No government has

solved childcare and

housing questions. Why
should this one be any
different?
John Downing Twitter
BIO
PUBLISHED
14/10/2016

1
'Even opponents of Housing Minister Simon Coveney acknowledge
his commitment'

Childcare has been called the "second

mortgage" for the past 20 years. There's a
housing crisis every 20 years. Governments
come and go and they sometimes ignore as
much as they can get away with. Other times
they "speak to the problems" as best they
can.
Given the competitive multi-seat constituencies returning
deputies for a maximum of five years, it might be a stretch
to expect more long-term remedies for the issues which
confront citizens. The answer is that politics is pointless
unless we can strike an optimistic note.
So, can this odd hybrid minority coalition, which could

collapse in any given week, achieve things which previous

governments, armed with thumping great majorities,
could not do?
Staying with optimism, the answer is that they could
surprise us - especially in regard to childcare where the
germ of something different appears to be emerging. On
housing, the jury will remain out for some time.
Even opponents of Housing Minister Simon Coveney
(below) acknowledge his commitment. But remedies need
time he may not have. The childcare packages unveiled by
Children's Minister Katherine Zappone have not been
universally welcomed. She has acknowledged that they
may require some fine-tuning, especially the details of
stipulations on registered childcarers.
But many people who have lobbied for more realistic and
systematic childcare systems in Ireland, beyond lashing
out more cash in child benefit, appear ready to give Ms
Zappone's plans a fair wind.
Big picture, the two schemes outlined - the one which
targets people on low income and the more universal
scheme - have been generally welcomed.
The targeted scheme could help children from
disadvantaged homes. In an ideal world it could allow
mothers a chance to get out and earn some extra income.
The more universal scheme offers 50c per hour subsidy for
children under three and will benefit lots of parents. The
amount is rather miserly - but it is a start and symbolic of
a first real and belated recognition of childcare as a key
political issue.
Katherine Zappone, as the Minister in the gap, finds that
much is expected and it's a case of so far, so good for her.
But some credit must go to the last government's
interdepartmental committee, which did good preparatory
work on the issue and informed much of this week's
announcements.
It is vastly too early to deploy the "l-word." She will recall
Labour's Alan Kelly "o'erleaping himself" in that regard in
November 2014, and drawing a whole heap of trouble

down on his head with talk of "legacy" in handling the

Irish Water fiasco.
Yet even with that caveat in mind, this one has potential.
There is considerable "new money" being deployed here,
with 35.5m in total.
But let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. There are still
alarming gaps in Irish childcare provision.
A report by Early Childhood Ireland entitled "Doing the
Sums," which was published a fortnight ago, shows that
community and private childcare operations at best just
manage to break even.
Those working in the sector have low incomes, there is
high staff turnover and a lack of continuity.
Dnall Geoghegan, communications director of Early
Childhood Ireland, said Minister Zappone has recognised
this difficulty.
He points to a provision for creches to be paid for noncontact or administration time spent speaking with
parents and other such tasks.
It is part of the reason his group, and others active in the
sector, are anxious to give these Budget packages on
childcare a fair hearing. Given the precarious position of
this Government it is to be hoped that all politicians take a
similar stance and allow a deal of urgency to be inserted
into proceedings.
Back with the housing issue, Fianna Fil are keen to turn
the screw on Simon Coveney. On this one we may need to
take optimism to new levels.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/c
olumnists/john-downing/nogovernment-has-solved-childcare-andhousing-questions-why-should-thisone-be-any-different-35129508.html

Union leader urges public-sector

workers urged to take 'pragmatic
approach'
Sunday, October 23, 2016

Public-sector employees are being urged to work together

to restore their pay.
The call comes as garda and teachers plan strike action
this month and next, with train drivers also being balloted
on industrial action.
The various disputes surround the Lansdowne Road
Agreement and the Financial Emergency Measures in the
Public Interest (FEMPI) Act 2015.
http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2015/911
5/b9115d-memo.pdf

We can all check our prejudices and decide

who - if anyone - in the public sector
deserves a pay rise.

Should it be the garda, who often work at risk to personal

safety? What about nurses, who can literally save lives? Or
teachers, who shape future generations? And maybe there
are other unsung public service workers who need and
deserve a rise? But rather like the parents of a large family,
ministers must appear to treat all their children equally.
Otherwise the fragile fabric of the public service pay deals
could quickly unravel. Ministers facing up to garda,
teachers, nurses and whatever other groups, are under no
illusions here: any "special deals" awarded to one group must be applied across the board. That cannot happen.
Now Budget 2017 has been agreed, the real challenge for
this minority Coalition is public service pay policy under
pressure after seven years of continual cuts.
Fianna Fil, underpinning the Coalition, might cosy up to
one or other of the public service unions. That is exactly
what Fianna Fil did in opposition in the mid-1980s when
teachers were fighting for pay increases. Watch Michel
Martin and his colleagues as we face into turmoil in
November.
After the modest 1.3bn Budget giveaway, the
Government insisted it would still continue cutting deficit
and debt in line with EU obligations. But it assumes the
more modest 3.5pc growth rate next year - given early
fallout from Brexit that might be optimistic.

The Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors (AGSI)

yesterday followed the rank-and-file officers in the Garda
Representative Association (GRA). Both groups will
withdraw labour on four Fridays next month.
But AGSI also decided to up the ante with a work-to-rule
next Friday and Friday week. This is a straight head-tohead between garda and government.
The GRA and AGSI are unhappy about pay and conditions
and things are complicated by the GRA being outside the
Lansdowne Road Agreement, which involves a phased
restoration of public pay cuts.
Both garda representative groups are getting a favourable
hearing from Justice Minister, Frances Fitzgerald, on
demands for better union rights - but the minister must
take a tougher stance on pay increases.
Our secondary schools will very likely also be hit by
industrial action. Education Minister Richard Bruton has
offered talks but the Association of Secondary Teachers
Ireland (ASTI) has already voted for seven strikes in the
coming three months.
ASTI also decided to withdraw from supervision and
substitution duties from Monday, November 7. The union
demands an unconditional process and their position is
complicated by also being outside the Lansdowne Road
deal.
The Education Department has conceded the difficulties of
fixing alternative supervision arrangements. The need for
garda vetting of people working with young students
means health and safety considerations may lead to the
mass closure of secondary schools.
Fasten your seatbelts. Tough times a'coming.

2
Lead: Leo Varadkar Photo: Doug O'Connor

Social Protection Minister Leo Varadkar

now has the momentum to succeed
Taoiseach Enda Kenny as leader of Fine
Gael and has taken a decisive lead over his
nearest challenger, Housing Minister Simon
Coveney, according to the latest Sunday
Independent/Kantar Millward Brown
opinion poll.
Varadkar is the clear favourite among Fine Gael
supporters and is edging further away from Coveney as the
battle to replace Kenny intensifies after the Government's
'give-away' Budget failed to produce any significant gains
for the party.

Fight: Taoiseach Enda Kenny's personal rating is up Photo: Tom

Burke

Varadkar is the first choice leader-in-waiting for 39pc of

Fine Gael supporters and now commands a massive 14
point lead over Coveney, who is the preferred leader for
25pc of party supporters polled. There was a four-point
gap between the two front-runners in a similar poll taken
in June.
The poll results are indicative of his popularity among the
grassroots. Every member of the party has a vote in the
leadership elections, but votes are weighted depending on
their position. The votes of TDs, senators and MEPs
account for 65pc, councillors have 10pc of the vote and
ordinary members have 25pc.
However, the poll boost for Varadkar comes as two Fine
Gael ministers last night warned that Kenny would "take
on" the minister in a leadership battle if he was to move on

the Taoiseach.
Amid mounting concerns surrounding his leadership Enda
Kenny remained defiant last night stating he'll be "around
for a long time" - copper-fastening his plan to remain on
as Taoiseach when Pope Francis visits Ireland in August
2018.
A number of senators, TDs and ministers contacted by the
Sunday Independent yesterday said Kenny would
definitely face a heave if he sought to remain leader for
two more years.
Prominent Fine Gael TD John Paul Phelan said: "No one
believes that Enda Kenny will be Taoiseach in August
2018."
Today's poll shows less than half (49pc) of Fine Gael
supporters believe Enda Kenny should remain as party
leader, while 30pc said he should resign now.
Meanwhile, Fine Gael saw no increase in public support
after the Budget - despite spending 1.2bn on investment,
welfare increases and tax cuts. Kenny's party is down one
to 29pc, while Fianna Fail is up one to 27pc and Sinn Fein
remains unchanged at 20pc. The Labour Party is up one to
8pc, the Greens are down one to 2pc, while
Independent/Others are up one to 15pc.
Fine Gael's partner in government, the Independent
Alliance, is at 5pc - the same figure as the Anti-Austerity
Alliance/People Before Profit, while the Social Democrats
are at 1pc. One in five people (20pc) said they believe they
will be better off next year while almost a quarter (23pc)
think they will be worse off.
A little more than a third (37pc) said the Government
should have introduced more tax cuts in the Budget, while
a similar number (35pc) said more funding should have
been invested in services.
Kantar Millward Brown associate director Paul Moran said
the poll showed public reaction to the Budget was
"relatively muted".
"The Budget could have been an opportunity [for the
Government] to stamp its identity onto the psyche of the

nation. Instead we got a rather tepid mismatch of

consensus - a nil-all draw in soccer parlance," Mr Moran
said.
Meanwhile, almost two in five Fine Gael supporters
believe Varadkar should lead the party compared with just
a quarter who back Coveney for the role. In the last similar
poll, Varadkar held 30pc of party support while Coveney
had 26pc.
Among the general public, Varadkar is also clear favourite
(28pc) to replace Kenny, compared to Coveney (19pc).
Some 10pc of Fine Gael supporters said they believed
Education Minister Richard Bruton should be the party's
next leader.
Health Minister Simon Harris was not offered as an option
for respondents - but yesterday, during an interview on
RTE Radio One, he expressed an interest in running for
the leadership. Tanaiste and Justice Minister Frances
Fitzgerald is also eager to challenge for the leadership.
However, today's poll findings will be a major blow for Mr
Coveney who backbenchers say has upped the ante in the
leadership battle by making himself more accessible to
Fine Gael TDs.
Last night, a Fine Gael minister said the Taoiseach had "no
notion" of going anywhere and would stay on as party
leader for as long as he could.
"The only way he'll go is if he's pushed - and if Leo moves
too soon I think Kenny will fight him," the minister added.
Another minister said: "Leo is gathering momentum and
is a good media performer - but Kenny will take him on if
it comes down to it. Enda is up for it, he has a lot of
experience and he's a fighter."
However, it is understood that Varadkar is eager to
distance himself from those planning to move on Kenny,
as his supporters believe it could damage him in a future
leadership battle.
Some of the Taoiseach's critics say he should begin the
process of stepping down next March, soon after the
official State visit to the US for St Patrick's Day

Others believe he should resign in June, by which time he

will have exceeded John A Costello as the longest-serving
Fine Gael Taoiseach.
Kenny's personal rating is up slightly to 29pc but he is still
far behind Fianna Fail leader Micheal Martin on 43pc.
Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams is also at 29pc and
Labour Party leader Brendan Howlin is at 25pc.
Fianna Fail is far more transfer-friendly than Fine Gael,
despite having less public support. The poll shows one in
four Fianna Fail supporters would never vote for Fine
Gael, while just 13pc of Fine Gael voters said they would
never vote for Fianna Fail.
A little more than a fifth (21pc of respondents) believe the
Government will last more than three years.

What Fine Gael Minister Pascal Donohue has recieved in Salary and
Expenses in the last five years up to 2015
20 October
2011: = 119,123
2012: = 124,958
2013: = 157,540 2014. = 173,533 2015. = 173,533Total. =
748,687Does he not deserve more to keep him honest?

TDs query Irish

Waters access to
DPP ahead of legal
actions
Justine McCarthy
September 25 2016, 12:01am,
The Sunday Times

Irish Water has held discussions with the Office of

the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) about
how the utilitys relationship with water meter
installers can be best presented in criminal
prosecutions.
TDs who oppose water charges claim the
discussions indicate an unusual level of access to
the DPP and say that they intend to raise the
matter in the Dail.
The discussions came to light in a letter obtained
during court proceedings relating to an antimetering protest in Dun Laoghaire in May 2015.
The letter, dated July 20, 2015, was written by Kevin
McSherry, Irish Waters metering development
manager, and

water chief who profits from meters

Posted on 23 November 2014.

By: Michael OFarrell, Valerie Hanley

THE CEO of Irish Waters parent company owns shares worth 1m in a firm
that makes millions annually from water meter installation and waste-water
contracts.
Ervia boss Michael McNicholas owns 440,707 shares in NTR plc which
makes 2m a year from Irish Water contracts.
Mr McNicholas left his job as CEO of NTR for his current job at the helm of
Bord Gis now Ervia in May 2013. But he is still an adviser to NTR, Ervia
has confirmed.
Six months later, he sold 352,970 of his Turn to Page 4 ?? From Page One
793,677 NTR shares at 0.92 per share, or 324,732. His remaining shares
were worth just over 1m this week as NTRs share price hit 2.35.
Mr McNicholas, who is paid 250,000 a year, was placed centre stage this
week as new water rates were announced in a bid to quell rising protests
appearing on Six One, Prime Time and Morning Ireland in the space of 15
hours.

Irish Mail on Sunday November 23, 2014

Asked on RT radio during this PR blitz, why Irish Water CEO John Tierney
was not doing the interview, Mr McNicholas said: As a new unity board has
been put in place that means there is a single organisation, a single board
with responsibility for Gas Networks Ireland and Irish Water, Im the group
chief executive and Im responsible for both those companies. Thats why Im
here. He also took responsibility for the mistakes made by Irish Water
including the requirement for customers PPS, which was scrapped this week.
We recognise that we have not met the publics expectation and we have not
gained its trust and confidence, he said.
But the revelation that he owns shares in a company that makes millions from
Irish Water will raise perceptions of a possible conflict of interest at the very
heart of Irish Waters.
It comes as pressure mounts on the Government, with protests continuing this
weekend, in the lead-up to a mass demonstration on December 10.
This is despite a package of measures announced this week which will reduce
charges to 60 for a single person household, after State grants, and 160 for
all other households severely reducing Irish Waters potential revenue. An
MoS analysis of projected lost revenue suggests that the utility will be down
141m from a year of full metering rather than the 21m that Irish Water

claims.
A Red C poll last night showed that Fine Gael had taken the brunt of public
anger, down four points to 22% with Sinn Fin gaining two points to 22%.
The company also faces the threat of strike, with Siptu sources saying they
will ballot for action if Irish Water does not pay contracted bonuses for 2013
and 2014.
NTR formerly known as National Toll Roads, the controversial West-Link
bridge operator is connected to Irish Water through its 50% ownership of
Celtic Anglian Water Ltd (CAW).
CAW has contracts from Irish Water for meter installation and wastewater
worth 4m a year, meaning they are worth 2m to NTR. Concerns about a
potential conflict of interest will be heightened by the f a c t that
Mr McNicholas still sits on NTRs investment advisory committee. According
to NTRs last annual report, the committee advises the main board on
investments, joint ventures, acquisitions and divestments.
Asked three times this week, Irish Water refused to say whether
Mr McNicholas held shares in NTR. NTR also declined to answer, saying:
NTRs policy is to not comment on any shareholding that may be held by
individuals. The MoS then went directly to Mr McNicholass home on Friday
evening and twice on Saturday, without getting an answer. Later on Saturday
morning., an Ervia spokesman contacted the MoS to confirm
Mr McNicholass shareholding. The spokesman said the shares and
Mr McNicholass ongoing work with NTR had been declared to the board
every year since he joined Bord Gis, adding: The latest disclosure was in
September just two months ago. Mr McNicholass appointment to Bord Gis
was announced in February 2013 and he took office in May. His ownership of
793,677 shares was disclosed in NTRs 2013, 2012 and 2011 annual reports,
after he became CEO in spring 2010.
But as Mr McNicholas was no longer on the NTR board, his shareholding was
not included in the 2014 report, making it impossible to verify whether he still
held them. Last night, campaigners for better corporate regulation said best
international practice would not allow conflicts of interest to arise or be
perceived. Richard Tol, a former ESRI economist who is now professor of
economics at the University of Sussex, said: This is absolutely not on. The
fact that he is still working in another capacity for his old company essentially
means he is his own client and that cant be.
Typically what you would see would be a cooling-off period of two years
before you can move from a client company to a contracting company. In
African countries and Asian countries, this is commonplace but not in Europe.
Not in the States. In recent years NTR and its jointly owned water utility
company, CAW, have been anticipating a windfall from Irish Water. Speaking
to the MoS in 2011, CAWs managing director, Mark Driver, was upbeat,
saying: Its waters time really. It surely is the new gold, the new oil, if you
like. And in 2012, a year prior to moving to Bord Gis, Mr McNicholas himself
said: The metering of Irish water opens up opportunities for CAW. Celtic
Anglian is well positioned to provide those services. In its statement to the
MoS, Irish Water said Mr McNicholas had fully complied with the code of
conduct for Ervia board members.
He has removed himself from any Ervia or Irish Water discussions about
commercial decisions regarding CAW contracts. Likewise, in his role on the

