, in April 2014, looks to be receding by the day.

Judging by the demeanour and language of finance minister, Michael Noonan, during a special debate
on the issue on 1 February the Government has no intention of exploring the serious allegations of
corruption and fixer fees that surrounded the Project Eagle deal, despite an all-party agreement to set
up a commission.

Given that Fianna Fil leader, Michel Martin had pressed the Taoiseach to agree to a Commission last
year, it seemed until then that Enda Kenny and Noonan would have no choice but to accede to the calls
across the opposition benches for an inquiry into the astounding claims about the sale which have been
aired north and south of the border over the past eighteen months.

Indeed on 1 February, Fianna Fil finance spokesman, Michel McGrath, accused Noonan of resiling
from the Taoiseachs promise of an inquiry just a few months ago, and said he detected what he
described as a muddying of the waters in relation to the Governments commitment.
There is a shift here in the Governments position, he told Noonan in response to the claim by the
finance minister that any Commission of Inquiry cannot circumvent the Garda or other law
enforcement agencies such as the National Crime Agency (NCA) in the UK and the Security and
Exchange Commission and the FBI in the US, which are investigating the Project Eagle deal.

What should be most obvious is that a Commission of Investigation cannot deal with a range of non-
specific claims, Noonan replied before raising concern over the possibility of unfocused and ill-
defined inquiries which could distract NAMA from completing its vital task of winding down its
distressed loan book. He said that the findings of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) investigation
due for publication within weeks should be assessed in any case before any decision on a Commission
is made by the Oireachtas.

With that, the chairman of the PAC and Fianna Fil deputy, Sean Fleming, got to his feet alongside
McGrath to trot out all the reasons why a Commission may not be the best way forward given that his
committee had already covered a lot of ground during its public hearings last year. A FF double act
was revealed when Fleming expressed his concern that NAMA will fold up its tent long before any
commission makes its findings.

It would have problems with compelling witnesses from outside the jurisdiction, Fleming said, and that
it would be preferable and less costly for the Oireachtas to do the job of investigating such matters,
rather than an inquiry led by an independent judicial figure.

Careful not to contradict his party colleague, it was evident to those listening from the other opposition
benches that Fianna Fil was engaged in a public u-turn. Pearse Doherty of Sinn Fin immediately
noted the display of political gamesmanship between the two largest parties. He rounded on Noonan
for failing to use his powers to stop the sale of Project Eagle in April 2014 when he was informed of
the 15 million fixer-fee arrangements promised to a former member of NAMAs Northern Ireland
Advisory Committee (NIAC), Frank Cushnahan, Tughans Solicitors and solicitors Brown Rudnick
by US fund Pimco.

Doherty reminded Noonan that he had instructed NAMA in relation to other matters and the ministers
argument that he was not legally empowered to intervene with the Project Eagle sale was untrue and
unsustainable. In other words, Noonan has a political interest in preventing any independent public
inquiry into the sale and purchase, despite the strong whiff of corruption involved in it. Further,
Doherty asked about the developers whose loans were taken into NAMA who have repaid substantially
less than the money they owed despite the expressed intentions by the agencys architects that it would
pursue developers to the end of the earth for every cent they owed.

His colleague, David Cullinane, a member of the PAC, reminded Noonan of the sequence of events
which led to Pimco withdrawing from the sale process in March 2014 when it was advised by its own
compliance department that the fee payments were in breach of US law.

He described how Cushnahan and Ian Coulter of Tughans had been working with solicitors Brown
Rudnick as far back as 2012 in relation to the NI Portfolio and on the basis of a potential 15 million
fee to be shared between them if successful in offloading the portfolio through a single sale. They met
Pimco in April 2013 and then a month later brought the US investors to meet NI first minister Peter
Robinson and finance minister Sammy Wilson, to discuss the conceptual transaction they envisaged.

In other words, a member of the NIAC, apparently without the knowledge of the NAMA board,
chairman or chief executive, was exploring a possible fire-sale of its NI loans to interested buyers.
NAMA already knew that Cushnahan had associations with six NAMA debtors, which raised potential
conflicts of interest that were subsequently explored in last years critical report by the Comptroller and
Auditor General (CAG) on the sale.
But the CAG was only dealing with the value-for-money aspects of the sale, not the entire corrupted
process that appears now to have underpinned it, Cullinane said.

If this assessment and further contributions by PBP/AAA TDs Richard Boyd Barrett and Ruth
Coppinger were not enough to scare the government troops from going anywhere near a Commission
of Inquiry, an impassioned speech by Independents for Change TD, Mick Wallace, must certainly have
done the trick.

Wallace outlined a series of sensitive matters which such an inquiry must investigate including the
unauthorised leaking of documents from NAMA, the allegation of cash payments made to agency
officials by clients seeking to get from out of its clutches, and the more recent claim by businessman
Barry Lloyd that he was approached as far back as December 2010 by Cushnahan to broker the sale of
NAMA properties in the North to Asian investors. Lloyd dealt with Cushnahan and Tughans until a
proposed deal fell through in December 2012 leaving him exposed to the wrath of the potential buyers
unhappy with the manner in which the negotiations concluded.

Wallace went on to remind Noonan and others how the planned deal with Pimco was constructed and
how Lazards and other external consultants supposedly in charge of overseeing the Project Eagle sale
were excluded from vital aspects of the process. When Pimco withdrew over the 15m fee-demand,
and Cerberus entered the competition in late March 2014, NAMA executives apparently did not bother
to ask the new bidders whether they had been approached for any inappropriate payments.

NAMA didnt ask about Cerberus paying fixer fees, Wallace exploded, as he proceeded to name
others he claimed were central to negotiating the 1.24bn purchase by the giant US fund of the
portfolio of more than 800 distressed properties across the North, once valued at 4.6bn.

He said that Belfast accountant David Watters put the deal together with Coulter and Cushnahan in
Belfast, while NAMA executive Ronnie Hanna did the deal in Dublin.

He said that NAMA threw Cushnahan under the bus when his role in the affair emerged in mid-2015,
not least through Wallaces sensational claims in the Oireachtas in July of that year that senior
politicians were among those due to benefit from a Stg7m sum lodged offshore.

Wallace reminded the by now shell-shocked, if depleted, government benches and those viewing on
Oireachtas TV, that Hanna had been identified by Cushnahan in the now infamous tapes made by
developer John Miskelly and broadcast on the BBC Spotlight programme over the past year, as a key
figure in his efforts to assist distressed Belfast developers.

He described how Cushnahan said on tape that Ronnie Hanna would ensure that John Miskellys
lights would not be put out. Hanna, a former Ulster Bank executive in Belfast, was a Dublin-based
head of asset management with NAMA until he resigned in October 2014. He, Cushnahan and Coulter
have been arrested and questioned by the NCA about the allegations surrounding the Project Eagle
sale.

Wallace went on to claim that NAMA had misled Oireachtas hearings by claiming that it did not know
anything of the 15m fee payments until he had made his damning Dil statement in July 2015.

Is it credible?, Wallace asked. I know someone asked to look into the 15m in January 2015, by
NAMA.

He went on to list other claims which had arrived through the NAMALeaks website he set up and
which concerned alleged payments of large amounts of cash to NAMA officials, including into
offshore accounts.

There are new kids on the block, he said, whose fortunes are built on the proceeds of crime.

In this country, Wallace said, we dont like the truth, we dont want to hold state bodies to account.
Nama is rotten to the core and the minister knows it. By then, Michael Noonan had left the scene
leaving others to take the brunt of the verbal offensive from the Wexford TD.
Fianna Fil and Fine Gael are engaged in deception in dealing with the people of Ireland, he said, as
he watched the prospects of a thorough investigation into Project Eagle and other NAMA disposals
drift away, for now.

As public hearings at the Public Accounts Committee into the controversial sale of the Project Eagle
portfolio of distressed assets in Northern Ireland and Britain come to a close, its members are facing
some difficult choices with potentially serious political implications.

However, the absence of key individuals who have declined invitations to give evidence, including of
former Northern Ireland first minister, Peter Robinson, his former finance minister Sammy Wilson, Ian
Coulter of Tughans Solicitors in Belfast, as well as of some unsuccessful bidders for the 4.5bn
property portfolio (sold for 1.6bn to Cerberus) will make it extremely problematic to make definitive
conclusions on a number of matters.

Even more complicating is the absence from hearings of the former member of the Northern Ireland
Advisory Committee of NAMA (NIAC), Frank Cushnahan, and of the agencys former head of asset
recovery, Ronnie Hanna, both of whom have cited the ongoing criminal investigations in the UK by the
National Crime Agency as reasons for their absence as witnesses.

Without this pair, it is arguable that the final report and conclusions can only rely on a great level of
speculation as to the real motivation behind the decision by the eventual successful bidders, Cerberus,
in paying a 15m success fee to be divided between US law firm Brown Rudnick, Tughans and
Cushnahan which of course is the most dramatic and questionable aspect of the entire Project Eagle
saga.

The PAC inquiry is based on the finding of a report from the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG),
Seamus McCarthy that NAMA could have secured some 220m more from the sale of the mainly NI-
based assets, that it applied a greater than expected discount to the buyer and that it failed properly to
investigate a series of apparent conflicts of interest involving key figures in the transaction. The
committee is restricted to the parameters of the comprehensive and detailed CAG report and to the
broad question of whether NAMA delivered the Irish people value for money from the purchase.

But what has emerged from the public hearings goes much further than this and opens up a truly
appalling vista if it emerges in time, following the various investigations in the UK and the US, and by
the Bureau of Fraud Investigation in the Republic, that the executives and board of NAMA failed to
uncover an attempt by a small number of key insiders, in business and politics, in the North to enrich
themselves at the expense of the state agency.

This was the thrust of the sensational claims by Mick Wallace TD when he revealed the 15m success-
fee arrangement, in the Dil in July 2015 and in much of the subsequent debate in the House and at the
Committee hearings into the controversy while it is also central to the demand by the opposition
parties, including a somewhat reluctant Fianna Fil, for a full-scale Commission of Investigation into
the Project Eagle purchase and sale.

When and what NAMA knew about the details of this success fee were at the heart of the most recent
hearings of the PAC when further questions were put to its chairman Frank Daly and chief executive
Brendan McDonagh about this crucial issue that goes to the heart of how the property management
agency dealing with billions in distressed assets across Ireland, the UK, the EU and US has dealt with
its awesome responsibilities.

Under robust questioning by several committee members including Josepha Madigan of Fine Gael,
Mary Lou McDonald and David Cullinane of Sinn Fin and independent, Catherine Connolly on 24
November, the NAMA executives were put to the pin of their starched collars to explain how Frank
Cushnahan could have been seeking purchasers for the Project Eagle assets as far back as November
2012 without any senior executive of the agency knowing about his activities.

Cushnahan met Brown Rudnick along with Ian Coulter to discuss the idea of finding a buyer for the
entire NI property portfolio in late 2012. Cushnahan represented six debtors, mainly in Belfast, who
made up more than 50% of the entire bundle of distressed commercial property and residential assets
and had declared some of these interests under NAMA compliance requirements.
It has emerged in recent correspondence from PIMCO, the US fund which was forced to withdraw
from the sales process in March 2014 after it revealed to NAMA that Cushnahan was to share in the
three way 15m success fee. Pimco has also claimed that it was approached by Brown Rudnick and
introduced to Cushnahan in April 2013.

Peter Robinson, Frank Cushnahan

PIMCO also asserts that Cushnahan set up a meeting for PIMCO with the NI first minister Peter
Robinson and finance minister Sammy Wilson a few weeks later, in May 2013. PIMCO also confirmed
in a letter in early November last to the PAC that it was approached by Brown Rudnick in June 2013
about a success fee, one third of which was to go to Cushnahan. PIMCO went on to claim that it sought
assurances from Brown Rudnick, whose then partner Tuvi Keinan was leading its effort to secure the
Project Eagle portfolio, as to whether NAMA had been informed of, and approved, the involvement of
Cushnahan in the planned deal.

During all of this time, and until 7 November 2013, Cushnahan was a member of the NIAC which was
chaired by Frank Daly and which sometimes held its meetings in the offices of Tughans solicitors in
Belfast, where Cushnahan occupied an office.

The NAMA executives claim that none of these meetings or requests were raised by PIMCO as it
entered into discussions to purchase Project Eagle between September and December 2013. The
discussions followed a request by Wilson in a letter to his Dublin counterpart Michael Noonan to
consider PIMCOs request to buy the entire NI portfolio of NAMA in an exclusive deal that would not
involve the normal open tendering process.

The board of NAMA did not agree to this exclusivity requirement but allowed PIMCO to access the
virtual data room which provided details of valuations, debts, borrowings and other essential
information on the properties included in the Project Eagle portfolio. Daly told the PAC hearings that it
was not until March 2014, when the sale was about to close, that PIMCO legal personnel advised
NAMA executives, including the key negotiator for the agency, Ronnie Hanna, of the promised fee to
Cushnahan.

Hanna, an executive of Ulster Bank in Belfast before he joined NAMA, was familiar to Cushnahan and
indeed to the other major players named in various parliamentary hearings north and south in
connection with the deal. Cushnahan was a close advisor to Robinson in the office of first minister for
several years. The refusal of Hanna and Cushnahan to give evidence is thus a fundamental flaw in the
efforts by the PAC and others to track the complete process of meetings, discussions, email and
telephone communications that surround the Project Eagle debacle.

When Hanna learned of the fee arrangement he informed PIMCO that it would cause a problem for
NAMA and asked whether there was any way around the problem that would allow the sales process to
continue. PIMCO, on advice from its US based compliance officers, said that it could not continue as it
could breach US corruption laws.

In his evidence to the hearings in November, Daly contested much of what PIMCO asserted in its
recent correspondence to the PAC and insisted that the first he and the NAMA board knew of
Cushnahans role over the previous two years of discussions with different parties in relation to the sale
was during those phone conversations between 10 and 12 March 2014, after which PIMCO withdrew
from the sale.

Brown Rudnick then approached Cerberus to pick up the pieces and the US fund came on board to
meet the reserve price set by NAMA of almost 1.3bn having confirmed that no former or current
employee of the agency was involved in their bid. It subsequently confirmed that it paid an acquisition
fee of 15m to Brown Rudnick in order to ensure that it had sole access to confidential data in relation
to the portfolio. The sale was completed in April 2014. Asked by Deputy Cullinane about the
circumstances leading to the PIMCO withdrawal and the late entry of Cerberus to the competition,
Daly told the PAC:
What was our focus at that time in March 2014? We were in the final stages of the competition for
Project Eagle. The main point was that PIMCO were gone or exiting at that stage. The main point was
that we were making sure Cushnahan did not get any money. The main point was that in respect of
Cerberus we were ensuring, by means of a declaration, that Cerberus was not paying any fee to anyone
connected with NAMA.

At the heart of the exchanges was the insistence by Daly that NAMA was never informed by PIMCO,
or anyone else, of Cushnahans significant role in pushing the sale of the NI portfolio after late 2012
and of his refusal to accept a claim by PIMCO that it provided the agency with details of meetings it
held with Cushnahan, Coulter and others starting in April 2013. Attempts by NAMA since April 2014
to find out from Cushnahan the extent of any conflict of interest arising from the deal or the fee
arrangement, have met with silence, Daly said.

Daly and McDonagh have disputed the CAG suggestion that it could have obtained 220m more from
the sale, and claim that there was sufficient competitive tension in the bidding even after the
withdrawal of PIMCO, in March 2014, to justify pushing ahead. They also insist that the particular
conditions in Northern Ireland, and the reluctance of debtors to engage, made it more realistic to have a
quicker than normal sale of the entire bundle of assets at a discount rather than a piecemeal disposal
over a number of years.
Hercules/Wallace grapples Cerberus

Although it is not allowed to delve into a range of other matters outside the parameters of the CAG
report, the members of the PAC would need to be living on another planet if they are not aware of
hugely damaging allegations, including taped interviews, which suggest that Cushnahan was taking
money from debtors in Northern Ireland while a member of the NIAC, and apparently making
promises of a light touch from NAMA in return.

On one secret tape made by developer, John Miskelly, Cushnahan is apparently heard naming Ronnie
Hanna as a key individual in NAMA who was helping to ensure that debtors in the North were not
wiped out in the carnage that followed the arrival of vulture funds into the Irish property market.

Mick Wallace has recently revealed how a businessman in the far east, Barry Lloyd, claims he was
approached by Cushnahan about the property portfolio as far back as 2010.

The refusal of key politicians in Northern Ireland to attend the PAC hearings is telling in itself.
Meanwhile in the South finance minister, Michael Noonan, failed to intervene after he was informed of
the extraordinary withdrawal of PIMCO in March 2014 and failed to make any effort to stop or delay
the process until the potentially sordid details of the finders fee arrangements were fully investigated.

Compliments to WhistleblowerIrl. I say that because I see a difference between

'informing' and closing gaps in governance.

No-one can deny that the lack of regulatory oversight hasn't been a contributory
factor in Irish financial travails.

With banks as well those employees who allow liquidity breaches can
themselves face years in jail if they take the rap and anyone here who works in
any corporation will know that blame trickles down a lot faster than reward.

Also if you let something go which is material you are compromised forever.
There's no going back.

Lot of respect for anyone who can stand up in that sort of environment and resist
bribes or pressure to conform to a dodgy culture.
https://www.scribd.com/document/293907896/crs-gfcanalysis-20091002-pdf

More salt than butter.





Meaningful surnames

Cush

Barrister Michael Cush has been appearing for Denis OBrien in some of his exhausting judicial
travails. The last two letters of the senior counsels name suggest posh, plush, an advocate who
cushions, shushingly. The first two letters suggest something altogether less generous. All in all, just
what youd want.

Map it out

Talking of what youd want in a lawyer, Village editor, Michael Smith is facing a defamation action
from Michael McLoone, former County Manager in Donegal over a 2014 article titled Dodgy Donegal
Planning, published in this magazine. Smiths legal team at the 14 December callover to obtain a
date for the High Court jury trial includes Kevin Neary and Jim OCallaghan. Smith and Colm
MacEochaidh, the judge designated for that callover, offered a reward anonymously in 1995
through Nearys firm which is based in Newry. The reward for information on planning corruption
flushed out whistleblower James Gogarty whose allegations led to the instigation of the planning
tribunal. OCallaghan is Fianna Fil spokesperson on justice and a former counsel on other matters
to Bertie Ahern who got into some trouble at that tribunal. McLoone is represented by Michael
McDowell SC who advised Smith some years ago on a private prosecution that it was hoped would be
taken on the back of the evidence Jonathan Sugarman could give about failure by Unicredit, Italys
biggest bank, to observe the liquidity requirements of the Central Bank. In 1995 it was the advice of
McDowell, then a PD TD, to Gogarty that he should seek out a criminal lawyer to look at his
allegations that led Gogarty to make contact with Neary.

McDowell and MacEochaidh stood in Dublin South East in the 2002 General Election. As did Village
contributing editor John Gormley. The constituency has been renamed Dublin Bay South, one of whose
TDs is Jim OCallaghan.

Trust the trust

An Taisce, the states biggest environmental campaigner, seems to be in trouble. It has unaddressed
financial difficulties, leading to staff problems, and has just lost its Programmes and Administration
Officer, Eoin Heaney, who had been earmarked as one part of a CEO team the position of Director,
effectively CEO, is mandated by the organisations articles of association. Sources told Villager that
Heaney felt the organisations board of management was failing to fulfil its functions and bemoaned
the absence of the articles-mandated Strategy that could guide employees and An Taisces unwieldy
Council. The organisations secretary is stepping down and its chair is rotating after the last one
resigned in acrimony. The charity, which has the advantage that it in general tells the truth about
planning and the environment, has had its government subsidy cut to nothing over the years and could
do with some support from the public, in funding, membership or engagement.

Red and Cross

Meanwhile there is more trouble at another worthy charity, the Irish Red Cross (IRC). Only last year it
installed Liam ODwyer, former Director of the Society of St Vincent de Paul as its new Secretary
General and indeed reinstated former FF Minister, Pat Carey, who had resigned after he was
unethically implicated in unsubstantiated child-abuse allegations, as chairman. Sadly, in the end nearly
everyone resigns at the IRC because its so badly run but ODwyer (who replaced short-lived former
AIB Managing Director, Donal Forde the one-time beneficiary of a 1.4m salary at the bank) have
been seen as progressive and scrupulous. Like An Taisce, the IRC suffers from having an excessively
cumbersome Central Council made up of geographically-representative non-professionals, a weakness
promoted by the legislation governing charities and companies limited by guarantee. The Red Crosss
Central Council consists of 30 members (one per local area) elected by the various Society local areas
throughout the country.

The IRCs problems are longstanding. As long ago as 1972 and the Arms Trial it was used as a murky
vehicle for transmitting most of the aid to Northern Catholics fleeing the troubles. Charlie Haughey
had to ensure that no transaction involving arms should be traced back to bank accounts in the North of
Ireland in case it would come to the attention of British Army Intelligence.

Thirteen years later, in 1985, the Sunday Tribune reported Red Cross in Crisis over Funds report. In
June 2007 the Secretary General left in acrimonious circumstances. She had been pushing for reform, a
dangerous pursuit in the IRC.
The discovery in 2008 of an undeclared bank account which had had 162,000 lying in it for over
three years, in Tipperary under the name of the IRC, caused consternation and panic. The money had
been intended for victims of the 2004 Asian tsunami but was not forwarded to IRC head office as
required by IRC financial protocols. The then Vice Chairman of the IRC, Tony Lawlor, was a
signatory on the account.

Whistleblower Noel Wardick, who described the pattern of dysfunctionality in an anonymous blog and
then in this magazine, was fired in 2010 for gross misconduct though he has since been vindicated
and compensated.

Now its Athlone branch is causing problem according to a statement from the IRC: The Athlone
branch bank account in question, containing a small amount of money, has been temporarily frozen due
to concerns that rules of the organisation with regard to the management of charity property have not
been followed. It is our hope that this matter will be resolved quickly, internally. There has been no
discussion in relation to the disbandment of the Athlone branch. All monies will be used as specified
and any commitments made to assist those impacted by flooding in Athlone will be honoured.
Professionalise, lads.

Cross to bear

Its all a pity as the Red Cross does crucial work internationally. This year, in the Armageddon of Syria
for example, it has carried out 55 cross-frontline operations, bringing food and essential aid to 8 million
of people, and clean water to millions more.

Cross Power

Truth spoken by
Power

As Village went to press the UN Security council was meeting in New York to discuss developments in
Aleppo, which Russia now says has fallen to Syrian Government and allied forces.

Addressing Syria, Russia and Iran, the US ambassador to the UN, semi-Dubliner Samantha Power (and
blessed with another meaningful surname), asked if the countries were truly incapable of shame.

Your forces and your proxies are carrying out these crimes. Your barrel bombs and mortars and air
strikes have allowed the militia in Aleppo to encircle tens of thousands of civilians in your ever-
tightening noose, she said.

Three member states of the UN, contributing to a noose around civilians. It should shame you.
Instead, by all appearances it is emboldening you, you are plotting your next assault. Is there no act of
barbarism against civilians, no execution of a child that gets under your skin is there nothing you
will not lie about or justify?.

Power noted reports of up to 100 children trapped in a building under heavy fire: Clearly they must
be terrorists, she said. Because everybody being executed, everybody being barrel bombed,
everybody whos been chlorine attacked youre going to be told theyre terrorists, every last one of
them. Even the infants.

Russian envoy Vitaly Churkin, who had been the one to deliver the news about the fall of rebel forces
within Aleppo, punched back, accusing Mount-Anville educated Ms Power of building her statement
as if she was Mother Theresa.

Please remember your own countrys track record, and then you can start opining from the position of
any moral supremacy, he vituperated.

100k is enough, chaps

Villager takes the view that

equality must be assessed stringently. If some notable provider of public services seeks a pay rise the
thing is to assess if that is equitable. If garda are earning 100k on average he simply thinks thats
enough. Not in any doctrinaire way but because it must be assessed relatively. It is beyond serious
dispute that public sector pensions are extremely valuable. The arrangements for public servants a
pension after full service of 50 per cent of final salary with a lump sum of 150 per cent when they retire
are unavailable and (for most employers, most notably Village Magazine) unfundable in the private
sector.

But the recent Horgan report suggests that the premium pensions are even more valuable than
previously estimated.

John Horgan admits that his calculations are rough and ready. But any more precise findings will be
based on the same numbers.

He estimates that the value of the garda pensions amounts to a whopping 80 per cent of pay for the
average garda. Enough.

2% please.

Villager, who admittedly gives only a tiny fig for the market, is pleased to see the introduction of rent
restrictions through a 4% cap on increases in Dublin and Cork. Last years introduction of in effect a
two-year freeze had little dampening effect on rental inflation. Annual rental inflation was 8.5% in Q3
2016 compared to 7.7% in Q3 2015. However, the two-year freeze applied only to those renewing
current tenancies, while the new 4% cap will apply to new and existing tenancies. This might mean
these new controls prove more binding on the market than last years, but it remains to be seen how
well they will be enforced in the current supply-constrained market. Young Simon Coveney has
signalled the measures would be fast tracked through the Dil but Fianna Fil, which has spent its
entire political lifetime undermining rent control and other interferences with property rights, now
correctly as far as Villager is concerned wants the measures to go further.

Fingalsomething

A team involving prominent

people from Village magazine was mugged by former Village art director now museum curator, Simon
OConnor, at the culmination of the Little Museum of Dublins annual Christmas dinner quiz. One of
the highlights of the social calendar was ruined for many after quizmaster OConnor went into a
convulsion when the radiant team packed with Village contributors and hangers-on (and others)
correctly answered a tie-breaker question about the (Samuel) Beckett family business: which of course
was quantity surveying. OConnor purported not to hear the answer, instead awarding the garlands to a
team of fragrant and effulgent nobodies from Dublin 6 which happened uselessly to know all the
forenames of Oscar Wilde.

Ballynomun

Ballymun Shopping
Centre: dilapidated

Environment Minister Simon Coveney declared some months ago that the redevelopment of Ballymun
was complete. But it isnt, The areas depressing 50-year-old shopping centre was bought by
Treasury Holdings in 2005 with a view to demolition and reconstruction for a vast shopping centre
with cinema and 800 apartments. When Treasury burnt out and died the poor shopping centre lost
heart, and even Tesco upped sticks. But Dublin City Council bought the centre and, as always with that
erratic body, something may or may not happen. In particular it appears to be on the verge of
offloading the site to developers. The Ballymun for Business group claims there is enough land in
Ballymun for 2000 housing units once services are installed. The economic revival hasnt happened
at the pace of the residential development, they say.

Ethicilliteracy

The suspension by Fine Gael of Kildare Councillor Fiona McLoughlin Healy went ahead despite last
months article in Village showing that the complaints she levelled centring on the failure of then-
Councillor Fiona OLoughlin (FF) to absent herself from a vote on the Bluebells and Blues Festival
which was chaired by her brother merit a complaint to the Standards in Public Office Commission
(SIPO). None of the local or national media have grasped the story, which mirrors the ethical illiteracy
of Dublin City Council some years ago when then-Councillor Oisn Quinn voted on resolutions
promoting high-rise even though he had a share in a valuable office block that might benefit from
passage of those resolutions. In Dublin too, none of the local authority officials wasany difficulty with
the approach. In the end, however, SIPO found it unethical.

The Gal way

Doubts have been thrown by the Department of Heritage and Galway City Council at plans for the
restoration of a block of derelict buildings on Quay Street and Quay Lane in Galway City to become
an upmarket shop for Aran sweaters, of which Galway, the capital of craic and knitted jumpers, cannot
get enough.

However, the Department has voiced its objection to any plan to restore the building to an appearance
as at some notional date in history, while the Council has ordered a redesign.

GlenAran Ltd, which is owned by the McCarthy family from Glengarriff in West Cork, bought No 25
Quay Street and numbers 2 to 5 Quay Lane at the end of 2015 for over its 600,000 guide price. A
previous owner had pursued a plan for a 10m bar, restaurant and upmarket hostel premises in the
buildings which were built as a warehouse in the Seventeenth Century, but converted to residential
units in the 1830s.

The practice of restoring a building or structure to an appearance at some notional date in history, as
is proposed to No. 25 Quay Street, is entirely contrary to internationally accepted best practice,
asseverated the Department.
On the other hand, in the case of the buildings at Numbers 2-5 Quay Lane, the original roofs of these
buildings were only removed in recent years and the Dept believe there is sufficient documentary and
photographic evidence to restore the roofs to the original profile.

Yet here it is proposed to construct an entirely false medieval style roof. In our opinion, the type of
works proposed in this application would serve to confuse the evidence of the historic buildings, the
Departments submission reads.

Meanwhile, the City Council has ordered a redesign of the proposals and further archaeological
investigation of the site. Good enough for them. Galway, least serious of all Irelands metropolises, has
transfigured so much of its medieval heritage.

Wuthering Lows

Wutheringly
wonderful

Kate Bush has described fellow leather-trouser-model Theresa May as wonderful in a Canadian
magazine interview. Villager does not like anything that complacent people describe as wonderful.

Speaking to Macleans magazine, Bush said that having a female prime minister is the best thing
thats happened to the UK for a long time. I actually really like her, she added implausibly,
Villager would guess. Bush previously wrote a song for a sketch on a 1990 episode of TV series The
Comic Strip, about the former Labour Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. The lyrics included: Look
to the left and to the right. We need help and theres nobody in sight. Where is the man that we all
need? Well tell him hes to come and rescue me. Ken is the man that we all need. Ken is the leader of
the GLC.

John Coyle RIP

The figurative painter John Timney Coyle has died. He was born in Scotland in 1928 and educated at
the National College of Art and Design in Dublin and the Glasgow School of Art. He first exhibited in
Cork in 1948 and has exhibited in most public exhibitions in Ireland since then. Coyle was head of the
Art Department and subsequently Vice-Principal of Blackrock College in Dublin, where he famously
provided sanctuary for anyone who could see that all of life was not found in an oval ball, and lectured
in the National College of Art & Design and Dun Laoghaire School of Art. A gentle man, he was
famous for carrying a roll of masking tape in his pocket. In case of emergencies.

He and Gary Coyle were the only father and son to be members of the Royal Hibernian Academy.
Garys work embraces various media, including Drawing, Photography and Spoken word/Performance.

In a eulogy in Glasthule Church, Gary said he was confident that after his death his father would finally
achieve the recognition he deserved.
John Coyle

Irish Cement
apologises for
'dust emissions'
from Limerick plant
COMPANY HAS MADE ARRANGEMENTS
FOR CAR WASHES AND CLEANING
PROPERTIES

Fintan Walsh
28 Apr 2017

IRISH Cement has issued a public apology to its neighbours

following a number of recent dust emissions in the vicinity of the
Mungret factory.
The apology comes after the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) stated that samples of dust deposited on cars and homes in
the Mungret and Raheen area contained Irish Cement plant
material along with ambient dusts due to the extended dry
weather.
Since the end of March, the EPA, Limerick City and County
Council and the HSE who issued a joint statement this Friday
have received a significant number of complaints about these
deposits.
Complainants believed that the source of the dust was likely to be
the nearby Irish Cement plant, the joint statement said.
However, up until this Friday, the company had denied liability for
the dust emissons in the area.
In a fresh statement to the media, a spokesperson said: Irish
Cement notes the contents of the statement published today by the
EPA, attributing responsibility to Irish Cement for recent dust
emissions in the vicinity of the Mungret factory.
The company apologises for any inconvenience caused to its
neighbours and commits to continuing to work with all the agencies
and local communities to rectifying the situation. Irish Cement met
with the EPA this week, and has also taken a number of proactive
steps locally. Company personnel are visiting neighbours and have
made arrangements for car washes and cleaning of affected
properties.
Since the first complaints were made, EPA personnel have been
investigating the issue and have now convened an interagency
group with the council and the HSE, to ensure integrated
oversight of the investigation.
Follow

Cllr Daniel Butler @DanielButlerFG

IRISH CEMENT UPDATE: Below is the link to a joint
statement and update from the EPA, HSE and Limerick
City and...
http://
fb.me/8tuxoDZwY

2:40 PM - 28 Apr 2017

1 1 Retweetlikes

The EPA has commenced a formal compliance investigation into

the management of dust at the factory.
As part of this investigation, the company is conducting a detailed
inspection of the material and product handling infrastructure and
processes over the entire site to identify any potential defects, the
joint statement said.
It said that the factory is to conclude the review in a month, and will
report back regularly to the EPA. Any defects or failures are to
be rectified immediately on discovery.
It added: Health advice based on sampling results to date and
surveillance of healthcare usage confirms that exposure to the dust
may cThe recent report by the EPA exposing further dust blow
outs in the Mungret and south-western side of the city once again
exposes the habitual negligence by Ireland's most powerful
multinational.
Earlier this month, Brian Gilmore, head of communications at Irish
Cement, categorically denied the blow outs as having any
connection to Ireland's oldest cement works. The EPA has now
shown that Gilmore was lying.
Irish Cement are offering free car washes to the hundreds of
households effected by the blow out, but will they also be paying
for the increased number of nebulisers for families reporting
higher levels of respiratory problems among the young of this
city?

ause respiratory irritation but does not pose a serious health risk in
the short term. In relation to possible health implications, HSE
Mid-West liaised with general practitioners and the local hospital
emergency department. To date, no unusual patterns of ill health
have been identified. HSE Mid-West will continue to monitor the
situation in the coming weeks.
The EPA and the council are setting up a network of dust
monitoring stations in four locations in the city. These will provide
information on the levels of dust, which will be examined against
air quality standards. This will support ongoing health risk
assessment by the HSE, the three bodies stated.
The EPA stated that it encourages the public to contact the agency
in the event of experiencing dust or other EPA-licensed facilities,
via its website or its 24-hour call service, at 053-916 0600.
http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/home/247385/irish-cement-apologises-
for-blow-out-at-limerick-plant.html#.WQN12ywsQuI.facebook
PLEASE SHARE: This morning I have phone calls of another dust
covering on cars in the area. Below are pictures from my car as of
30 minutes ago. Can you check your car and report it to me if there
is a similar dust covering? If you have been effected please log a
call with the EPA, the Council Environmental section & Irish
Cement. Make sure to state that you wish to make an official
complaint otherwise your call will not be officially treated as a
complaint. EPA 053 916 0600, Irish Cement 061 487200 & Council
061 407100.
All thanks to the cement factory, my car is covered in this gritty filth !!! This
was taken in The Grange Raheen.
Received call this morning that there has been allegedly another
blow out by the Irish Cement factory which will raise further
peoples concerns and is currently under investigation. If this does
prove to be an Irish Cement blowout then Irish Cement will have
some tough questions to answer. Please check your cars if you
live locally & let us know if your affected. Be careful as cars must
be cleaned by specific combinations of water and other chemicals
to avoid damage.
An Taisce objects to proposed
Northern Distributor Road for
Limerick
HERITAGE BODY IN LIMERICK BELIEVES
ROUTE WILL NOT SOLVE CITY'S TRAFFIC
PROBLEMS

Nick Rabbitts
30 Apr 2017

AN Taisce in Limerick has lodged a formal objection to the 150m

Northern Distributor Road, claiming if it goes ahead it will be
detrimental to the centre.
With councillors set to decide next month whether to vary the
development plan to allow the orbital route go ahead, the heritage
body has added its voice to the opposition.
When the plan came before members in 2015, it was resoundingly
defeated. But since then, the architects behind the scheme have
made changes, and sources have indicated it will be more warmly
received by councillors.
The road will open up Coonagh, Moyross, then cross the Shannon,
bypass Corbally and traverse the Mountshannon Road before
continuing to the Cappamore Junction and the Dublin Road.
A spur is proposed across the Mulcair River to provide a link to the
National Technology Park, while the Northern Distributor Road
would eventually continue and connect to the Mackey roundabout
to allow access to the M7 motorway.
But An Taisce believes this road is only an easy fix to alleviate
city centre traffic congestion, but is not backed by best practice in
transport planning.
Research has consistently shown that construction of such roads
does not actually lead to a reduction in congestion due to the
phenomenon of induced demand.
An Taisce Limerick says, We have plenty of examples in Limerick
already. Peak time congestion on the Dock Road and Condell
Road has not been significantly alleviated by the construction of
the Limerick Tunnel. Chronic traffic congestion at peak times still is
a feature of the Childers Road, despite the construction of various
distributor and link roads and the M7 east of the city.
An Taisce add the building of the road will bring increased car
dependency and urban sprawl.
We believe that a peripheral ring road will inevitably encourage
development on the outskirts of the city, instead of encouraging
development at its heart.
But at a meeting last week on the proposed Limerick-Cork
motorway, Caroline Kelleher of the Limerick Chamber pointed to
an unprecedented intervention from the IDA, and bosses of three
of the biggest firms in the National Technology Park at Plassey
stating its need.
She said: I think its very clear its a necessary piece of
infrastructure for Limerick. We have seen a number of key
businesses citing it as necessary to develop Limerick. If we are
talking about attracting foreign direct investment and supporting
the jobs market in Limerick, its crucial. Take a look at the National
Technology Park. That will not be developed further [at present]
due to the congestion. We have a serious problem with that its
the regions largest business park.
Ms Kellehers comments came after Cathal McCarthy, who is
opposed to the scheme questioned its need.
Referring to both projects, he said: This is an either/or choice. We
have to make our mind up about what we really need. Lets pick
one we definitely need and put the other on the back burner.
http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/home/247532/an-taisce-limerick-object-
to-150m-orbital-route.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

RTE journalist links

Callinan to McCabe
smear
John Mooney
April 30 2017, 12:01am,
The Sunday Times

RTE broadcaster Philip Boucher-Hayes has made a

statement to the Charleton tribunal alleging that the
former garda commissioner Martin Callinan made
disparaging remarks to him about the whistleblower
Sgt Maurice McCabe. Callinan then advised the
journalist to get more details from the garda press
officer Dave Taylor.
Boucher-Hayess statement is the first independent
verification of claims made by Taylor that he was
directed by Callinan to discredit McCabe by
smearing his reputation.
The judge Peter Charleton is examining whether
McCabe and other garda whistleblowers were
subjected to a smear campaign that questioned
their family life and adherence to basic standards
of human decency.
In a statement he has given to Charletons
investigation, Boucher-Hayes alleges a relevant
incident took place after Callinan agreed to give
an
Hope he sues the hole lot of them . God Bless Stg Mc Cabe
FURTHER CORRUPTION

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rte-journalist-links-callinan-to-mccabe-
smear-fzbttnbvr

State to pay visually

impaired mans costs in case
over voting
Robbie Sinnott sued Minister after failure to provide way of
allowing him cast ballot secretly
Robbie Sinnott, from James Street in Dublin, expects to be unable to see at all
within four years. Photograph: Collins Courts

Mary Carolan
Fri, Apr 28, 2017, 19:31

The State has been ordered to pay the legal costs of a

severely visually impaired man after he won a High Court
declaration concerning his right to vote privately and
without assistance in referendums and elections.
Robbie Sinnott, supported by the Free Legal Advice
Centres, took his proceedings against the Minister for the
Environment and the State.
Mr Sinnott, of James Street, Dublin, is a member of the
Blind Legal Alliance and, having been born with severe
visual impairment, expects to be unable to see at all within
four years.
He told the court he must ask the polling station presiding
officer to complete his ballot paper which effectively
means he is being deprived of his right to vote in secret.
In his judgment in favour of Mr Sinnott last month, Mr
Justice Tony OConnor said the court could not ignore
delays by the Department of the Environment up to last
year after Mr Sinnott took his case in introducing
regulations allowing for use of templates to assist visually
impaired persons when voting in referendums.
Related
Visually impaired man wins case against State over voting
New regulations to allow visually impaired to vote unaided in
referendums
The fact the Minister acted last year on his 20-year-old
power to introduce regulations allowing for use of
templates in referendums underscored acceptance that
tactile voting devices could have been made available for
multiple referenda since 2009.
The judge also empathised with Mr Sinnotts complaint
about the lack of information emanating from the
department relating to the actual steps taken, or to be
taken, to emulate the use of the devices available in
Northern Ireland.
Two declarations
He considered Mr Sinnott was entitled to two declarations.
The first was that the Minister has a duty to outline
publicly details of planned studies and regulations for the
provision of arrangements to facilitate voters with visual
impairments to mark their ballot papers without
assistance as envisaged by Section 94(5)(i) of the 1992
Electoral Act.

inRead invented by Teads

The second was that the Minister has a duty to provide
such arrangements where there are no disclosed
reasonably practicable economic or effective reasons not
to vindicate the right to mark ballot papers without
assistance.
He adjourned the matter to Friday to make final orders
and address liability for costs.
Michael McDowell SC, for Mr Sinnott, said the State had
informed his side they objected to the first declaration
being made but not to the second.
He said that because the State was technically correct,
his side had not sought the first declaration and felt its
position was vindicated by the judgment.
Having heard the sides, the judge made the second
declaration only.
He also rejected arguments by Frank Callanan SC, for the
State, that Mr Sinnott should not get all of his costs
covered.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/state-to-
pay-visually-impaired-man-s-costs-in-case-over-voting-1.3065663?mode=amp

Brexit summit: EU accepts

united Ireland declaration
Way clear for North to automatically become part of EU if
its people vote for united Ireland

Denis Staunton in Brussels, Pat Leahy in Brussels

April 29th , 17
European Union leaders have unanimously approved
tough guidelines for negotiations on Brexit, including a
commitment to protecting Irelands interests and a
guarantee that Northern Ireland could rejoin the EU as
part of a united Ireland.
The leaders took just one minute to approve the guidelines
at the special EU summit on Brexit in Brussels, before
breaking into applause.
German chancellor Angela Merkel said she had never seen
such unity of purpose at a European Council meeting.
The Taoiseach said he was pleased with the outcome,
adding that the guidelines fully reflect Irelands concerns.
He described the statement about the future status of a
united Ireland in the EU as hugely important.
The declaration regarding Ireland paves the way for
Northern Ireland to automatically become part of the EU
if it ever wished to join the Republic in a united Ireland.
Mr Kenny stressed, however, that the statements purpose
was to ensure that Brexit does not undermine any
provision of the Good Friday Agreement, rather than to
move towards Irish unity.
The only new thing here is Brexit and we need to ensure it
doesnt undermine the Good Friday agreement. This is not
about triggering any mechanism; I have been consistent in
my view that the conditions for a referendum do not
currently exist, Mr Kenny said.
EU leaders at a special summit on Brexit in Brussels on Saturday.
Photograph: EPA
Brexit negotiations will begin after Britains election on
June 8th, with an initial focus on the rights of EU citizens
in Britain and British citizens on the continent, Britains
financial obligations to the EU, and issues surrounding
Ireland and the Border.

The EUs chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, told the leaders

he hopes to see sufficient progress on these issues that
they can start talks on Britains future relationship with
the EU as early as October this year.

Michel Barnier and the Commission today announced a

very clear timeframe for phase one - they foresee phase
one being completed by the fall of this year and then we
could move to phase two, Dr Merkel said after the
summit.
Phase one of the negotiations will be about separation
and we will negotiate phases one and two as clearly
separate phases. And we will take a conscious political
decision before we move from phase one - separation - to
phase two, the transition to future relations.
One voice
Dr Merkel said that it was the most natural thing in the
world for the 27 remaining EU member states to present
a united front in the negotiations, dismissing Theresa
Mays assertion that EU countries were lining up to
oppose the UK.
We havent lined up against anyone. Weve made it easier
for Britain, by speaking with one voice, she said.
Britains Brexit secretary David Davis said the guidelines
showed that the forthcoming negotiations were likely to be
tough, adding that they underscored the need for Ms May
to win an enhanced mandate in Junes election.
Both sides are clear - we want these negotiations to be
conducted in the spirit of goodwill [and] sincere co-
operation and with the aim of establishing a close
partnership between the UK and the EU going forward.
But there is no doubt that these negotiations are the most
complex the UK has faced in our lifetimes.
They will be tough and, at times, even confrontational.
There are already people in Europe who oppose these aims
and people at home trying to undermine them, he said.
The declaration in relation to Northern Ireland, known in
Brussels as the Kenny text, says: The European Council
acknowledges that the Good Friday Agreement expressly
provides for an agreed mechanism whereby a united
Ireland may be brought about through peaceful and
democratic means.

In this regard, the European Council acknowledges that,

in accordance with international law, the entire territory of
such a united Ireland would thus be part of the European
Union.
Speaking in Irish as he entered the summit, Taoiseach
Enda Kenny said he was happy his fellow EU leaders were
holding the special one-day summit to approve the blocs
priorities in advance of the opening of negotiations with
the UK.
Prior to the summit, president of the European Council -
the highest decision-making body of the EU, made up of
the heads of governments of all members states - Donald
Tusk had described the priorities of the EU side as being
people, money and Ireland.
Drafts of the EUs priorities for talks have been circulating
in European capitals for the past month, after the British
government triggered the article 50 mechanism, formally
giving notice of their intention to leave the EU.
Under the terms of the article, the UK will exit in two
years, at the end of March 2019.
However, both sides have acknowledged the possibility of
a transition period after 2019, during which the UK could
gradually withdraw from EU rules, rather than a sudden
exit.
The declaration on Ireland, which echoes the experience of
East Germany after German unification in 1990, will be
recorded as a statement for the minutes, the equivalent
of council conclusions at a formal summit.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/brexit-summit-eu-accepts-
united-ireland-declaration-1.3066569?mode=amp
THE REUNIFICATION OF GERMANY ... of German Reunification: East Germany's Integration
into ... 13 Agreement with Respect to the Unification of Germany, 1990
http://endofcoldwarforum.org/sites/default/files/docs/germany/Frowein.pdf

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Theresa May has triggered Art. 50 today
setting in train Britains two-year, slow-motion exit from the European Union.

http://oebrg.nu-
media.at/attachments/article/533/ABS%20POLICY%20PAPER%20No%202_LA
NG_%2029.03.17_%20FR3.4.pdf



n a letter to Foyle MP Mark Durkan, David Davis confirmed that under the terms of the
Good Friday Agreement, Northern Ireland would not have to undergo the complex 'Article
49' to become part of the post-Brexit EU if a majority of its people voted for Irish unity

BRITISH Brexit secretary David Davis's assurance that the north
would automatically become part of the EU in the event of Irish
unification has been welcomed by SDLP leader Colum Eastwood.
In a letter to Foyle MP Mark Durkan, Mr Davis confirms that under
the terms of the Good Friday Agreement, Northern Ireland unlike
an independent Scotland would not have to undergo the complex
'Article 49' to become part of the post-Brexit EU if a majority of its
people voted for Irish unity.
The precedent for such a scenario was set in 1990 when East
Germany automatically joined the EU when it was reunified with
West Germany.
While a slim majority of people in the UK voted in last June's
referendum to sever ties with Brussels, 56 per cent of people in the
north voted to remain in the EU.
Mr Durkan had first raised the issue at a recent meeting of
Westminster's EU select committee.
In his response, Mr Davis said the British government was
committed to the principle of consent but points out that it supports
Northern Ireland's current constitutional status "as part of the UK
but with strong links to Ireland".
However, he concedes that if the democratic will is for Irish
unification then the north will rejoin the EU unhindered.
"If a majority of the people of Northern Ireland were ever to vote to
become part of a united Ireland the UK government will honour its
commitment to enable that to happen.
"In that event, Northern Ireland would be in a position of becoming
part of an existing EU member state, rather than seeking to join the
EU as a new independent state."
The minister's statement is the first time British government has laid
out its position on how Brexit would impact the reunification process.

Mr Eastwood said his party had been seeking clarity from the British
government on whether the north would face an 'Article 49'
application process in the event of Irish unification.
"Over the course of the last number of weeks, SDLP MPs and
negotiators have pressed the British government to concede that
unlike any other part of these islands, we have an automatic route
back into the European Union," he said.
"The principle of consent and provisions for a unity referendum in
the Good Friday Agreement allow people here to make the decision to
join a sovereign united Ireland and, in doing so, rejoin the European
Union."
The SDLP said it was welcome that the Brexit secretary had now
conceded the argument.
"Brexit has shaken the tectonic plates of our constitutional landscape
people in Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU; the people of
Ireland voted for the Good Friday Agreement underpinned by
Europe," he said.
"If that context is to be ripped apart and our political foundations
thrown into flux, then the time will be right for people here to begin
to explore our constitutional future."
Mr Eastwood said the British governments "Brexit juggernaut"
threatened to "smash through the fragile complexities of the Irish
political dispensation".
United Ireland moving closer
to fulfilment, but Government
needs to do more - Carthy
29 April, 2017 - by Matt Carthy MEP

Sinn Fin MEP Matt Carthy said has said that with each day that passes, the aspiration for a
United Ireland is moving towards fulfilment.

He was speaking after EU leaders today guaranteed that the North would resume full membership
of the European Union as part of a united Ireland.

He added however that the Irish Government had fallen short in its negotiation strategy by failing
to seek designated special status for the North of Ireland post-Brexit.

Matt Carthy said:

With each day that passes, political developments in Ireland, Britain and Europe demonstrate that
the aspiration for a United Ireland is moving ultimately towards fulfilment.

The provision for the North of Ireland to immediately resume full membership of the European
Union following a successful referendum on Irish unity is another step in this direction.

Todays announcement reinforces the provisions of the Good Friday Agreement regarding the
peaceful political route to a United Ireland.

"Sinn Fin believes however that more was achievable by the Irish Government in relation to the
EU Council guidelines which fall short of the wording already agreed by the European Parliament.

"The Irish Government got what it sought but did not ask for enough. Crucially it did not seek
support for designated special status for the North of Ireland within the EU post-Brexit. This was a
major mistake.

"I believe that this can yet be achieved, if the Government makes it a priority objective in
forthcoming negotiations.

"It is in Ireland's national interest that both parts of the island remain within the Single Market and
that vital EU funding for peacebuilding and economic and social development continues.

"Sinn Fin will continue to press the Government on this issue and to work with others in Ireland
and across Europe to achieve it.

In the wake of the declaration that the North will immediately resume full EU membership in the
event of a United Ireland, it is imperative that the Irish Government, and all parties who claim to
support a United Ireland, work with Sinn Fin to agree clear criteria for the delivery of a unity
referendum.
" It is especially important that we work together to set out an agreed vision as to what a United
Ireland will mean for communities across the island so that we can win the referendum and begin
to deliver upon the potential of our country".

Sinn Fin Euro Election candidate Mary Lou McDonald and the party's Spokesperson on
International Affairs and the EU Aengus O Snodaigh TD will join a picket organised by PANA
outside the Portmarnock Hotel this afternoon where a meeting of the EU Defence Directors is
taking place. The picket is to be held between 12pm and 1pm.

Speaking before leaving for the protest Ms McDonald said: "The Irish presidency is being used to
further the militarisation agenda of the European Union. A Government that claims to be
committed to some sort of ill-defined idea of military neutrality is facilitating the construction of a
European Army and a military industrial complex through many of the meetings taking place
during this Presidency.

"Sinn Fin is committed to a policy of positive neutrality and to non-membership of military

alliances. I will be attending along with my colleague Deputy O Snodaigh and members of PANA
to register our anger at the continuing erosion of Irish neutrality facilitated by this Government."

http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/44400
Sinn Fin President Gerry Adam said: We welcome the provision for the North to seamlessly
resume full EU status following a successful Irish Unity Referendum. However, It is disappointing
and deeply concerning that even at the first hurdle the Irish government has fallen short. The EU
Council guidelines fail to go far enough. They do not even match those agreed by the EU
Parliament. If the Irish government fails to secure a better deal for Ireland during the actual
negotiations, the implications for the economy and Good Friday Agreement will be profound."

Mr. Adams said:

The Good Friday Agreement provided for a pathway to Irish Unity. We welcome that this
provision has been reflected in the discussions to allow the North to seamlessly resume full status
with the EU following of a successful Irish Unity referendum. In the Dil next week we will be
asking the Taoiseach to set out how this will be achieved. Alongside this, it is time for the Irish
government to set out the criteria and context against which they will judge it is time to support
the calling of a referendum on Irish unity.

Todays extraordinary meeting of the European Council was very important for Ireland, north
and south. There was a high level of media spin that the Irish government would deliver in the
national interest. It is disappointing and deeply concerning that even at the first hurdle that the
Irish government has once again fallen short. The European Council guidelines should have gone
considerably further. There is support for Ireland in Europe and the Taoiseach has failed to
harness it.

There is widespread recognition across the EU of the unique and special circumstances faced by
Ireland as a result of Brexit. There is also widespread support for the peace process and the
Good Friday Agreement. A stronger approach from the Irish government, could have achieved far
more today. There is now a huge amount to do in the coming negotiations.

"The Taoiseach cannot do the lifting for the British Government. He has to stand up for Irelands
national interest and put this before any other consideration.
The best way to secure Irelands future is through designated special status for the North within
the EU. This can still be achieved, if this objective becomes a priority for An Taoiseach. The
government needs to discuss with our EU partners; how all of Ireland can remain members of the
Single Market and the Common Travel area, how EU funding streams can continue to be
accessed, how the rights of Irish citizens in the north will be delivered, how trading arrangements,
north and south and between Ireland and Britain are protected. And critically how the
Good Friday Agreement is preserved in all its parts, because that is how we will continue to
advance the peace process.