NTR Investment Advisory Committee he has not been involved and will not
be involved in any discussions about water, it said. In its statement, NTR said
its Investment Advisory Committee has never discussed any matters relating
to its shareholding in CAW or NTRs plans with regards to water-related
investments.
NTR said Mr McNicholas had been offered a modest remuneration for his
advisory work and Irish Water clarified that he had not accepted this payment.
Footnote; The morning after this article was published Mr McNicholas
appeared on RTEs Morning Ireland to announce he was resigning as an
NTR advisor. He also pledged to sell his NTR shares and donate the
money to homeless charity Focus Ireland. Some of the ensuing
coverage can be found at the links below.
http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!
rii=9%3A20686544%3A48%3A24%2D11%2D2014%3A
http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!
rii=9%3A20686879%3A0%3A%3A
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/ervia-boss-to-ditch-400000-shares-inwater-meter-firm-299391.html
http://newsfeed.eastcoast.fm/2014/11/head-of-ervia-owns-one-millioneuro.html
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/water/irish-water-crisis/irish-water-bossdefends-100m-overrun-on-water-meter-installations-30768689.html
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates
%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2014112500019?opendocument
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/taoiseach-rails-at-sfmembers-insulting-ordinary-people-1.2014837
http://www.politics.ie/forum/current-affairs/232219-more-irish-water-headlineservia-boss-shares.html
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/11/24/murky-murky-murky/

European Commission
nds Ireland granted
illegal State aid and
orders recovery a
further review

http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/European_Commission_fi
nds_Ireland_granted_illegal_State_aid_and_orders_recovery__a_further_review/$FILE/2016G_02695-161Gbl_EC%20finds
%20Ireland%20granted%20illegal%20State%20aid%20and
%20orders%20recovery%20-%20a%20further%20review.pdf

Zappone v Revenue Commissioners ... role because in the

hierarchy of laws, constitutional law supersede ... as a family
under Irish domestic law

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
Introduction
Constitutional law is the body of law which defines the
relationship of different entities within a state, namely, the
executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. Not all nation
states have codified constitutions, though all such states
have a jus commune, or law of the land, that may consist
of a variety of imperative and consensual rules. These
may include customary law, conventions, statutory law,
judge-made law or international rules and norms. The Irish
Constitution (Bunreacht na hireann) is the fundamental
law of Ireland. It falls broadly within the tradition of liberal
democracy and establishes an independent state based on
a system of representative democracy. It guarantees
certain fundamental rights, along with a popularly elected
non-executive president, a bicameral parliament based on
the Westminster system, a separation of powers and
judicial review. It is the second constitution of the state
since independence, replacing the 1922 Constitution of
the Irish Free State. It came into force on 29 December
1937 following a national plebiscite held on 1 July 1937.
Topic 1 Fundamental Rights in the Irish Constitution
1) Liberal Constitutions and Fundamental Rights
The Irish Constitution falls under the umbrella of a liberal
democracy. There are two tenets to this:
Maximize the individuals freedoms.
To achieve this, two spheres are created, the public and
private spheres. The private should be as large as possible

and the public as small as possible.

Democracy where political power is derived from the
people.
How are this liberal democratic ideas then translated into
the Irish Constitution?
Separation of Powers (See Irish Legal System for more).
Rule of Law (a government of laws, not men).
Fundamental Rights Split into two categories: Civil and
Political (freedoms and liberties) and Economic and Social
(entitlements)
By doing nothing, the State exercises your Civil and
Political rights (negative rights).
Socioeconomic rights instead burden the State (positive
rights).
What articles of the Irish Constitution discuss these civil,
political, social and economic rights?
Art. 40 44 These are the primary articles.
They are supplemented by Art. 38 and 45.
As a result of capitalism, rights in Western societies are
usually treated as freedoms (negative rights). There is a
catch however. Art. 40-44 deal primarily with civil and
political rights (negative rights). These are justiciable. On
the other hand, Art. 45 deals primarily with socioeconomic
rights. As a result of these being positive rights, Art. 45 is
not justiciable. Art. 45 is primarily a set of guidelines for
the Oireachtas. Further, Art. 42 is another exception to
the rule. Art. 42.4, the right to free primary education, is
the only enforceable socioeconomic right in the
Constitution. Although it is a positive right, it is seen as so
fundamental as to warrant it being afforded justiciable
constitutional standing. In Summary: Civil and political
rights are justiciable, socioeconomic are not with the only
exception being Art. 42. 2) Limitations on Fundamental
Rights The most important question in this topic is: Are
rights absolute? Contrast the example of free speech in
different jurisdictions. The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) in America
are afforded the right to unfettered free speech. On the
other hand, in Ireland, their proponents would be
considered an incitement to hatred. As a result, it is seen
that rights are not absolute. Consider however the

argument that some rights should be absolute (e.g.

freedom from torture, right to a fair trial etc.). The case of
Ryan v AG established that no personal rights are
unlimited.
***Ryan v Attorney General [1965] IR 294
Per Kenny J None of the personal rights of the citizen
are unlimited: their exercise may be regulated by the
Oireachtas when the common good requires this.
This involves a balancing exercise between affording
rights to citizens, but not letting those rights be abused.
Although contentious, the KKK example applies in this
sense. Would we want to see KKK protests in Ireland?
Interestingly, the Irish Constitution is not necessarily
compatible with the European Convention on Human
Rights (ECHR). Article 3 (freedom from torture/inhumane
treatment) and Article 4 (freedom from slavery) are
deemed to be absolute rights. HOwever, under the Irish
Constitution, as seen in ***Ryan v AG, no rights are
absolute. It has been established that in the Irish
Constitution, no rights are absolute. So, when may
grounds for legitimate interference emerge (i.e. when can
rights be infringed upon)? There are several grounds:
The common good This is noted in Art. 42.3.2, 42.5
(education) and 43.2.2 (private property); ***Ryan v AG)
Public order and morality Articles 40.6.1 and 44.2.1
(personal rights subject to public order consideration). This
specific issue has not yet been addressed in the courts
and is therefore we only have a hypothetical
understanding of its legal matrix.
The principles of social justice Art. 43.2 (private
property)
Although these three tenets exist in determining where
interference with rights is legitimized, the best measure in
fact is that of proportionality (this is discussed in more
depth below). Proportionality Test: limitation imposed on
right must be proportionate to the objective being
pursued.
**Heaney v Ireland [1994] 3 IR 531
Issue: Is the right to silence an absolute right? (Concerned

IRA/Offences Against the State Act 1939)

The criteria established in the case were:
Pursue an objective of sufficient importance
Be rationally connected to that objective, and not unfair or
arbitrary.
Impair the right as little as possible
Effect on right must be proportionate to the objective
3) Natural Law in the Constitution
Broadly, natural law is a principle or body of laws
considered as derived from nature, right reason, or religion
and as ethically binding in human society.
An example of natural law in action: The Nuremberg Trials
> This was where Allied lawyers relied on natural law to
convict Nazi generals and soldiers for the murder of Jews
contrary to Nazi domestic law at the time which ordered
the killing of such persons. They relied on a higher law
that is universal and unchanging and discoverable by
reason. It was understood that laws that are contrary to
the natural law are no laws at all and therefore can be
disobeyed.
Cicero identified the differences between humanities
ability to reason versus other animals inability to do so.
Cicero argued that because we are rational humans, we
should be able to derive from reason, what the natural law
is.
In the Irish Constitution, the Fundamental Rights identified
(Art. 40-44 etc.) are heavily influenced by the natural law.
Although, articles 40-44 were intended as headliners to
subsequent legislature in 1937 these were not expected
to become the mechanism for a vigorous judicial review. In
practice they have contributed significantly to the
protection of the rights of the individual.
There are two positions to which the courts determined:
Courts operating under the constitution can enforce only
the guarantees to which the Constitution gives expression.
Articles 40-44 merely state, not completely or exactly the
fundamental rights (personal rights of the citizen). This is
where recourse is still possible to a range of eternal,
natural existing rights existing independent of the
Constitution.

After the seminal decision in ***Ryan v Attorney General,

where the Supreme Court asserted the jurisdiction to
identify implied rights enjoying constitutional protection,
natural law was relied up by numerous judges, notably
Walsh J. as a source for the identification of such rights.
(See ***McGee v AG) But, how do we know Arts. 40-44
have a natural law foundation?
Language used
natural
rational
inalienable and imprescriptible
antecedent and superior to all positive law
Art. 43.1 (examples)
The State acknowledges that man, in virtue of his rational
being, has the natural right, antecedent to positive law, to
the private ownership of external goods.
This idea was questioned in several cases before being
accepted in Ryan (e.g. **Re Article 26 and the Regulation
of Information Bill 1995 [1995] 1 IR 1, **The State (Burke)
v Lennon).
***Ryan v AG was the first case in which natural law
theory was vehemently accepted. Some further examples
are given below where the use of natural law was
affirmed.
***Ryan v Attorney General [1965] IR 294
Supreme Court accepted the plaintiffs submission that
there was such a thing as a right of bodily integrity, even
though not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
Kenny J found these rights to be derived from the Christian
and Democratic nature of the State here associating
these facets of a state under God.
But nowhere in the Constitution is the state named a
Christian one.
*McGee v Attorney General [1974] 1 IR 284
Case to invalidate law penalizing the importation of
contraceptives.
4 of 5 majority agreed.
Walsh J: In particular, the terms of Article 40.3 expressly
subordinate the law to justice Earlier in his speech, he
indicates that justice is placed above the law and
acknowledges that rights are not created by the

Constitution but rather recognizes their existence and

gives them protection.
*The State (Healy) v Donoghue
Reference here is undoubtedly given to a higher law. This
is in the case where a persons freedom is put in jeopardy.
*Murphy v PMPA Insurance Co.
Doyle J made a proposition that certain natural and
personal rights may exist side by side with the constitution
although not specifically referred to or comprehended in
the Articles of the Constitution which give personal
guarantees.
*Northampton Co Council v ABF [1982] ILRM 164
The natural law is of universal application and applies to
all human persons, be they citizens of this State or not,
and in my opinion it would be inconceivable that the
father of the infant child (father was not an Irish citizen)
would not be entitled to rely on the recognition of the
family contained in Art. 41 These rights are recognized
by the Constitution and the Courts created under it as
antecedent and superior to all positive law.
Difficulties with Natural Law Theory i) Multiple Meanings
There is definitional difficulty in natural law.
One distinction is made between natural law standards as
understood in the common law tradition concepts such
as equity, reasonable man, reasonable price etc. and the
now dominant conception of natural law as antecedent to
the Constitution.
In the former distinction these rights are vulnerable and
latent to government whereas the latter are patent and
accorded primacy in the constitution.
Although this gives some legitimacy to cases conferring a
basis on natural law principles and doctrines, this does
not raise it to a constitutional power, or immunize a right
flowing from it against curtailment.
The concept is highly uncertain.
Different answers provided by Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, St.
Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham, John
Finnis.
Is it the same as morality? If so, whose?
Natural law has previously been a major influence.

Recently however, there has been a shift away from

reliance on Natural Law
Constitution Review Group (p. 348)
But, is there a more advanced analysis of the natural law
theory that is less uncertain? Some examples that have
been put forward are:
Rights contingent on various natural factors
Rights based on personhood
Sub-class of basic rights identified by the interaction of the
above two meanings
Rights derived from the nature of justice
Rights derived or conform with Gods agency as
recognized in the natural teleology of physical events
ii) Immutability of Aspects of Constitution
The SCt rejected the idea that the power to amend the
Constitution was restricted by principles of natural law.
Arts. 40.3.3, 41, 42 & 43 prescribe heavily to the
influences of natural law over time and within the
framework of the common law.
The Court considered the role of the judiciary in
interpreting the Constitution and in identifying implied
fundamental rights. It concluded: (***Byrne v Ireland)
Personal rights (natural law) has been found and can be
found impliedly within the provisions of the constitution.
Did not recognize natural law as superior to the
Constitution.
People are entitled as per Art. 46 to amend the
constitution as they see fit.
The only thing that is actually made clear here is that
natural law cannot be relied upon to invalidate any explicit
provision of the Constitution. This was touched on in:
***WOR v EH
Natural father applied to be appointed guardian of his
children
Debate arose over whether fathers had natural
rights/constitutional rights over their children.
Held: Natural rights may be invoked only insofar as they
are expressly or implicitly recognized by the Constitution

comprised in the Common Law; i.e. superimposed onto

common law principles.
This case is an interesting development as it touches on
the recommendations made by the Constitution Review
Group. In their report they suggested that any further
unenumerated rights be only found when they are implicit
in the Constitution as it stands or implicit in common law
principles. 4) Who can rely on Constitutional Rights? In
order to rely on a constitutional right, the general rule is
that a person must be able to show that their interests are
adversely affected by the law or action which is claimed to
be unconstitutional.
Only the person whose rights have been breached can
take the case.
There is exception (next friend) for those who do not
have legal capacity (minors, disabled adults etc.)
***Cahill v Sutton [1980] IR 269
Propounded the rule of locus standi: Interests must be
adversely affected by unconstitutional law or action
Hypothetical cases cannot be brought
Real facts are a more effective way of deciding cases than
doing it in the abstract.
Courts do have discretion to hear a case where the person
taking it does not have locus standi where it is in the
interests of justice. per Henchy J at p. 285.
i) Corollary of Natural law Theory Citizenship vs. NonCitizenship
In all tenets of natural law theory above, citizenship was
irrelevant.
The question of whether the same rights are conferred to
citizens as non-citizens only arises as a result of the
variable usage of the different terms.
Cannot Invoke Fundamental Constitutional Rights
*Kent Co Council v CS Irish father who had lived in
England brought his child to Ireland to avoid wardship
jurisdiction of the English Courts held that his rights as a
father under Art. 41 and 42 had not been infringed and
ordered the return of the child to the UK.
*Saunders v Mid-Western Health Board Where parents

having no connection to Ireland bring their children into its

jurisdiction with the intention of being awarded preferable
rights to them in their scenario, it cannot be accepted that
they can by that act alone confer themselves and their
children constitutional rights under Articles 41 and 42 of
the Constitution.
*Fajujonu v Minister for Justice Alien parents of Irish
citizens can not assert any constitutional right to reside in
Ireland.
*Minister for Justice v Wang Zhu Jie referred to Aliens Act
1935 as giving considerable power to authorities which
perhaps might not be necessary or even legal against
citizens.
In three cases concerning personal liberty, it was found
that aliens can invoke fundamental rights protected by the
Constitution
*The People v Shaw
*Nantharatnam v Minister for Justice
*Ji Yao Lau v Minister for Justice
In ***Re Article 26 and ss5 and 10 of the Illegal
Immigrants (Trafficking) Bill 1999 it was noted that illegal
immigrants can enjoy constitutional protection for some of
their rights, even if these were not co-extensive with those
afforded by citizens and other lawfully residing in the
State.
Non-Citizens can Invoke Fundamental Constitutional
Rights
*Northants Co Council v ABF
*The State (McFadden) v Governor of Mountjoy Prison
****Finn v Attorney General
In Finn it was argued that the word citizenship does not
necessarily derive from his citizenship but rather from his
nature as a human being.
The State does not create rights or remove them but
rather recognizes the existence of them (negative law)
*The State (Kugan) v ORourke Such relief under 40.4.2
can be sought by any person
The view that non-citizens can rely on Articles 41 and 42 is
shared by;
*The State (Bouzagou) v Stateion Sergeant, Fitzgibbon St
Garda Station