Sinn Fin remains committed to securing designated special status for the North within the EU.
We will continue with our diplomatic offensive and engage with all relevant parties and actors in
Ireland and in the EU to bring it about.

http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/44399
Last Friday afternoon, I went online to the Department of Social
Protection's website - welfare.ie. There, I found the fraud tip-off
page. A glaring red warning sign said there are criminals "cheating
welfare". It says that last year the department saved 500m
"thanks to people like you".
This is not true. That isn't savings recovered from cheats, and it
doesn't come from tip-offs.
Then, in pursuit of my duty as a citizen of the Republic, I reported
someone for abuse of social welfare. It felt good.
Frankly, being old fashioned, I'd be a little queasy if I had to ring
an actual human and report someone and get them into trouble.
Happily, you can now just anonymously fill in an online form.
Which is what I did.
Under "type of fraud" it gives you a drop-down menu.
I skipped "Working and claiming".
I skipped "Living with partner and claiming One-Parent Payment".
I skipped the other six varieties of fraud you're asked to report.
I ticked the ninth fraud option: "Other".
Then the name and address: Leo Varadkar, Leinster House. I filled
in the rest of the form (sorry, lads, I don't know Leo's car
registration, so I left that blank).
And in the special box I added details of Leo's abuse of social
welfare: "Using public money to conduct a phoney anti-fraud
campaign, to impress Fine Gael supporters and enhance his
chances of becoming the next leader of the party."
For the past 10 days there have been posters all over the place,
ads blaring across the airwaves. You're walking down the street
and a bus goes past with a message from Leo on the side:
"Welfare Cheats Cheat Us All".
The message, in a campaign costing a reported 204,000, is
inescapable - your neighbours are crooks and liars. Rat them out.
So, that little bugger around the corner who's forever driving too
fast, with his windows down, his lousy taste in music blaring - it's
not hard to convince yourself he's on his way from doing a nixer
to collecting the dole.
So, online, by phone, scribbled on bits of paper and posted to Mr
Varadkar - every random suspicion, justified and not, is
channelled to the Campaign For Leo.
And, repeatedly the stats are sent to the media, which broadcasts
the latest figures the politicians have "saved". (Those journalists
who are played like fiddles by politicians might ask themselves
why they're given only the number of tip-offs - which means
nothing - and not the number of genuine frauds disclosed by
pissed-off, over-suspicious informants.)
Some politicians seem convinced there's a class of sponger out
there who takes out of society far more than they put in. They
seem to believe there's a pool of deadbeat, money-grubbing
chancers who use every trick - legitimate and illegal - to line their
pockets.
And, of course, the politicians are right.
These people are called tax dodgers.
Hundreds of millions of euro are drained from the economy each
year by people who break the law and evade tax. On top of that,
hundreds of millions more are swiped by people who employ
specialist lawyers and accountants to locate loopholes in the tax
laws.
It's long been my belief that when politicians have finished
drawing up financial legislation they pass it to the Loopholes
Section of the Department of Finance. There, an agreed number
of loopholes are drilled into it, as arranged in meetings between
departmental officials and lawyers representing the tax-dodging
classes.
Yes, there is welfare fraud.
Sometimes, thieves go to some lengths to steal from the State.
Mostly it's a few hundred here and there. Maybe someone loses
their job, they're on the dole, they owe money, they get the odd
nixer and they don't want to sign themselves off the dole because
they don't know where the next nixer is coming from.
These are not people taking a shortcut to riches - they have given
into temptation.
But, it's nothing we need get excited about. There are substantial
"control measures" in place to police the rules, and 600 people
specifically assigned to protect the system. (The money that
would be lost if these measures were not in place is regularly
described by politicians as "savings" by anti-fraud measures, as
though it was somehow recovered from thieves. It's not.)
There's no epidemic of fraud against which we all need to be
warned, with posters, radio adverts and accusatory buses.
Fraud is officially listed under "fraud and error" and by far the
greater part of the losses are due to error - the welfare recipient's
or the system's.
It might, for instance, be discovered that I've applied for and
received a payment I'm not entitled to. It will be stopped.
But it may be clear my mistake means I haven't applied for the
payment I am entitled to. And the correct payment will henceforth
be paid instead of the one I claimed.
It's not fraud. It's not a problem.
Here's the Secretary General of the Department, before the Public
Accounts Committee in March 2013: "Overpayments in their
totality, which amounted to 92m, equated to 0.44pc of
expenditure. The fraudulent element of that was 0.2pc of
expenditure."
Any financial entity dealing in tens of billions will leak some
money.
About 50m is a small fraction nicked, but it's real money - maybe
50m or thereabouts some years. Some taken by professional
thieves, mostly in small amounts by people living hand to mouth.
Compare this with large multiples of that amount stolen in tax
frauds by well-off, greedy people.
Far from being a problem, the welfare system is a solution.
Without it, for instance, the labour market, with all its necessary
job transitions and retirement periods, could not function.
Most benefits go to the old and the very young. Again, without
such a system society could not function.
The State is right to take measures to protect public money. What
it's not entitled to do is stage an hysterical war against a non-
existent eruption of fraud, as though it's a major problem for the
public finances.
The major problem is the tax dodging.
It would not be legitimate to mount a campaign demonising
business people as crooks and liars, just because some business
people dodge tax.
It is not legitimate to mount a campaign demonising those
receiving welfare payments - which, in the course of a life includes
most of us.
It's morally wrong and it's socially damaging.
For a start, it increases welfare fraud. When chancers like Leo
create a belief that "everyone is at it", it increases the number of
people who believe that fraud must be easy, so they try it on.
Others feel like they're among a dwindling number of honest
eejits, and they too are tempted to have a go.
Smearing a lot of people, in order to demonstrate Varadkar's
leadership credentials is a waste of public money when fraud is at
a low level and is not a threat to financial stability.
I've had my fun on Leo's Fraud Page. I'm not recommending that
others do likewise. But if you do check it out you might note
there's a malfunction in the extremely expensive exercise.
You must say whether you made a previous report on the alleged
culprit - and if so on what date. If you haven't made a previous
report, the site won't accept your tip-off unless you insert a
random date on which you didn't previously make a report.
Not very competent, Mr Varadkar.""

Do it for Leo's sake, rat out your neighbour

Last Friday afternoon, I went online to the Department of Social Protection's
website - welfare.ie. There, I found the fraud tip-off page. A glaring red
warning sign said there are crim
INDEPENDENT.IE
The Government has re-
written the terms for the Grace
inquiry after criticism
The Cabinet signed off on new terms last evening after criticism in the
Dil.
Mar 9th 2017

John Deasy
Source: Rollingnews.ie
Updated at 7.35am
THE TERMS OF reference in the forthcoming inquiry into
the Grace case have been amended after angry exchanges in
the Dil and suggestions that they werent fit for purpose in
their original form.
The revised terms of reference for the Commission of
Investigation were agreed by Cabinet yesterday evening, the
Government confirmed.
The new terms were circulated to TDs last night. There will
be two phases:
The first will deal with Grace case specifically.
The second will deal with the care and decision-making
process in respect of 46 other children who passed
through the home in question.
The new terms will be made available on the Department of
Health website from later today, its planned. They will be
debated and voted on in the Dil at 12.45pm.
Dil row
Yesterday, Disabilities Minister Finian McGrath agreed to
return to Cabinet to draft fresh terms after TDs John Deasy
and John McGuinness harshly criticised the terms as they
stood.

Waterford Fine Gael TD Deasy has been heavily involved in

the Grace case since it first came to light more than 12
months ago.
Deasys speech primarily concerned a dressing-down of the
HSE over what he described as misleading evidence given
to the Public Accounts Committee in relation to the case of
Grace, a woman who was left in an abusive foster home in
the southeast of the country for 20 years.
Speaking in the aftermath of those exchanges, Taoiseach
Enda Kenny said that clearly there are appalling
circumstances here.

Follow

Gavan Reilly

@gavreilly
McGuinness says he won't be supporting the terms of
reference and that the Dil should be ashamed of passing
them if it does.
10:57 AM - 8 Mar 2017
 18 18 Retweets16 16 likes
Source: Gavan Reilly/Twitter

I want to make this clear, the Government and Minister

McGrath are quite open to having this commission of
investigation to deal with other cases, many of these have
not had any statutory investigation into them, he said.
You can take it that the Government are quite open to
having everybody necessary included in this.
He said he wants to make it crystal clear that the
Government are quite willing to include others, but said that
Grace is being treated as a priority and as evidence and new
information comes to light, others will be included in the
investigation.
The scope of the investigation was criticised for not going far
enough earlier in the week when the original terms of
reference were first published.
Speaking at the time McGrath claimed that the issue was the
most important of his political career.
The debate yesterday finished 30 minutes ahead of schedule
as no other TDs elected to follow Deasy and McGuinness.

AUTHORITIES HAD AT least four opportunities over 13

years to make the girl at the centre of an abuse scandal safe.
Two reports released to the public today show details of the
potential abuse the intellectually disabled girl known as
Grace suffered during the 20 years at the foster home.
The 2015 Conal Devine report also identified at least four
opportunities where action could have been taken and Grace
could have been removed from the home. However, an
absence of supervision and adherence of protocols meant
that Grace was allowed to remain there.
The report found that Grace moved in with the foster family
in 1989 a time when foster carers were paid by the health
services.
It outlines concerns raised by staff regarding bruises and
disturbing behaviour by Grace. In one case, it is reported
that she stripped her clothes off for no reason. Other
concerns related to bruising, poor hygiene and bad
behaviour.
It says that the authors of the report think that she (Grace)
suffered abuse while living with this family.
1996: case conference
In 1995, she began attending a day service, where staff
noticed she was distressed and had bruises on her body. The
following year the mother of a different service user said
that her daughter had been abused while living with the
same foster family as Grace.
Staff from the health services in the area met in April to
discuss the situation. They said that Grace should move to a
new home.
The foster family told the health services they would appeal
the decision, but lost that appeal. They wrote to Health
Minister at the time, Michael Noonan. The Department of
Health asked for more information and was told the case
was under review.
In October 1996 there was a case conference which noted
that:
There was no evidence that anything happened to the
young woman or that her welfare was not being met by
the foster family
No other children would be placed there
This conference ended with a decision that Grace would stay
with the family. However, there is no record of many of the
agreed actions being followed up on.
2004: Potential move to residential care
In 2004, authorities asked the foster family whether or not
they should keep Grace on a waiting list for a permanent
placement in a residential unit.
They were told no by the foster mother. The report could
not determine if health service staff looked at Graces file or
was aware of concerns about her care. The report says that
staff did not carry out agreed actions and Grace was left with
the family.
2008: Consent from birth mother for move to
residential care
In 2008, Graces birth mother consented to her being placed
in a residential unit.
However, staff disagreed on what action to take. Some staff
said she should be made a ward of court before she could
move, others said that wasnt necessary. A lack of agreement
meant that Grace stayed where she was until July 2009. The
report says this should and could have been done earlier.
March 2009: Review at sexual assault treatment
unit

Minister Finian McGrath speaking to reporters today.

Source: Sam Boal/Rollingnews.ie
On 27 March 2009, staff at Graces day centre noticed
bruises on her thighs and breasts. She was sent to hospital,
where the bruising was reported to garda and the sexual
assault treatment unit. Hospital staff didnt think it was
suitable for her to spend the night but when care staff tried
to find alternative accommodation, there was confusion
around what was available.
She returned to her family.
Eventually, Grace was moved to a residential facility, but
even this was poorly handled, says the report.
It says she thought she was going to her day service and was
never told she would not be returning to her foster family.
She was not ready mentally or logistically for the move, the
report says.
It appears that the health services had not tried to tell her
about the move beforehand.
Finances
The report also outlines allegations that Graces foster
mother mishandled her finances during her time with the
family.
Commission
Taoiseach Enda Kenny today announced that Minister of
State for Disabilities Finian McGrath will bring the terms of
reference for a commission of investigation to Cabinet next
week.
These two reports speak for themselves and they are
shocking, said the Taoiseach.
Speaking outside the Dil today, McGrath said the role of
Michael Noonan, who allegedly made a representation
which led to the appeal being overturned, will be included in
the terms of reference.
I dont think theres any concerns there, but that is going to
be included in the terms of reference, he said.
The Dublin TD told reporters that he met with Noonan last
week and is satisfied that the Ministers alleged
involvement will be dealt with.
Commission of Investigation (Certain matters relative to a disability service in the
South East and related matters)

MINISTER FINIAN MCGRATH has defended the terms of reference for the
inquiry into the handling of the Grace case.
http://health.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/DRAFT-Commission-of-
Investigation-Terms-of-Reference-1.pdf

6.3 million settlement

approved for woman at centre
of Grace case
Fianna Fil TD John McGuinness said that the settlement was
appropriate, but questioned whether anything had changed at the HSE
and Tusla.
Thu 2:46 PM 10,903 Views 28 Comments
Share10 Tweet Email2

A SETTLEMENT BETWEEN the HSE and a woman who

was left in foster care despite years of abuse has been
approved by the High Court this afternoon.
According to RT News, the settlement was 6.3 million
and that the HSE again apologised in court for the failings
in her care.
The HSE said that they do not comment on court cases.
A woman known as Grace was left in an abusive foster
home in the southeast of the country for 20 years, despite
several reports to authorities of her abuse.
An inquiry into the Grace case and a further 46 other
children who passed through the home in question is
currently being set up.
Reaction
Whether its enough, I dont know. What kind of money
could you give someone to make up for the torture that that
young woman went through?

Reacting to the news of the settlement, Fianna Fil TD John

McGuinness, who highlighted the Grace case at the Dils
public accounts committee said that although the news was
welcome, there was still work to do.
Grace has been through the most awful treatment of her life
while in the care of the state, he told TheJournal.ie.
People may think its a huge amount of money, but measure
it in the fact that her life was robbed, and her life today is
one of continuous suffering.
He said that although the money wont redeem anything, the
settlement is recognition that the state did not meet
standards in her care.
Id like to see what will happen to the other 46 children who
have had their lives ruined. Will the state undertake care for
them?
McGuinness said that hes proactively working with the
families concerned and that todays result have them some
level of satisfaction, but its still the least the state could do.
In some cases they have been treated very badly.
Its of huge importance because of the wrongdoing and
because they tried to cover it up, when really they should be
reaching out to the families affected to make sure theyre ok.
McGuinness said that theres a possibility that other court
cases similar to this one will emerge, but stressed that
thered be no need to bring it to the courts if the HSE
acknowledged the wrongdoing and met the families involved
to find a solution.
He expressed concern that although the HSE has
apologised, that little has changed in the system in response
to how complaints are dealt with and how vulnerable people
are cared for by the State.

Grace case whistleblower says

she's 'disappointed' with HSE's
response
The whistleblower, who remains anonymous, told RTs This Week that
she wants to appear before committee to set the record straight.
April 30, 17

A WHISTLEBLOWER INVOLVED in the Grace case has

said that shes disappointed with the HSEs responses to
serious questioning and has requested to appear before
committee to give greater insight into the core issues.
A woman known as Grace was left in an abusive foster
home in the southeast of the country for 20 years, despite
several reports to authorities that she was being abused.
RTs This Week spoke to the whistleblower who first made
a protected disclosure to the Public Accounts Committee
(PAC) in February 2015 about reports of Graces abuse.
The whistleblower, who remains anonymous in order to
protect Graces identity, said that she would like to appear
before the PAC to set the record straight.
Its been two years since I first made the protected
disclosure to the public accounts committee and still some
questions remain unanswered or certainly unclear.

RT reports that the committee chair Sen

Fleming confirmed that he would view the request
favourably when the committee reconvenes.
The woman said that her appearance before the committee
could make any subsequent questioning of the HSE more
productive.
She said that the HSE needs to correct the record in some
cases and was disappointed with their responses to
questions being put to them.
But she believed that it was too late for the HSE to issue her
an apology, which she requested in 2016: That ship has
sailed at this stage, there is no meaningful apology that can
be offered.
Last week the High Court approved a settlement of 6.3
million in compensation to the woman known as Grace, with
the presiding judge calling her case a scandal and
mentioning that there were still unanswered questions.
In March HSE boss Tony OBrien apologised to TDs for
telling them that no health worker involved in the Grace
case was still in public service, in what he called a
monumental cock-up.
A worker who sat on the panel that decided to leave Grace in
the foster home retired in 2012, but is in receipt of full HSE
pension and still carries out some specialist clinical services
for Tusla on a part-time basis.

Cabinet ministers have reacted with fury over HSE delays in

publishing reports into the Grace sex abuse scandal in a Waterford
foster home.
A Government-backed Commission of Inquiry is being held up
because the HSE is refusing to publish two previous reports into the
case involving a woman known as Grace despite legal opinion
which has cleared it to do so.
It is understood that Attorney General Marie Whelan has said there is
no impediment to the publication of the 2012 Conal Devine Report
and the 2015 Resilience Ireland report.
This opinion would support a similar finding by Conor Dignam SC in
a recent report which set out the terms of reference of the
Commission of Inquiry.
At the centre of this case are allegations of extreme sexual and
physical abuse against disabled children and adults who passed
through this foster home between 1992 and 2013.
At last Tuesdays Cabinet meeting and in a subsequent meeting
between Taoiseach Enda Kenny and the Independent Alliance TDs,
the unforgivable delays by the HSE were raised as a matter of
concern.
It is understood that HSE director general Tony OBrien recently
wrote to super junior minister for disabilities Finian McGrath, an
Independent Alliance member, saying he cannot release two
unpublished reports into the scandal it commissioned in 2012 and
2015 because of a garda request.
It is understood that the HSE refusal has delayed the announcement
of the final terms of reference and the official naming of the
commissions chairperson, who has been chosen.
Confirming the discussions at Cabinet level, Independent Alliance
leader and Transport Minister Shane Ross revealed the anger and
concern at ministerial level over the delays.
Finian McGrath has raised this vociferously in meetings with the
Taoiseach and other ministers at Cabinet and in private meetings. He
is very, very unhappy with the situation, Mr Ross told the Irish
Examiner.
He has been very loud and clear and I share fully his concerns.
In response to queries from this paper, Mr McGrath said he is
demanding the immediate publication of the two reports.
My position is crystal clear, he said. I want those two reports
published now so I can get on with the commission as early as we
can in 2017 as possible.
Despite his unhappiness with the HSE, Mr McGrath himself has come
in for some criticism from within Government as to the delays.
Fine Gael TD for Waterford John Deasy last night expressed his deep
concern at the significant setbacks to the formal establishment of an
inquiry, despite it being committed to by the previous Government
on the eve of the general election.
It took almost a year using any method possible to force an inquiry
into this, said Mr Deasy. It has now taken Enda Kenny and his
Cabinet another year to wise up to the fact that the HSE didnt want
this in the first place.
It hasnt been helped by the fact that Minister Finian McGrath has
shown no ambition to see this concluded. Any expressions of
frustration from Mr McGrath need to be taken with a huge pinch of
salt.
In response, the HSE said its position has not changed and that it
was awaiting a response from the garda as to whether it can publish
the two reports.
We have followed Dignams recommendations and we have made
contact with the garda, said a HSE spokesman. We are awaiting
their response. This is not a simple matter. We have to be assured
that publishing the reports could affect ongoing investigations.
Last month, following several lengthy delays, the 309-page report by
Mr Dignam was published.
Mr Dignam made a series of findings, including:
The procedures and processes followed by the HSE when
commissioning the reports did not meet its own procurement
rules;
These procedures were not adequate to ensure the independence of
those conducting the reviews;
40 families of vulnerable children and teenagers placed in the foster
home had reviews of their cases delayed by almost four years.
It has been a long time coming but at last the woman weve come to
know as Grace has a secure future.

With a 6.3m settlement approved by the High Court, she will have
all the comforts and supports that money can buy.
But what will that really mean to a woman who, the court has heard,
was taken 20 years too late from an abusive foster home, holding on
for dear life to a toy to which, to this day, she still clings?
They say the first two years of a childs life are critical in determining
how well they will cope with the rest of it. Fail to nurture, to support,
and to love a child in that crucial first phase and the impact can be
lifelong.
Grace had love but it was from a mother who feared she could not
adequately care for a child with profound learning disabilities and
who trusted the professionals to find her that care instead. And when
she needed nurturing and support to compensate for the distance
from her mothers love, she got instability, exclusion, and abuse
instead. Not just for two years, but for 30.
In approving the settlement, Judge Peter Kelly remarked that, for
reasons unknown, a recommendation that Grace be removed from
the last home where she was placed after seven years there was
reversed and she languished there another 13 years.
Unknown or not, he speculated that the reason was that health
officials did not want the bother of having to explain to a court why
they needed to vary her care order to remove her from the home.
Judge Kelly is probably right. It would have cost them time and
trouble to explain their concerns about the home, to defend their
vetting of that home in the first place, to find a new home for Grace,
to face her mother, and tell her what had been going on.
So they transferred that cost to Grace, who lost 20 years of her life as
a result. And they transferred it to her mother, who lives with the
anguish of her daughters suffering.
They transferred it to two brave social workers who risked their
careers to speak out on her behalf. And they transferred it to the
taxpayer, who now foots the bill for a commission of inquiry and for
the court settlement.
Judge Kelly described the case as not just shocking, but a scandal.
This from a man who, for years, dealt with troubled teens who
became known as Kellys Kids, who, day after day, grappled with
cases of runaways and tearaways, children from chaotic backgrounds
or tragic backgrounds or good backgrounds that somehow proved
insufficient to save out of control youngsters from themselves.
It takes a lot for Judge Kelly to declare that something is a scandal. It
will take a lot for the effects of this scandal to work their way out of
Graces life.
6.3m is a start, but a caring heart, a listening ear, and a brave soul
back when Grace was a child would have been spared a lot of cost,
and not just in money terms.
Speaking to the Irish Examiner after the landmark judgement, the
whistleblower said while the ruling was a good day for Grace, the
HSE has yet to provide any answers or accountability for who is
responsible for the 20-year scandal.
In a settlement yesterday after detailed deliberations, High Court
president Peter Kelly sanctioned a HSE offer worth 6.3m in
response to what happened to Grace, a woman with severe physical
and intellectual disabilities who was abused for two decades at a
State-funded foster home.
The settlement includes 4.6m in promised personal care for the rest
of Graces life; 600,000 in damages, 150,000 above usual limits
due to the scale of abuse suffered; and 600,000 to cover the HSEs
failure to properly support her since the scandal emerged in 2009.
In addition, the settlement also involves 87,000 in disability
allowance payments to cover money Graces foster family abusers
illegitimately kept from her; 275,000 in future disability allowance
payments; and 175,000 for ongoing medical-related transport.
Speaking during yesterdays High Court hearing, Justice Kelly said it
was disturbing that this abuse scandal occurred in the 21st century
and involved abdication of responsibility by health officials.
He said it remains a mystery why the decision to remove her in
1996 was not acted on and was later reversed by a three-person
health board committee after the foster familys father contacted
then health minister Michael Noonan.
If a State commission of investigation he hopes will get to the
bottom of this had not already been set up, Justice Kelly added he
would have rejected the settlement and instead insisted on answers
by trial.
Speaking to the Irish Examiner last night, the whistleblower at the
centre of the case repeated this view, saying that while the money is
welcome and a source of huge relief for Grace and her carers, it
cannot undo the damage caused.
As Peter Kelly outlined today, money is the only mechanism
available within the law to compensate, but no money can undo
what the HSE did or, indeed, failed to do, the whistleblower said.
It is a good day for Grace, but there have been no answers and still
no accountability for this gross negligence.
Yesterdays High Court hearing was told that despite
recommendations more than a decade ago that Grace be made a
ward of court, this failed to be acted on due to fears a court would
ask questions about her care.
It also heard that when Grace was removed in 2009 from her foster
family abusers, she was in a wretched state, frail, dirty, and
unkempt, with health problems due to a poor diet and psychosis.
Her only possession was a childs toy which she held onto for dear
life.
The HSE yesterday again apologised unreservedly for the failings in
your [Graces] care.
However, given the HSEs track record in the case Justice Kelly
insisted on a sworn HSE court guarantee it will abide by the terms of
the settlement and begin payments within four weeks.
While the settlement has now been reached, Justice Kelly stressed
the State commission of investigation into the scandal must uncover
who was responsible.
Speaking on RTEs Six One News last night Fergus Finlay, chief
executive of childrens charity Barnardos, welcomed the settlement
but said: The State failed her [Grace] again and again, and again.
I hope todays settlement is certainly not the last settlement,
because other people were abused.
The High Court has approved a settlement worth 6.3m for 'Grace' ,
the young woman with intellectual disabilities who was left in the
care of a foster family for 20 years despite physical abuse, gross
neglect and possible sexual abuse.
President of the High Court, Mr Justice Peter Kelly approved the
settlement describing the failure of care in this case as a scandal,
write Daniel McConnell and Fiachra O Cionnaith of the Irish Examiner.
Grace's story has been extensively covered in the Irish Examiner over
several years.
In court, the Health Service Executive (HSE) apologised to the
woman in court for the failings in her care.
The court heard those failings included inadequate monitoring and
oversight of her care and inadequate action to remove her from the
foster home after significant concerns had been raised.
In its apology, the HSE said the care she received "fell short of the
compassionate, caring and personalised support that she was
entitled to".

In the letter of apology from Chief Officer Aileen Colley and read out
to the court by senior counsel the HSE said it sincerely regretted that
Grace experienced "a number of very serious failings" in her care
during this time up to 2009.
These included, the statement said:
"Inadequate monitoring and oversight of your care; an absence of
necessary liaison between those responsible for your placement in
the foster home ; inadequate action to remove you from your foster
home after signficiant concerns had been raised and an absence of
the necessary protocols and arrangments to support the placement
of vulnerable children and adults with a disability in foster families.
It added: "The care you received fell far short of the compassionate,
caring and personalised support you were entitled to . For all of
these faiilings I wish on behalf of the HSE to sincerely apologise to
you."
The letter concluded: " I want to reassure you and everbody
associated with your care the HSE has taken steps both locally and
nationally for continued service improvements, standards and safe
care."
Approving the settlement, Mr Justice Kelly said the reasons why
'Grace' was left in the foster care placement in 1996 despite
recommendations from professionals and health board personnel
that she be moved "remained a mystery".
He said a decision to move her was reversed by a three-person
health board committee, after representations were made by the
foster parents to the then minister for health.
He said it remained a mystery as to how that decision was made.
He said it was a scandal when you considered how this young
woman had been treated while in the care of the HSE and its
predecessor.
As reported in the Irish Examiner, Grace has very significant needs
and was unable to speak.
In court, Mr Justice Kelly said there was a suggestion that she had
been sexually abused. He said she had certainly been physically
abused.
Mr Justice Kelly said a decision had been made in 1996 to remove
'Grace' from the foster family. But he said that decision had been
reversed by a three-person committee in the health board for
reasons which remained a mystery to this day.
He said this was after representations were made by the foster
parents to the then minister for health.
He said the decision was made in the teeth of recommendations
from the professionals and health board personnel.
HSE director general Tony OBrien will yet again be forced to
publicly answer a series of questions from the public accounts
committee over the Grace foster home sex abuse scandal after fresh
concerns were raised about his evidence, writes Fiachra Cionnaith
and Daniel McConnell.

The PAC said it will tell Mr OBrien to attend in a fortnight after the
HSE gave further information about five individuals who were
central to the controversial decision to reverse plans to remove
Grace from the home in 1996.

In a letter to the PAC on Wednesday evening, HSE assistant national

director Ray Mitchell said that despite previous evidence last year, it
is now accepted that a number of the individuals involved in the
1996 decision continue to work in the public service.