*Eastern Health Board and TM and AM v An Bord Uchtala

*Kennedy and Arnold v Ireland
***Rederij Kennemerland BV v Attorney General (fishing
vessels of Dutch nationals)
This case allows for the application of the fundamental
rights provisions of the constitution to non-citizens without
having to invoke any natural law theory.
In none of these cases did the non-citizen have to
establish a connection with the State. ii) Companies
Corporations and legal persons cannot generally rely on
constitutional rights.
Quinns Supermarket Ltd. v Attorney General [1972] IR 1
Case concerned supermarket opening hours extended
beyond normal trading hours to allow Jews to buy meat
before the Sabbath.
Held: For the purpose of corporate bodies, they could not
rely on Art. 40.1 which by its terms was confined to human
persons; but the plaintiff company was permitted to
invoke 44.2.3 (forbidding religious discrimination) which
does not use the terms persons or citizens.
This would then allow corporate bodies to invoke
constitutional provisions with similar neutral phrasing e.g.
retrospective legislation.
***P.M.P.S. Ltd. and Moore v Attorney General. [1983] IR
154
Shareholders could claim certain rights however the
corporate body could not.
Contrast the general position with the following case
however:
***Iarnrod Eireann v Ireland [1996] 3 IR 321
Keane J argued that in terms of the property rights
afforded in Art. 40.3.2, the expression of every citizen is
not confined to individual citizens in their individual
capacity as human persons and that artificial legal entities
must also be protected by the laws of the State against
unjust attacks on their property rights.
iii) Constitution as a Last Resort Constitutional rights
should be considered a refuge of last resort.
***McDonnell v Ireland [1998] 1 IR 134

constitutional rights should not be regarded as

wildcards . If the general law requires an adequate
cause of action to vindicate a constitutional right it
appears to me that the injured party cannot ask the court
to devise a new and different causes of action. (per
Barrington J)
Topic 2 Personal Unenumerated Rights
This topic is not examinable at UCC for the 2013 summer
examination period. As a result, this topic will be update at
some point later in time or if time permits.
Topic 3 Article 41: The Family
1) The Marital Family
Art. 41.1.1 The State recognises the Family as the
natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society,
and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and
imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all
positive law.
Art. 41.3.1 The State pledges itself to guard with special
care the institution of marriage on which the Family is
founded and to protect it against attack.
Both of these articles are laden with natural law terms.
Inalienable cannot give away the right or waive it.
Imprescriptible cannot be taken away/the right inheres
in them.
Antecedent these rights existed prior to positive law.
Superior derived from the natural law, therefore there is
a limit to which man-made laws can interfere with these
rights.
Why do the references to the natural law matter?
It is not really possible to describe a legal right in stronger
words.
Provides the family with the utmost protection in the face
of legislative backlash or other concerns regarding the
treatment of the family in Irish law.

Some other points to consider are: Art. 41.1.2

guarantees to protect the Family in its constitution and
authority .
The reference to constitution is not to the Irish
Constitution, but instead to the strife undertaken to
maintain the family unit as an important entity in the
State.
The reference to protect[ing] the family supposes the
States lack of intervention in family affairs.
A clear implication of Art. 41.3.1 is that the Family
recognised under the Constitution is the Family based on
marriage.
Corollary to this is the point that childless married couples
also fit the description of Family (Murphy v AG)
In the following case, the natural law ethos of Arts. 41
(Family) and 42 (Education) were considered in some
depth:
***Northwestern Health Board v HW & CW [2001] IESC 90
(PKUTest Case)
Keane CJ considered the natural law ethos of Arts 41 and
42:
Family unit enjoys rights that pre-date those set down in
the Constitution.
Discusses love as the greatest human virtue.
The rights enjoyed are both rights of the family as an
institution and rights of the individual.
The Constitution firmly outlaws any attempt by the State
in its law or its executive actions to usurp the exclusive
and privileged role of the family in the social order.
Denham J (as she then was) expressed different views:
The fact that the family is the fundamental unit group of
society is a constitutional principle.
The child is the responsibility of the parents. Although
these are not absolute.
Legislation has long recognized the welfare of the child as
paramount.
Keane CJs and Denham Js (as she then was) views
differed markedly.
Keane CJ had the view that the family pre-existed civil
society and because of this it is recognized in the
Constitution a face of negative law.

Denham J viewed the primacy of the family as being

established by the Constitution a fact of positive law.
It is seen that the natural law ethos also pervades Art. 42
Per Glendening J:
1920s Catholic Social movement provided an alternative
to the European socialist movement.
Papal encyclical Quadragesima Anno (1931) provides
that the States role in the life of the child and education is
subsidiary to that of the familys (parents).
This became the underpinning of Art. 42 and 44
Arts 41 and 42 specifically deal with the position of
women/mothers in the family as well as the position of
children within the family unit. Men/fathers were never
referenced. What is the meaning of this absence? Per
Justice Flynn:
When the Constitutions text is being read by the courts,
it becomes apparent that there is a paradigm of
masculinity at play within the Irish legal order. In some
ways the contours of masculinity as imagined under the
Constitution can be drawn in opposition to those of
femininity.
Definition of Marriage and Family
The terms are not explicitly defined in the Constitution.
However, Art. 41.3 provides: the institution of marriage
on which the family is founded.
***State (Nicolau) v An Bord Uchtala [1966] IR 567
Unmarried father of a child wanted to stop adoption
process initiated by mother.
Held: Walsh J rejected this argument on that basis that this
unit of unmarried parents and the child did not constitute
a family protected by Art. 41.
From Nicolau it is seen that the Family is founded in the
institution of Marriage. This is interesting since it is
nowadays not the only conception of family there is.
What therefore are the effects of this limitation?
It precludes unmarried families from availing of the
protections afforded in Art. 41.
Unmarried fathers are excluded completely from
constitutional protection.

Unmarried mothers while excluded from Arts. 41 and 42,

can rely on the right afforded in Art. 40.3 (personal
unenumerated rights)
It provides constitutional authorization for legislative
discrimination against unmarried families.
It implicitly deems non-marital families to be less worthy
of recognition than marital families.
As a result, the 1996 Constitution Review Group
recommended that Art. 41 be amended to provide
recognition to married and unmarried families. This
recommendation was premised on statistics citing that 1
out of every 4 births was out-of-wedlock. Since 2002, this
has risen to 1 out of 3. There is a clear disconnect here yet
oddly, the All Party Oireachtas Committee proposed no
change. They believed that such an amendment would
cause deep and long-lasting division in our society and
would not necessarily be passed by a majority. Instead it
recommended some legislative (as opposed to
constitutional) changes in light of the three issues above .
The discrimination against men is on grounds of gender.
We may ask why the courts have been so inflexible in
relation to this matter concerning the limited rights of
unmarried couples. Simply, it is because the Constitution
is so inflexible. The Constitution in stating the
institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded .
leaves nothing for the courts to work with in terms of
affording equal rights. It is up to the legislature to make
changes.
Two cases further resolve some questions regarding what
constitutes a family:
***Murray v Ireland [1985] IR 532
Held: Married couple need not have children to be
considered a Family under Art. 41.
***G v An Bord Uchtala [1980] IR 32
Non-production or death of both or one parent(s) does not
affect the status of the unit as a constitutionally protected
one, provided the parents were married.
We have established what a Family is, now we must ask

what Marriage is in the Constitution.

The classic position was set out in:
Hyde v Hyde [1861-73] All ER 176 (English case)
Confirmed in Ireland in **B v B [1995] 1 ILRM 491.
The test of Art. 41 was to protect the classic common law
definition of marriage from this case; the voluntary union
of one man and woman to the exclusion of all others for
life.
This permanent and heterogeneous definition was
supported in:
***Murphy v Attorney General [1982] IR 241
Marriage is defined as the permanent, indissoluble
union of man and woman.
Some points to note from this definition:
Marriage is only possible by heterogeneous individuals
(opposite sex).
Marriage must be monogamous (one man and one
woman) as opposed to polygamous.
However:
*N v K
Defined marriage also as a civil contract which creates
reciprocating rights and duties .
**CT v DT
Slightly altered (N v K) allowing for divorce. it is not
entered into for a definite period.
The Divorce referendum in 1995 altered the traditional
definition, as seen in CT v DT.
As a result and in summary, it may be said that:
Marrigae is both a necessary and sufficient condition for
constitutional protection under Art. 41.
Legislative Recognition of Non-Marital Families
The Income Tax Act 1967 aggregated the incomes of wife
and husband in order to determine their liability for
income tax. As a result, many married persons with two
incomes paid significantly more tax then they would have

if they were single.

***Murphy v Attorney General [1982] IR 241
Held: This system of tax breached the pledge of the
State to guard with special care the institution of marriage
and to protect it against attack.
This point was clarified later in ****Muckley v Ireland
The decision in Murphy was to the effect that the invalid
sections penalized the married state. Section 21 of the
Finance Act 1980 has the same effect and does not escape
through imposing an identical tax burden, the effect is
retrospective and not continuing or prospective. It still
contains the fatal flaw in common with the invalidated
sections of imposing on the married couples to whom it
applies a greater burden of taxation that imposed on a
man and woman living together outside of marriage.
In Muckley it was held that Art 41 prohibited the
penalizations of marriage. This decision was
uncontroversially applied in a number of other cases:
*Hyland v Minster for Social Welfare (discrimination
against married couples in the context of unemployment
benefits)
*H v EHB (discrimination against married couples in the
context of disability benefits)
*Greenve v Minister for Agriculture (discrimination against
married couples in the context of eligibility for hedage
payments)
This was all clouded by however by:
***MhicMhathuna v Ireland
The plaintiff here questioned the constitutionality of tax
legislation that provided a tax-free allowance to single
parents who had a child or children living with them. They
also challenged the constitutionality of social welfare
legislation that provided an unmarried mothers
allowance.
Held: These arguments were not accepted based on the
obvious idea that no woman would rather have a child outof-wedlock so as to get greater benefits.This can be of no
form, an attack on the institution of marriage.
Rejected the inducement and penalization arguments.

Penalization: rejected on the basis of a direct/indirect

discrimination point and a justification point.
Inducement: as married couples living together
Murphy, Muckley and MhicMhathuna all arose in the
context of a discrete legislative advantage or
disadvantage that impacted favorably on married couples.
There is considerable judicial support for a penalization
test and some judicial support for an inducement test.
However, in MhicMhathuna, Carroll J decided that there
was no inducement simply because there was no
penalization.
Outside the Muckley case, this would mean the tests are
identical.
The Right to Marry?
***OShea v Ireland [2006] Found that certain legislation
barring marriage of former brother-in-law, after divorce
was unconstitutional. The reasoning was founded on;
relationships would be created regardless, and the fact
that marriage was a constitutional right.
****Zappone v Revenue Commissioners [2008] 2 IR 417
Two lesbian women, who were also Irish citizens (although
Dr. Zappone was originally Canadian), were married in
2003 in Vancouver. They wrote to the Revenue
Commissioners requesting that they should be allowed to
claim their allowances as a married couple in Ireland. This
was refused as the legislation referred to husband and
wife. During the case, s.2(2)(e) of the Civil Registration
Act 2004 came into force. This precluded marriage by
same-sex couples. Although no declaration of
unconstitutionality was sought in respect of this
provisions, the case turned on whether the plaintiffs had
an entitlement to marry as a matter of Irish law.
Court accepted a right to marry, but held that
discrimination was justified by reference to Art.41.
The couple referred to changing consensus in the world
and Ireland with regard to same-sex marriages.
Dunne J recognized slight changes in some jurisdictions
but rejected the argument based on sheer lack of support.
This did raise the question of what role the Courts should
play in advocating social change.
Note: A constitution with a strong egalitarian clause (Art.

40.1 in the Irish) might allow for the recognition of samesex marriage. However, Art. 40.1 in Ireland has been given
limited force and the explicit approval of legislature
discriminations against non-marital families is consistent
with existing case-law for the courts to rely on a
traditional, albeit now contested, understanding of
marriage in order to exclude same-sex couples from that
institution.
This decision to the SCt was abandoned although fresh
proceedings have been suggested to the HCt, on different
grounds, challenging s. 2 of the Civil Registration Act
2004.
**Foy v An t-Ard Chlaraitheoir (No. 1) (High Court,
Unreported, July 9 2009)
Lydia, a woman, was born a man called Donal. Donal
married a woman and had children. Subsequently
underwent gender reassignment surgery and became
Lydia. Lydia applied to have her birth certificate
retrospectively changed.
Held: it is crucial for legal purposes that the parties
should be of the opposite biological sex
***Foy v An t-Ard Chlaraitheoir (No. 2) [2007] IECH 470
Lydia brought a new case (based on ECHR Act finding UK
in breach) arguing breach of Art. 8 of ECHR to recognize
re-assigned gender.
If Irish law is required to recognize Lydia as a woman, then
she would be de facto in a same-sex marriage.
Does this mean same-sex marriages are allowed or does
this mean her marriage is null and void?
The ***Foy (No. 2) case impacts the ***Zappone case in
many aspects. There is considerable pressure to decide
the matters of same-sex marriages/gender re-assignment
in Ireland.
2) The Life of the Woman in the Home
Art. 41.2 provides:
1 In particular, the State recognises that by her life
within the home, woman gives to the State a support
without which the common good cannot be achieved.
2 The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that

mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to

engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the
home.
This Article has been described by Kelly as perhaps the
single most dated provision of the Constitution.
Although contentious, interestingly, this aspect of
fundamental rights had generated almost no case-law
however.
In this next case, Denham J (as she then was) thought Art.
41.2 should be viewed in light of this modern era:
***Sinnott v Minister for Education [2001] 2 IR 545
it is to be construed in the Ireland of the Celtic Tiger
Article 41.2 does not assign women to a domestic role. It
recognises the significant role played by wives and
mothers in the home [and] does not exclude women and
mothers from other roles and activities .
In light of this modern interpretation, it is now seen that
Art. 41.2 has in fact been used to justify legislative
discrimination in favour of women (**Dennehy v Minister
for Social Welfare (High Court, unreported, 26th July 1984)
and *Lowth v Minister for Social Welfare [1998] 4 IR 321)
3) Adoption
Adoption, as implemented in 1952 related only to extramarital children and marital families where both parents
had died.
Section 24 of the Adoption Act 1952 provides:
Upon an adoption order being made
(a) the child shall be considered with regard to the rights
and duties of parents and children in relation to each other
as the child of the adopter or adopters born to him, her or
them in lawful wedlock;
(b) the mother or guardian shall lose all parental rights
and be freed from all parental duties with respect to the

child.
The Adoption Act 1952 does not require the consent of an
extra-marital father where a mother wishes to initiate
adoption proceedings (See also **G v An Bord Uchtala
[1980] IR 32)
As a natural father of an extra-marital child has no
constitutional rights in respect of the child, the 1952 Act
does not require his consent when an adoption order is
made (usually by the mother). A constitutional challenge
to this situation failed in ***State (Nicolau) v An Bord
Ucthala [1966] IR 567. However, this was found to be in
breach of Articles 6 & 8 of the ECHR in ***Keegan v Ireland
(1994) 18 EHRR 342 and so the law was amended by the
Adoption Act 1998.
The Adoption Act 1988 introduced a limited mechanism for
children of married parents to be put up for adoption
under certain conditions (these are seen as overly
rigorous) where the parents have failed in their duties
(best interests of the child). They are:
Parents must fail in their duties continuously for 12
months.
It must be shown that this failure will continue
uninterrupted until that child in turns 18 years old.
This is effectively impossible. Even at this restrictive level,
the constitutionality of the act was considered because of
the family rights being inalienable, imprescriptible etc. It
was referred to the SCt to see whether this was
unconstitutional
***Re Article 26 and the Adoption (No. 2) BIll, 1987 [1989]
IR 656
The Court rejects the submissions that the nature of the
family as a unit group possessing inalienable and
imprescriptible rights, makes it constitutionally
impermissible for a statute to restore to any member of an
individual family constitutional rights of which he has been
deprived by a method which disturbs or alters the
constitution of that family .

The 1998 Act was therefore upheld.

Court went on to state that the failure of the parents must
be total (must be of 2 parents where both are present); it
must be for physical or moral reasons, and physical does
not include external factors such as poverty.
4) Parental Failure and the Best Interests of the Child
The Constitution affords very strong rights to the family as
a unit. Conversely, the rights of the child do not feature to
any great extent in the express provisions of the
Constitution.
Note: With the Childrens Referendum and the passing of
Art. 42A, whether the rights of the child have been
increased, or have remained the same, has been the
subject of much debate.
It has been noted however, in case law, that the child also
has natural rights as seen in:
***G v An Bord Uchtala [1980] IR 32
The child also has natural rights. Normally, these will be
safe under the care and protection of its mother. Having
been born, the child has the right to be fed reared
educated have the opportunity of working . These
rights (and others which I have not enumerated) must
equally be protected and vindicated by the State. (per
OHigging CJ)
As of 10th November 2012 (Thirty-First Amendment of the
Constitution (Children) Bill 2012) Article 42.5 of the
Constitution has been removed, and Article 42A has been
inserted.
So, the Constitution was criticised for not affording
children their rights in an explicit manner. Previously, they
are not mentioned. Where they were, they were
mentioned indirectly, usually by way of parents and even
when education was concerned, it said that the State will
provide it with due regard to the rights of the parents.
It is arguable whether Art. 42A changes much at all. (See
link to constitutional changes here)
Although the Constitution has changed, we must still look
at Art. 42.5 to perhaps try and understand that

background to Art. 42A and what may occur in future

cases with regard to childrens rights.
Art. 42.5 (as it was), placed a duty on the State to
endeavour to supply the place of the parens in cases
where they fail in their duties towards their children:
So, we may ask ourselves where the exception kick in with
regard to Art. 42.5?
Back to Art. 41.1.2 > where the State guarantees to
protect the family in its constitution and authority, a
knock-on effect of this is that the State tries not to remove
children from the family.
As a result of this constitutional footing, where the State
has seemingly minimal power, this is an area where
legislation interacts closely with the Constitution.
Types of cases that arise are:
Private Law Family Disputes disputes between parents
about custody, access, guardianship etc.
e.g. Guardianship of Infants Act 1954
Adoption Acts 1954-2010
Public Law Family Proceedings this concerns cases
involving abuse, neglect etc. pursuant to Art. 42.5
These types of cases have one common denominator >
The Welfare Principle.
The Welfare Principle This is where the childs best
interests (the welfare of the child) is the paramount
consideration. This suggests that in a case where a
parental right is being exercised which damages the
welfare of the child, the welfare of the child should take
priority over the parental right; in theory.
It is a legislative (not a constitutional) principle.
The interaction between this legislative principle, and the
constitutional rights of parents have an interesting role
because in the hierarchy of laws, constitutional law
supersede legislative law. Also, when producing
legislation, the Oireachtas must have regard to the
Constitution. In cases of clear conflict, the legislation will
be struck down, however this is very rare. There is a grey

area where legislation is open to different interpretations.

The principle is that it must be given the interpretation
which is most coherent with the constitution.
Some cases that consider Art. 42.5 and the Welfare
Principle are:
***Re JH (an infant), Case E v An Bord Uchtala [1985] IR
375
A young, unmarried woman, became pregnant. Decided to
place child for adoption.
When a child is placed for adoption, there are two stages:
1) The initial consent to placement (with prospective
adoptive parents). 2) Final consent to the adoption order.
The idea of this two stage process is that there is an
opportunity for the mother to change her mind (this is
seen as being in the best interests of the child).
However, the welfare of the child must be considered as
well. The Adoption Act 1974 allows for the adoptive
parents to apply for a waiver on the second consent, and
proceed with the adoption, based on the interests of the
child such that going back to the natural mother would not
be in the childs best interests.
In this case, the mother and father continued their
relationship. After some time, they decided to get married
then the child was 2 years old and had been with adoptive
parents since birth (at this point the second stage had not
been consented to).The mother, now married, wanted the
child back and refused to provide second stage consent.
Issue: Whether or not the second consent should be
waived, as it might be detrimental to the child?
Per Justice Lynch The evidence presented was that
returning the child would cause the child serious
psychological harm.
Held: Declined for the child to be returned. Similar
decisions to dispense with consent have been held for
children of merely 12-15 months.
The mother appealed to the SCt. What is interesting about
the SCt case was how it approached the question of the
welfare principle.
SCt Held: Justice Lynch had applied the incorrect test;
Lynch J had not given adequate attention to the
constitutional rights of the parents, who were now married

and could rely on Art. 41 and 42 of the Constitution.

There is a constitutional presumption that the welfare of
the child is to be found within the family unless there are
compelling reasons why this cannot be achieved, or unless
the Court is satisfied that the evidence establishes an
exceptional case where parents have failed to provide
education for the child and continue to fail to provide
education for the child for moral and physical reasons.
What did it take to rebut this presumption?
The case went back to Lynch J in HCt the child was, by
this time, 3 years old.
Based on presumption of best interests, Lynch ordered the
child to be returned.
This shows us that: a risk of psychological harm and
evidence of that risk was not sufficient to rebut the
presumption that the welfare of the child was to be found
in the constitutional rights of the family.
This next case follows the same thread:
***North Western Health Board v HW [2001] 3 IR 622, (PKU
Case)
A PKU test is a heel prick test by which a sample of blood
is taken to screen babies for a range of different
conditions, which are easily treated if identified early, but
if not identified, can prove to be very serious in later life.
The test carries, in effect, no risk to the child, yet also
carries a significant benefit. However, like any other
medical issue which involves medical contact and
breaking of the skin, it requires consent. Parents have to
give consent on the infants behalf as the infant does not
have the requisite capacity. Here, the parents refused
consent to the test. They said they held a belief that no
human should harm another. However, the Health Board
disagreed and wanted to proceed with the test. The Health
Board brought an application for an interim care order.
Issue: Is the welfare of the child is the first and paramount
consideration for the court? (this case is under the Child
Care Act).
Having said that, the court must presume that the best
interests lie in the family (That the familys authority be
respected) (following obiter provided in numerous cases,

including ***Re JH)

Denham J: Welfare Principle must be read in light of the
Constitution.
Held: The parents decision was: ill-advised, unwise and
disturbing, but it was their constitutional right to do so.
To summarize these two cases then:
In both of these cases, legislation is overridden by the
Constitution.
What must it take to rebut this presumption (that
legislation supersedes the Constitution)?
Re JH seen that psychological harm was insufficient.
PKU death or serious injury is required.
***N v Health Services Executive (Baby Anne) [2006] 4 IR
473
Involved a young couple in which the girl became
pregnant and didnt want to keep the baby. The child was
placed for adoption. The mother gave initial consent but
then not final. After 2 years the case came to the High
Court (the child had spent its entire life with adoptive
parents) The High Court said that the evidence suggests
that returning the child would be damaging. Re JH and PKU
case were strongly approved.
HCt ruled contrary to Re JH 20 years earlier. The HCt
seemed to be inviting the SCt to reconsider.
SCt unanimously overturned the HCs decision.
Presumption was that the childs welfare was to be found
in the marital family. Baby Anne was to be returned to her
natural parents.
This test for intervention is developed by this case, yet
there is a lack of commentary provided by the judges on
the exact requirements/test.
Where the HSE (Health Services Executive) takes child
protection actions, they are done so in the District Court
and are usually not reported so we do not have many
examples of cases where intervention is
allowed/warranted. However, sometimes they are
appealed to the HCt etc. such as:
***Re Baby AB [2011] 1 IR 665
Baby required blood transfusion. Medical advice was that
there was a serious risk the baby would die without the

transfusion. The parents were Jehovahs Witnesses.

Hospital applied to the HCt to override that decision by the
parents.
Since the childs life was at risk and the PKU test outlined
that the presumption (Constitution supersedes legislation)
can be rebutted, the HCt overruled the parents in order to
save the childs life.
What about the grey areas however, that are between the
PKU case and Re Baby AB. What is the tipping point at
where intervention becomes permissible? We must ask
ourselves whether this tipping point been set too close to
catastrophe (life at risk)?
Some useful commentary can be taken from ***North
Western Health Board v HW [2001] 3 IR 622
Denham J: In assessing whether State intervention is
necessary the fundamental principle is that the welfare of
the child is paramount. However the childs place in a
family must be taken into account.
Murray J: there must be some immediate and
fundamental threat to the capacity of the child to continue
to function as a human person, physically, morally or
socially, deriving from an exceptional dereliction of duty
on the part of parents to justify such an intervention.
Out of all this case-law came a series of reports, ultimately
leading to the Thirty-First Amendment of the Constitution
(Children) Bill 2012 and the replacement of Art. 42.5 with
Art. 42A on November 10th 2012. To get there however, a
series of reports and investigations happened:
In a series of reports, the Constitution was seen to strike
the balance too much in favor of the parental rights, and
not enough in favor of childrens rights. In other words, the
States hands are tied too tightly by the Constitution.
**Kilkenny Incest Investigation Report the fear of
impinging the rights of the family (parents) ultimately
results in a situation where abuse/neglect is left
unsolved. The report suggested including an explicit
statement of the welfare principle, along the lines of Art.
3(1) of the UNCRC.
Constitution Review Group 1996 Also recommended that
in particular, the Welfare Principle should be put into the

Constitution. This would give constitutional force to that

principle and counterbalance the powerful rights of the
family (parents).
Similarly, The All Party Oireachtas Committee at p. 124 of
their Tenth Progress Report, stated that they were firmly
of the view that there is a need to improve the
constitutional rights of the child, while at the same time
preserving appropriate parental authority.
They suggested adding to Art. 41 in providing that [i]n all
cases where the welfare of the child so requires, regard
shall be had to the best interests of that child.
Subsequently a Joint Oireachtas Committee on the
Constitutional Amendment on Children proposed the
wording of an amendment as early as 2007 which has, as
of now, replaced the existing Art 42.5.
The wording of Art. 42A has arguably, not done must in
changing/putting to the fore, the rights of the child. (See:
Kilkelly & OManohy, The Proposed Childrens Rights
Amendment: Running to Stand Still? [2007] 2 Irish Journal
of Family Law 19.)
Topic 4 Article 40.3.3 and the Rights of the Unborn
1) Background to the Eighth Amendment
Abortion is a criminal offense in Ireland under s.58 of the
Offenses Against the Person Act 1861 > To procure an
unlawful miscarriage
However, after the legal prohibition of the importation and
sale of contraceptives was found to be unconstitutional as
a breach of an unenumerated right in ***McGee v Attorney
General [1974] 1 IR 284, fears arose that the doctrine of
unenumerated rights might be stretched so as to
invalidate the criminalization of abortion. Indeed, this is
what had already happened under similar provisions in the
US Constitution; the right to privacy had been applied to
the issue of contraception in **Griswold v Connecticut 381
U.S. 479 (1965) and this was found to legalize abortion in
certain circumstances in **Roe v Wade 410 U.S. 113
(1973).
**Griswold and ***McGee are very similar. **Griswold took
place in 1965, the same year as the Unenumerated Rights
doctrine was found to exist in Irish law in the case of
***Ryan v Attorney General.
In **Roe v Wade, a constitutional right not explicitly

stated/provided for in the US Constitution was found to

extend to the legalization of abortion in the first trimester
as in **Roe v Wade. This right was that of the Right to
Privacy and this was what was found in ***McGee.
It is not hard to identify the correlative connection
between occurrences in the US and fears of the same
occurring in Ireland. **Griswold v Connecticut identified an
unenumerated right in the US Constitution to privacy. In
Ireland, the same was found in ***McGee v AG. In the US,
as a result of **Griswold, **Roe v Wade allowed for
abortion in some cases. The fear was that in Ireland,
because of the precedent set in the US between
**Griswold and ***Roe v Wade, abortion might succumb to
be allowed in Ireland in certain instances.
Consequently in Ireland, a successful campaign (PLAC)
resulted in the insertion of a new provision recognizing the
right to life of the unborn in Article 40.3.3. It provided:
The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn
and, with due regard for 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.
This was the 8th Amendment to the Constitution and took
place in 1983.
Through this campaign the vagueness of the Constitution
was amended (or at least had tried to be amended) to
preclude the possibility of abortion being recognized as an
extension of the right to privacy as found in ***McGee with
the rejection of legislation criminalizing contraceptives.
Ideally, the Oireachtas should fill in the blanks with regard
to the Article for the right of life to the unborn e.g. clarify
with regard to frozen embryos, IVF etc. but this is yet to be
done. It is a politically hot topic.
Kelly went on to remark that the newly inserted Art. 40.3.3
tried to achieve the impossible it expressly equated two
rights which, on those rare occasions when they come into
conflict, cannot be reconciled.
Dr. Neville Cox noted that the amendment was sectarian
and an oversimplification of a complex problem.
2) The States Duty to Protect the Right to Life of the
Unborn
Having achieved in inserting Art. 40.3.3 into the

Constitution, the pro-life lobby decided to push ahead by

taking a case against abortion information providers.
***Attorney General (SPUC (Ireland) Ltd.) v Open Door
Counselling Ltd. [1988] 1 IR 593
ODC provided information to pregnant women about
abortion services available in the UK.
Issue: Was providing information about abortion
procedures overseas, in Ireland, a violation of Art. 40.3.3?
Held: Article 40.3.3 is self-executing (no need for the
Oireachtas to pass legislation) and imposes an obligation
not only on the Oireachtas, but also the courts. The courts
were not only entitled, but obliged to act directly on foot of
Art. 40.3.3 to protect the right to life of the unborn if asked
to do so the fact that the Oireachtas had not passed any
relevant legislation did not matter.
Also, there cannot be an unenumerated right to receive
information about a service outside of the State which, if
availed of, would have the direct consequence of
destroying the expressly guarantees constitutional right to
life of the unborn.
ODCs arguments were based on the right of
communication etc. It was seen that this was not viable as
an unenumerated right as it would destroy the express
right afforded to the unborn in Art. 40.3.3.
This case went on to the European Court of Human Rights.
Similar to ***SPUC v Open Door Counselling Ltd. is
***SPUC (Ireland) Ltd. v Grogan (No. 1) [1989] IR 753
which concerned the Trinity College Dublin student
handbook where numbers of UK abortion clinics were
provided. The Students Association lost this case, yet it
was appealed to the Court of Justice of the European
Union (formerly the European Court of Justice).
The SPUC cases were later found to be in breach of Art. 10
(freedom of expression) of the ECHR. The CJEU went on to
say that abortion was a service within the meaning of the
Treaty and that a commercial agent of an abortion clinic,
lawful in another Member State, could distribute
information about that abortion service in Ireland.
3) Threats to the Life of the Mother

One of the most significant cases in Irish legal history is

***Attorney general v X [1992] 1 IR 1, more commonly
known as The X Case, established the right of Irish
women to an abortion if a pregnant womans life was at
risk because of pregnancy, including the risk of suicide.
*****Attorney General v X [1992] 1 IR 1
Background: A fourteen-year-old girl (X)who had been
raped by a neighbour, became pregnant. X told her
mother of suicidal thoughts and as abortion was illegal in
Ireland (in both Northern Ireland and the Republic), the
family travelled to England for an abortion. Before the
abortion was carried out, the family asked the Garda
Sochna if DNA from the aborted foetus would be
admissible as evidence in the courts, as the neighbour
was denying responsibility. Hearing that X planned to have
an abortion, the Attorney General, Harry Whelehan,
sought an injunction under Article 40.3.3 of the
Constitution preventing her from having the procedure
carried out. The injunction was granted by Mr Justice
Declan Costello in the High Court. The case was appealed
to the SCt.
Issue: Whether or not Art. 40.3.3 entitled X to travel to
England to have this abortion or precluded it.
Arguments against travel:
SPUC cases determination and unequivocal nonrecognition of Art. 10 of the ECHR.
Travelling for an abortion would undermine Art. 40.3.3 as a
constitutional provision and disregard the right to life of
the unborn.
Arguments for travel:
Balancing the right to life of the mother vs. unborn.
The life of the unborn is wholly contingent on the life of
the mother.
Held: The Supreme Court overturned the HCt decision by a
majority of four to one (Hederman J. dissenting). The
majority opinion (Finlay C.J., McCarthy, Egan and
OFlaherty J.J.) held that a woman had a right to an
abortion under Article 40.3.3 if there was a real and
substantial risk to her life. This right did not exist if there
was a risk to her health but not her life; however it did
exist if the risk was the possibility of suicide.