Following on from evidence given by Mr OBrien to the PAC on

March 23 this year, Mr Mitchell said one individual, given the code
H3 in Grace-related reports, retired from the HSE in 2012 before
joining Tusla, the States child and family agency in a senior capacity
in December 2013.

A second person [H7] retired from the HSE on October 17, 2010; and
a third [H12] on February 29, 2012; while another individual [H6]
joined Tusla on December 9, 2013, and a fifth [H4] resigned from the
HSE for as yet unknown reasons on April 29, 2009.

Mr Mitchell repeated Mr OBriens view from March 23 that the HSE

director general was unaware anyone had joined Tusla until 24 hours
before last months meeting due to the HSEs complicated payroll
tracking systems.

Separately, he said the HSE did not attempt to limit a Freedom of

Information Act request specifically on HSE claims that garda were
blocking the publication of two reports into the Grace scandal for up
to five years from RT radios This Week programme as no time line
was put forward.

Mr Mitchell also said that because of poor record keeping, absence

of files, and because people had different recollections, it is unclear
why Grace was left at the home in 1996 despite a decision to remove
her being made months earlier.

In responding to these issues yesterday, the PAC said that Mr OBrien

must be recalled before the committee yet again.

Sinn Fins David Cullinane, who is a member of the PAC, said:

Theres some of the people who where involved in the Grace case
who are still in the public service.

He added that attempts to find out what happened is like getting

blood from a stone.
Health Service Executive failed to properly investigate abuse claims about a foster home in
the South East over a prolonged period.

The report by Senior Counsel Conor Dignam was published this evening.

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/south-east-disability-service-final-report-2016.pdf

HSE releases two reports, the Inquiry into Protected Disclosures, SU1 report by Conal Devine &
Associates and the Disability Foster Care

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/disability-foster-care-report.pdf
 Disability Foster Care Report, HSE South East (Resilience Ireland) reports,
relating to the so-called 'Grace' case at a foster home in the South East.

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/disability-foster-care-report.pdf

New maternity
hospital will provide
standard of care
expected by women
- Taoiseach
Updated / Thursday, 27 Apr 2017

Artist's impression of new National Maternity Hospital at St

Vincent's
Taoiseach Enda Kenny has said agreement on the
new National Maternity Hospital will conclude in the
next number of weeks and the hospital will provide
the standard of care women are entitled to expect in
this day and age.
Mr Kenny said if issues arise that mean women need
hospital treatment "it will be on the campus of St
Vincents".
"What we want to do is put in place a legally
waterproof situation where it will be perfectly clear for
everybody that what's at stake here is proper world
class facilities for expectant mothers and pregnant
women," he said.
The Taoiseach added that the breathing space
requested by Minister for Health Simon Harris on the
issue has been given to him.
This morning former master of the National Maternity
Hospital Dr Peter Boylan resigned with immediate
effect from its board.
Mr Kenny said the decision by Dr Boylan to resign
from the board is one for himself.
Earlier this week, Dr Boylan refused to resign after
publicly criticising the planned move of the hospital to
the St Vincent's campus due to the deal giving
ownership of the new tax-payer funded facility to the
Religious Sisters of Charity.
Dr Boylan said he had resigned today from the board
as it had become apparent there was no point in
trying to influence it, as the board "seems to be
blind" to the consequences of the decision to relocate
to the lands at St Vincent's Hospital.
Speaking on RT's News at One, he insisted any
clinical practices that would take place on land owned
by the Catholic Church - such as the potential
liberalisation of the abortion legislation - will be
subject to Canon law, rather than modern maternity
practices.
Dr Boylan said the current board structure was not
independent and almost designed to develop
"friction and conflict".

He said while no legal agreement in place yet, the

impression has been given that it has been "signed,
sealed and delivered".
Board member and Sinn Fin councillor Mchel Mac
Donncha, who also voted against the re-affirmation of
the agreement, said he believes that Dr Boylan was
effectively forced to resign, which he said was very
regrettable.
The board of the St Vincent's Healthcare Group has
reiterated its support for the proposed relocation to
the Elm Park campus.
Following a meeting this evening the board issued a
statement saying they support the move proceeding
under the terms of the agreement mediated by Kieran
Mulvey
Concern over NMH board meeting
Meanwhile, Dublin Lord Mayor Brendan Carr, who
chaired last night's board meeting, has said he found
the attitude of some of the senior members of the
board astonishing.
At the three-hour meeting, the board endorsed its
commitment to the hospital moving to the St
Vincent's campus.
Councillor Carr said the initial decision to approve the
move was made by a number of board members
under duress.
Speaking on RT's Morning Ireland, Mr Carr said he
felt the meeting was held in a very "bullying and
intimidatory way" and contempt was shown towards
him.

During the meeting, he said, no consideration was

given to the main concerns raised in the media over
the past couple of days.
He also objected to a letter circulated at the
beginning of the meeting backing the planned
move, signed by consultants at the hospital.
Mr Carr reiterated that the Government could issue a
compulsory purchase order for the land in order to
"take the heat out" of the argument. This, he said,
was the "only way to go".

Analysis by Health Correspondent Fergal Bowers

This controversy has started the debate about

whether it is a good or a bad thing that the State
funds voluntary hospitals that are owned by the
religious orders. The question is should we no longer
invest in these hospitals?
For example, the Mater hospital or the St Vincents
group - you cannot pull funding overnight from these
hospitals because they are major facilities treating
tens of thousands of people every year.
It is a question that maybe needs to be looked at. If
the State was to nationalise these facilities it would
cost billions of euro. On one hand, thats money that
the health service needs on a day-to-day basis to run
the service.
If planning permission is granted later this year and
then the awarding of the contract, you could see the
new National Maternity Hospital opening in about
three or four years.
However, we saw how long it took to get the new
childrens hospital going and we still have to see a
brick of the new project to go down. But that project
looks like it will proceed.

Meanwhile, Councillor Claire Byrne, who is a member

of the NMH board, has said she did not witness any
bullying or intimidating at last night's meeting, which
she described as "terse".
She said the meeting was the first in three years that
she had attended where the Lord Mayor was also
present.
Cllr Byrne told RT's Today with Sean O'Rourke she
had attended the majority of meetings on the issue
over the last three years.
She said she was satisfied that the Sisters of Charity
would have no input into clinical decisions at the new
hospital, that she had raised this as a concern over
the last number of years and received reassurances
every time that this would not happen.
In addition, Cllr Byrne said there has been little or no
support between this, or previous, governments to
end the relationship between Church and State.
The reality is, she said, that we need this hospital
and the facility at Holles Street is not fit for purpose.
Around 24 board members attended the Holles Street
meeting last night.
A majority of those in attendance re-endorsed the
commitment to the deal, mediated last November by
former Workplace Relations Committee chief Kieran
Mulvey.
Three people voted against the endorsement to move
the hospital, including Cllr Carr and Cllr Mac
Donncha.
Labour leader Brendan Howlin said it is "hugely
disappointing" that Dr Boylan has resigned from the
board.
Speaking on the same programme he said Dr Boylan
was told his responsibility was to the board and not
the citizens of Ireland, the women who will use this
facility.
Mr Howlin said: "if we have learnt anything from
financial crisis, and other crises, it is that we need to
listen and encourage debate and concerns should be
raised and not be suppressed. That is what has
happened here."
He said we need to have those points openly
debated.
"We should go with a rational expectation that State-
funded institutions that are 100% funded by the
taxpayer, that are staffed by people who are 100%
paid by taxpayer, should be owned and controlled by
the taxpayer."
Mr Howlin said Ireland's health systems are
democratically funded and controlled and they should
not be subject to any ethos.
"I would like to see an agreement made with the
Sisters of Charity to hand over the land, obviously for
financial consideration, also taking into account the
redress board monies due", Mr Howlin said.He said
certainty is needed before the Dil will vote to
allocate 300m for this facility.

Senior doctor calls

for absolute
separation of
Church and
medicine
Updated / Friday, 28 Apr 2017

Artist's impression of the new National Maternity Hospital at St

Vincent's
Former master of the Coombe Hospital Professor
Chris Fitzpatrick has stood down from the project
board of the National Maternity Hospital in support of
Dr Peter Boylan.
He said he shared reservations expressed by Dr
Boylan, who resigned from the National Maternity
Hospital board yesterday, in relation to the proposed
ownership and governance of the new hospital.
Dr Boylan had been critical of the fact that the
Religious Sisters of Charity is to be given ownership
of the new 300m taxpayer-funded National
Maternity Hospital because it owns the land on which
it is to be built on the St Vincent's Hospital campus in
Dublin.
Prof Fitzpatrick said it is absolutely critical that there
is absolute separation between church and medicine,
especially when it comes to female reproductive
healthcare.

Professor Chris Fitzpatrick said he shared reservations expressed

by Dr Peter Boylan
In a letter accompanying his resignation note, Prof
Fitzpatrick said it was "wholly inappropriate in 21st
century pluralist, secular Ireland that the ownership"
of this publicly-funded women and infants' hospital
"should be entrusted in any shape, way or form to a
religious organisation - of an denomination".

Excerpt from Prof Fitzpatrick's letter

He said a religious link would be "deeply insensitive"
and would also "have the potential to erode public
confidence" in clinical services.
Prof Fitzpatrick said "owners have a certain
responsibility for what happens on their property".
He said that, despite assurances of the contrary, to
believe that the arrangement "could never lead to a
conflict of interest between the ethos of the owners
and their nominees/representatives on the Board and
clinical practice is wishful thinking".

Excerpt from Prof Fitzpatrick's letter

However, Prof Fitzpatrick said it is absolutely
essential that the National Maternity Hospital co-
locates to St Vincent's as planned and said that
nothing should derail or decelerate the project.
Speaking on RT's Today with Sean O'Rourke, he
said: "There is an opportunity to resolve the
problem" as it is of "national significance" as the first
maternity hospital being built this century.
After his tenure as health minster, Brian Cowen famously described the
Department of Health as Angola due to the constant faction fighting and the
sheer number of political landmines that lie in wait.

This week - amid the fall-out from the supposed 'revelation' that the new
National Maternity Hospital is to be handed over to the Sisters of Charity -
Simon Harris will know exactly what Cowen meant as he witnessed one of his
department's rare 'good news' stories blow up in his face in spectacular
fashion.

Just days after scoring a positive PR goal on funding for Cystic Fibrosis drug
Orkambi, Harris found himself attacked from all sides when it 'emerged' that
the new maternity hospital would be handed over to the St Vincent's Hospital
Group which is owned by the Sisters of Charity.

Opposition parties, left-wing activist groups and atheists quickly seized on the
'news' of the 'secret' deal and an online poll protesting the plan soon went
viral, attracting over 70,000 responses in a matter of days.

However, there is one glaring problem with the narrative that has been doing
the rounds thanks to social media. The deal with the Sisters of Charity is not
and never was a secret and far from 'emerging' this month, it was widely
known about as far back as last May. Legal issues involving the site of the new
hospital - and its eventual ownership - have been in the public domain since
2013 when the HSE waged a very public PR battle with the St Vincent's
Hospital Group over governance at St Vincent's public and private hospitals.

Indeed, it was in 2013 that we learned that the St Vincent's group had used its
State funded public hospital as collateral to finance the development of its
private facility, an issue that is at the real core of the current row.

As a result, the banks have first dibs on St Vincent's lands and even if the
hospital group wanted to sell the site of the maternity hospital to the State, it
probably couldn't. The banks' involvement would also make a compulsory
purchase extraordinarily difficult.

So, if all this has been known for years - and the full details of the deal were
announced at a press conference last November - why the current outrage?
The simple answer would seem to be opportunism on the part of politicians
and general ignorance on the part of the public.

Many of the civilian groups so vehemently opposed to the deal seem to have
been entirely unaware of the situation and were only alerted to the 'emerging
news' when it erupted on social media.

Senior politicians - especially those who were in Government when the deal
was being finalised - were certainly well aware of what was happening and
some appear to be using the current controversy to score cheap political
points.

Public ignorance and cynical political games now threaten to completely derail
a vital project that will benefit thousands of women and children. That's the
real scandal here

Follow

RT News

@rtenews
Prof Fitzpatrick says he thinks a Catholic ethos will prevail
at the NMH
11:03 AM - 28 Apr 2017
13 13 Retweets14 14 likes
But he said there is "sufficient ambiguity in the
composition of the board" that he says will guarantee
division and confusion.
"This is not the way to run a maternity hospital", he
said, referring to it as a "compromise governance
model".
The Chairperson of the Association for Improvements
in the Maternity Services Ireland has said it is vital
that there is clarity that the new maternity hospital will
provide all the services that a 21st Century maternity
facility should provide.

Speaking to RTs Six One, Krysia Lynch said that

clarity is needed from the Sisters of Charity.
She said the Government must put up its hands and
realise that it does not have a mandate to have a
State-Church partnership in funding the health
service.
Ms Lynch said the memorandum of understanding
released this week does not give the required
assurances as various members of the Catholic
Church have pointed out that under no circumstances
could procedures such as abortion and IVF and other
procedures that go directly against Catholic ethos, be
carried out in a hospital owned by the Sisters of
Charity.
Ms Lynch said the Sisters of Charity are being put in
a very difficult position to be expected to enable such
types of procedures.
Letter Mr Jim Curran Chairperson of the National
Maternity Hospital/St Vincents University Hospital
Co-location Project Board,
In a letter accompanying his resignation note, Prof Fitzpatrick said it
was "wholly inappropriate in 21st century pluralist, secular Ireland that
the ownership" of this publicly-funded women and infants' hospital
https://www.rte.ie/documents/news/profchrisfitzpatrickresignationletter.pdf

Petition to Members of the Oireachtas

The right-to-life is non-negotiable and can never be subject to a

vote. Therefore, we the undersigned, petition members of the
Oireachtas to reject all calls to hold a referendum on the repeal,
or alteration, of the pro-life Eighth Amendment. Holding such a
referendum would open the way for the elimination of the legal
protection of the right-to-life and, consequently, to the killing of
Irelands unborn children by abortion.

The Eighth Amendment to the Irish Constitution was introduced to

prevent the violation of the right-to-life of unborn children by abortion.
The amendment protects the lives of mothers and unborn children
equally. It states:
The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due
regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws
to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and
vindicate that right.

International pro-abortion activists are campaigning to strip away this

protection from Irelands mothers and children. In October 2016 a
Citizens Assembly, convened by the Irish government, began its
discussion of the future of the Eighth Amendment. It is considered
likely that the assembly, which is due to report in June 2017, will
propose a referendum on the repeal or alteration of the Eighth
Amendment.

The right-to-life is the most fundamental of all human rights and is

recognised by international law. Ireland is a signatory to the
Convention on the Rights of the Child, which affirms that the child,
by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special
safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before
as well as after birth.

The Irish state has a moral and legal obligation to protect the human
rights of everyone within its jurisdiction. It is the duty of the state to
recognise the right-to-life and ensure its protection in law. No state,
no legislature, no assembly, regardless of public opinion, can
abrogate or deny fundamental human rights.

Any attempt to limit, nullify or deny the right to life of children before
birth is wholly illegitimate.

All calls to hold a referendum must be rejected by Irish lawmakers

and by the Irish people.

http://www.nodeath.ie
Irelands youth are no big
fans of priests, politicians or
police
Only one group fared worse than the three Ps in survey
no prizes for guessing which
Tue, Apr 25, 2017, 21:02
Conor Pope

Tough crowd: results all come from Generation What Europe, a landmark
survey taken by nearly a million young people across Europe. Photograph:
Frank Miller
Irish millennials have expressed an almost complete lack
of confidence in priests, politicians and police, who used
to be considered the three pillars of Irish society.
Only 2 per cent of Irish people aged 18-34 told
researchers working on behalf of the European
Broadcasting Union they had complete faith in religion,
while 56 per cent said they had absolutely no trust in it,
according to a Europe-wide survey of 18-34-year-olds.
The survey also showed that 35 per cent of young adults
in Ireland believe all politicians to be corrupt, and a
further 41 per cent expressed the view that at least some
of them are up to no good.
The news is not all bad for politicians, however: although
just 22 per cent of Irelands young adults expressed a
good deal of confidence in Irelands political class, the
percentage was still sufficiently high to rank Ireland as
the most trustworthy country of the 18 European states
surveyed when it came to politicians honesty.
Dublin and Cork among top 100 cities for millennials
Generation Z comes of age, but spare a thought for
inbetweeners
No dating, please, we are Generation Snowflake
The news wasnt great for An Garda Sochna, either, as
46 per cent said they distrusted the force to some extent.
Children of the revolution
The survey also suggested that the political world should
be on its guard, as more than half of Irelands
millennials appeared to be prepared to join a large-scale
uprising against the generation in power.
The results all come from Generation What Europe, a
landmark 149-question survey taken by nearly a million
young people across Europe including more than
20,000 in the Republic covering a range of topics from
politics to happiness, education, nationhood and
immigration.
Despite the growth of nationalism and populist politics,
there seems to be no appetite for a ban on immigration
across Europe, with 73 per cent saying they believed
immigration made society richer, and Spain, Germany
and Denmark all supporting immigration by more than
80 per cent.

An overwhelming 98 per cent said they could not be

happy without music, while 73 per cent tied their
happiness to books and a somewhat suspicious 63 per
cent said they could get along without their mobile
phone. That percentage fell to a slightly more convincing
52 per cent when the internet was involved.
While politicians, the guards and religion all fared badly
in the trust stakes, they were not the least-trusted
groups. That dubious honour belongs to the fourth
estate, with 43 per cent of those aged 18-34 saying they
had no trust in the media and a further 44 per cent
expressing a degree of mistrust.
All told only 1 per cent said they had total faith in the
media.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ireland-s-youth-are-no-big-fans-of-priests-
politicians-or-police-1.3061302
The Cabinet are set to agree the terms for a State inquiry next week.
Tusla - the Child and Family Agency - welcomed todays publication of the
reports.
"Graces placement predates the introduction of the Child Care (Placement of
Children in Foster Care) Regulations 1995, and her experience does not reflect
current foster care placements which are highly regulated both externally by
HIQA and internally by Tuslas monitoring service," a Tusla statement read.
"94% of all children currently in foster care have an allocated social worker and in
the small number of cases where a child doesnt have an allocated social worker
they are monitored by a team leader to ensure their safety and wellbeing.
"Where a child is at immediate risk they receive a timely response, and 93% have
care plans which means that the childs needs are assessed and they are placed
in the most suitable foster care placement, taking those needs and the best
interests of the child into account.
"We can confirm that Tusla staff referred to in these reports were identified to us
by the HSE in the last two weeks. We have met with staff concerned to advise
them of the publication of the reports and have completed an initial HR review
process.
"We are currently examining the reports published today and will further review
the individual staff involvement in the case at the time. If any issues emerge as a
result of this review, further HR processes will be invoked, as necessary.
"We are actively liaising with an Garda Siochna to ensure that our own internal
review processes do not impede their separate, ongoing investigation.
Additionally, we will fully cooperate with the forthcoming Commission of Inquiry."
Connect is available to provide free telephone-based counselling to anyone
impacted by todays Foster Care reports.
The head of children's charity Barnardos claims it would be a
'disgrace' if the state inquiry into the Grace case does not look
at other children in the same foster home.
Fergus Finlay claims the inquiry's terms of reference, which
will be signed off by Cabinet this morning, could form a
template for all future abuse investigations.
Researchers will be given a year to examine the foster home
in the south east where Grace was reportedly sexually
abused.
They will be expected to publish an interim report in six
months but it is still unclear how far their investigations can go.

Fergus Finlay thinks they need to cover all children who lived
at the home.
"I heard several reports last night saying terms of reference
will be limited to the case of Grace and that might be seen as
seen as some kind of template for future investigations.
"If terms of reference are set up to explore a range of cases
but prioritise one as a first module, then the others will be
investigated."
Michael Noonan insists he is innocent of wrongdoing in
'Grace' case
02/03/2017
Finance Minister Michael Noonans handling of the Grace
case while he was health minister featured prominently at a
meeting of Fine Gael ministers before Cabinet this week, the
Irish Examiner has learned, writes Daniel McConnell, Political
Editor.
Mr Noonan has come under sustained fire as a decision to
remove the intellectually disabled girl from the foster home at
the heart of the scandal was overturned on his watch in 1996.
As revealed by the Irish Examiner, Mr Noonan was lobbied by
the then foster father who appealed to have Grace left in the
home.

Mr Noonan has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing or failure to

act on his behalf saying he merely referred the matter to local
health officials for consideration.

Grace remained in the home until 2009 despite allegations of

sexual abuse being known by authorities.
It has emerged that ahead of the Cabinet discussion on
Tuesday about the publication of two HSE reports into the
scandal, Mr Noonan voluntarily offered an explanation of his
position on the scandal to his Fine Gael ministerial colleagues.
According to some of those present, Mr Noonan again insisted
he was innocent of any wrongdoing. He was not prompted or
requested to explain his role, he did so voluntarily, said a
source.
Asked by the Irish Examiner as to his view of Mr Noonans
role in this scandal, Taoiseach Enda Kenny has said he was
satisfied with Mr Noonans handling of the Grace case.
A spokesman for Mr Noonan said that as Disabilities Minister
Finian McGrath has made public that he intends to propose
the establishment of a commission of inquiry, Mr Noonan has
nothing to add to what he has already placed on the public
record on this matter.
In February, Mr Noonan confirmed he was made aware of the
Grace case around 1996 and the matter was passed on to his
junior minister, Austin Currie.
We were told that the young woman in question, or young
child in question, had been removed from the foster home, he
said.
Some weeks later, it transpired that the South Eastern Health
Board officials, who had made the decision, had reversed the
decision for some reason.
He also contested the account given by solicitor and Fine Gael
councillor Garry Mr OHalloran who accused Mr Noonan of
failing in his duty of care for abuse victims in the South East.
He told the Irish Examiner: I cant be responsible for third-
parties who make allegations about me which I refute.
Independent Alliance minister Mr McGrath says Mr Noonans
role as health minister will be investigated.
He said: I met Michael Noonan last with with officials from the
Department of Health and we gave him an update on the
correspondence that was there.
We are satisfied that will bea dealt with within the commission
but my gut reaction is that I dont think there is anything to
answer.
Inclusion Ireland is claiming that people with intellectual
disabilities are abused every day in institutions around the
State.
Meanwhile, Fianna Fil TD John McGuinness, who has led
the charge to highlight the abuse scandal, has urged Mr
McGrath to ensure the commission is not just limited to
Graces case.
There were 46 other children and young adults, vulnerable
adults who went through the home, including a boy who was
locked in a cupboard under the stairs. They cannot be left out
of the terms of reference. They must be included, he said.
Mr McGuinness raised the matter at a meeting of the Fianna
Fil parliamentary party meeting yesterday and urged his
party leader to insist the cases of all children are included in
the inquiry.
Two HSE officials directly involved in the Grace foster abuse
scandal were promoted to senior roles to protect vulnerable
adults at risk of abuse two years after the damning Conal
Devine report was completed, writes Fiachra Cionnaith,
Daniel McConnell, Elaine Loughlin, and Noel Baker.
The Irish Examiner has learned that the appointments were
made despite serious concerns over how foster care
standards and check-ups were overseen throughout the crisis.
Details of the promotions were revealed as the HSE and Tusla
confirmed they have opened disciplinary investigations into 11
employees after yesterdays publication of the Devine and
Resilience Ireland reports show two individuals central to the
case were promoted after the scale of what happened became
known.
And while the HSE stressed it has conducted a review of all
remaining employees to assure itself no one is at risk, the
revelation is likely to lead to fresh questions over whether
those involved will face adequate disciplinary action.
It is understood that, after the Devine report was concluded in
2012, two of the five HSE officials involved in decisions which
led to repeated failures to end Graces 20 years of abuse were
promoted to senior roles overseeing the care of vulnerable
adults.
One of these individuals was involved in the failure to
adequately review Graces case file in 2004, which led to her
being incorrectly taken off a list to find a new placement
prolonging her ordeal for five more years.
The second individual was involved in a 2008 internal HSE
decision to veto plans to give the whistleblower who
highlighted Graces case greater powers to protect her client.
The incidents are recorded in the Devine report which, while
published yesterday, was made available to senior HSE
managers in 2012.
However, despite this fact, in 2014 two years after the HSE
said the Devine reports recommendations were acted on
both individuals were appointed to regional roles overseeing
the safeguarding of vulnerable adults at risk of abuse.
A HSE spokesperson last night said an initial HR review has
found no issues arising at this time in relation to their current
roles, adding the appointments were made via normal public
service recruitment rules.
The revelation two of the five HSE officials central to the
Grace case were promoted after the scale of the scandal
emerged as the HSE finally published the Devine and
Resilience Ireland reports, detailing a shocking level of abuse
inflicted on Grace and others at the foster home.
Speaking at a media briefing in Co Kilkenny, HSE head of
operations for disability services Cathal Morgan and assistant
national HR director Tess ODonovan confirmed that five
senior HSE officials are now the subject of disciplinary
investigations.
However, despite the move and separate Tusla
confirmation six of its ex-HSE employees are also being
investigated the officials were heavily criticised for only
starting disciplinary action now and for allowing individuals to
remain in their positions while inquiries take place.
Grace foster abuse scandal were promoted to senior roles to protect vulnerable adults at risk of abuse
two years after the damning Conal Devine report was completed inquiry-protected-disclosures-su1
http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/inquiry-protected-disclosures-su1.pdf
The head of HSE disability services said he understands why
the public suspects the health authority tried to cover up in the
Grace scandal, writes Claire O'Sullivan.
Dr Cathal Morgan said he could not explain why the HSE
avoided bringing the case of the vulnerable child to court,
would not share health records, and waited three years after
receiving a damning internal report before contacting garda.
I understand why people have those feelings, he said.
In an interview on RT Radio, Dr Morgan said HSE chief
executive Tony OBrien was correct in telling the Dil Public
Accounts Committee that none of the three HSE staff
responsible for implementing the action to keep Grace in
foster care were still working in the public sector.
He said it was also correct that one of three HSE staff who
made the key decision is still in the public sector.
advertisement
Dr Morgan repeated that the report drawn up by senior
counsel Conor Dignam could not find evidence of a cover-up
but, with a statutory commission to investigate the Grace
case,there may be information that I may not have seen,
thats not known to the HSE that people may want to bring
forward.
Documents obtained by RTs This Week, under freedom of
information, show the HSE first contacted garda about
publishing the Conal Devine report in March 2015, three years
after it was completed, even though the HSE had told the
Department of Health that garda had advised them not to
publish the report or begin disciplinary action due to parallel
Garda investigations.
Furthermore, the Devine report, which was eventually
published last week, outlined how it met with investigating
garda in 2011, who stated they had no issue with the report
proceeding or being completed in parallel with their
investigation.
I cant explain that, but the guards had always said at a local
level that they didnt want it to interfere with their own
investigation, said Dr Morgan.
The terms of reference of the upcoming statutory investigation
into the handling of the care of the non-verbal intellectually
disabled young girl are to be discussed in the Cabinet
tomorrow.
The Devine report also revealed a repeated failure to make
Grace a ward of court because of potential damage to the
HSEs reputation.
Minutes of meetings showed that staff were concerned a
judge may consent in relationship to wardship, however, the
independent person who be appointed may explore aspects of
the case from a historical perspective that the HSE may find
difficult to answer.
Further records show an individual noted that a court would
ask questions about actions taken by the HSE or other
relevant bodies around Grace.
The report also reveals that HSE staff said in 2009 that a court
will likely ask what the HSE has been doing for the past years
for this client.
Dr Morgan described the response as inexplicable and
difficult to understand.
He also described as unacceptable the HSEs refusal to
share Graces health records with an intellectual disability
service and even with the person made a committee of the
person for Grace.
There was no legal barrier to the sharing of these documents.
This is fundamentally wrong, he said.
Dr Morgan took up a HSE position a year ago and had no
involvement with the Grace case before that.
I cant speak for the action of the persons centrally involved,
he said.
RT Investigates has seen a copy of the terms of reference for the
inquirywhich will look only at the case of 'Grace' and her experience in
the foster home, which is referred to as Family X.
https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/terms.pdf

Transcript of interview with RTs Investigates Aoife Hegarty

and Graces mother as broadcast on Claire Byrne Live.
https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/transcript-of-interview-with-rte-investigates.pdf

The Health Service Executive has provided copies of two previously unpublished reports to
the families of service users affected by failures in the foster care system in the Waterford
region over a prolonged period of time.