This allowed for the abortion to take place in Ireland. The

1861 Act made it an offence to procure an unlawful
miscarriage. So, there are situations where it is necessary
to remove a foetus to save the mothers life. This is the
case in an ectopic pregnancy for example. The SCt saw
this as much the same thing, the unborn childs life was
for lack of a better word, doomed either way. The SCt did
emphasize that it must be a risk to the mothers life and
not merely to the mothers health.
However, the SCt went on to say that if the mothers life
was not at risk, they would have granted the injunction,
preventing her from traveling the right to life took
priority over the right to travel.
X miscarried shortly after the judgement. The perpetrator
was sentenced to 14 years in prison, reduced on appeal to
4 years.
There are conflicting interests in this case: Mothers right
to life vs. the unborn childs right to life.
What seems to have arisen in this situation is that the
mothers right to life succeeds over the unborns right to
life, when they come into conflict with one another.
Forgetting any moral implications, and basing this ruling
on logic, it makes sense when we consider that the life of
the child is contingent on the life of the mother (if X
committed suicide, the child would likely die as a
consequence).
An interesting question, and something that has not been
parsed yet is the issue of whether this hierarchy of rights
is absolute. An example might be if a mother, after being
raped and becomes pregnant, threatens suicide. She may
be placed on suicide watch if the unborn is in a stage of
development such that it may be saved if the mother were
to take her own life. In this sense would the courts decline
to permit an abortion?
The X Case caused much controversy: Neither side was
happy:
Pro-life On the basis that when the amendment to the
constitution was made, the intention was to prevent
people from having an abortion in Ireland. This they
claimed, made it too easy. It was flouting the intended

achievement of the amendment. (People could abuse this

and go to their doctors and say I am suicidal etc.)
Pro-choice On the basis that the court retained the right
to stop travel to get an abortion. They felt this was a
draconian measure.
While this (The X Case) was ongoing, influences from EC
and ECHR law were making it clear that a further
constitutional amendment would be required; the ***Open
Door Counselling case led to a successful application to
the ECtHR, which the ***Grogan case led to a successful
application to the ECJ (now the CJEU).
***Attorney General (SPUC (Ireland) Ltd.) v Open Door
Counselling Ltd. [1988] 1 IR 593
This case went to the ECtHR in Strasbourg.
Argued: Women did have a right to receive information
about abortion overseas under Art. 10 of the ECHR.
The right to free expression in Art 10 included the right to
receive information about legal activities in another
member state.
Held: They did have the right to receive information.
This placed Ireland under political pressure. However, it
was only pressure rather than automatic legal information
***SPUC (Ireland) Ltd. v Grogan (No. 1) [1989] IR 753
This case went to ECJ in Luxembourg
Argued: That prohibiting the distribution of information
about legal services that are lawfully available in another
member state was contrary to the Free Movement of
Services
Because of Art 29.4.6 this was a legal intervention.
Held: They did have the right to receive information.
Although we now see that the SPUC cases granted
abortion information to be distributed, these cases took
place in the European courts. We shall take a quick look at
the relationship between the ECtHR and CJEU.
ECtHR
CJEU (ECJ as it was in Grogan)
Location Strasbourg
Luxembourg
Law ECHR
EU Law (Treaties, Directives etc.)
Organization Council of Europe (much larger than the
EU) European Union
Domestic Law ECHR Act 2003 this is sub-constitutional.

Irish constitution therefore takes priority Article 29.4.6

This has constitutional footing.
Open Door Counselling Art 10 ECHR Freedom to
Communicate Information
GroganFree Movement of
Services
With the ECtHR and CJEU handing down critical judgments
of the law and application of that law in Ireland, the
Government saw that a referendum was needed. Proposed
were three amendments to Art 40.3.3.
Travel Amendment whether or not people should be
allowed to travel This was passed.
Access to Information This was passed.
Therefore the SPUC cases (Grogan and ODC) were no
longer good law.
Do we want to remove suicide as grounds for abortion
This was not passed. It remains good law in Ireland.
10 years later in 2002, the 3rd amendment (removal of
suicide as grounds for abortion) was put forth again. Once
again, it was rejected. However, the issue has still not
disappeared. This is seen by the closeness of the votes:
50.4% voted NO and 49.6% voted YES in 2002.
Art 40.3.3 now reads:
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.
This subsection shall not limit freedom to travel between
the State and another state.
This subsection shall not limit freedom to obtain or make
available, in the State, subject to such conditions as may
be laid down by law, information relating to services
lawfully available in another state.
Note that legislation regulating the provision of
information relating to abortion services was challenged,
but found to be constitutional, in Re Article 26 and the
Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for
Termination of Pregnancies) Bill 1995 [1995] 1 IR 1.

***A and B v Eastern Health Board [1998] 1 IR 464

This case was very similar to the X case the girl was 13
(14 in X case), she was a rape victim and wanted an
abortion, saying she was going to commit suicide if she
could not have one. The circumstances were,
unfortunately, worse in this case.
The girl was living in poverty (they were also members of
the traveler community (this is noted only for a
cultural/background understanding of the girls position)).
The alleged rapist was a friend of the family and the girls
parents were not supportive of 1) the prosecution and 2)
her request for an abortion.
The Health Board sought to take the girl into care for they
believed her life was at risk (she was suicidal). Under the
travel amendment, she could travel to the UK if her
parents let her, but her parents would not allow this.
Held: The District Court granted a care order (childs
welfare/life is at risk). Once in the care, the HSE then has
the legal authority to consent to the girl travelling and to
consent to the medical procedure (abortion).
The parents appealed this to the High Court where their
appeal failed. Ultimately the child was taken to the UK
where she had an abortion.
The HSE took the case to court to rubber stamp the girls
travel and deflect criticism onto the judiciary.
This case does not add much to the law, however it
illustrates the controversy that surrounds the issue. Some
arguments from either side that surround this case are:
Pro-life: The taxpayer is paying for the girl to have the
abortion (the pro-life activists feel they are contributing to
the murder of a child).
Pro-choice: The X case said that you are entitled to an
abortion in Ireland if you are entitled to it in Ireland, you
shouldnt have to travel so abortions were not available
in Ireland with regards to rape victims who may commit
suicide. she was not able to get an abortion because no
legislation has been enacted and doctors are not willing to
take the risk.
Medical council guidelines allow for termination in 3 cases:
Ectopic

Cervical cancer
Pre-eclampcia
There is no legislation clarifying when abortions are
permitted.
Another case (seen below), although less important, it
illustrates the controversy found in ***The X case and ***A
and B v Eastern Health Board:
**Miss D (The Irish TImes, May 10, 2007)
17-year-old girl was in the care of the State when she
became pregnant (the sex was consensual). Her unborn
baby was diagnosed with a severe abnormality (portion of
brain was missing) and would die within a day or two of
being born (i.e. incapable of surviving outside of the
whom). Miss D took the view that she did not want to go
to the trauma of carrying the child full term, birthing the
child and then having the child die in her arms. She
wanted an abortion and said that she was not suicidal.
Since there was no threat she was not entitled to an
abortion in Ireland.
Held: As the child would be born alive, the child will
accumulate legal personality, even if for mere hours only.
Also, the child has the right to life in the womb, pursuant
to Art. 40.3.3 since it is as likely as any other fetus to be
born alive.
Nevertheless, she was still entitled to travel by virtue of
the amendment to the Constitution after the X case.
An interesting question is why did this case end up in the
High Court if the legal position is relatively clear (as seen
in X)? This occurred for two reasons:
No legislation
Overhang of the ***A and B case.
***A, B and C v Ireland (25579/05, December 16, 2010)
Three women had different forms of cancer. In each case
an abortion was necessary to treat their illness effectively.
In each case they failed to have their abortion in Ireland
because they did not fall within the narrow category as set
out in The X case. All the women travelled to the UK to
have abortions and had issues with their after-care (since
their abortion doctors were in the UK).
Held: Ireland is permitted to ban abortion, however,

Irelands failure to implement legislation clarifying the

circumstances in which abortion is legal, is a violation of
Art. 8 of the ECHR.
We are still waiting on the Report by the expert group on
their recommendations coming from ***A, B and C. This
might be the next big political storm we will see in Ireland.
4) Threats to the Unborn other than Abortion
***Baby O v Minister for Justice [2002] 2 IR 169
A mother was being deported to Nigeria and argued that
her unborn child was at a risk in Nigeria due to the
statistically higher infant mortality rate there.
Held: The SCt felt that the deportation of a pregnant
mother to another State with a higher infant mortality rate
does not interfere with the right to life of the unborn child,
since the Irish State is not trying to terminate that
pregnancy.
The development of technology such as the morning-after
pill, embryo research and in vitro fertilization (IVF) has
raised major questions as to the point at which the right to
life of the unborn comes into effect (Art 40.3.3) Is it on
conception? Implantation? Viability? What constitutes
viability? These are all interesting and current questions,
yet the law has been slow in catching up.
****Roche v Roche [2010] 2 IR 321
Background: Couple had undergone successful IVF
treatment and had a child. There were a number of
fertilized embryos in storage but the couple later split up.
Subsequently, the mother wanted to be implanted with
the remaining embryos. She was referring to the embryos
as her children. The father did not want more children
and objected (did not consent).
Issue: Whether or not the mother could be implanted with
embryos when the father objects?
Contractual dispute: contractually, the fathers consent
was required (clinic would not release embryos without
fathers consent)
However, the mother argued that the embryos had a right
to life under Art. 40.3.3.
Arguments For:

They are fertilized embryos, as would be in the womb.

The word unborn is a broad term (does not refer to fetus
specifically etc.)
By Art. 40.3.3 referring to the mother, her rights may
trump those of the father.
No qualification on the unborn in the text of Art. 40.3.3
The constitution is a living document and must be read in
light of new technological developments, such as IVF.
Arguments Against:
The concern in 1983 with the amendment and insertion of
Art.40.3.3 was abortion only (did not consider IVF).
Allowing the mother to implant the embryos would
possibly stretch the limits of the courts jurisdiction it
may be the job of the legislature.
The text of the provision does not make it clear the status
of embryos of IVF treatments.
In the HCt, McGovern J (his first case as a HCt judge) held
against the mother. He said: the case was not about
when life began, that was a philosophical question, the
question for the court was whether frozen embryos fell
within the meaning of Art. 40.3.3
The Attorney General submitted to the High Court that the
general electorate in 1983 were concerned with abortion.
McGovern J accepted this argument the 8th
amendment was motivated by concerns about abortion
and the electorate in 1983 did not have IVF/embryos in
their mind.
McGovern J noted the fact that there was no legislation
protecting embryos and held that the original meaning
stood, and to extend it would be the job of the legislature
or the people (by referendum).
But, what did the electorate mean in 1983? During the
course of the SCt appeal, a woman who voted in the 1983
election applied to be a party to the case because the AG
had, in her mind, misrepresented the electorates
intentions. The SCt however, declined to add her to the
proceedings.
Held: On appeal, the SCt unanimously rejected the
mothers appeal. They reached their decision however, on
different grounds (in contrast to McGovern J in the HCt).
They stayed away from speculating about what the
electorate had in their mind in 1983. They took a very

narrow approach, focusing on the wording of Art. 40.3.3.

It came down to two points:
The word unborn implied the potential to be born, but
this does not arise until the embryos are implanted.
In Art. 40.3.3 you have a balancing between the right to
life of the unborn and right to life of the mother The
Court asked why this was done and they said the only
reason was to do this if they came into conflict. This can
only happen when the embryo is in the womb. An embryo
in a test tube does not pose any threat to the mother.
The provision only makes sense where there is a physical
connection between the unborn and the mother, and in
the absence of such a physical connection, the provision
does not apply.
Essentially, the mother could not rely on Art. 40.3.3 as
there was no physical connection between the herself and
the embryos Therefore, it may be deduced that Art.
40.3.3 requires some sort of physical connection to be
invoked.
The SCt was however, extremely critical of the Oireachtas
for failing to legislate on the issue this is the same point
that arose in the ***A, B and C case in the ECtHR.
Topic 5 Article 42: Education
1) Parental Rights in Education
Art. 42 approaches the issue of education from the
standpoint of the parents. It only mentions children
indirectly -> in parents having rights over their children.
It emphasizes the position of parents and the rights they
have with respect to making education decisions on behalf
of their children.
The State plays a subsidiary role to the parents. It is there
merely to support the parents in the education of their
children.
So, the question we must ask is; what are parents entitled
to decide with respect to their children and how do these
decisions interface with the role of the State?
Parents have the right to:

Art. 42.1 Provide for the religious ad moral, intellectual,

physical and social education of their children.
Art. 42.2 Establish and direct private schools.
Art. 42.2 Educate their children at home.
Choose their childs school (State (Doyle) v Minister for
Education (1995) [1989] ILRM 27)
2) Role of the State
The State has the following duties:
Art. 42.3.2 To ensure a certain minimum standard of
education
Art. 42A To intervene in cases where parents fail in their
duty to provide for the education of their children.
Consequently, all parental rights are subject to
restrictions, e.g. the admissions policies of schools, the
duty of the State to verify standards and ensure a certain
minimum standard of education.
***OShiel v Minister for Education [1999] 2 ILRM 241
A group or parents applied for the State to fund a new
Steiner school for their children.
Cases stated to the SCt.
Held: While the State must have regard to parental choice,
it is not obliged to grant funding to every group of parents
who apply for it. The State is entitled to have a scheme in
place so as to allocate funding, and the current one is
permissible under the Constitution. In an obiter statement,
certain minimum education was seen to be of a lower
standard than the primary education referred to in Art.
42.4.
See also the case of Carberry v Yates.
How does the State address the issue of providing a
certain minimum education requirements as per Art. 42.4?
Under the Education Welfare Act 2000, it is compulsory for
children to attend a recognized school up to the age of 16,
with certain exceptions in place, seen in s. 17(2) of the
Act. This is in support of Art. 42.3 where children must
receive at least a minimum education.

***DPP v Best [2000] 2 ILRM 1

Parents were not happy with the education their children
had been receiving in school so removed them and began
home schooling. The childrens syllabus was inspected and
it was found that the education being provided at home
had a lack of structure and they were not being taught
the Irish language. The parents were served with a school
attendance notice. When the parents did not comply, they
were prosecuted in the District Court. The parents tried to
defend the case by arguing that acertain minimum
education is not defined in Art. 42. The District Court
stated a question to the SCt.
Justice Denham: pointed out that because the Constitution
is a living document, certain minimum education is a
standard which varies from time to time and is to be
interpreted in light of prevailing conditions and ideas.
Further, the standard must be conducive to the child
achieving intellectual and social development and must
not place the child in a discriminatory position.
Keane J: The primary school curriculum is above the
constitutional minimum and we should not equate the
term certain minimum education with the standard
primary school curriculum.
This brings us to the issue of the Irish language and
whether or not this forms part of this certain minimum
education. Because in Art.8, Irish is the first official
language, is this bearing on the education requirements?
Keane CJ said that the absences of Irish from the
curriculum does not, of itself, indicate that the standard
has not been reached; however, it can be taken into
account. But, because Irish is the first official language
and knowledge of it is required in certain forms of
employment it must be taken into account.
3) The Right of the Child to Receive Education
Art. 42.4 places a duty on the State to provide for free
primary education
***Crowley established that the duty on the State to
provide for free primary education created a
corresponding right held by those on whose behalf it was
imposed to receive what must be provided.

***Crowley v Ireland [1980] IR 102

Background:
Art. 42.4 notes the State shall provide for free primary
education in the original drafting the word for was not
inserted. De Valera inserted it however so as to distance
the State from the schools, where in Ireland the system of
national schools are run and owned by the churches, but
funded by the State (1800s).
So schools in Ireland are privately owned and privately
managed, but paid for by the State. this was established
in the Crowley case.
Held: Per O Higgins CJ the imposition of the duty under
Art. 42.4 creates a corresponding rights in those in
whose behalf it is imposed to receive what must be
provided.
***Sinnott v Minister for Education [2001] 2 IR 545
With regard to the duty to provide for, Barr J. in the
HCt commented [the State] may elect to dischage its
duties through third party organizations. However it has
an obligation in discharge of its constitutional
obligations; to take a positive role in the organization,
provision and supervisions of services offered on its
behalf, and also to provide funds necessary to meet its
constitutional obligations.
The bigger question that comes up however is what does
free primary education mean, and who does it extend
to?
We must first consider what was in the mind of De Valera
in 1937. This, undoubtedly, would have been your basic
primary school education as seen then: 3 Rs Reading,
Writing and Arithmetic. This was between the ages of 4
and 12.
But, the constitution is a living document, so the fact that
that what was understood in 1937 does not mean this is
the case now.
In particular we must ask to what extent does free
primary education require the state to make provisions
for disabled and special education children?
4) Primary Education and Special Educational Needs

The following cases outline the questions surrounding the

role of the State with regard to special educational needs
of its citizens.
***ODonoghue v Minister for Health [1996] 2 IR 20
Paul ODonoghues educational needs, as an autistic child,
were not being met by the State.
Arguments put forth on behalf of State:
Art. 42.3.2 presupposes that only a minimum education
is required nonetheless, every child is supposed to get a
minimum.
What is the distinction between healthcare and education?
The State felt that Pauls needs fell more in terms of
healthcare as opposed to education.
On behalf of the common good the State felt that they
needed to manage resources effectively. To attest to Pauls
needs would be far too burdensome.
Paul ODonoghue was incapable of being educated as he
was so profoundly disabled (This is a question of fact,
rather than a question of law)
Expert evidence however, showed that he was capable, to
a degree. (This argument failed entirely)
Primary education in Art. 42.4 is scholastic in character
and refers to the primary curriculum the State said this
was available to anyone, but said that what was available
wasnt of use to Paul ODonoghue.
Arguments put forth by Paul ODonoghue:
He was entitled to equal treatment under the law this
was therefore a discrimination case in the eyes of Ps legal
team.
Held: Looking to ***Ryan v Attorney General [1965] IR
294, and ODalaigh CJs commentary, the definition of
education was determined. OHanlon J stated: There is a
duty imposed by Art. 42 on the State to give provide free
basic elementary education and this involves giving each
child such advice, instruction and teaching as will enable
him or her to make the best possible use of his or her
inherent potential capacities, physical, mental and moral,
however limited these capacities may be.
The addition to the definition given in Ryan is seen in bold.
This qualification to the Ryan definition expanded the
scope of the States requirement to include in its ambit,

disabled children and those with special needs. As a result,

hundreds of cases flooded the courts.
McGuinness J went on to **Comerford to affirm this
principle set down in ***ODonoghue.
**Comerford v Minister for Education [1997] 2 ILRM 134
McGuinness J: the right to free primary education extends
to every child, although [it] must vary in accordance
with the childs abilities and needs.
On establishing that the right to basic elementary
education should include in its ambit all children,
however limited [their] capacities, what about their
education into adulthood? ***Sinnott asked exactly this
question.
***Sinnott v Minister for Education [2001] 2 IR 545
Background: Sinnott argued that the right to free primary
education should extend into adulthood if necessary.
Sinnott had one year of appropriate education provided
by the State during his 23 years of life.
Barr J in the HCt looked at the provision in two ways:
He looked at Art. 42.4 and determined that there is no
age limitation on a citizens right to on-going primary
education provided by or on behalf of the State. Literal
interpretation.
It is evident that the right to primary education would be
fundamentally flawed if narrowly interpreted as ending at
an arbitrary age Purposive interpretation.
Barr J : The ultimate criterion in interpreting the States
constitutional obligation to provide for primary education
of the grievously disabled is need and not age. This
was the decision of Barr J in the HCt.
The Supreme Court, by a majority of 6-1, overruled the
HCt (This was the first time in Irish history that 7 judges
heard a case).
The majority, using harmonious interpretation, felt that
Art. 42.4 was addressed to meeting the needs of children
up to the age of 18 years and no further. The majority
rejected the arguments that a severely disabled adult such
as Sinnott, who was entirely dependent on his family for
care, could be regarded as a child merely for the
purposes of Art. 42.

Keane CJ was the dissenting judge who cited 7 different

ages that were transition ages in the law. He said there
cannot just be a cut off point.
We may ask ourselves why one court uses one approach
to constitutional interpretation (the HCt using the literal
approach) and another court uses something different (the
SCt using the harmonious approach)? Most likely in this
case, the SCt had a discomfort with ordering the
Government to spend their resources in a certain way, and
thereby they were protecting the separation of powers. It
may be argued that this question in ***Sinnott boiled
down to a policy issue and in this sense, they chose the
harmonious interpretation to give way to this. It is
somewhat of a cop-out by the judiciary, but perhaps a
necessary one at that.
We have moved now from the cases where the State was
providing nothing, to where in this case (**OCarolan),
what was being provided was thought not to be good
enough:
***OCarolan v Minister for Education [2005] IEHC 296
Background: The plaintiff had been offered placement in a
school in Dublin but his parents did not think it was
suitable for his needs. They argued he should be placed in
a different unit that happened to be in Bangor, Wales.
Note: In ***Crowley v Ireland [1980] IR 102, as discussed
above, the word for was deliberately inserted into Art.
42.4 so as to distance the Government from the operation
of schools, as they were predominantly run by churches,
and therefore the provision of education through third
parties. The question was whether or not the plaintiff was
entitled to this?
Held: Per MacMenamin J In determining whether a childs
constitutional right to education was being vindicated, the
test is not whether an alternative placements is better or
the best; the question is whether the placement in
question is appropriate to the needs of the particular child.
This decision is interesting because although
***ODonoghue was cited as the law on this area, and said
that education must provide for the best possible
whereas in ***OCarolan the States obligations are being

alleviated. However, as of recent, we have seen the courts

retreating from Barr Js high water mark for education
provisions as set out in ***OCarolan.
5) Religion and the Education System
The education system in Ireland:
92% of public schools in Ireland are Catholic
denominational schools.
6% are Protestant schools (of all denominations)
<3% are multi-denominational schools (Educate
Together Organization) the vast majority of these are in
the big population centers (Dublin, Cork etc.)
In theory, religious freedom is fully protected in the
education system
Art. 42.1 Provides parents the right to ensure the
religious education of their children.
Art. 44.2.1 Freedom of conscience prohibits State
discrimination
Art. 44.2.3
Art. 44.2.5
Starting with Art. 42.1 the reality facing many parents is
that the only type of school in their immediate
neighborhood is a catholic school.
Is this really a problem though because if we see Art. 44
the State cannot discriminate and children do not have to
attend religious instruction classes. Therefore, freedom of
conscience are protected.
***Quinns Supermarket Ltd. v Attorney General [1972] 1
IR 1
Background: Case concerned legislation regulating the
opening hours of butcher shops, but made exceptions for
Jewish butcher shops with regard to the Sabbath. This was
challenged on the equality ground Art. 44.2 was one of
the grounds.
Issue: Whether companies can rely on constitutional
rights?
Held: Prima facie, discrimination is present in this case,
however, Art. 44.2 must be in harmony with the

Constitution and the beginning of said Article.

The primary purpose of art. 44.2 was to guarantee
freedom of conscience. Prohibition or discrimination was
secondary to that overall aim. As a result, sometimes you
have to treat people differently in order to facilitate them
in their freedom of religion Discrimination is permissible
where it is necessary to the overall aim of practicing
religion.
Topic 6 Equality Before the Law
This topic is not examinable.
Topic 7 Remedies for Breaches of Constitutional Rights
i) Invalidity of Legislation
Pursuant to Art. 50 of the Constitution certain rules:
Pre-1937, unconstitutional laws are valid up to December
29th 1937
Post-1937 laws, if struck down, were never law (void
abinitio or void retrospectively)
Pre-1937 laws, are not afforded the presumption of
Constitutionality (Art. 15.4), but remain law until struck
down.
A declaration of invalidity can take two forms:
Unconstitutional in isolation > Severance
Unconstitutional in whole > Entire statute is struck down
Severance may only take place where what remains is
constitutional and capable of surviving and being operated
independently (**Maher v Attornery General [1973] IR
140). An example of severance in practice can be seen in
***T OG v Attorney General [1985] ILRM 61 where only
the proviso s. 5(1) was severed leaving the rest of the Act
intact.
Retrospectivity
Where a declaration of invalidity is made, the question
arises as to the effect of the invalid legislation during the
period between its enactment and its being declared

invalid.
If the invalid legislation was a pre-1937 Act held invalid
under Art. 50, then it is deemed not to have survived the
enactment of the Constitution and to become invalid from
that time (i.e. 1937) onwards.
There is clearly an issue here. If the declaration made
under Art. 50 amounts to a judicial death certificate
(Murphy v AG [1982] IR 241), what about all the people
convicted/held liable post-1937, under unconstitutional
laws?
In the interests of orderly administration of justice, a
number of limits have been places on the retrospective
effect of a declaration of unconstitutionality.
A person convicted of a criminal offence under
unconstitutional legislation that is subsequently struck
down can only seek to benefit from its invalidity if the
issue of constitutionality was raised in his case.
***DPP v Kavanagh [2012] IECCA 65
Defendant was convicted of armed robbery. Part of the
evidence against him had come from the issue of a search
warrant. Subsequently, the legislation governing search
warrants was struck down in another case.
Because his lawyer had brought up the issue, he was
allowed to avail of this.
The courts have distinguished between the retrospective
effect of invalidity on the legislation itself and on acts
done pursuant to the legislation.
***Murphy v AG [1982] IR 241
Income Tax Act 1967 Tax was collected under this Act for
15 years but was found void ab initio.
Held: Not retrospectively invalid.
***de Burca v AG [1976] IR 38
Juries Act 1927 Struck down after 40 years of criminal
trials being conducted in accordance with it.
Distinction was drawn between the law itself and acts
done pursuant to the law.
***McMahon v AG [1972] IR 69
Legislation governing elections did not comply with

rewquirement of the secret ballot and therefore was

deemed unconstitutional.
Held: Elections conducted in accordance with the invalid
electoral legislation were not invalid.
***A v Governor of Arbour Hill Prison [2006] IESC 45
Defendant pleaded guilty to a 1935 Act governing rape
and was sentenced to 3 years in prison. Subsequently in
**CC v Ireland [2006] 4 IR 1, that law was struck down
because it did not allow for a mistake of age.
Mr. A brought a case under Art. 40.4 (habeas corpus). HCt
released him. However, this cause moral panic in Ireland
and on appeal to the SCt, the decision was overturned,
perhaps as a result of societal pressure.
Also, Mr. A did not raise the issue of constitutionality in his
case in the first instance (DPP v Kavanagh). In the words
of the SCt The egg cannot be unscrambled.
What if the SCt overrule one of its earlier decisions holding
a statute invalid? In the US, re-enactment is not required
(*Chicot County Drainage v Baxter State Bank (1940) 308
US 371). In Ireland however, it may be necessary. In
Murphys case it was pointed out that whereas judicial
review of statutes only arises by implication under the US
Constitution, Bunreacht na hEireann specifically provides
therefor; and there are other differences between the two
which were held to make some American options
unavailable to the courts here.
Judge McMahon reasoned that to become law legislation
must 1) Pass through the Oireachtas and 2) conform to the
Constitution. So, if a decision of unconstitutionality is
overturned it would seem the Chicot doctrine would apply
in Ireland.
The Constitution Review Group suggested an amendment
to creeping unconstitutionality cases. This is where
legislation become unconstitutional by reason of changing
circumstances. They recommended that the courts should
be empowered to fix the date upon which the legislation
became invalid.
ii) Horizontal Effect: Remedies against Non-State Actors

Constitutional law normally regulates the relationship

between the citizen and the State (vertical effect). The
purpose of a Bill of Rights (Art. 40-45) is usually to require
the State to protect fundamental rights, not to protect a
private individuals right against the actions of other
private individuals (horizontal effect). However, the
language of the Constitution is sufficiently open-textured
that in certain circumstances, it may be permissible to
pursue an action against a private individual or body in
respect of a breach of constitutional rights, and this has
occurred on a number of occasions.
***Educational Co. of Ireland v Fitzpatrick (No.2) [1961] IR
345
Per Budd J: There exists a correlative duty on the part
of other citizens to respect the rights another citizen is
afforded under the Constitution.
Successful cases where actions were brought include:
***Conway v Irish National Teachers Organization [1991] 2
IR 305
Strike by teachers on behalf of children who were not able
to access private education.
The children were subsequently able to sue a private body
for breach of their constitutional rights.
***Sinnott v Carlow National Newspaper
Here, a football player whose testicles were photographed
and published sued the newspaper who did so. He could
not sue for defamation because the picture showed a true
image however he argued it breached his constitutional
right to privacy. He won this case.
***Hayes v Ireland [1987] ILRM 651
Breach of constitutional rights = breach of statutory
rights.
iii) Damages
***Hayes v Ireland [1987] ILRM 651
Per Carroll J: A plaintiff who establishes unlawful
interference with a constitutional right must be in as
strong a position as a plaintiff whose statutory rights have
been infringed, and is entitled to recover damages for
injury suffered by him.

Infringement of constitutional rights = or > infringement

of statutory rights
***Conway v INTO [1991] 2 IR 305
Finlay CJ set out three headings of damages which may
arise in the event of a breach of a constitutional rights:
Ordinary compensatory damages
Aggravated damages
Punitive/exemplary damages
iv) Declaratory Relief
Declaratory relief is where a court makes a declaration of
the law and assumes that the parties to the case will
respond in such a way as to bring their conduct into line
with the law as declared by the Court.
This is often used where the courts do not want to
intervene as the issue properly lies within the domain of
the legislature or executive.
***O Donoghue v Minister for Health
This case concerned the the meaning of parts of the
Constitution.
The Court merely stated the true legal position, then
noted the States failure in this, but leaves it to the State
to decide what to do next.
This type of relief is made when there are issues
surrounding the Separation of Powers.
***Doherty v Government of Ireland [2010] IEHC 369
Government had 4 vacant seat in the Dail and was not
filling them for political reasons. However, under the
Constitution, they have to organize by-elections.
Doherty took a case against the Govt for failing to do this.
He won and the Court made a declaration that there had
been an unreasonable delay.
The Govt did go on to hold the elections.
But, what about where the party does not respond to a
declaration from the Court, particularly where they are the
State or a member of the Executive?
****FN v Minister for Education [1995] 1 IR 409
Held: The State should honor its constitutional obligations

as soon as reasonably practicable.

Damages in this case were not an adequate remedy
Also, a huge volume of litigation was underway in respect
of the same issue.
Nothing happened for 4 years.
Can the Court, where a declaration is not responded to,
grant an injunction? The Court here has to choose
between observing the Separation of Powers or allow the
State to breach constitutional rights with impunity.
v) Injunctive Relief
As guardians of the Constitution, the courts should
arguably have available all powers necessary to ensure
the Government comply with their Constitutional duties
(Boland v An Taoiseach [1974] IR 338).
There are two types of injunctions available to the Courts:
Prohibitory Injunctions (prohibit actions)
Mandatory Injunctions (require actions)
This raises a sort of action/inaction dilemma.
Nevertheless, prohibitory injunctions have been granted
without causing undue difficulty:
***Crotty v An Taoiseach [1987] IR 713
Case considered the Single European Act. The Government
was trying to ratify it without holding a referendum.
However, the SCt granted a prohibitory injunction from
doing this.
This shows us that the courts are willing to step on the
toes of the Government where they are clearly acting
unconstitutionally.
However, what about mandatory injunctions? This is a
more contentious issue as it does not so much step on
the toes of the Government as shackles and whips it. In
effect, by granting a mandatory injunction, the courts are
seriously curbing the doctrine of Separation of Powers and
bringing themselves into dangerous territory.