The Conal Devine and Resilience Ireland reports, copies of which have been seen by RT
Investigates, will be officially published today.
The publication of the reports follows revelations by RT Investigates in 2015 concerning the
story of 'Grace' - a young woman with profound intellectual disabilities who was left in a foster
home in the Waterford area for almost 20 years despite a succession of sexual abuse
allegations.

She was one of 47 children placed with the foster family over a 20-year period.

The HSE commissioned two reviews into the foster home, one in 2012 by consultant Conal
Devine and another in 2015 by the consultancy firm Resilience Ireland, but neither report was
published at the time of its completion.

RT has seen copies of the two unpublished reports, which list multiple failures in the care
system.

The Conal Devine report finds that a decision to leave Grace in the foster placement was
made in late 1996 despite an earlier decision to remove her.

According to the report, that meant Grace continued to live with the foster family "beyond
her 18th birthday with minimal intervention for a further twelve and a half years."

It was also decided at this point "to explore the possibility of making 'Grace' a Ward of
Court".

But this did not happen and Grace continued to live in the foster home until 2009.

The 2015 Resilience Ireland report looked at all users who were placed in the foster home.

It makes a series of critical findings, among them that:

There was no evidence that placing children in the foster home "...would be conducive to their
welfare..."

Children were placed with the foster family on respite from 1983 but the family was "...not
approved as foster carers... until 1985".

They were approved to "...take a maximum of two children for holiday/respite care, primarily
during the months of July and August." However, over the following years anywhere between
14 and 20 children stayed there at any one time and the lengths of stay gradually increased.

Neither report was published at the time of completion.

Last year the Government announced a statutory commission of investigation into the foster
home scandal.

The terms of reference for that inquiry were to be published this week, however that will not
now happen until after next week's Cabinet meeting.

A spokesperson for Minister of State for Disabilities Finian McGrath has confirmed that the
Minister instructed the HSE to publish the reports as soon as possible. The publication will
take place tomorrow.

It is understood the HSE has specialist teams in the Waterford/Kilkenny region today
providing support services to the families of those affected, in advance of the publication of
the reports.
A spokesperson for the HSE said it will not be making any comment in advance of publication
tomorrow.

Key quotes from the Conal Devine and Resilience reports

Devine Report

On the decision not to remove Grace from the foster home:

"After a further case conference, it was decided not to proceed with removal of her under
Section 43 of Childcare act. She will continue to live with the X family for the present time with
regular review of the situation by Adult Mental Handicap service. It was also decided to
explore the possibility of making her a Ward of Court. "

On the consequences of leaving Grace in situ and not pursuing the idea of making her
a Ward of Court:

"The inquiry team, on the basis of the evidence available, would be of the view that the two
persons designated to hear the representations made by (...) did not uphold the appeal of that
decision. The Inquiry team would be of the view that the decision taken at October's case
conference to effectively reverse the outcome of the April case conference was taken by the
professionals concerned including (...). It is not clear however if this decision was made prior
to the October case conference or was taken at the case conference.

The consequences for [Grace] were that the placement with the X continued beyond her 18th
birthday as an ad hoc placement with minimal intervention and monitoring for a further twelve
and a half years"

On the lack of any reference on file to interventions or interactions with Grace:

"There are no references on [Grace's] file to any interventions or interactions for the period 30
August 2004 - 31 December 2004"

Again there were no interventions or interactions for "...1 January 2005 - 31 December 2005"
and again there were no interventions or interactions for "1 January - 31 December 2006".

On the accountability of people directly involved, at a particular point during Grace's

time in the foster care setting:

"The inquiry team's view is that whichever of the possible scenarios identified above actually
occurred, any one of these scenarios represents a failure to discharge duty of care
responsibilities to [Grace]".

Following a call from the birth mother in 2007, Grace's file was acted upon by the HSE.

A "designated person" was in charge of investigating the file. The designated

person's position was to take a legal framework to make her a Ward of Court, so as to remove
her from the home. It prompted a sequence of internal disagreements about the handling of
Grace's situation.

At the same time, the Devine Report describes the lack of managerial supervision and
structure to allow correct decision-making and in managing her case file in the period of mid-
2007 until 2009.
Finally, in 2009 Grace was removed. The report goes on to say:

"The Inquiry Team notes that (...) was requested to provide a report to (...) in December 2007
re [Grace] and related issues. This report was circulated to the (...) in January 2008 and
furnished t the solicitor, with an updated version furnished in March 2008. Is it noted that
discussion at the (...) meeting of 12 December 2007 indicates that there was a need for "legal
representation to protect HSE and the personnel involved"

It adds: "The Inquiry Team understands that (...) Solicitors was requested on 1 September
2008 to proceed to seek Counsels Opinion re [Grace]. The Inquiry Team further understands
that (...) was not a party to those discussions. The Inquiry Team notes that in September
2008 (...) advises contact with the birth mother. (...) "suggests that legally we have very few
options. If we seek to take the client back into the care of the HSE a judge would need strong
evidence of why it is necessary given that she has been in this woman's care for so long. The
judge would need to see that it is in the client's best interest and there is little evidence of this.
The court will likely ask what have the HSE been doing for the past years for this client." (...)
advised that legal counsel's opinion should be sought on the case.

Resilience Report

The Resilience Ireland report looked 47 other service users who were places at the home
from 1983 to 1993. These placements were mainly for the purposes of respite and most
lasted a week to two weeks.

The report identified nine children who were placed privately at the home and these private
placements continued to 2013. These placements were not notified to the health board and
therefore not monitored.

The regulations governing these placements are known as the Boarding Out Regulations
1983. They stipulate that there should be reports on any potential home by an authorised
officer of the health board. They should detail the number, sex and ages of those living in the
home, the suitability of sleeping arrangements and other domestic conditions.

It is stated by the report team that they:

"...could not find evidence on file of any reports which would indicate that boarding out
children in the home of foster family X would be conducive to their welfare as per the
Boarding Out Regulations 1983."

The report looked at a particularly vulnerable group of 5 children and is critical that again in
relation to these children "...there was a consistent failure in to meet the basic requirement
associated with the regulations".

There was "...no evidence of any visit by an authorised officer of the health board or the
conducting of an assessment of foster family X's suitability".

Furthermore the report states that "...the health board was required to carry out periodic
inspections of the home in which s/he was boarded out within one month after the child was
place there and thereafter at such intervals not exceeding six months. The team has not
found evidence on file to demonstrate that such inspections occurred in most of the cases or
were recorded in any reasonable manner."
The report notes that overcrowding was problem in the home and that "...the maximum
number of two children being cared for during the respite period of July and August each year
was breached on more than one occasion."

During the time of compiling the report a number of historic service users were identified that
the enquiry team believed warranted further investigation, the report states: "During the
course of this enquiry ... a total of four service users were formally identified by An Garda
Sochna initially to the HSE who then made appropriate referrals to Tusla."

Enda Kenny said he did not have details on the criminal

investigation into the case
The Taoiseach has told the Dil that the terms of
reference for a commission of inquiry into abuse at a
foster home in the southeast will be published next
week.
Enda Kenny was responding to questions from Sinn
Fin's Mary Lou McDonald about the treatment of
'Grace' - a young woman with profound intellectual
disabilities who stayed at the home for almost 20
years.
Mr Kenny said "the very least this house can do is
apologise to 'Grace' and her family.
"Her treatment is a disgrace to us and our
country".
The HSE today published two reports commissioned
several years ago on failures at the home where 47
children were placed over two decades up to 2013.
The HSE has since reiterated its apology to all those
affected.
Ms McDonald asked who in the HSE has been held
responsible and whether arrests have been made in
the criminal investigation.
"Grace was left in the home for nearly 20 years,
despite a litany of sexual abuse allegations and
neglect. She was forgotten, abandoned by those in
the health service charged with ensuring her care,"
she said.
"It is quite frankly vile and disgusting.
"It's not enough to produce shocking reports - we
need accountability," Ms McDonald said.
In response, Mr Kenny said he did not have details
about the criminal investigation and said it was a
matter for the Garda Commissioner and the Minister
for Justice to give those details.
He said the Government had agreed to set up a
commission of investigation and Minister of State with
responsibility for Disabilities Finian McGrath would
bring the terms of reference to the Cabinet next
Tuesday.
Mr McGrath said: "I cannot emphasise too strongly
how concerned I am about the serious allegations
addressed in the reports and the need to establish
the facts of the matter for once and for all. This is the
least that the individuals at the centre of this case,
and their families, deserve."
He said he hoped to get an interim report within three
months.
Mr McGrath added that there could be no guarantee
there is no abuse going on at present but said new
procedures and systems had been introduced over
the past number of years.
Social Democrat joint leader Risn Shortall said the
Dil was discussing yet another scandal involving the
negligence and incompetence of State agencies.
She said the response of the Government was to set
up a commission of investigation, when what was
needed was accountability.
She asked whether it was still possible that some of
the people involved in the care of 'Grace' are still
involved in child protection.
Mr Kenny said he did not have that information.
Fianna Fil leader Michel Martin has called for a
Dil debate next week on the two reports, describing
them as "utterly shocking".
The Taoiseach agreed to the request, describing a
debate as "appropriate".
Whistleblower in Grace case claims HSE lied to
discredit her
Social worker alleges young woman sexually abused at
foster home for over 20 years

In the Dil last night, Fine Gael TD John Deasy

The whistleblower at the centre of a case involving
allegation of sexual abuse at a foster home in the southeast
has alleged that the HSE used a combination of lies,
misinformation and obfuscation to discredit her.

TH The National Child and Family Agency Tusla says it has yet to receive clarification as to
whether any of its current staff were involved in decisions to leave an intellectually disabled
woman known as 'Grace' in a foster home setting around which risks were raised.

Despite allegations of physical and sexual abuse against a person in the foster care setting
being raised in the mid-1990's, 'Grace' remained in that setting until 2009 before legal steps
were taken to remove her by a voluntary service provider.

Following issues around 'Grace's care being raised at the public accounts committee,
specifically where staff who had dealt with her care now worked, the HSE delivered a copy of
a 2012 report on the matter Tusla.

However, in a statement to RT's This Week, Tusla told the programme that it had only
received an anonymised version of the report, which was compiled by management
consultant Conal Devine for the HSE.

Tusla told RT "the [copy of the Conal Devine] report received by Tusla refers to the posts
involved in Grace's case but does not specify names.

"Following the comments made by the HSE in front of the Public Accounts Committee, Tusla
requested the names of any individuals involved in the case who are now working in Tusla.

Tusla has not yet received a response from the HSE."

The HSE says it is seeking legal advice before passing on the information requested by
Tusla.

In a statement to This Week, the HSE said: "The Conal Devine and Reliance Reports, with
permission of An Garda Sochna given and in line with legal advice have been provided to
Tusla.

The statement said some additional information has been sought this week by Tusla and the
HSE through its legal advisors is consulting with An Garda Sochna on whether the
additional information can be provided in the context of the live Garda Investigation.

E government has confirmed that the report into alleged abuse against a
disabled woman Grace while in foster care in Waterford will be published
imminently, provided the HSE has covered all its tracks.

Some 9 months after Taosieach Enda Kenny promised swift action and justice
for Grace, an initial report into the case remains unpublished amid concerns,
voiced by the barrister compiling the report, over the HSEs co-operation.

Look, youve got to understand weve got to cover our asses first, a HSE
spokesperson explained to WWN, we want to give all relevant information for
the report, but weve got to leaf through it first and make sure none of us will
get in trouble.

Under government guidelines any senior HSE staff found to be in dereliction

of their duty could face the very serious prospect of full pay and pension, and
in some of the most severe cases, a promotion.

We handed some files we had to the barrister carrying out the investigation,
and maybe we didnt hand over some other files. But were trying to break a
435 bad report in a row streak, the spokesperson added.

We all dream of the day when a HIQA report says something other than I
cant fucking believe the HSE fucked up yet again and caused people suffering
and indignity. And on that glorious, hypothetical day, well immediately ask
for a pay rise and create another 100 middle management roles for no
reason, the spokesperson concluded.

The HSE asked members of the public who are outraged at the allegations of
people being sexually abused while in foster care to save their anger for the
next, presumably worse HSE scandal.
Reports published
in Kilkenny
highlight failings of
south-east foster
home
HSE APOLOGIES OVER 'GRACE' CASE AND
FAILINGS OF SYSTEM

Sam Matthews
28 Feb 2017
Two reports highlighting 'significant failures' in the foster care
system in the south-east were published at HSE offices at Lacken
in Kilkenny today.
On foot of their publication, the HSE issued an 'unreserved and
heartfelt apology' to those affected by the failures of the former
South Eastern Health Board in dealing with a foster home at the
centre of the allegations.
The two reports, Inquiry into Protected Disclosures, SU1 (Conal
Devine & Associates) and 'Disability Foster Care Report, HSE
South East (Resilience Ireland), focus on failures at the home in
the south-east region where 47 children were placed over two
decades up to 2013.
They also deal with 'Grace' a young, intellectually-disabled
woman who was left in the home for almost 20 years, despite the
many sexual abuse allegations.
Grace was admitted to the home in the south-east of the country
when she was 11 years old. On one occasion, she was sent back
to the home even after her day carers noticed physical injuries
and bruising on her thighs and breasts.
The Conal Devine report says that an absence of supervision and
adherence of protocols meant that Grace was allowed to remain
there, despite at least four opportunities where action could have
been taken and she could have been removed from the home.
The reports were completed in 2012 and 2015, but their
publication was delayed pending clearance from the gardai.
Local TD John McGuinness has called for a full public inquiry into
the matter. It's expected that the Government will set out the terms
for such next week.
http://www.kilkennypeople.ie/news/home/237671/reports-published-in-
kilkenny-highlight-failings-of-south-east-foster-home.html

The Roscommon Child Care Inquiry: An Article 3 Perspective ...

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/publications/Children/RoscommonChildCar
eCase.pdf
HSE Opening Statement to the Public Accounts Committee
in relation to the South East Former Foster Home
Chairman, members of the Committee. Good afternoon. I welcome this opportunity to provide
further information and to answer questions in relation to the South East Foster Home matter. As
you are well aware this involves allegations of abuse and neglect of the most egregious
nature. You have asked the HSE to provide clarity on two particular matters of concern which
have emerged over the past week. I am conscious that recent media coverage may have raised
other issues that you may also wish me to address. In addressing the Committee today we will be
mindful of the fact that this matter remains subject to a live investigation by an Garda and we will
be careful not to prejudice or to impede that process.
In order to best provide evidence to the Committee and to answer your questions, I am
accompanied by Pat Healy National Director for Social Care and Aileen Colley, the recently
appointed Chief Officer of the South East Community Health Organisation.
The Committee asked the HSE to specifically address a number of key issues which I will deal
with in turn.
Before I address those issues, I wish to place on the record that I met with both Ministers
Varadkar and Lynch yesterday during which we discussed the recommendation to Government for
the establishment of a Commission of Investigation into this matter.
I welcome such a Commission as it would provide a statutory mechanism in order to conclude this
drawn-out process and allow the 47 service-users, their families and other interested parties to get
answers to the questions that they have been asking for many years now on this deeply concerning
and dreadful case and to achieve some level of closure for all concerned.
Turning now to the issues:
Regarding the Apology

The intention in early December 2015, was for the HSE to provide an update and an official
apology to 47 service users, including Grace, who had contact over the years with the foster
home at the centre of the abuse allegations. Letters, which included official apologies, issued by
registered post to 43 families (3 service users were untraceable by the HSE or An Garda Siochana)
on December 9th and a verbal briefing including an official apology was to be given to "Grace"
and her mother on the next day (December 10th).
While the 43 letters issued as planned, the HSE mishandled issuing the important apology to
Grace and her mother. In considering how to communicate to Grace in the most appropriate way,
the view taken was that this should be undertaken in person, in the first instance, rather than by
letter. With this change in the mode of communication in the case of Grace it is now evident that
the official HSE apology that was intended to be issued to "Grace" and to her mother was not
made at that time.
Unfortunately, the desire to offer a formal HSE apology was lost in the communication to the staff
members who were to conduct the meeting in person with Grace.
Having personally reviewed the situation with those staff involved, I am satisfied that it was the
intention to offer a full and frank apology to Grace.
I wish to confirm that the HSE has since apologised officially to Grace and her mother. This
official apology has been made by the Chief Officer both in person and in writing, with the
assistance of the professionals now caring for her. (Appended)
As the Director General of the HSE, I wrote yesterday to the 44 families, to let them know that I
am unhappy with the way the HSE mishandled the apology and I also apologised to them for the
further distress that this mishandling may have caused them or their family member. (Appended)
Furthermore, it is clear from both of the unpublished reports that there were significant failings in
the care provided by that foster family and significant failures by the former Health Board (and
subsequently the HSE) to make the situation safe.
For this, I offered them and their family member a full, sincere and heartfelt apology.
Clarification on Communication to the PAC

The HSE became aware of concerns being raised in the public domain on 20th January 2016
following a report in a national newspaper.
The HSE sought reassurance at local level that the apology had in fact been given. As a result of
this a report was provided confirming that an apology had been offered. This report formed the
basis of the submission to the PAC by the HSE on the morning of the 21st January, 2016.
However, it is the case that the assurance given to the Chief Officer, which she in-turn passed
upwards, referred to an individual expression of regret of the senior staff members to Grace and
her mother. This expression of regret was then mistakenly taken as confirmation of an official
apology on behalf of the HSE.
I wish to take this opportunity to offer an unreserved apology to the Public Accounts Committee
and its members for submitting a document that contained erroneous information at that time. I
want to assure you that having, met the principals involved I am satisfied that there was no
intention to mislead the Committee.
Regarding the Question of Other Placements After 2009 (when Grace was removed)
It is important at this point to assure the Committee that based on all the information available to
the HSE and having regard to the two investigation reports the best information currently
available is that:
i. No new placement was made by the then South Eastern Health Board after the primary
decision of 1995.
ii. Grace was the only Health Board placed person to remain with the foster family after
1995.
iii. The South Eastern Health Board and now HSE are aware of one other person having
contact by living arrangement with the family after 1995. I confirm that, today, she (Ann)
remains in full-time seven-day residential care with a voluntary provider and takes regular visits
home to her mother.
iv. In April 2015, following a national broadcast the provider as fulltime carer contacted the
HSE having reflected on their involvement in recent years and indicated concerns regarding
historical unexplained bruising.
Two professionals independent of the case were commissioned by the HSE to examine this matter.
The investigation report was provided to the HSE yesterday and I can say that nothing untoward is
evident in the findings. The provider has also provided information to HIQA and Tusla, and the
HSE remains in contact with those organisations.
Within the limited powers it has, the HSE is pursuing references to alleged non residential contact
between Ann and her former foster carers. I can confirm she is in a residential placement and this
is her primary source of protection.
It is the case of this person Ann which I would now like to briefly address.
Summary of Anns Case:
From a summary review of the information based on files reviewed by Resilience I can summarise
the position in respect of Ann. I am conscious that this will be the subject of further detailed
consideration and therefore I emphasise this is a high level overview.
Ann was born in 1980 she is now aged 35 years and has a severe Intellectual Disability since
birth. Her contact with the foster family commenced when she was 12 years old and with whom
she lived on a part-time basis. All of her arrangements were conducted privately by her own
family. During June 2011, having been contacted by the Gardai the HSE team at local level
engaged with the family again to confirm that there was a Garda investigation, to advise them of
concerns and to invite them to make direct contact with an Garda if they wished.
In October, 2011, Ann then 31 years of age, was residing in a five-day week residential placement
with a voluntary provider. A seven day week service was offered with the same provider but her
family confirmed they had no concerns regarding the foster family and wished to continue their
part-time contact with the foster mother and had confirmed this to An Garda Siochana. The seven
day week placement was not taken up at that time.
In early 2012, the local HSE team sought legal advice on the case of Ann which informed them
that they could take no further action in relation to Anns placement at that point.
Throughout the period from 2011 through to 2013 there were various engagements with Anns
family essentially to persuade them to cease contact with the former foster family.
In October 2013 the HSE formally demanded the foster family cease all care activity which was
either current (Anns case) or which they might be minded to engage in towards the future.
Later that month Anns family was formally written to, to request that they would cease the
placement, and it ceased shortly thereafter.

Care Needs of those who had any contact with the foster home in question
I want to confirm to the committee that the Service User, who was removed from the foster home
in mid 2009 is being fully cared for in full time residential care by a voluntary service provider
since mid-2009. The HSE Chief Officer and her team in the South East will continue to work
collaboratively with the Service Provider, the Service User and advocates to ensure the highest
quality of service and support continues to be provided to the Service User involved.
An important aspect of the Resilience Ireland report, commissioned by the HSE, was to 'lookback'
at all service users who had any contact with the foster home in the South East and to have their
care needs reviewed to ensure that the necessary supports and services were in place. In the main,
the service users were either in residential placement or living at home and availing of day
services, as a result of the review increased respite was provided where needed to those living at
home and specially tailored supports in some other cases.
Others mater raised in correspondence by voluntary providers
In relation to equity of funding of providers in the South East, outlined below is the funding
relevant to the provider in question.
FUNDING
2009 WIDA 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
1.848mRespite and 1.793m 1.761m 1.694m 1.676m 1.659m 1.997m*
residential
0.352mAdult Education 0.460m 0.422m 0.428m 0.421m 0431m 0.476m*
and Training
2.200mTotal 2.253m 2.183m 2.122m 2.097m 2.091m 2.473m
(2% incr) (3% decr) (3% decr) (1% decr)
(no 18%
change) incr)

*This includes additional funding in 2015 for new service re named individuals, sleepover cost,
school leavers and changing needs.
Between 2008 and 2014 the largest five funded organisations in the State providing ID services
received an average reduction in funding of 12%. Since 2009 the disability sector has been
generally protected from any decreases in allocation except for government reductions such as pay
awards, Haddington Road and FEMPI.
In examining the % increases / decreases of the 3 main providers in the area from 2009 to
2014. The voluntary provider involved had a 4.9% reduction in funding while the average
nationally was 12% and in the local area the average reduction 9% for the main providers. The
increases in 2015 reflect the intention to support the provider particularly in the context of the
needs of individuals highlighted in the Resilience review.
Actions taken to address service and management failings

It is important to assure the members, those concerned and the wider public that the HSE did not
wait for the publication of reports to take actions to improve the service and management failings
identified in the child care and disability services and to act on the recommendations of the
reports. A comprehensive action plan is in place to address the combined recommendations of the
reports. A number of the key actions implemented include.

Childcare and Fostering services:

Childcare and fostering services in Waterford had a full review undertaken and recommendations
implemented between 2010 and 2012 with investment in staff and improvements in practice and
supervision.

Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults:

Intervention with vulnerable adults is limited in the legislative and policy framework. A key
recommendation of the Conal Devine report was the implementation of a HSE safeguarding
policy for vulnerable adults. This policy was published in December 2014 with an immediate
implementation plan which has progressed throughout 2015. This included the establishment of
professional resourced safeguarding teams in the nine Community Healthcare Organisations.

National Independent Review Panel:

The HSE is establishing a National Independent Review Panel with an independent chair and
Review Team for Disability Services. Establishment of the Panel has been included as a priority in
the HSEs National Service Plan for 2016. It is intended that in the first instance, the Review
Panel will focus on serious incidents that occur in disability services across the HSE and HSE
funded services.
The Review Panel will be modelled on the Tusla Review Panel which reviews cases where
children who are in the care of the State, die or experience serious harm.
i. Confidential Recipient:
In December 2014 I appointed Ms Leigh Gath as an independent confidential recipient to examine
concerns and provide help and advice to vulnerable adults, or anyone concerned about a
vulnerable adult, in a HSE or HSE funded service.
Publication of both reports (Conal Devine & Resilience)
The HSE received confirmation in writing from An Garda last Friday 29th January that its
investigation remains ongoing and that clearance is not yet provided for either of the reports to be
published.
This concludes my opening statement.
Thank you Chairman and members.
Last updated on: 02 / 02 / 2016

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/PACopeningstatement
DG.html

HSE Statement on upcoming Commission of Inquiry.

The HSE heard extracts from the interview with Graces mother on radio this morning. It is
genuinely to our regret but we understand why Graces mother cannot accept our apology
now. We do hope that in the future she may be in a position to do so. What is most important is
that any questions she has which remain to be answered, that she will get those answers from the
objective viewpoint of the upcoming Commission of Inquiry. Graces mother can be assured that
the HSE will co-operate in every way to assist the Commission of Inquiry fulfil its Terms of
Reference. The fact she and others have so many unanswered questions is indicative of just how
complex this matter is over a twenty year period. All that we know and can find to date is in the
two reports published and in the Conor Dignam report which the Government commissioned as a
precursor to the Commission of Inquiry. Once again the HSE can only apologise to Grace and her
mother and say that we genuinely are very sorry for all of the failings in her care and in our
system.

Over the weekend certain media suggested that of the 3 person panel referred to by the Director
General in the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), one of those persons is now in a senior role in
TUSLA. This is a misinterpretation of the Director Generals comments. He was referring to 3
persons who were fundamentally involved in the decision to leave Grace in the foster home and
who were specifically charged with the responsibility for the implementation of the necessary
steps required to be taken to create a environment within which she could remain in the foster
home, including making her a Ward of Court. These 3 individuals are retired from the HSE and
are in receipt of a pension.

While RTE's "This Week" reported the matter accurately, certain other media subsequently
asserted that the HSE did not engage with the Garda in relation to the Devine report until 3 years
after its publication . This assertion is incorrect. Throughout the period, from 2011, further live
Garda investigations linked to the former foster home and the Grace case continued throughout
2012, 2013, and 2014 which were the subject of ongoing contact, including correspondence and
provision of additional information and files, to the Garda by HSE staff in the South East. HSE
staff involved were working on the basis of the standard practice whereby reports are not
published in advance of live Garda investigations being finalised. Following publication of the
Dignam report, the HSE and An Garda Siochna have established a liaison group in order to
streamline publication of reports in the future.

Last updated on: 07 / 03 / 2017

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/HSE-Statement-on-
upcoming-Commission-of-Inquiry-.html
The HSE has today, Tuesday, 28th February, published the Inquiry into Protected Disclosures,
SU1 (Conal Devine & Associates) and the Disability Foster Care Report, HSE South East
(Resilience Ireland)'.

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/inquiry-protected-
disclosures-su1.pdf

Both reports are available here:

Inquiry into Protected Disclosures, SU1 (Conal Devine & Associates)

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/inquiry-protected-
disclosures-su1.pdf

Disability Foster Care Report, HSE South East (Resilience Ireland)

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/disability-foster-care-
report.pdf

he policy Safeguarding Vulnerable Persons at Risk of Abuse, launched in December 2014,

provides one overarching policy to which all Social Care Services, including those provided
directly, or funded by the HSE

http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/publications/corporate/personsatriskofabus
e.pdf

Abuse case social worker to meet HSE

Director General
Published on Wednesday, February 17th, 2016 at 3:33 pm
Michelle Clancy reports

The Waterford-based social worker who fought for seven years to hold the
health services accountable for not removing an intellectually disabled
women from a foster home at the centre of sexual and physical allegations
will meet the head of the HSE this week.
The whistleblower is set to discuss with HSE director general Tony OBrien
the failings in the case of Grace, a now 37-year-old woman who spent
twenty years at the foster home in the Waterford area. Grace, who was the
subject of the HSE-commissioned Conal Devine Report in 2010, allegedly
suffered horrific sexual, physical, financial and emotional abuse at the home.
The allegations first arose in 1995 and the then South Eastern Health Board
ruled that no more children be placed at the foster home.
However, though a decision was made to remove Grace, this was
countermanded by a three-person health board panel and she remained
there until she was removed in 2009, with little contact with social workers. It
emerged last week that a second young woman, also with severe intellectual
disabilities, was placed privately with the family until 2014. The Waterford
Intellectual Disability Association has confirmed that it contacted the HSE in
2009 seeking assurances that families involved in private arrangements
would be protected.
The social worker was one of three professionals to make protected
disclosures in relation to the case under whistleblower legislation.
Last week, the Government announced a Commission of Inquiry to
investigate the case, with Health Minister Leo Varadkar commenting that
there were conflicting accounts of what happened and the whistleblowers
were not aligned in what they were saying.
The Conal Devine Report is one of two reports commissioned by the HSE
into the case. The second, carried out by Resilience Ireland, review all
placements with the foster family during the period 1983 1993. Neither
report has been published because of ongoing Garda investigations, the HSE
says.
In recent days Michael Noonan, who was health minister at the time,
admitted that the father in the foster family wrote to him in a bid to keep
Grace in 1996.
Minister Noonan said he had no clear memory of the letter but, on
reviewing the records, he did find the correspondence.
I got my officials to contact the South Eastern Health Board and my
understanding of it was that the person would be removed from foster care,
but subsequently, information came through that there was some kind of
appeal, and that that [the removal of the person] didnt happen.
A spokesman for Mr Noonan said he had not sought to direct or influence
the decision of the health board in any way in relation to the case. The foster
father is now deceased.
The Dils Public Accounts Committee, which has reviewed the case
extensively over the last year, has been told that the foster family received
approximately 70,000 in allowances for Grace, with carers allowances
available when the foster allowance on her 18th birthday.
In The Irish Times last weekend, the woman who ran the foster home said the
allegations of abuse at her home were lies.
In an interview with Kitty Holland, the woman said she was told by a social
worker (now deceased) that Grace could remain at the home, despite the
fact, she added, that the South Eastern Health Board could have removed
Grace if they so wished in 1996.
They told me I could keep her, she said If they were trying to move her in
1996, why didnt they move her then? I was trying to keep her. Yes, I loved
her. She was like my own, but they could have moved her if they wanted her.
They said, Do you want to keep her? and I said, Yes. She was like my own.
She was very happy here.
The woman told Kitty Holland: The social worker told me not to let [Grace]
go to anybody, to keep her here. Then I rang the health board asking to know
if they would give me any money to keep her and they said, No, because
when she was 18 she wasnt their concern any more. That was the end of it.
When asked about bruises allegedly sustained by Grace, which were later
examined on request by a social workers, she replied: Ah stop. That was
utter rubbish. How could she have been sexually abused when I was looking
after her?

Brexit is bad for the UK, bad for Europe, and bad for
Ireland' says Flanagan
30/04/2017
Charlie Flanagan has said that Ireland's issues have been
"prioritised" in the EU Council's Brexit guidelines, but has
reiterated that in his opinion Brexit will be bad for all
concerned, writes Claire Anderson.
"Brexit is bad for the UK, bad for Europe, and bad for Ireland,"
said Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Charlie Flanagan.
He stressed the importance of protecting Ireland's interests
during the 'divorce-period' on RT's The Week in Politics this
afternoon.
Deputy Leader of Sinn Fin, TD Mary-Lou McDonald asked:
"How can we protect Ireland from the catastrophe of Theresa
May's hard Brexit?"
Ms McDonald recognised the Taoiseach's efforts, but claimed
that enough was not achieved because we did not achieve a
special status.
Follow

The Week in Politics @rtetwip

We need to argue collectively for special designated
status for #NorthernIreland within the #EU
@MaryLouMcDonald tells #twip #brexit
12:28 PM - 30 Apr 2017
5 5 Retweets5 5 likes

"I'd love to say so far so good but I can't," she said.

Stephen Donnelly, Fianna Fil TD, pointed out that "much of
what was achieved was already enshrined in the Good Friday
Agreement".
"What the Government have done is gotten a re-statement of
what we already had," he said.
He pointed out that where Spain got a veto, Ireland got "warm
words".
Mr Donnelly said that what we need now is a "clear statement"
from the Government about what does and what does not
infringe on EU law in regards to our rights.
Charlie Flanagan argued that the "particularly good start
needs to be acknowledged" but that it's far from over.
Follow

The Week in Politics @rtetwip

Irelands issues prioritised in EU Council #Brexit
guidelines Foreign Minister @CharlieFlanagan tells #twip
12:26 PM - 30 Apr 2017
16 16 Retweets8 8 likes

"There's no celebration here," he said.

Mr Flanagan directly asked Ms McDonald to ensure her party
would "sort out the Executive in the North" so that proceedings
can continue as a "voice in the North" is necessary for the
agreements to stand.
Ms McDonald argued that without securing a special status,
the Good Friday Agreement is at risk.
"Something significant needs to happen if we are going to
protect the Good Friday Agreement," she said.
"I think what the Government has accepted is very low, I think
you could have and should have pushed the boat out," she
said.
The statement on a United Ireland that was submitted
yesterday (April 29) will not be adopted until the June summit.

Earlier: The Taoiseach says the Brexit guidelines agreed by

EU leaders clearly recognise the unique and specific
challenges faced by Ireland.
Speaking after yesterday's summit meeting in Brussels, Enda
Kenny says it is a huge endorsement of the Governments
approach, which involved more than 400 meetings at political
and official level over the past ten months.
He says the guidelines appreciate Ireland's need to avoid a
hard border, to protect the Common Travel Area and to
maintain the benefits and commitments of the Peace Process.
"The minutes of the meeting will record a very clear statement
about the potential of the Good Friday Agreement to achieve a
United Ireland some time in the future, by consent, if people
so wish.
"It also means that the European Council has given
unanimous support that if such an eventuality takes place that
the entire island of Ireland will be recognised as being a
member of the European Union.
"I have to say I'm very pleased about that," he said.
REBEL PRODS
Rebel Prods review: The Protestants behind Irish independence
A history of the little-known people who defied the political
consensus in their churches
... See More
REBEL PRODS
Rebel Prods review: The Protestants behind Irish independence
A history of the little-known people who defied the political consensus in their
churches
Erskine Childers (1870-1922), with his wife aboard his yacht, the Asgard,
which was used to run guns for the Irish Volunteers. Photograph: Hulton
Archive/Getty Images
Erskine Childers (1870-1922), with his wife aboard his yacht, the Asgard,
which was used to run guns for the Irish Volunteers. Photograph: Hulton
Archive/Getty Images
Frank MacGabhann
Sat, Apr 29, 2017, 06:00
First published:
Sat, Apr 29, 2017, 06:00
Rebel Prods: The Forgotten Story of Protestant Radical Nationalists and the
1916 Rising
ISBN-13:
9780995672208
Author:
Valerie Jones
Publisher:
Ashfield Press
Guideline Price:
25.0
This timely book deals with the involvement of Protestants (in the wide sense,
including Presbyterians and other denominations) in the national movement
in Ireland, particularly in the Easter Rising of 1916.
The author, Valerie Jones, died after she had finished her first draft of the
book, and her children, Heather and Mark, completed it.
Jones brings to life the charged political climate of 1912-1916 and makes the
point that the same process of rebelling against their parents politics was
occurring in Protestant as well as Catholic homes. Given their sometimes
pronounced unionist backgrounds, some Protestants wondered about their
being both nationalist and Protestant. Many decided to learn Irish. Joining
the Gaelic League opened up new vistas, and for some, this was the first
step on the way to eventually shouldering a gun.
Argentinian writer Samanta Schweblin: author of Fever Dream, which has
been shortlisted for the 2017 Man Booker International prize. Photograph:
Miguel Bellido/GDA/APFever Dream review: extraordinary work full of eerie
menace
In Harvesting, both girls have their identities stripped from them, have no
control over their bodies and are pumped with drugs before being sent out
each evening. Photograph: Lewis Whyld/PA WireHarvesting review: Lifting
the lid on sex trafficking in Ireland
Killers of the Flower Moon: Osage representatives with President Coolidge at
the White House in 1924. Photograph: Bettmann/GettyKillers of the Flower
Moon: The calamity of the Osage oil
Divided along the fault lines of class and race, the nations sense of itself is
sustained by a counterfactual narrative of homogeneity and exceptionalism.
Image: iStockNotes From No Mans Land review: the USs self-delusion laid
bare
The author argues that Ordinary Protestant participants in the Rising have in
the main either been forgotten or written out of history. She does not make
a convincing case that Protestants were written out, which implies a
deliberate writing out. She accurately states that there was a great deal of
publicity just after the Rising that emphasised the Catholicism of the leaders,
especially in the Catholic Bulletin and subsequently. But Brian Murphy has
pointed out that Maj Ivon Price, the censor, refused to allow its editor to
publish material about the Protestant leaders or even to publish poems or
memorials by Protestant poets and writers about the Rising for months
afterwards. It suited the British, keeping an eye on Carson and the Ulster
Unionists, to make it appear as a Catholic putsch.
Family histories
On the subject of forgetting the Protestants role, the same can be said for
ordinary Catholic participants. Outside of the leaders, how many ordinary
Catholic participants of the Rising are remembered, outside of their own
families? The answer is the same for both Protestant and Catholic: very few.
Martin Maguire has observed that The witness statements in the Bureau of
Military History Archive made by a number of Protestant republicans show
little consciousness that they were in a predominantly Catholic movement
and no consciousness of being considered cultural or ethnic intruders. In
other words, they were republicans who happened to be Protestants and did
not want to be patronised. What mattered was not which foot one kicked
with, but which shoulder the rifle felt more comfortable on.
There are very interesting sketches of many Protestants who were involved in
1916, including five members of the Norgrove family. The author laments the
fact that the Irish Free State became more and more obsequious to the
Catholic Church and illustrates how that affected the lives of certain rebels
sketched. She is particularly good on Dr Kathleen Lynn, who, despite her
wonderful record on caring for children (and prior military record), was denied
the funding to expand her nonsectarian hospital, in favour of a Catholic
hospital. Lynn, along with many other Protestant rebels, the author points
out, resisted the idea of conversion to Catholicism and were, in fact, quite
conformist in their religious views. This, the author believes, served to
reassure their coreligionists. Other Protestants, perhaps less strong in their
beliefs, converted to Catholicism, particularly on marriage.
Kathleen Lynn: was denied the funding to expand her nonsectarian hospital
in favour of a Catholic hospital
Kathleen Lynn: was denied the funding to expand her nonsectarian hospital
in favour of a Catholic hospital
The author makes the important point that Ernest Blythe, as the only northern
Protestant in the Free State executive during the 1920s, was silent at the
cabinet table while the Catholic cabinet members were incorporating into law
the Catholic agenda on censorship, contraception, adoption and divorce. He
could have expressed a Protestant attitude on [those] religiously divisive
subjects. This might have aided the development of more diverse policies in
the new state. By not demurring, Blythe gave Cosgrave and OHiggins the
impression that northern unionists would not find these measures
objectionable.
Gun runners
The author considers the Howth and Kilcoole gun runnings, which were
largely middle-class Protestant affairs involved were Mary Spring Rice
(annoyingly referred to as the Hon), Molly and Erskine Childers and others
apart from treating the question of decline in numbers of Protestants and the
effect of the Ne Temere decree on mixed marriages.
The author cites a number of instances but only offers speculation as
evidence of anti-Protestant bias in the early years of the public service of the
Free State.
IRB member Harry Nicholls believed that he was not promoted to chief
engineer of Dublin Corporation because he was Protestant, but it is also true
that the man promoted was senior to him.
Sam Maguire, of GAA fame, was dismissed from his civil service job
following his implication in the army mutiny in March 1924 and in a
subsequent attempt to overthrow the Cosgrave government the following
December. Perhaps these attempts to overthrow the government weighed
more heavily regarding his dismissal than his religion.
The author laments the failure to promote Judge James Creed Meredith from
the High Court to the Supreme Court for 13 years. In fact Meredith got
promoted on, effectively, the second vacancy that arose in the Supreme
Court. This was hardly a sign of bias. As well, he joined a Protestant (and
unionist) already on the Supreme Court. In any case, a High Court judgeship
was hardly a purgatorial appointment.
However, the brilliant Meredith does deserve to be much better-known. He
was also a champion sprinter, a novelist, a playwright, a 1914 gun-runner
actually crewing the yacht, a philosopher, a translator of Immanuel Kants
Critique of Judgment (still in print a century later) and an expert on Brehon
Law who used it as president of the republican courts during the War of
Independence. Imagine an Irish judge these days reading, let alone
translating, Immanuel Kant; one cant, now that the late and much-lamented
Adrian Hardiman is no longer with us.
This valuable and well-researched book adds greatly to our knowledge of
hitherto little-known men and women who defied the political consensus in
their churches to play their part in the struggle for the independence of their
country.
It's right but the councils always take immigrants side over us,the only time you see councillors is when it's
time to Vote
It's about time we think of our own race we should be put first we have a lot rof people living on the streets houses should
be for our own first just go around and about to see for yourself just get of your bums and walk the streets at night to see
how many people are living on the streets. Not one of you will walk streets because it not your problem so as long as you
go home to a warm place and a comfortable and a warm meal and a warm bed
Great piece by Gene Kerrigan in today's Endapendent on Leo
Varadkar's Fine Gael leadership stunt - the hugely expensive
advertising campaign encouraging people to snitch on their
neighbours. The 500 Million figure as Kerrigan points out is a LIE
and he says the campaign is really aimed at impressing Fine Gael
supporters in the hope they will vote for him in the party
leadership contest. Gene Kerrigan described in the article how he
went to Welfare.ie and filled in a fake fraud report. I have just done
the same and I would encourage you dear friends to also log in
and report the real fraudster Leo Varadkar. (unfortunately, I can't
post the complete article from the Sindo, because Dinny is now
charging for content and I'll be fucked if I'm paying for his
propaganda paper. Read it for free in a coffee shop, he gives it to
them for free to boost sales figures)
Here is the link ...
https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/secure/ReportFraud.aspx
Type of fraud being reported? Other

First name of the person you are reporting? Leo

Surname of the person you are reporting? Varadkar
What is the person's approximate age? 40 - 50
Address of the person you are reporting Line 1: Dil ireann
Address of the person you are reporting Line 2: Kildare Street
Address of the person you are reporting Line 3: Dublin 2
County of the person you are reporting: Dublin
What is their car registration (if known)? 017 D 99999
Gender: Male
Have you reported this person previously? Yes

If so when? (dd/mm/yyyy) 01/01/2017

Give all the detail you know about the suspected fraud:
Wasting taxpayers money on a false advertising campaign
Who and what number should we call If we need more
information?
(01) 619 8444
Have you seen our new advertising campaign? Yes/No
No
.
http://www.independent.ie//do-it-for-leos-sake-rat-out-you
Leo varadkar is another minster who joint the tell lies group of fg ff labour, how can they be so down on
ordernery people of this country, all the cutback they done on poor people, Leo forgets the mess he left the
health service, them he has the nerve to ask people to report dole fraud , I can't remember ever a minster to
do this . What about the fraud of the banks , builders that left this country 100 billion more in depth, start at top
of house before you go bottom Leo .
Leo Varadkar wants us to believe that the 1.5% of the Welfare budget lost to fraud hurts us
the most. In actual fact, the billions in Corporate welfare enjoyed by Large Multi Nationals like
Starbucks who pay little or no tax in this state are sucking us dry.
Ordinary working people are paying the cost of keeping the lights on and the state running,
while those who can afford it avoid it. Campaigns around welfare fraud only exist to distract
from the real cheaters in our society while demonising the most vulnerable.
Fine Gael lie? To screw the working class? They'd never do
something like that!
These numbers are a joke and a blatant attempt to gain exposure
ahead of a leadership race rather than a genuine attempt to tackle
fraud, Mr OBroin said
Leo Varadkar T.D. is the embodiment of a right wing ideologue,
Enda Kenny was just out for his own legacy, whereas Varadkar
genuinely hates the working class.
Varadkar, who had everything in his life handed to him on a silver
plate, thinks that if you are in receipt of government assistance,
you are lazy, stupid and not worth the help.
There is a line being drawn in the sand, and the day that we are
confronted with that, you need to know which side you are on;
Sinn Fin and the ordinary people?
or Fine Gael, Denis O'Brien and international capital.
Make no mistake, this isn't an attempt by Varadkar to address
welfare fraud, it is an attempt to demonise people.
http://www.irishexaminer.com//leo-varadkar-overstated-
amou

Leo Varadkar overstated amount saved by anti-

fraud measures
Varadkar has been accused of massively overstating the amounts saved by
the State in anti-fraud measures.
IRISHEXAMINER.COM

https://video-frt3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t42.1790-
2/18185864_261200641011163_8554936801880440832_n.mp4?efg=eyJybH
IiOjMwMCwicmxhIjo1MTIsInZlbmNvZGVfdGFnIjoic3ZlX3NkIn0%3D&rl=300&
vabr=94&oh=65626f0c4e40742723162c8e18c56e2e&oe=5906B1B8
The Grand old Duke of Cork
Simon Coveney to defy advice on water charges
Simon Coveney is set to defy the water committees recommendations to
scrap charges and instead attempt to railroad through his own legislation,
which he claims will comply with EU laws.
IRISHEXAMINER.COM
Simon Coveney is set to defy the water committees
recommendations to scrap charges and instead attempt to railroad
through his own legislation, which he claims will comply with EU
laws.
Do not get complacent.
Fine Gael are determined to keep water charges in place. So we
need a massive demonstration of people power on Saturday!
We've come too close to let this slide and let Fine Gael away with
undermining our democratic demand to scrap water charges and
the metering system!
See you all in two days!

The Housing Minister said last night that he was disappointed with
Fianna Fil changing position on an Oireachtas committee on water
assessing the funding of services.
Tense meetings of the committee yesterday resulted in
recommendations that no new homes are metered and the removal
of excessive water use from sections of its report.
Right2Water TDs claimed this was a victory for communities who
had protested against charges.
But relations between Fine Gael and Fianna Fil are now at a new
low after a war of words broke out over terms and recommendations
for the report.
The row is now threatening to destabilise the Fine Gael government
support pact with Fianna Fil, a path which could trigger a fresh
general election.
The committee will hold a final vote on the report today. But under
the confidence and supply agreement with Fianna Fil, Fine Gael are
obliged to implement the committees recommendations even if
they disagree with them.
Mr Coveney denied the pact obliged a minister to implement
legislation, especially if it was against EU laws. I wont introduce
anything that is not legally sound because it could result in Ireland
getting tens of millions of euros in fines.
He pointed out that the agreement required the Government to
facilitate legislation on water.
Party TD Colm Brophy said Fianna Fil had done a monumental flip
flop since a deal was agreed between both sides last week.
No new homes would now be metered, the issue of excess use had
been removed in places, and 8% of users would not now face
penalties for wasting water, said the committee member.
Fianna Fils Barry Cowen and other members though said the
government party had been preparing to reintroduce water charges
by the back door.
Earlier, Mr Cowen and Mr Coveney engaged in a Twitter spat, with
both sides accusing each other of changing their positions over the
last week.
But committee members opposed to water charges also noted last
night that the group had received independent advice that the
changes were in fact legal.
Mr Cowen said that the electorate did not want an election over
this issue but that it was now up to Mr Coveney to implement the
recommendations after the report goes before the Dil.
Sinn Fin TD Eoin Broin and Solidarity TD Paul Murphy claimed
victory after the meeting, noting there would be no excessive
charge, no new domestic meters, and that there would be a
referendum now to put water services in public ownership.
But Mr Coveney is adamant that any changes put before the Dil or
legislated for on water must be legal. He told the Irish Examiner:
The agreement [last week on water] was fundamentally undermined
by Fianna Fil. This isnt water charges by the front door or by the
back door. The legal advice is that Ireland has no derogation
[exemption from charges].
He said recommendations by the committee, if legislated for in their
current form, would be struck down by the Supreme Court.
The ministerdenied the outcome of the committees
recommendations was a failure for Fine Gael. No, I dont think so,
he said.
But it would be difficult to correct or change the committees
recommendations today, he added.
Instead, he said he would send the recommendations to the attorney
general and would likely have to tweak them. I support putting
legislation together reflecting as much as possible of the report, but
also taking the attorney generals advice on elements of the
legislation that comply with the water framework directive,
otherwise we will be exposed to huge fines.

Emma, Alex and Eoin: Where Are the Water

Wasters? - Dublin Inquirer
We have mapped 106 locations we believe have residential swimming pools,
writes UCD geography lecturer Eoin O'Mahony and two of his students.
WWW.DUBLININQUIRER.COM
So after all of the hype and manufactured outrage from
government TD's and senior journalists who complained that so
many Irish people have swimming pools, it turns out that there
have been approximately 106 planning applications for swimming
pools in Dublin City Council and Dn Laoghaire-Rathdown County
Council - the two councils most likely to have private pools. Bear
in mind, this doesn't mean they actually have a swimming pool,
just that they applied for permission.
Did the Minister, who says he's committed to conservation, find
this out? No! He said his department didn't know.
Did the mainstream media who kept referring to swimming pools
as an excuse to bring in regressive water charges find this out?
No! They didn't want to contradict their own rhetoric.
A small group of academics in UCD did the research and have
provided the government with a very useful map of where those
residential swimming pools are. Now they can bring in their
swimming pool tax and leave the rest of us alone.
See you all at the #Right2Water national demo on Sat, April 8th.
Well done to Emma, Alex and Eoin. Great work.
https://www.dublininquirer.com//eoin-heres-where-the-wate/

I know who are the polluters in Ireland, the Guiness and Whiskey Companies,
farmers, and Multinationals Using and Polluting our Waters Charge all of
these Extra Huge Charges,

So the Spanish government secures a veto with Gibraltar, and what does the southern
government get for the north?
Absolutely nothing.
Enda Kenny has to be hands down the weakest leader this island has ever seen. He does
nothing for our people, meanwhile he begs and pleads at the feet of the multi-national
corporations.
Brexit is going to be a disaster for Ireland, but this government has done absolutely nothing to secure
Irish interests, they don't care; because at the end of the day it will be the working class who suffers the
most.
We need someone in leadership who is going to fight tooth and nail for equality and justice. If only
Enda Kenny fought as hard for us as he fights for multi-national corporations like Apple to avoid
paying tax.
http://www.cnbc.com//eu-offers-spain-veto-right-over-gibra
Photo by Lois Kapila

ANDY: WHATS THE

GOVERNMENT GOT
AGAINST PUBLIC
OWNERSHIP?
ANDY STOREYAPRIL 26, 2017

Will the new national maternity hospital, to be owned by

the Sisters of Charity via the St Vincents Hospital Group,
operate independently of Catholic doctrine?
The master of the current facility at Holles Street, Rhona
Mahony, says it will. One of her predecessors, Peter
Boylan, is, however, far from convinced.
Boylan poses the obvious question: Are we seriously
expected to believe it will be the only maternity hospital
in the world owned by the Catholic Church that will
allow procedures including abortion, sterilisation, and
contraception?
Tens of thousands of people have signed a protest petition
on the issue. [Editors note: the petition had 92,760
signatures when this column was published.]
The Sisters of Charity receive a reported 1.2 million a
year in rent on St Vincents at a time when they may still
owe the state 3 million under the redress scheme for
abuse that occurred in the industrial schools they ran.
(The order claims they have indirectly paid this bill by
waiving their legal costs).
They also ran notorious Magdalene laundries, for abuses
at which they have point-blank refused to pay anything at
all by way of redress. The Magdalene Survivors Together
group has registered their deep anger and absolute
shock at the maternity hospital decision.
But how did we ever end up in a situation whereby a state-
built hospital has, in effect, been given away to a private
organisation, even if it were one with a squeaky-clean
historical record? How is it possible, as Sarah Carey,
asks, that the State is about to spend 300m on a
hospital it wont own?
Nor, as Carey notes, is this an isolated case. Holles Street
is owned by a private trust chaired (nominally at least) by
the archbishop of Dublin.
Over the last decade, the state has spent 266 million on
the Mater Hospital, which remains fully owned by the
Sisters of Mercy (and which, because of its Catholic ethos,
will not supply women with the contraceptive pill).
Carey goes on to argue that there is not much to be done
about all this, in the short term, asking rhetorically, Are we
willing to buy them out or force some kind of
nationalisation?
Well, why not?
This certainly is the position argued by economist Paul
Sweeney, who documents the wider nature of the
problem, impacting as it does on most schools and
hospitals in the country largely built and maintained by
the state but given away for free to religious orders.
Yes, the orders may often have supplied the land, but that
would entitle them to rent not to ownership and
management of the buildings and facilities.
Sweeney makes the case that All public assets which
were given away to the religious for nothing, amounting to
tens of billions, should be taken back into public
ownership. This seems eminently reasonable.
But the idea would run up against a seemingly deep-
seated ideological hostility to the very principle of public
ownership.
This also bedevils attempts to resolve, for example, the
housing crisis the government remains religiously
wedded to private provision of housing for private
ownership despite the fact that public provision for rent
would be a vastly more efficient approach.
Meanwhile, Minister for Social Protection Leo Varadkar
has just announced a new crackdown on alleged dole
fraud, noting that Nothing upsets people more than
someone else cheating the system at their expense.
But, in reality, it is only the little cheats who are targeted.
Pocket a dole payment you are not entitled to and you can
expect to feel the full force of the law pocket a hospital
built at public expense and you will be laughing all the way
to the bank.