In the field of educational rights, declarations were

granted in ***ODonoghue v Minister for Health [1996] 2 IR
20 and ***Comerford v Minister for Education [1997] 2
ILRM 134.
Matters came to head in;
*****DB v Minister for Justice [1999] 1 ILRM 93
This case followed the *FN v Minister for Education where
there was a 4 years gap where the Govt did not respond
to declaratory order. As a result, Justice Kelly was tired of
the Govt failing to fulfill their duties and so in this case
went on to grant a mandatory injunction.
Kelly J said that the situation was a scandal and that
[t]he addressing of the rights of the young people that I
have had to deal with appears to be bogged down in a
bureaucratic and administrative quagmire.
Even though Kelly J granted the mandatory injunction, he
justified this on the basis that he was not dictating or
even entering into questions of policy. The order that I
propose making will merely ensure that the Minister who
has already decided on policy lives up to his word and
carries it into effect.
This reasoning by Kelly J is weak yet it appears to be the
only way to justify the order. With the Separation of
Powers being the pinnacle of the Irish legal system, it
must be treaded lightly on. Kelly J, although not doing this,
managed to come up with something that was afforded
legitimacy, however minimal it was.
*****TD v Minister for Education [2000] 3 IR 62
Kelly J reaffirmed his decision in ***DB and went on to set
down four criteria to be considered when granting a
mandatory order.
Whether declaratory relief has already been granted,
allowing the Govt the opportunity to put things right.
The need to act expeditiously in order to secure rights to
applicants before they attain majority and lose entitlement
to those rights.
The effect of the Govts failure (inluding any risk of harm).
Due regard is to be had to the efforts of the Govt.
This case was successfully appealed to the SCt. The SCt

(Denham J dissenting) felt that the order was a breach of

the Separation of Powers. They relied heavily on the HCt
decision in ***OReilly v Limerick Corporation [1989] ILRM
181, where Costello J relied on Aristotles distinction
between distributive and commutative justice:
***OReilly v Limerick Corporation [1989] ILRM 181
Travellers took a case arguing they had a right to certain
facilities (toilets etc.) on their campsites.
Costello J reasoned that:
Distributive Justice = fair distribution of goods and
burdens in society;
Commutative Justice = correcting a wrong.
In this, he articulate that commutative justice is a matter
for the courts, not distributive, which is better sought in
the legislature (Leinster House, not the Four Courts).
Other relevant aspects of the SCt decision include:
Once Kelly J made his order in relation to policy formulated
by the Minister, it became the policy of the Court and
therefore the Minister could not change it without
permission of the Court.
The order assigned to the judiciary a dominant position
over the legislature and executive which was not justified
under the Constitution.
An order may only be made where there is a conscious
and deliberate decision by the organ of the State to act in
breach of its constitutional obligations accompanied by
bad faith or recklessness and as an absolutely final
resort in circumstances of great crisis and for the
protection of the Constitutional order itself.
There has however been a slight step back from the strict
approach set down by the SCt in ***TD. This is seen in:
***Cronin v Minister for Education [2004] 3 IR 205
Laffoy J granted a mandatory interlocutory injunction.
Laffoy J distinguished this case form TD in that the
facilities were available, however the applicant was merely
being denied access.
Reasoning this, as the facility already existed, the Minister
had already sanctioned it and was therefore solidified
policy.

***Doherty v Government of Ireland [2010] IEHC 369

Here, although no mandatory injunction was granted, as
the Govt acted on the declaratory order, the court said it
would be willing to grant such an order.
Topic 8 Constituent Power: The People
i) The Referendum: Article 47
***McKenna v An Taoiseach (No.1) [1995] 2 IR 1
Case concerned the spending of 500,000 by the
Government to promote a Yes vote in the fifteenth
amendment to the Constitution (Divorce Referendum).
This case took place in the HCt per Costello J
Held: Not every grievance can be remedied by the
courts judges must not be led into areas calling for
adjudication on political and non-justiciable issues. The
plaintiffs complaint is a complaint of political misconduct
on which this court can express no view.
This decison was overturned in the SCt:
*****McKenna v An Taoiseach (No.2) [1995] 2 IR 10
Held: A majority (Hamilton, Blayney, OFlaherty, Denham
JJ; Egan J dissenting) of the Supreme Court held this was
an interference with the democratic process and an
infringement of the concept of equality which is
fundamental to the democratic nature of the State.
Grounding this reasoning in the Constitution, Article 47.1
is being read, inter alia in light of Article 40.1 (equality
provision).
This case established the McKenna principles, which
although elusive, have been somewhat clarified in the
subsequent case of:
******McCrystal v Minister for Children [2012] IESC 53
where Denham CJ made a list of nine principles. They
were:
The Govt can campaign by any method, except by the
expenditure of public funds.
Members of the Govt can, in their personal capacity
campaign for change (also entitled to use State transport).
Right to equality applies in a referendum process.
Spending public monies in favor of one side puts one class
of citizen above another (not equal).

Govt must not spend public monies to espouse a point of

view that may be anathema to certain citizens.
There exists a right to a democratic process in a
referendum Govt cannot benefit one side over another.
Right to fair procedures scales must be held equally.
Right to freedom of expression corollary to this is the
point that public monies should not be spent to fund only
one side.
Government has a right to disseminate information, but
not with the use of public funds to the benefit of only one
side.
The TEST laid down is that: A publicly funded publication
must be fair, equal, neutral and impartial.
Murray J on the other hand ostensibly considered the
principles to be summarized into just two points; that
[t]he right to a fair and democratic process is a right
vested in the People and such a right means that the
use of funds to promote one side of the referendum
would be in breach of that constitutional right.
Some differences between McKenna (No.2) and McCrystal
should be considered.
McKenna (No.2)
McCrystal
Vote Yes
Inform
4 Judgments made. Condensed into 9 principles by
Denham CJ
Vote Yes is clearly unconstitutional
Due to this being
inform the application of the law is tricker, however, it is
still found unconstitutional.
Govt loses 1 week before the referendum
Govt loses
two days before referendum, but voting had begun on the
islands.
Some specific references to the booklet are:
Page 9 it will continue to be the case
Page 12 Other rights and interests
Page 14 Campaign language is extensively used.
Logos and slogans are not impartial.
Childs voice on radio/TV advertisements.

Moving onto the next case (Hanafin), which concerned the

divorce referendum (fifteenth amendment), it is useful to
first see some statistics concerning the referendum, so as
to contextualize the case:
10th Amendment => 36.5% / 63.5%
15th Amendment => 50.3% / 49.7%
Clearly the 15th Amendment was very close. In this regard
can it be said legitimately that the advertising campaign
by the Government materially affected the outcome of the
referendum?
***Hanafin v Minister for Education
Pursuant to the Referendum Act 1994, it states that the
validity of a referendum may be questioned by petition to
the HCt (s. 42) and that only if a referendum is materially
affected by:
obstruction or interference
failure to abide by this act
mistake or other irregularity in the conduct of the
referendum
or anything else that materially affects the outcome.
May the referendum be deemed illegitimate.
However, this situation creates a catch-22 scenario:
You can never ask somebody what they voted or why.
When this fact is excluded, there is only
hypothetical/speculative evidence left to utilize in such a
case.
Also, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that
the misuse of public funds materially affected the
outcome of the referendum. Obviously this is impossible
since there is no hard evidence to prove this.
Also, none of s. 43(1) is designed to catch illegality in the
campaign run-up (e.g. misue of public funds/bias
advertising)
There were five judgments given: All refused the petition
(agreed with HCt)
Hamilton CJ:
Looked to McKenna (he was a judge in McKenna). In
McKenna he said that the use of public funds was wrong
but now states that it is not the use of funds that is wrong
per se but instead how those funds are used. In this way

he is distinguishing McKenna. His arguments now rest on

s. 43 of the 1994 Act.
He says that the will of the people is sacrosanct and
cannot be interfered with
In effect, this means that no matter what the wrongdoing,
the referendum cannot be impugned if the result was not
materially affected. The evidence is impermissible in court
and therefore although the burden of proof rests on the
plaintiff, there is no actual way of proving that the
referendum was materially affected.
OFlaherty J:
He says that although the margin is tiny (0.56%), whether
or not the referendum was materially affected by the
Governments campaign is impossible to prove. He also
says that each voter must be considered to be sufficiently
enlightened to exercise free choice.
Denham J:
We have to take what the HCt has said and accept it.
She states that there is no way of determining if the result
of the referendum was materially affected.
Some arguments put forth in a newspaper article include:
That the burden of proof should be on the Govt.
The SCt should not confine itself to s. 43 of the 1994 Act.
The act should read: might or may be materially
affected allowing for hypothetical/speculative judgments.
***Coughlan v Broadcasting Complaints Commission
[2000] 3 IR 1
This case concerned the Divorce Referendum (15th
Amendment), the same one as Hanafin.
It was argued that it was the public medias responsibility
to be impartial.
Pursuant to s. 18 of the Broadcasting Act 1960, news and
current affairs must be impartial
On the divorce referendum, 42.5 mins was reserved for
arguments of the Yes vote while only 10 mins was given
to the No vote.
Held: SCt found this illegal by a SCt majority of 4:1.
ii) The Power of Amendment: Article 46
Article 50 of the 1922 Irish Free State Constitution allowed
for the Oireachtas to amend the Constitution for a period

of eight years, at which point it either becomes permanent

law by way of majority vote in a referendum or ceases to
exist as law.
So, could the Oireachtas perhaps have eradicated
fundamental rights for at least a period of eight years?
Looking to German Constitutional law:
Art. 79(3) allows for amendments to the Constitution, bar
any affecting Art. 1 (human dignity) or Art. 20
(democracy).
This exception would not be possible under the 1922
Constitution as Art. 50 seems to be absolute in its ambit.
Similarly, Art. 46 seems absolute in Ireland.
Beginning in 1929, the Oireachtas passed two
amendments to the Constitution which in many ways
rattled the Irish political system.
Amendment No. 16 of the Irish Free State Constitution,
1929
Increased the 8 year period to 16 years
Amendment No. 17 of the Irish Free State Constitution,
1929
Implemented Art. 2A which allowed for certain offenses
(even some minor) to be tried in a special military court.
Some offenses included: unlawful assembly, common
assault etc.
As a result of this, this next case came about:
***State (Ryan) v Lennon [1935] IR 170
Two arguments were advanced against Amendments 16 &
17:
Amd. 16 contrary to Constitutional principles
Amd. 17 Contrary to natural law (habeas corpus etc.)
Majority: Fitzgibbon J: Decided here is that Art. 50 is
absolute and there are in effect no limits on the powers of
amendment
Kennedy J dissented: provisions of this kind are the
antithesis of the rule of law, and are, within this scope,
anarchy.

He also felt that Art. 2A was not so much an amendment

as a radical alteration to the Const. He felt it was up to the
courts to stand between the citizen and executive as Art.
2A gives too much power to the Executive Council and
takes away all aspects of a fair criminal procedure.
He also said that there were 4 limits on the powers of
amendment:
Natural Law
Anglo/Irish Treaty
Rule of law
8 years (this is absolute and cannot be changed)
Other relevant cases here are:
***McGee v Attorney General [1974] IR 284
***Re Article 26 and the Information (Termination of
Pregnancies) BIll 1995 [1995] 1 IR 1
***Hanafin v Minister for Environment [1996] 2 IR 321
Topic 9 Legislative Function
Before delving into this topic, we must begin with an
outline of the relevant principles of the Constitution.
Art. 25.2.1 This outlines the normal procedure for signing
bills into law.
Art. 25.4.1 One the President signs the Bill it becomes
law.
The preamble to Art. 26 (judicial review) provides:
cannot be applied to a Money Bill, or a bill containing a
proposal to amend the Constitution, or a bill the time for
consideration of which by Seanad Eireann shall have been
abridged under Art. 24 of this Constitution.
Art. 26 further provides:
Art. 26.1.1 Allows for any bill to be referred to the SCt if
the President feels it is repugnant to the Constitution.
Art. 26.1.1 Every reference shall be made no later than
the 7th day after presented for signature.
Art. 26.2.1 The SCt, when entertaining an Art. 26
reference must be comprised of not less than 5 judges and
must deliver a judgment within 60 days. The Attorney
General defends the bill whilst appointed lawyers assigned

by the Court argue against it: This is called the Abstract

Review Procedure.
Art. 26.2.2 Only one judgment is delivered.
Art. 26.3.1 and Art. 26.3.3 If it is deemed to be
constitutional the President must sign the Bill into law,
whereas if the Bill is deemed unconstitutional he cannot
sign it into law.
Abstract Review Procedure
**In re Article 26 and the Offences Against the State
(Amendment) Bill 1940 [1940] IR 470
Due to the presumption of constitutionality, the burden of
proof rests on those who argue that the Bill is
unconstitutional to prove it is so.
The repugnancy must be clearly established.
**In re Article 26 and the School Attendance Bill, 1942
[1943] IR 334
Confirmed In re Article 26 and the Offences Against the
State (Amendment) Bill 1940 [1940] IR 470
***In re Article 26 and the housing (Private Rented
Dwellings) Bill 1981 [1983] IR 181
The matters to be dealt with, should be done so as
abstract issues in this regard evidence may not be
introduced and is not necessarily required.
Employing evidence would make it far more difficult for
the Court to make a unanimous/single judgment.
However there is one issue. If a Bill is deemed to be
constitutional (it cannot be questioned again in any court).
Without evidence being given in the court, how may a full
hearing and therefore judgment be made? It seems a little
unfair to people who may see the Bill in the future as
unconstitutional but can unfortunately do nothing about it.
Concrete Review of Legislation (Art. 34.3.2 and 34.4.5)
Some provisions of the Constitution we must consider are:
Art. 15.2 Provides that only the Oireachtas can make
laws for the State.
Art. 15.4 The Oireachtas cannot enact legislation that is
contrary to the Constitution.
Art. 34.3.2 Jurisdiction is vested in the Supreme Court to
determine the constitutionality of a bill.

Art. 34.4.5 Only one judgment may be handed down.

Concrete Review is where a real plaintiff, with locus
standi brings a case arguing that an Act or some part of an
Act is unconstitutional. However, the true battle remains
between the organs of the State (Judiciary, Executive and
Legislature).
There are four principles of Concrete Review:
Presumption of Constitutionality
Def: Until the contrary is proven, legislation will be
deemed constitutional.
***Pigs Marketing Board v Donnelly [1939] IR 413
***Buckley v Attorney General [1950] IR 67
Note: Pre-1937 legislation is not afforded this presumption.
Rule of Self-Restraint
Def: If there is any way of solving the plaintiffs case
without examining the issue of constitutionality, the
judge(s) should do that.
***M v An Bord Uchtala [1977] IR 287
***Cooke v Walsh [1984] IR 710
Double Construction Test
Def: If there are two possible interpretations of the
legislation where one is constitutional and the other is not,
the court should choose the constitutional interpretation.
***McDonald v Bord na gCon [1965] IR 217
Doctrine of Severability
Def: Art 15.4.2 The legislation under scrutiny shall to the
extent only of such repugnancy be deemed invalid.
***Maher v Attorney General
i) Constitutionality of Legislation
***State (Sheerin) v Kennedy [1966] IR 379
This case makes some important remarks about the status
of law as it proceeds through either Art. 26, 50 or 15/34.
Under Art. 50.1 Pre-1937 legislation, under the
Continuity Provision can only be deemed inconsistent with
the Constitution (as opposed to unconstitutional etc.)
Under Art. 26 the Bill may be described as being
repugnant to the Constitution as it is merely a proposal
put forth by the Houses of the Oireachtas and has not in
fact become law.