Peter Boylan: New maternity hospital

should not be given to Sisters of Charity
The religious order disagrees with modern maternity and gynaecological care
Fri, Apr 21, 2017, 01:00
Dr Peter Boylan

23

Video

Images
Play Video
Some 200 people gathered outside the Department of Health in protest at the Governments plans to
give ownership of the new National Maternity Hospital to the Sisters of Charity.


 A new national maternity hospital is badly needed to serve the interests of the
women and infants of Ireland. There is no argument about this.
Despite clinical outcomes that compare with the best in the world, there are
obvious infrastructural deficiencies in the existing building, on Holles Street in
Dublin.
The design of the hospital planned for the Elm Park campus, next to St Vincents
University Hospital, is superb.
Huge credit is due to those who have invested so much time and effort in the
project. It is to be hoped that planning permission will soon be granted.
The cost is expected to be at least 300 million, although inflation may cause that
figure to rise.
Funding is to be provided by the State, together with the proceeds of the disposal
of the Holles Street site.
Breakdown in negotiations
Following a breakdown in negotiations between the National Maternity
Hospital and St Vincents Healthcare Group last year, a mediation process
directed by Kieran Mulvey was put in place by Minister for Health Simon Harris.
Last November agreement was reached between the Sisters of Charity, the sole
shareholders of St Vincents Healthcare Group, and the board of the National
Maternity Hospital.
The decision of the hospital board was not unanimous, but there was a significant
majority.
I did not support the proposed arrangement and, indeed, expressed my
reservations to my fellow board members over an extended period of time.
The shareholders of the National Maternity Hospital are the 100 governors, who
own the hospital in trust and who will need to agree the proposed arrangement. I
am one of those governors. To date the agreement has not been put to us for
decision.
St Vincents should declare its independence, experts say
Hospitals position on procedures must be clarified, says professor
Sinn Fin to call for National Maternity Hospitals independence

Principal points of the agreement

The principal points of the agreement are that the Sisters of Charity will be sole
owners of the new hospital, and of the new company that will run the hospital, and
that a new nine-person board will be set up to oversee the running of the new
hospital.
The board will consist of four directors nominated by St Vincents Healthcare
Group, four nominated by the National Maternity Hospital and one who is an
obstetrician gynaecologist of international reputation.
It is suggested that clinical independence will be protected by reserved powers,
and the Minister for Health will hold a golden share as further protection.
So let us be clear: the Sisters of Charity will be the sole owners of the new
National Maternity Hospital.
Many at the hospital are satisfied that adequate
protection is provided. I am not
Many at the hospital are satisfied that adequate protection is provided. I am not.
Modern maternity and gynaecological care encompasses contraception,
sterilisation, IVF, gender reassignment surgery and abortion, as well as the usual
day-to-day activities of a busy maternity hospital.
Are we seriously expected to believe that if the hospital goes ahead according to
the proposed arrangement it will be the only maternity hospital in the world owned
by the Catholic Church, and run by a company owned by the Catholic Church, that
will allow these procedures? This stretches credibility to breaking point. Indeed it
would seem to be naive.
The board of any hospital oversees, in a corporate sense, the clinical work of the
hospital.
The proposed structure means that the four directors nominated by St Vincents
Healthcare Group will have fundamental religious objections to a significant part
of the clinical work of the hospital.
This structure will inevitably create conflict and is not a recipe for a harmonious
working relationship at board level.
In a power struggle who is more likely to win? Is it likely
to be the owners of the hospital and the company tasked
with running it?
In a power struggle who is more likely to win? Is it likely to be the owners of the
hospital and the company tasked with running it? Who is the ninth member more
likely to support?
The golden share held by the Minister for Health is supposed to be the ultimate
protection. Ministers for health come and go and will inevitably hold differing
views.
Indeed, if the safeguards for true clinical independence are as robust as is currently
claimed, why is there any need for the Minister to hold a golden share?
Understandable outrage
Since the news broke this week of the plan to hand sole ownership of the taxpayer-
funded new National Maternity Hospital to the Sisters of Charity there has been
public outrage. This is understandable.
Public statements of reassurance about clinical independence have been
undermined by the revealing interview with Sr Agnes Reynolds, a director of St
Vincents Healthcare Group, quoted on the front page of this newspaper yesterday.
When given an opportunity to provide reassurance that the the religious beliefs of
the Sisters of Charity will not influence medical care, Sr Agnes refused. What she
said was: I cant make a judgment on that.
Why cant she give a judgment on that? When will she give a judgment on that?
Her phraseology has echoes of Cardinal Connells explanation of the Catholic
Churchs use of mental reservation. The proprietorial tone of her remarks was also
deeply concerning.
Is there a solution to what has clearly become a cause of public outrage? I believe
there is. The Minister for Health now needs to address two key issues: the
ownership of the new hospital and the composition of its board.
I do not believe that ownership of the 300 million, state-of-the-art National
Maternity Hospital should be gifted to the Sisters of Charity. A lot of other people
appear to share my view.
Secondly, a properly independent board needs to oversee the running of the new
hospital.
The Minister has the power to intervene to protect both the medical interests of
women and their infants and the financial interests of the Irish taxpayer. He must
now do so.
Dr Peter Boylan is chairman of the Institute of Obstetricians and
Gynaecologists and a former master of the National Maternity Hospital

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/peter-boylan-new-
maternity-hospital-should-not-be-given-to-sisters-of-
charity-1.3055744

THE Government, and specifically health minister Simon

Harris, has been heavily criticised since it emerged that
ownership of the new National Maternity Hospital - which
will be funded to the tune of 300m by the taxpayer - will
be handed over to the Sisters of Charity.
A demonstration will take place outside the Department of
Health in Dublin at 1pm today and over 50,000 people
have signed a petition in a bid to prevent the religious
order from becoming owners of the new hospital.

A photo of the new hospital released by the Department of Health

Here is what you need to know about the controversy:
Who are the Sisters of Charity?
The Sisters of Charity are a congregation of religious
women founded in Dublin. They are involved in
healthcare, education and also carry out work with asylum
seekers and homeless people.
However, they were also one of the organisations included
in the Ryan Report, which unveiled a vast amount of
systematic institutional abuse going back decades.
Controversy surrounds ownership of new
maternity hospital

They ran some of the notorious Magdalene Laundries

workhouses and along with 17 other congregations, were
ordered to pay the State 128m towards redress for abuse
victims.
However, the Sisters of Charity have yet to fulfil its
obligations in this regard.
The order still owes the State another 3m from a
commitment it made almost a decade ago in 2009 to pay
another 5m towards redress.
Why are they being given ownership of a hospital
then?
<img src="//cdn-
01.independent.ie/incoming/article35634290.ece/01a6a/AUTOCROP/w6
20/II%20Cabinet%202%20INT_ED5_S01%20Read-Only.jpg"
alt="Minister Simon Harris said the hospital will be independent
Picture: Tom Burke" title="Minister Simon Harris said the hospital will
be independent Picture: Tom Burke" width="620" height="452" />
6
6
Minister Simon Harris said the hospital will be independent Picture:
Tom Burke
The new hospital is set to be built on a site at Elm Park in
south Dublin - which is owned by the Sisters of Charity.
It will be located on the St Vincent's University Hospital
campus and will cater for up to 10,000 births per year.
The Sisters of Charity are the shareholders of the St
Vincent's Healthcare Group, which the Department of
Health announced would be the "sole owner of the new
hospital".
So, are they going to benefit financially from this,
despite owing 3m to abuse victims?
People gather to protest against plans to allow Sisters of Mercy to
own new National Maternity Hospital
According to Health Minister Simon Harris, they won't.
While he said it was "not acceptable" that some orders had
yet to pay all they owed to the redress scheme, he said it
was wrong to associate the redress issue with a
"desperately" needed maternity hospital.
Will they be running the hospital? If so, will that
affect certain treatments being carried out?
The nuns will have "no active role" in the running of the
hospital, according to Kieran Mulvey, the former chairman
of the Workplace Relations Commission, who acted as a
mediator to end an impasse over the hospital's future
between Holles Street and St Vincent's.
Meanwhile, Master of the National Maternity Hospital, Dr
Rhona Mahony, said the hospital would be
"independently" run.
There is a triple lock in place which will guarantee the
autonomy of the National Maternity Hospital, she told
RTs Today with Sean ORourke show.
Let me be very clear, the nuns will not be running this
hospital, it will not be under Catholic ethos. It will be
completely independent.
The ethos will be excellence in clinical care, it will not be
a Catholic ethos."
However, questions have been raised about what affect
their ownership will have on certain treatments being
carried out at the hospital.
Speaking on RT's Morning Ireland, former master of the
National Maternity Hospital Peter Boylan said it casts
doubt about any future IVF, abortion and gender
realignment operations due to it being contrary to the
nuns' beliefs.
Earlier, Sister Agnes Reynolds, who sits on the board of
the St Vincent's Healthcare Group, told the Irish Times
that the new hospital will "always respect the rights of the
mother and the baby."
Read more: Feuding over funding muddies
 maternity hospital row
Did we only find out about this now?
Not really, as the feuding over funding and the agreement
has been ongoing for a while now.
Independent.ie previously highlighted the problematic
links to the Sisters of Charity in April last year and the
agreement between St Vincent's and the National
Maternity Hospital was made last November.
It was first mooted in 1998.
How is Minister Harris responding to the
backlash?
Not very well.
He has basically said that either this goes ahead, or the
new hospital doesn't happen.
Most of his reaction has been given through Twitter. In
one tweet, he wrote: "When it comes to our maternity
services, I take the views of those responsible for the
delivery of infants and the clinical care of women."
The normally talkative young politician has been
conspicuous by his absence in the media in recent days.
Dozens of protesters gathered outside the Department of
Health on Thursday, calling on the minister to prevent
ownership going to nuns.
A nationwide protest is also due to take place outside a
number of hospitals on Saturday, including St Vincent's
Hospital where the new maternity hospital is due to be
built.
Criticism
Many people have spoken out against the decision and
criticised the health minister.
Labour Party spokesperson on health, Alan Kelly said:
"The fact that the Sisters of Charity have been given sole-
ownership of this land when they are party to the 128m
redress scheme with the State is ludicrous."
Social Democrats TD Risn Shortall described it as
"highly inappropriate".
"Why is the State building a 300m hospital with
taxpayers money and handing it over to a religious order?
It is very hard to see how there could be any rationale for
this transaction."
While survivors of the Magdalene Laundries are appalled
by the decision.
Mary Murphy (78) spent four years in what she described
as "hell on Earth" as a virtual slave in the Stanhope Street
laundry run by the Sisters of Charity.
"Religion has no place in Irish hospitals. Just as it had no
place in interfering in my life," she said.

Remember that time Shane Ross TD tried to have Sinn Fin Ireland banned?

Gowl.

BANK TO THE FUTURE

Banking crisis whistleblower
Jonathan Sugarman claims Irish
financial situation has gotten much
worse since collapse
Former Unicredit Risk Manager Jonathan Sugarman slams Irish
politicians for "failing the public"
By ADAM HIGGINS
6th December 2016
A BANKING crisis whistleblower has slammed
Irelands politicians for failing the public in the crash.
And he claims the financial situation here has gotten
much worse since the collapse in 2008.

Former bank executive Jonathan Sugarman warns that Irish

banking situation has gotten worse
Jonathan Sugarman, a former executive with Unicredit
Bank Ireland, resigned from his role in 2007 after
informing former Financial Regulator Patrick Neary that he
(Sugarman) was breaking the law by signing off on billions
of euro that didnt exist.
The ex-risk manager recently addressed the EU
Parliament where he said his concerns were ignored by
the Financial Regulator in 2007 and that there is nothing
being done to sanction the people responsible for the
collapse of Irish banks that led to the recession here.
Sugarman claims he has met with a number of politicians
who are aware of his story including Fine Gaels Richard
Bruton and Labours Joan Burton.
Speaking to the Irish Sun at the launch of his book The
Whistleblower, Sugarman said former Finance Minister
Ruairi Quinn wanted him to speak in front of the Public
Accounts Committee but later changed his mind.
He said: Labour Partys Ruairi Quinn wanted me to come
in front of the Public Accounts Committee. Then Quinn
changed his mind and I dont know why. Of course the
politicians failed the country. I say this very clearly in my
book.
When Joan Burton looks at me in my eye and says to me
obviously youre a foreigner, you didnt know that in
Ireland there is no such thing as white collar crime. Had I
known you at the time I would have told you to get another
job. That is exactly what she said to me.

Former Unicredit Rish Manager reveals all in his new book

The Whistleblower
Sugarman says he received all kinds of threats when he
began telling his story to media across the globe and has
lost everything as a result of blowing the whistle.
He said: I have lost everything. Ive been hospitalised.
Apart from selling my body Ive sold everything else.
And the only way Ill sell my body now is by the kilo.
Who would employ a banker who obeys the law in
Ireland? Name me one bank. I would do it all again
because I can walk through Dublin and hold my head up
high.

The former bank exec also claims Ireland has not learned
from its mistakes and our banking sector is now much
worse than it was before.
He said: In Irish law it says that if there is a failure, not
only are the executives to be held responsible but also the
regulator.
How many people in the regulators office have been held
accountable for the absolute collapse of Irish banks? How
many? None! This is fact. This is five years in prison.
If I was taken seriously nine years ago of course Ireland
would be in a better position today. We wouldnt have had
to cough up all of these billions to bail out other peoples
banks. We are far from getting it right now. Far from it.
Given the emails Ive seen in the last few days it has all
gotten much worse.
Irish MEP Ming Flanagan has backed Sugarmans claims
Irish MEP Luke Ming Flanagan, who took Jonathan
Sugarman to the European Parliament early this year, told
the Irish Sun nothing has changed since the banking
collapse and Ireland is in major trouble in the future.
He said: What has changed since the crisis is that we are
now at an additional 70bn plus in debt, thanks to the
decision to bail out the banks.
As for being on the right track we are on the same
track, just a hell of a lot further down the line. All our banks
are still in major trouble. In Europe, well, just wait til the
chickens come home to roost in Deutsche Bank and
Unicredit, to name but two of the big fish.
Add Coveney Noonan and Varadkar. And not forgetting Ak47 . Then you will have a full deck of vile enemies
of our Country.

Dinosaurs they would want to get there act together.

Add Coveney Noonan and Varadkar. And not forgetting Ak47 . Then you will have a full deck of vile enemies
of our Country.

YES GET STUFFED ,WE DO NOT WANT OR NEED YOU

Signing the Declaration What is treason and why was it ... their names to a
treasonous document
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/carderockspringses/classroom/grade5/S
S%20Unit%201B%20Review%20Completed.pdf

The Declaration of Rights February 1688/9 Day Tuesday 12 ... Treason Act 1351;
The Declarationof Rights ... France and Ireland

The Declaration of Rights 1688/9

The Declaration of Rights

February 1688/9 Day Tuesday 12

Whereas the late King James the Second, by the assistance of

divers evil counsellors, judges and ministers employed by him,
did endeavour to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion
and the laws and liberties of this kingdom;

By assuming and exercising a power of dispensing with and

suspending of laws and the execution of laws without consent
of Parliament; By committing and prosecuting divers worthy
prelates for humbly petitioning to be excused from concurring
to the said assumed power;
 By issuing and causing to be executed a commission under the
great seal for erecting a court called the Court of
Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes;
By levying money for and to the use of the Crown by
pretence of prerogative for other time and in other
manner than the same was granted by Parliament;
By raising and keeping a standing army within this kingdom in
time of peace without consent of Parliament, and quartering
soldiers contrary to law;
By causing several good subjects being Protestants to be
disarmed at the same time when papists were both armed and
employed contrary to law;
By violating the freedom of election of members to serve in
Parliament;
By prosecutions in the Court of King's Bench for matters and
causes cognizable only in Parliament, and by divers other
arbitrary and illegal courses;
And whereas of late years partial corrupt and unqualified
persons have been returned and served on juries in trials, and
particularly divers jurors in trials for high treason which were
not freeholders;
And excessive bail hath been required of persons
committed in criminal cases to elude the benefit of the
laws made for the liberty of the subjects;
And excessive fines have been imposed;
And illegal and cruel punishments inflicted;
And several grants and promises made of fines and
forfeitures before any conviction or judgment against
the persons upon whom the same were to be levied;
All which are utterly and directly contrary to the known
laws and statutes and freedom of this realm;

And whereas the said late King James the Second having abdicated
the government and the throne being thereby vacant, his Highness
the prince of Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God to make
the glorious instrument of delivering this kingdom from popery and
arbitrary power) did (by the advice of the Lords Spiritual and
Temporal and divers principal persons of the Commons) cause
letters to be written to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal being
Protestants, and other letters to the several counties, cities,
universities, boroughs and cinque ports, for the choosing of such
persons to represent them as were of right to be sent to Parliament,
to meet and sit at Westminster upon the two and twentieth day of
January in this year one thousand six hundred eighty and eight [old
style date], in order to such an establishment as that their religion,
laws and liberties might not again be in danger of being subverted,
upon which letters elections having been accordingly made;

And thereupon the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and

Commons, pursuant to their respective letters and elections, being
now assembled in a full and free representative of this nation,
taking into their most serious consideration the best means for
attaining the ends aforesaid, do in the first place (as their ancestors
in like case have usually done) for the vindicating and asserting
their ancient rights and liberties declare:

That the pretended power of suspending the laws or the

execution of laws by regal authority without consent of
Parliament is illegal;
That the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the
execution of laws by regal authority, as it hath been assumed
and exercised of late, is illegal;
That the commission for erecting the late Court of
Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes, and all other
commissions and courts of like nature, are illegal and
pernicious;
That levying money for or to the use of the Crown by
pretence of prerogative, without grant of Parliament, for
longer time, or in other manner than the same is or shall
be granted, is illegal;
That it is the right of the subjects to petition the king,
and all commitments and prosecutions for such
petitioning are illegal;
That the raising or keeping a standing army within the
kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of
Parliament, is against law;
That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms
for their defence suitable to their conditions and as
allowed by law;
That election of members of Parliament ought to be free;
 That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in
Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any
court or place out of Parliament;
That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual
punishments inflicted;
That jurors ought to be duly impanelled and returned, and
jurors which pass upon men in trials for high treason ought to
be freeholders;
That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of
particular persons before conviction are illegal and
void;
And that for redress of all grievances, and for the
amending, strengthening and preserving of the laws,
Parliaments ought to be held frequently.

And they do claim, demand and insist upon all and singular
the premises as their undoubted rights and liberties, and
that no declarations, judgments, doings or proceedings to
the prejudice of the people in any of the said premises ought
in any wise to be drawn hereafter into consequence or
example; to which demand of their rights they are
particularly encouraged by the declaration of his Highness
the prince of Orange as being the only means for obtaining a
full redress and remedy therein.

Having therefore an entire confidence that his said Highness the

prince of Orange will perfect the deliverance so far advanced by
him, and will still preserve them from the violation of their rights
which they have here asserted, and from all other attempts upon
their religion, rights and liberties, the said Lords Spiritual and
Temporal and Commons assembled at Westminster do resolve that
William and Mary, prince and princess of Orange, be and be
declared king and queen of England, France and Ireland and the
dominions thereunto belonging, to hold the crown and royal dignity
of the said kingdoms and dominions to them, the said prince and
princess, during their lives and the life of the survivor to them, and
that the sole and full exercise of the regal power be only in and
executed by the said prince of Orange in the names of the said
prince and princess during their joint lives, and after their deceases
the said crown and royal dignity of the same kingdoms and
dominions to be to the heirs of the body of the said princess, and
for default of such issue to the Princess Anne of Denmark and the
heirs of her body, and for default of such issue to the heirs of the
body of the said prince of Orange. And the Lords Spiritual and
Temporal and Commons do pray the said prince and princess to
accept the same accordingly.

And that the oaths hereafter mentioned be taken by all persons of

whom the oaths have allegiance and supremacy might be required
by law, instead of them; and that the said oaths of allegiance and
supremacy be abrogated.

"I, A.B., do sincerely promise and swear that I will be faithful and
bear true allegiance to their Majesties King William and Queen
Mary. So help me God."

"I, A.B., do swear that I do from my heart abhor, detest and

abjure as impious and heretical this damnable doctrine and
position, that princes excommunicated or deprived by the
Pope or any authority of the see of Rome may be deposed or
murdered by their subjects or any other whatsoever. And I
do declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or
potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power,
superiority, pre-eminence or authority, ecclesiastical or
spiritual, within this realm. So help me God."

It is ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons

now assembled at Westminster that this Declaration be ingrossed in
Parliament and inrolled among the rolls of Parliament and Recorded
in Chancery.

Day 15 February 1688.

His majesties Gracious answer to the Declaration of both
houses.
My Lords and Gentlemen
This is certainly the greatest proof of the trust that you
have in us that can be given which is the thing that
maketh us value it the more and we thankfully accept
what you have offered. And as I had no other intention
of coming hither than to preserve your Religion, Laws
and Liberties so you may be sure that I shall endeavour
to support them and shall be willing to concur in
anything that shall be for the good of the Kingdom and
 to do all that is in my power to advance the welfare and
glory of the nation.
Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal assembled
at Westminster That his Majesties Gracious answer to
the Declaration of both houses and the Declaration be
forth with printed and published and that his Majesties
Gracious Answer this day be added to the engrossed
Declaration in Parliament to be Enrolled in Parliament
and Chancery.
The Bill of Rights 1689 was one of the inspirations for the ... jurors in trials for
high treason ought to be ... the Bill of Rights applies in Northern Ireland. ...
https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200708/jtselect/jtrights/165/165i.pdf

Understanding The Northern Ireland Conflict: A Summary And Overview Of The Conflict And
... Romes authority and the declaration of Henry as Supreme Head of the Church

http://www.communitydialogue.org/PDFs/UnderstandNI-HistJune05.pdf
Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxemburg, ... CE marking is the declaration by the manufacturer ...
Declaration of Conformity, European Free Trade Association (EFTA).2 In 1994, the EU and the
EFTA (with the exception of Switzerland) joined to become the European Economic Area (EEA)
http://ita.doc.gov/td/health/CEMarking.pdf

Republican Policy
Platform
The Principles Of
Applied Republicanism
The Irishman frees himself from slavery when he
realizes the truth that the capitalist system is the most
foreign thing in Ireland. The Irish question is a social
question. The whole age-long fight of the Irish people
against their oppressors resolves itself in the last
analysis into a fight for the mastery of the means of
life, the sources of production, in Ireland. Who would
own and control the land? The people, or the invaders;
and if the invaders, which set of them - the most recent
swarm of land thieves, or the sons of the thieves of a
former generation? James Connolly

Applied Republicanism
Recognising that each generation of Irish republicans
have strategic autonomy and onerous duty to pursue our
perennial right to national self-determination. It is the right
which is necessarily carried forward and not any given
strategy or stance taken in its pursuit.
Republican policies must be synonymous with their
pursuit. All policies must be developed in tandem with a
viable strategy to implement them.
All matters for policy must be defined in terms of how
they function and all policies must be applied strategically
to impact on that composite process.
 Success must be consolidated and translated into
policy. Failure must be recognised and democratically
discarded. Political Strategies & State
Institutions The right of the Irish people to national
self-determination is inalienable and indefeasible. This
right is perennial. Every generation of Irish people have
the inalienable right to pursue this right relevant to their
own circumstance and ingenuity. The parameters of
policies and strategies to pursue this right cannot be
determined by those who would deny this right or a
previous generations failed efforts to secure this
right. The False Dichotomy Entering partitionist
institutions has failed to secure republican objectives.
Abstaining from entering partitionist institutions has
equally failed to secure republican objectives. Blaming
each position for these respective failures has also failed to
secure republican objectives. Republicanism cannot allow
itself to be forced into a false dichotomy of having to
choose between two failed options. There can be no
loyalty owed to failure. Provenance & Function Leinster
House and Stormont do not currently exist because they
were created in 1922, they continue to exist because they
have managed to function since then irrespective of their
illegality or whether republicans participated in them or
not. Political and symbolic acts against their right to exist,
either within or outside of the institutions, are neither
effective nor revolutionary if they cannot inhibit nor
impact on these abilities to function. The arguments as to
the illegitimacy of the provenance of partitionist
institutions are now academic and provide no relevant
basis for contemporary republican activity as it is their
continuing ability to function which inhibits Irish unity.
Recognising that the institutions continue to function takes
precedence over non-recognition of their legal provenance
when formulating republican policies and strategies.
2
Republican Charter
The Republican Movement is a revolutionary separatist
movement whose primary aim is the restoration of Irish
national sovereignty and to facilitate the exercise of
national self-determination by the people of Ireland.
It is the core position of the Republican Movement that
a 32 County Irish Republic, based on republican and
socialist principles, affords the Irish people maximum
freedom, equality and justice.
The right of the Irish people to national self
determination is not in itself conditional on the Irish
people determining a particular political or ideological
point of view. The Irish people have a right to choose how
their self determination and sovereignty should be
democratically expressed, without external impediment,
coercion or force.
It is the foremost responsibility of the Republican
Movement to foster unity and comradeship within the
Republican Movement and with other progressive and
revolutionary organisations to advance republican
objectives.
It is the foremost duty of each individual republican to
conduct themselves in accordance with republican
principles and to act at all times in a spirit of comradeship
towards their fellow republicans and show due respect for
the citizenry of Ireland.
All claims to represent and/or act on behalf of Irish
republicanism must be evaluated relative to the quality of
activity in its pursuit.
All local and community republican activity, in
accordance with the primary aim of the Republican
Movement, must have a corresponding national
 dimension.
All Republican activity must be, constitutionally, under
civilian and democratic direction. Republicanism can only
advance in a democratic movement.
Republican policies, in the absence of clearly defined
objective strategies to implement them, are nothing more
than opinions. Opinions are not policies.
All discussions, positions and policies promoting
republicanism must be grounded in republicanism itself
and not in the individual or group.
All debates assessing, promoting and advancing
republicanism must be governed by the following rule:
The better argument prevails!
Republican prisoners are national prisoners. The
welfare of republican prisoners and their dependents
cannot be politicised.
Loyalty to leadership, individual or group cannot
surpass loyalty to the republican objective as
democratically defined by the Republican Movement.
3

Republican Policy & Strategy Development

|||

Development | Issue Relevance | Local Dimension | National

Dimension | Prof. Engagement | Economics

Application | Objectives | Resources | Local Strategy | National

Strategy | Coordination
Review | Timeframe | Process Review | Local Review | National
Review | Recommendations

The process within which policies and strategies are

devised is as important as the policies and strategies
themselves. A collective, democratic and accountable
process is essential for the Republican Movement, not
only to devise a credible and coherent policy platform, but
also to give it strategic effect.
Hierarchical secrecy and centralised control greatly
inhibits policy and strategy development because it
involves minimal debate and is devoid of any critical
analysis or review.
The democratisation of policy formation is essential.
The role of leadership is to garner the maximum from
republican resources and coordinate efforts to pursue
policy decisions democratically taken.
Policy and strategy must also reflect the true nature
and raison dtre of the Republican Movement as a
revolutionary national political force and not merely a
local protesting entity. Policies must present radical
alternatives beyond a critique of the status quo.
The engagement with relevant professionals and
frontline personnel in their given fields is a prerequisite
essential for policy and strategy development.
Alternative policies, to gain any traction, must possess
a pragmatic plausibility in political, social and economic
terms. Policies and strategies must make sense and be
expressed in a way that is readily understandable and
relevant to the communities we mean to introduce them
to.
 The growth and development of personnel within the
Republican Movement must be based on abilities and
articulations expressed within the policy formation
process, their strategic application and their critical
review.

Republican Policy Platform

A Relevant Voice
We therefore declare that, unable longer to endure the
curse of Monarchical Government, we aim at founding
a Republic based on universal suffrage, which shall
secure to all the intrinsic value of their labour.
The soil of Ireland, at present in the possession of an
oligarchy, belongs to us, the Irish people, and to us it
must be restored.
We declare, also, in favour of absolute liberty of
conscience, and complete separation of Church and
State. Fenian Proclamation 1867
5

National Policy Schematic

Policy Platform Outline
National Sovereignty is predicated on the autonomous
and democratic functioning of a just and inclusive society.
The welfare of the collective people, socially
constructed, constitutes the Social Imperative.
The development of the infrastructure necessary to
resource society must be in harmony with the structure and
functioning of society itself.
The fundamental needs of the citizen & family
represent the fundamental components of the republican
policy platform expressed at family, community and
national level.
The pivotal hub of republican policies is to facilitate,
resource and empower the functioning relationship
between the citizen / family, community and nation.
A central premise of the strategic application of
republican policy is an understanding of the need for a
coalition of strategies at family, community and national
level.
Republican Policy Platform
The Citizen & The Family
Community & Nation The
Right To Our Home
Let no man write my epitaph; for as no man who
knows my motives dare now vindicate them, let not
prejudice or ignorance asperse them. Let them and me
rest in obscurity and peace; and my tomb remain
uninscribed and my memory in oblivion until other
times and other men can do justice to my character.
When my country takes her place among the nations of
the earth, then, and not till then let my epitaph be
written. I have done." Robert Emmet

Right To A HomeThe Totality of Home, Rights &

Access
The right to a home is a fundamental human right and
essential to human dignity.
Having a home is integral to the definition of the
citizen and the family.
The citizen and family represent the core resource of
the community.
Communities are the core resource of the national
family.
The national family has an integral and essential right
to its national home.
The citizen, family, community family and national
family have a mutual co- dependence. Definitions

A citizen is sovereign and is the ultimate source of

national sovereignty. The rights of citizens and their
responsibilities to those rights, both individually and
collectively, are mutually inclusive.
 A family is defined as citizens co-habiting in secure
residence and functioning for their mutual social,
economic and long-term developmental welfare.
A home is defined as the necessary, adequate and
peaceful residence of the citizen and the family.
A community is defined by the social interaction of
citizens and families within a locality.
The national family is defined as the autonomous,
equal and democratic functioning of society.

The home of the Irish national family is Ireland.

Facilitation & Resources
The Social Imperative of the provision of homes to
citizens and families to be enshrined in Constitutional and
Property Law.
Homes are not to be viewed in terms of property cost
but in terms of social value. Provision of homes is not to
be profit orientated.
To establish a state National Home & Family Fund to
provide financial services and support for the acquisition
and maintenance of homes for citizens and families.

Republican Policy
Platform
An Tionscadal Forgra The
Proclamation Project
Are we amateurs and not professionals? We know the
lessons of history, we know the mistakes and we either
act accordingly or collapse. Salvation lies in clarity and
the courage to implement change Thomas Ta Power

An Tionscadal Forgra The

Proclamation Project
Introduction
The success of the Moore Street Occupation and the Easter
Monday Centenary Commemoration in Dublin are demonstrable
examples of how effective republican cooperation can be. Both
events returned, in some measure, a political dignity to Irish
republicanism. They also lay to rest the view that such
cooperation cannot work and negate any strategy that would
utilise this view to avoid engagement between republicans.
In each event, and in the processes to create them, the integrity
of all organisations and viewpoints were respected. To the fore
was the attainment of the objective at hand as opposed to using
the engagement simply to advance a given groups position. The
simplicity of the format became its dynamic, the underlying rule
being that the better argument prevails.
All those who participated were encouraged to speak in
whatever status they so chose, individual or group
representative, to ensure that whichever decisions were taken
reflected the majority of views expressed. It was also recognised
that any failure to find agreement on a given point would not be
viewed as an impediment or bar on seeking agreement on
others. Equally, points of agreement and decisions made were
not continuously re-visited but robustly implemented to
maintain forward momentum.
The initiative behind the Easter Centenary March was focussed
on requiring groups participating to present their core message
as opposed to simply advertising which particular group they
represented. The intent of this strategy was to move the current
republican narrative out of the cocoon of the group and into the
national conversation with their core political message. This was
as challenging as it was necessary because it contained inherent
implications; if a group has nothing different to say then why
does it exist? If it has something to say why not ally it with
similar views to propagate it wider?
The necessity of this challenge was born from the realisation
that what currently unites all shades of republicanism and
socialism is failure and that what is required is not the formation
of new groups but the consolidation and development of a
policy programme that can advance republican and socialist
politics. The current low state of Irish republicanism is self
inflicted; to pretend otherwise is a dangerous dishonesty. There
are no quick fixes and any solutions which are not challenging
are not solutions at all.
Both events referenced here were extremely challenging and
required a tenacity and pragmatism to see them through. But
central to the success of any future strategies must be the re-
introduction of a sense of comradeship between republicans
because in its absence even the most eloquent political theory
will not advance one iota.
A national struggle requires a national mindset and all
community political activity and campaigns must have a
national dimension. There is no place in the republican
10
struggle for parochialism. It is a debilitating and isolating
practice which feeds of narrow mindedness and innuendo.
Equally, seeking refuge in ideological rigidity or historical
technicalities is the very antithesis of what the concept of a
revolutionary movement should be. Claims to represent or be a
republican must be evaluated on the quality, depth and strategic
merit of the activity carried out in its pursuit. In short Irish
republicanism and socialism must be synonymous with that
pursuit.
The most fundamental form of political activity is the act of
talking, first to each other then together with others whom we
need to engage. Dialogue is essential if ideas are to be translated
into strategies and such strategies have a better prospect of
gaining traction if those who are implementing them played a
full part in their construction.
What is set out below is a template within which the dual
criterion of political strategy building can be initiated, namely,
conversing together to work out policy and strategy and acting
together to implement it.

The Proclamation Project

A credible political strategy must contain and be cognisant of
the following:
Unity of purpose

Defined objectives
Defined policies Unity of Purpose Republicans
 working together is as important as the fruits of that work.
The fractured nature of the republican base is testament to
the fact that dialogue amongst republicans is practically
non-existent. It has reached a crisis point wherein the
deliberate avoidance of dialogue is the first priority and
this is justified primarily on personal slander and parochial
ego. In normal political discourse there is merit in
considered disagreement yet even this is absent in the
republican case. It is failure manifested. It is beyond
pointless to pursue to any extent a political objective
which is predicated on failure. And it is equally pointless
to place false preconditions on addressing and ending such
a state of affairs. There is no issue of ideology, episode of
history or point of politics which is served by not ending
failure. Blame is not a solution. This is the first nettle
which needs to grasped; republicans and socialists need to
sit down together in a mature and pragmatic manner, in the
first instance, to demonstrate to the people in whose name
we claim to act that we can indeed do so. How can we talk
credibly of unity in any sense yet fail to practice it
ourselves? It is a wholly unsustainable position.

11
Defined Objectives

Aspirations are reached via the mechanism of defined

objectives. Objectives are so defined according to our abilities to
realistically achieve them. These abilities are greatly enhanced
with republicans working in tandem which also allows for a
more nuanced and practical process in selecting them. Once
selected they give structure and direction to the republican
struggle.
In setting out interim republican objectives we must balance the
equation of ability set against relevance; relevance to
contemporary society and relevance to the broader aspiration.
Objectives are practical goals and at their core must be a
working relationship between republicans and our communities.
We cannot hope to bring our communities into the republican
project by dealing with issues which do not affect them. This is
where it is critical in understanding that all local republican
campaigns must have a corresponding national dimension.
Defined Policies
An aspiration or an opinion is not a policy; nor is wearing a
mask. Stating a position of wanting a United Ireland or the
means of production to be in the control of the people are not in
themselves policies to achieve them. Inherent in any meaningful
definition of policy must be a strategy to pursue them. Policies
can only define who we are once we actively pursue and
implement them. It is our activism that will ultimately define us
because whereas a policy reflects intent activism in their pursuit
reflects ability and commitment.
There is a wealth of republican and socialist thinking at our
disposal. At times we have allowed this resource to be stagnated
by slogans and misappropriated to justify sides in schisms. From
Wolfe Tone to Ta Power there exists a rich tapestry of
revolutionary thought that a cooperating republican base can
devise exceptional and distinctive policies. Recognising the
primacy of revolutionary politics returns to the Republican
Movement a political sophistication which cannot be ignored.
It is vital that republican socialism removes itself from the
straitjacket of being perceived as a protest movement, more anti
capitalist than proactively socialist. Our policy platform must be
based on providing solutions.
Strategy Template
The next five years affords Irish republicanism an
unprecedented opportunity to reinvigorate the republican
project. The Centenaries of the most seminal events in
republican history will place into the national narrative the core
issues which are at the heart of Irish republicanism. As
witnessed with the Centenary of 1916 the State and the
revisionists were desperate to dilute the central tenets of what
the Proclamation represents. But ultimately this was a
distraction for republicans. Arguing with revisionists is not
providing political alternatives or delivering radical solutions.
This is where our focus must be.
The Easter Monday March was always to be viewed as a start
point, a watershed. Republicans marked the event with a display
of unity, a clear message in itself and an immensely fitting and
important first step. The oncoming Centenaries can act as focal
points around which a corpus of political and social policy can
be formulated. Using

12
the Centenaries in such a fashion allows republicans two critical
components; a defined timeframe with an end point to aim for
and a political end point in which the culmination of policy
formation can directly address. In effect republicans will
celebrate these Centenaries not with quaint pageantry but with
separatist politics structured around agreed policies.

EVENT
1918 General Election Founding of the First Dil Declaration of
Independence Democratic Programme War of Independence
1921 Treaty

POLICY
Democracy & The Citizen Parliament & The Citizen
Sovereignty & The Citizen Society & The Citizen War & The
Citizen Negotiations & The British
Within these headings will be issues that will directly affect
individual citizens, communities and the country at large and
which in turn republicans will have to formulate policies and
strategies to implement them.
Sovereignty of the Individual
Sovereignty of Community

National Sovereignty
Unionism
Right to a Home
Right to our Natural Resources
Debt, Poverty & Society
The Drug Abuse Question

A.N. Other The trajectory of this political activity is

ultimately a return to the negotiations table with the
British to end, once and for all, their presence in our
country. The revolutionary period between 1916 and 1921
is where Irish republicanism got it right. Where it failed
was in abandoning this position by allowing the British to
determine their constitutional status in the Treaty
negotiations. The British would not recognise the Irish
delegates as representatives of the Irish Republic but rather
as representatives of the British created Southern
Parliament. Once the delegates conceded to this they were,
in the words of delegate Robert Barton, on the road to
disaster. This error was repeated in the Good Friday
Agreement negotiations. The entry fee into those
negotiations was the prior acceptance of a partitionist
outcome which it duly delivered. The case for Irish
national sovereignty was neither made nor defended in that
process.
13
The key lesson from this history is that for republicans to call
for such negotiations we must have in place key elements which
reflect and protect the totality of the republican position:
Irish national sovereignty defined in International Law
The participation of the people via Policy Programme

Blueprint for a post withdrawal Ireland The

Proclamation Project proposal is geared toward
reinvigorating republican politics by concentrating on
building coherence in the republican message over a five
year period. As that coherency brings depth and clarity to
the republican position our political influence on the
national narrative increases also. It can only be
accomplished by republicans and socialists sitting down
and talking. To view or use the proposal as a means to
garner support, real or imagined, for any given group, or
given groups position, is to completely misunderstand its
purpose.

GETTY / YOUTUBE
Anthony Coughlan said the Republic of Ireland must follow the UK out of
the EU for its own good
Anthony Coughlan said the Republic of Ireland must replicate
its closest neighbours withdrawal in order to avoid economic
turmoil.
 The Trinity College Dublin professor said Ireland primarily
joined the bloc in the first place because Britain did - and now it
must once again follow closely as the UK negotiates its exit.

He said: It is only since Theresa Mays speech in January that

Irelands ultra-europhile political establishment is beginning to
realise that Brexit really does mean Brexit - and the case for it
being accompanied by Irexit is starting to be heard in Irish
business circles.
Writing for ConservativeHome.com, he said the Irish public, like
that in Britain, was in advance of the elite on the matter.
Prof Coughlan said: That realisation is now growing in Ireland.
Both public and elite opinion is likely to move in the direction of
Irexit over the coming two years, and UK policy-makers should do
all they can to encourage it.

GETTY
Irish Taoiseach Enda Kenny has warned of challenges ahead due to Brexit
Irish public opinion is in advance of elite opinion on this. An
opinion poll last October showed that almost four in ten Irish
people would choose open borders and free trade with the UK
over the EU.
This was before there was any realistion of the hugely adverse
effects on the Republic if it is so foolish as to seek to remain in t
EU when Britain and Northern Ireland leave it.
He said the Republic remaining in the EU while Northern Ireland
left with the rest of the UK would turn the invisible border into an
EU land frontier due to Brexit.
Prof Coughlan also said the economic benefits of remaining in the
EU had long since passed for Ireland, who are now net
contributors.
He said: Since 2014, the Republic has become a net contributor
to the EU Budget. This is a big change from the previous 40 years,
during which it was a major recipient of EU money, mainly through
the EUs Common Agricultural Policy.

GETTY
Anthony Coughlan said calls for Irexit are starting to be heard in Ireland
In future, money from Brussels will be Irish taxpayers money
recycled, as is already the case with the UK. This removes what
up to now has been the principal basis of Irish Europhilia, official
and unofficial namely, easy EU cash, not any ideological
enthusiasm for Eurofederalism or 'the EU project'.
Michael Fitzmaurice TD On Brexit Debate Dail Eireann 16/2/2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxqAqV8qlRA

He concluded by stating Irelands loyalty needed to be to Britain, not Brussels. He said,

like the UK, the country could embrace a more global market outside the bloc.

Prof Coughlan said: Economically and psychologically, Ireland is closer to Boston than
Berlin, and to Britain than Germany.

Irish Republic should join Britain's Brexit with Irexit - David

Coburn MEP

Oct 25, 2016

http://www.ukipmeps.org | http://www.ukip.org
European Parliament, Strasbourg, 25 October 2016
 Bluecard Question: David COBURN MEP, UK Independence Party (Scotland), Europe of Freedom
and Direct Democracy (EFDD) group - @DavidCoburnUkip
- Response: Marian HARKIN MEP (Ireland), Liberal group (ALDE)

Debate: Corporate taxation package (Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base - CCCTB)
Commission statement
[2016/2953(RSP)]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQDYGrvf3L8
IRISH FOR BREXIT 1
Jun 1, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhrUSdNxHic
Sinn Fein are Traitors Selling The Irish and the North to
EU, Ireland does Not want EU we want Out Erexit now
Adams: 'I never argued for Ireland to leave the EU
after UK vote'
Irish Independent

Sinn Fin leader Gerry Adams has denied that he privately told party members in
Northern Ireland he would advocate that the Republic should leave the EU if the Brexit
vote was passed.

The director of the National Platform for EU Research and Information, a private lobby
group, made the claim in a letter sent to Mr Adams and all of the party's TDs.

Anthony Coughlan, a retired associate professor of social policy at Trinity College Dublin,
said he was handing out pro-Brexit leaflets in Belfast when he was told by a Sinn Fin
activist that the party president had been making such comments.

Mr Coughlan claimed that the TD for Louth "had been saying privately to Sinn Fin
people that if the UK voted to leave the EU, you would advocate that the Irish State
should do the same".

Mr Coughlan went on to write that he would support Mr Adams's approach because "such
a course is the only way in which you can save what is left of the Republican project, for
which so many people made so many sacrifices over decades, and keep Sinn Fin relevant
as a political alternative to the Dil parties mentioned above".

He noted that he had written Mr Adams "many letters, ever since you first wrote to me
from Long Kesh internment camp away back in 1973 looking for information on what was
then known as the 'Common Market'".

Distraction

"I am sending you this one in the hope of persuading you that this is the principled
Republican and democratic course to take, and that Sinn Fin's talk of a border poll,
which has no hope of happening, and no hope of giving a desirable result even if it did
happen, is but a distraction from the real issues now facing the country," Mr Coughlan
said.

However, Mr Adams said that this was not his position - and that he made no such
statements in advance of the UK referendum.
"I know Anthony for a very, very long time. I admire his spirit. I agree with him on many,
many positions," he said.

"I share his criticism of the European Union - but for us it was a straightforward position
of trying to ensure that one part of the island wasn't in the European Union and the other
part outside the European Union," he added.

"I've written back to Anthony [to] point out the position he asserts. He says somebody
told him this. That certainly isn't my position," Mr Adams said.

In the letter, which has also been circulated to MLAs and councillors, Mr Coughlan
criticises the party's official stance in relation to Brexit.

He claims that Sinn Fin was throwing away an opportunity to establish links with
Northern Unionists and that the party had instead aligned itself "with the central policy
drive of the British government and with the Goldman Sachses, David Camerons, Peter
Sutherlands, Enda Kennys".

"Above all it will be necessary to say that by the South remaining in the EU while the
North leaves it along with the rest of the UK, the southern Dil parties that support
continued EU membership will be adding major new dimensions to partition,
aggravating the continuing division of the country and conniving at the further handover
of what is left of Irish national independence and democracy to Brussels," Mr Coughlan's
letter adds.

At the beginning of 2016, certain outcomes seemed

inconceivable. Like Leicester City becoming premier
champions. Or Ireland beating the All Blacks in rugby.
On a slightly more profound level, very few people
predicted Britain would go storming out of the EU. And,
oh, the same goes for Donald J Trump becoming the
45th president of the worlds most powerful democracy.
Its been that kind of year, so much so that other ideas
that seemed fanciful are now beginning to flash up on
the radar.
And among them is another portmanteau word: Eirexit.
Until very recently, the very notion of Ireland leaving the
EU was so outlandish and marginal that it did not
feature in any public discourse in a meaningful way.
But it has now been thrust more into the limelight by a
combination of Brexit, the Apple case, fears of an EU
stealth attack on Irelands most sacred cow, corporation
tax; and now, the election of Trump.
For major parties and for the Government, the idea does
not even begin to feature.
The recently published National Risk Assessment looks
extensively at the possible impacts of Brexit but is silent
on the possibility of a future Irish exit.
As one sceptic put it adroitly, the attitude of the
established political parties (and the Institute of
International and European Affairs) to Brussels is as
adulatory and hormonal as that of teenage girls to the
latest boy-band sensation.
Is the political establishment lagging behind the curve
on this question?
Public figures
Certainly, Eirexit has gained some momentum of late.
There is a small but growing band of public figures
questioning the basis of Irish EU membership. Some are
opposed to any notion of a federal Europe or EU
superstate.
Others think Eirexit might turn out to be inevitable if
circumstances change. And the public might be with
them on this one more than politicians think.
Over the course of 55 years, one person has been almost
a voice in the wilderness in his consistent opposition to
the EU.
In October 1961, Anthony Coughlan returned to Ireland
to lecture at Trinity College Dublin.
A month later he was one of seven people along with
Nol Browne and future Labour TD Barry Desmond
who signed a letter to The Irish Times opposing Irelands
application to join the European Economic Community.
The idea was being mooted in political circles at the
time.
Coughlan had read the memoir of one of the EU
architects, Jean Monnet, and was alarmed at his
enthusiasm for a supranational and federalist entity.
To me it seemed undemocratic, taking away sovereignty
from countries, the ability to make laws or policy.
Brexit terms may change stance of British people, Blair says
How Ireland achieved a crucial Brexit coup
Brexit: May rejects call to settle bill before trade talks start
Half a century later, Coughlans opposition to an
integrated Europe remains undiminished.
His energy for constant No campaigning has remained
undimmed. He was on the No side in the 1972
referendum on accession; and all referendums on the EU
since.
He and the late Raymond Crotty took a successful
challenge in 1987 that ensured any changes in EU
treaties would have to be put to referendum. Now, in
retirement, under the banner of the National Platform,
he continues to write letters and essays on an almost
daily basis.
A recent letter to British Brexit campaigners starts: All
hail to those UK democrats who have made Project Hope
prevail over Project Fear.
Coughlans belief is that the long term goal or the EU is a
European federation and superstate. He says the
creation of the eurozone was central to this.
Our supreme folly is having joined the eurozone
without the UK doing it, he said. It was lunacy for us to
join.
But would Ireland have progressed without EU funding,
particularly in agriculture? Coughlan agrees that Ireland
was a beneficiary but questions the net benefit, given
that Ireland compromised on fisheries and made other
concessions in return for funding.
Coughlan is adamant that Ireland should follow the UK
out. He points to two thirds of Irelands foreign trade
being done outside the eurozone and says a special
bilateral deal with the UK is necessary. However, this
cannot happen while Brussels controls trade.
In his thinking on the matter, Coughlan agrees with
Financial Times columnist Wolfgang Munchau who
argued if Brexit was hard, the Irish economic model
might be unsustainable unless Britain is followed out of
the EU.
It is highly probable indeed. I cannot see us staying in
the EU if the UK leaves, says Couglan.
As in the Brexit debate, those who have been most vocal
have been either determinedly left wing voices, or their
right wing counterparts.
The two main parties in the AAA-PBP alliance, the
Socialist Party and the Socialist Workers Party (People
Before Profit), both support an exit.
People Before Profit has said that in the event of Brexit,
it would campaign for the Republic to leave as well.
We favour the break-up of the current structures of the
EU on left-wing grounds.
left-wing argument
Socialist Party TD Paul Murphy holds the same view. Its
not a foreground issue but if a referendum were held,
they would support a Leave vote.
The EU has championed austerity and neoliberal
policies, and right-wing governments who wont deliver
for ordinary people.
He says the radical economic changes his party call for
are all illegal under EU law.
The dynamic for any new genuinely left-wing
government would be that it would first be forced out of
the EU the experience of Syriza in Greece was telling in
that regard.

Sinn Fins analysis of the shortfalls of the EU would not

differ too much from Murphys. MEP Matt Carthy lists
its treatment of peripheral countries such as Greece, the
TTIP trade deal, and what he calls its anti-democratic
institutions.
However, the party wants Ireland to stay in the EU. Our
view is the EU needs fundamental reform rather than an
exit, says Carthy.
Our priority is fundamentally to get people of the North
to stay in the EU. We cannot countenance a situation
where one part of the island is operating within EU and
the other is outside.
An important voice was added to the debate on Friday
when Frank Keoghan of the Technical, Engineering and
Electrical Union became the first significant trade union
voice to challenge the nature of Irelands future
relationship with the EU.
Superstate
Those on the right are suspicious of what they see as a
creeping move towards a superstate and the
repercussions this might have for Irelands sovereignty.
Former Progressive Democrats leader, Senator Michael
McDowell is a sceptic but one who wants to remain in
the EU.
He said he believes in a confederal EU, not a federal one
and is completely opposed to an EU superstate.
His former adviser Cormac Lucey, a Sunday Times
columnist, has written that Eirexit is an option that
ought to be considered, also arguing that the bulk of
Irelands trade is with the English-speaking world and
not the EU.
Micro parties such as Direct Democracy Ireland, and
other splinter groups, have set up social media platforms
calling for an Eirexit.
Renua councillor Keith Redmond, a member of the
right-leaning think-tank Hibernia Forum, says if the EU
presses ahead with any plans for a superstate, or
introduces customs tariffs on UK trade, then he will
support Eirexit.
Are these a collection of disparate and peripheral voices,
or do they reflect a population far less enamoured of
Brussels than its political leaders?
Coughlan has remained consistent over a lifetime, still
holding to the view the EU has not really benefited
Ireland as a whole, but rather a few bigger players.
He recalls Charles de Gaulles famous remark: Europe
is France and Germany; the rest is just the trimmings.
http://campus.ie/surviving-college/adams-i-never-
argued-ireland-leave-eu-after-uk-vote
European Council (Art. 50) guidelines for Brexit
negotiations European Council (Art. 50) guidelines
following the United Kingdom's notification under
Article 50 TEU
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/press-releases-
pdf/2017/4/47244658130_en.pdf
WHY HENRY VIII CLAUSES SHOULD BE CONSIGNED TO THE DUSTBIN OF
HISTORY

http://www.publiclawproject.org.uk/data/resources/2
20/WHY-HENRY-VIII-CLAUSES-SHOULD-BE-
CONSIGNED-TO-THE-DUSTBIN-OF-HISTORY.pdf
Ceding Power to the Executive; the Resurrection of
Henry VIII The Rt. Hon Lord Judge 12 April 2016,
Kings College London
https://www.kcl.ac.uk/law/newsevents/newsrecords/
2015-16/Ceding-Power-to-the-Executive---Lord-
Judge---130416.pdf

New Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law Briefing

Paper- Parliament and the Rule of Law in the
Context of Brexit
https://www.biicl.org/documents/1284_briefing_pap
er_-_parl_and_rol_in_brexit.pdf?showdocument=1

Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/25/data.p
df
European Communities Act 1972; Tobacco
Products Directive 2014/40/EU of the European
Parliament and the Council; Court of Justice of the
European Union Press Release No 48/16 (4 May
2016
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/
pdf/2016-05/cp160048en.pdf
Brett Solicitors, Press Statement (19 August 2016

Northern Ireland legal challenge to triggering article

50
http://www.mlex.com/Attachments/2016-08-
23_8U59768CT7N27FL6/Press%20Statement%20-
%20Legal%20challenge%20to%20Triggering%20Ar
ticle%2050%20-%20Update.pdf
Declaration of Conformity with Article 14 ... We SMC Pneumatics (Ireland) Limited ...
hydrofluorocarbons on the market made a declaration

https://www.smcworld.com/international/pdf/fgas/D
KU06258-C-003%20Official%20F-
Gas%20DoC%20SMC%20EU_Ireland.pdf