Under Art. 15/34 Under this the Oireachtas is the only

body that can legislate for Ireland and so in this respect
the question of determining the validity of a law, can only
refer to laws enacted by the Oireachtas established by the
Constitution.
What about primary legislation vs. secondary legislation.
In challenging primary legislation, this is done through a
challenge against its constitutionality.
In challenging secondary legislation, this is done through
arguing it is ultra vires.
In Ireland the Government effectively controls the
legislature (Party WHIP system). As a result, the legislature
is inclined to give a substantial amount of power to the
2nd legislature, whether those be Ministers of other
bodies. This is a difficult concept as there are arguments
on both sides, as will be shown in the following case law.
Nevertheless, by the legislature delegating such vast
powers to non-elected officials, the doctrine of separation
of powers and the fundamental principles of democracy
are being altogether undermined.
As a result of this conundrum, the courts try to limit the
amount of power that can be delegated. This is called the
Non-Delegation Doctrine. We will explore it below:
ii) Interference with Legislative Function
(a) Ministerial Orders
***Maher v Minister for Agriculture [2001] 1 IR 139
This case found in favor of the secondary legislature.
Fennelly J made some interesting arguments for the
delegation of power.
The secondary legislation consists of complex, technical
and detailed rules. This would burden the legislature
beyond capacity.
The evaluation of such specific, complex technical
problems are better left to experts (i.e. Ministers, not TDs)
There is a frequent need for flexibility and rapid

adjustment to meet changing circumstances (the

legislature could not cope).
In summary: Complexity, Expertise, Efficiency.
On the contrary however, we have a more recent
judgment outlining the cons of secondary legislation.
***Kennedy v Law Society of Ireland [2002] 2 IR 458
Interestingly, this case was also decided by Fennelly J.
Defeats the legislative intent.
Undermine the democratic principle (Ministers are not
elected).
Undermining the rule of law itself (not being agreed in a
public forum).
Maher was argued from a practical standpoint, whilst
Kennedy was argued from a principled standpoint. There
are merits to both arguments, however they are in conflict
with one another. A balance must be found.
We now come to one of the most significant cases on this
topic:
******City View Press Co. Ltd v AnCO [1980] IR 381
This case concerned s. 21 of the Industrial Training Act
1967. This allowed AnCO to make an order imposing a levy
(2nd legislation). As a result, the Industrial Training Levy
(Printing & Paper Industry) Order, 1972 was enacted which
made employers pay for the training of their employees
instead of employees paying for themselves.
This was challenged on two grounds (there are always two
grounds).
That s. 21 of the 1967 Act is unconstitutional.
That the 1972 Order is ultra vires.
Held: SCt found the Act not unconstitutional and the
Order, not ultra vires.
Per OHiggins CJ: The ultimate responsibility rests with
the courts to ensure that constitutional safeguards remain,
and that the exclusive authority of the National Parliament
in the field of law-making is not eroded by a delegation of
power neither contemplated nor permitted by the
Constitution In the view of this Court, the test is whether
that which is challenged as an unauthorised delegation of
parliamentary power is more that a mere giving effect to

principles and policies which are contained in the statute

itself.
Note: McMahon J in the HCt stated the legislature will
not be allowed to abdicates its legislative function.
Principles & Policies
Detail
Primary Legislation

Secondary Legislation
X Ultra Vires

Professor David Gilmorgan Raised the issue that there

hould have been a principles and policies guideline in the
Act itself (e.g. price limits, wages etc.). Leaving this
entirely up to the secondary legislature, in this case the
Minister is wholly incorrect.
Note: The City View Test can only be used on primary
legislation. This goes without saying.
******John Grace Fried Chicken v Catering Plc [2011] IEHC
277
This case concerned the Industrial Relations Act 1946,
s.42, 43 & 45 and the Industrial Relations Act 1990, s. 48.
These Acts gave power to the JLC (Joint Labour
Committee) to make EROs (Employment Regulation
Orders). This procedure has its origins in pre-1937
legislation (Trade Board Acts 1909, 1919) and as such
there are no specific rules guiding the JLCs specific
policies, in effect giving their EROs free range.
The ERO being challenged, ERO, S1142 of 2008, was
sanctioned in the Labour Court and increased the

minimum wage rates as well as holiday and Sunday pay

rates. This took place during the years of the Celtic Tiger.
When the recession hit, JGFC (John Grace Fried Chicken)
could not pay such high wages to its employees as he was
affected due to the standard form ERO contracts. As a
result, he took the case to court and argued that:
IRA 1946 and 1990 are unconstitutional. (But note ERO,
S1142 had already been rescinded)
Usually there are two challenges, but here the ERO had
already been rescinded.
It was so evident that the two Acts were unconstitutional,
the State did not challenge JGFC. Feeney J in the HCt
discussed the City View Test, affirmed it as the correct
test, and determined the legislation unconstitutional at
para. 5 in his judgment (very early on).
Feeney J, perhaps in response to Professor David
Gilmorgan in para. 22 outlined 17 factors to look out for
when determining what constitutes policies. Some of
these include:
Striking a balance between the exclusive law making
function of the Oireachtas and the proper function of the
legislature.
The principles and policies test is a flexible test.
The purpose of the legislation must be taken into account.
Court should have regard to the entire statute.
Whether standards, goals, factors and/or purposes can be
identified
The absences of particularity does not render a delegation
ultra vires.
Held: The legislation wasentirely silent with regards to
principles and policies.
***Burke v Minister for Labour
Feeney J used this as a precedent in the JGFC case as it
concerned the same legislation. Henchy J provided here
obiter that the power to make a minimum remuneration
order is a delegated power of a most fundamental,
permissive and far-reaching kind.
(b) Henry VIII Clauses
Historically: Statute of Proclamations 1539 This was an
Act passed by the Parliament that permitted King Henry
VIII to legislate by decree (in effect, secondary

legislation/legislature) which should be obeyed as though

it were enacted by Parliament itself.
Definition: Clauses in a Parent Act that provide that that
parents act (or another piece of primary legislation) can
be amended by way of statutory instrument.
This is not compatible with the Constitution for obvious
reasons. Namely the principles of democracy are
undermined, and in relation to Art. 15.2, it is the exclusive
authority of the Oireachtas to legislate for Ireland. As
McMahon J provided in the HCt hearing of City View, the
legislature will not be allowed to abdicates its legislative
function.
****Cooke v Walsh [1984] IR 710
A boy was injured in a car crash. Pursuant to the Health
Act 1970, Part IV:
s. 45 full entitlement to heave healthcare covered by the
State.
s. 46 with limited eligibility.
s. 72 allows for the Minister to make changes to these
sections (s. 45 and s. 46).
On this basis, the Health Services Regulations, 1971 came
into force. This transferred the boy from a person eligible
under s. 45 to a person under s. 46 (reduced eligibility).
On using the double-construction test, the Court said that
s. 72 must be read very narrowly. This was done in light of
the presumption of constitutionality afforded to legislation.
The procedure is as follows:
Presumption of Constitutionality -> Double-Construction
Test (Court read s. 72 narrowly) -> 1971 Regulation is
ultra vires.
By narrowing the scope of the Act they saved it, but went
on to determine that the Regulation was ultra vires.
****Harvey v Minister for Social Welfare [1990] 2 IR 232
Woman had 3 pensions. Under s. 75 of the Act, this gave
power to the Minister to disallow OAP pensions, widow
pensions, childrens allowance etc. to certain categories of
people.
Looks like a Henry VIII Clause.

Court used the double construction test and read the

provision is a very narrow manner.
***Mulcreevy v Minister for Environment [2004] 1 IR 72
This case concerned licenses to dig/excavate for
archeological reasons.
This case merely confirmed the City View Test.
Topic 10 Judicial Function
Judicial Function, in the Constitution concerns a number of
Articles:
Art. 34 Provides that justice shall be administered in the
courts also provides to the type of courts to be set up.
Art. 37 Provides that some small judicial functions can be
exercised outside of the courts where they are of 1) a
limited function, 2) not of a criminal nature and 3)
authorized by law (backed up by statute).
The following cases will try to decipher these articles.
i) Interference with Judicial Function: Art. 34
*****Buckley v Attorney General [1950] IR 67
People donated money to Sinn Fein party to support
widows and children of soldiers during the War of
Independence (1924). Not all the money donated was
spent however. Arguments were put forth that they want
their money back since it was not spent. At this time De
Valera was in power.
The Sinn Fein Funds Act 1947 came along.
s. 9 maintenance and management of monies
s. 10 any ongoing proceedings to be stayed by order of
the HCt if exparte application is made by the AG. The AG
made the exparte application to stop Ps claim. As a result
Buckley sued the AG to stop him being successful in his
exparte application.
Buckle began proceedings in 1942.
Per Gavan Duffy P:
The Separation of Powers is very important. It follows that;
The Courts have the power to administer justice, no other
organ has this power.
The HCt has full original jurisdiction, with a right of appeal
to the SCt.

1) Laws should be general and not directed at an

individual. The 1947 Act is aimed at one specific case,
namely Buckleys proceedings which began in 1942.
2) A trial must proceed before ex parte application can be
made.
3) Proceedings upon inquiry.
4) Renders judgment only after trial.
In essence, Gavan Duffy P felt that the courts could not
abdicate their proper jurisdiction to administer justice to
the Oireachtas, which in the 1947 Act had decided a case
before it went to trial, and in this sense, administered
justice outside of a Court of Justice.
Per OByrne J:
the effect of Art. 6 and 34-37 is to vest in the Court the
exclusive right to determine justiciable controversies. The
Act is clearly repugnant to the provisions of the
Constitution, as being an unwarrantable interference by
the Oireachtas with the operations of the Courts in a
purely judicial domain.
*****Maher v Attorney General [1973] IR 140
This case concerned s. 44(2)(a) of the Road Traffic Act
1968 where it provided that a certificate of blood alcohol
level shall be conclusive evidence. The plaintiff argued
that this interferes with judicial function as it does not
allow for courts to weigh the evidence of the case.
Application re. this statute:
Precludes the District Court judge from another judgment
with regard to blood alcohol levels.
Precludes the accused from contesting this vital evidence.
Per Fitzgerald CJ (SCt) The admin. of justice, especially in
criminal matters is reserved for the courts. This provision
is an invalid infringement of the judicial power.
The whole section was struck down.
****Deaton v Attorney General [1963] IR 170
This case concerned a pre-1937 piece of legislation (No
presumption of constitutionality).
The Act prescribed a penalty; either 100 or treble the
value of the goods, to be determined by the Revenue
Commissioners. The HCt found this no be not
unconstitutional.
Per ODalaigh CJ clear distinction between a fixed
penalty and the selection of a penalty [a] fixed penalty

is the statement of a general rule, which is one of the

characteristics of legislation; this is wholly different from
the selection of a penalty to be imposed in a particular
case.
What about pre-1937 cases?
***Lynham v Butler (No.2) [1933] IR 74
In this case it was seen that judicial power is an attribute
of sovereignty.
ii) Administration of Justice: Article 34
******In Re Solicitors Act, 1954 [1960] IR 239
Two solicitors were accused of stealing money. Under the
Act concerned, a disciplinary committee was established,
consisting of other solicitors (difficult to be impartial) who
investigate such claims. If found guilty, they had the
power to remove their license to practice (S. 18(1)).
It was argued that such matters should be dealt with by a
court of law and therefore the judgment in this case
revolves around whether this disciplinary committee and
their actions amount to an administration of justice. Note:
s. 23 of the Act provided for a right of appeal to the SCt.
Per Kingsmill Moore J:
There is no exact definition as to the nature of judicial
power.
Look to the effect of the powers given to a tribunal.
Such a far-reaching nature
Held: Act is unconstitutional must be tried in the courts.
*******McDonald v Bord na gCon [1965] IR 217 (HCt)
McDonald brought someone elses greyhound to a
racetrack (he was the trainer). The Bord suspected that
the dog did not belong to him.
In the context of the Greyhound Industry Act 1958;
Set up Bord na gCon (7 members)
Greyhound tracks must be licenses/maintained etc.
Regulates the breeding, sales, bookmaking etc.
Bord na gCon can investigate all issues of non-compliance.
s. 44 Bord na gCon can investigate at any race.
s. 45 Bord member has the power to make a
disqualification order, wither preventing attendance or
preventing the sale/purchasing od greyhounds.
s. 47 Exclusion Order from 1) being on any racetrack, 2)

public sale of dogs 3) course meetings

The accused may have representation, however there is
no appeal afforded against the order.
McDonald challenged the constitutionality or particularly s.
47.
Per Kenny J: He felt that the administration of justice had
certain characteristics:
Justiciable dispute
Determination of rights/liabilities
Final determination (Lynham)
Enforcement of rights/liabilities (Lynham)
Making an order
The HCt and SCt came to different conclusions on the
application of the same test.
HCt felt that it was administration of justice and
therefore unconstitutional.
SCt using the double-construction test, felt that it was
not administration of justice and therefore constitutional.
*****Goodman International v Hamilton (No.1) [1992] 2 IR
542
This case concerned the infamous Beef Tribunal.
Goodman was under investigation for
fraud/malpractice/illegality, which were criminal
allegations. however, the tribunal only decided issues of
fact (in vacuo) which had no legal effect. It was
inquisitorial rather than adversarial.
Held: HCt and SCt agreed there was no administration of
justice and therefore was not unconstitutional.
This case developed the law from **Bord na gCon in that
Finlay CJ pronounced the most important clause is
number 5 (making an order). He felt this was the case
because it was defining feature of administration fo
justice. However, in the tribunal there was only a report
produced.
****Keady v Garda Commissioner [1992] 2 IR 197
P (Gardai) was served a summons alleging that he
obtained public funds under false pretenses. This came
before the District Court, but the DPP entered into a do
not pursue (nuelle prosequi) plea.
There was then an inquiry into the matter and P was found
to be in breach. There was subsequent action to dismiss
him from the force.

Held: SCt and HCt agreed that the inquiry was not
administration of justice and therefore was not
unconstitutional.
But why?
Looking to the Solicitors case, even though factually it is
the same as it, the outcome is very different. In this regard
did they overrule or distinguish In Re Solicitors Act 1954?
We are not sure. Here is why;
Per McCarthy J: he seemed to put a question mark over
the 5 point test established in McDonald, instead opting to
favor a feeling of knowing it when we see it.
Per OFlaherty J: He reduced the 5 point test to a two stage
test:
Contest between parties
Liability or penalty
So, they seem to accept the 5 stage test, yet go on to
undermine it.
iii) Limited Functions: Art 37
Art. 37 provides that some small judicial functions can be
exercised outside of the courts where they are of 1) a
limited function, 2) not of a criminal nature and 3)
authorized by law (backed up by statute).
The definition of limited was discussed in :
******In Re Solicitors Act, 1954 [1960] IR 239
It is not a question of limited jurisdiction. It is also not a
numbers game.
This was seen to mean that the powers and functions
must be limited, not the ambit of their exercise.
The test as to whether a power is limited or not lies in the
effect of the assigned power when exercised.
lives, liberties, fortunes or reputations.
In summary: The powers and functions themselves must
be limited, and the test is the effect of which those have
on the lives, liberties, fortunes and reputations of those
against whom they are exercised.
****Cowan v Attorney General [1961] IR 411
Elections for Dublin CIty Council, governed by pre-1937
legislation. It established an Election Court that could
nullify the election of someone if they were found

bankrupt. This court consisted of one barrister.

Issue: Is this valid?
It was argued that this was not a limited function.
Held: will affect in the most far reaching way the lives,
liberties fortunes and reputations of tose against whome
they are exercised. Confirmed the test and found the
election court unconstitutional.
****Keady v Garda Commissioner [1992] 2 IR 197
This case distinguishes the Solicitors case, and though it
must be regarded as exceptional and perhaps anomalous.
It owes a great deal to the historic fact that it was the
judges who struck solicitors off the roll.
This case almost distinguishes the test established in
Solicitors out of existence.
Instead- OFlaherty J here says that there is well chartered
administrative law now in place that deals with such
things.
Topic 11 Executive Function: Internal Relations
i) Government and Oireachtas (Articles 13 & 28)
Some provisions include:
Art. 13
Art. 13.1.1 President shall, by election of the Dail,
appoint the Taoiseach.
Art. 13.1.2 Resignation of PM/Taoiseach is subject to
approval by the President
Art. 13.2.1 Dail is summoned and disslved by president
on advice of Taoiseach
**Art. 13.2.2 May refust to dissolved if Taoiseach has
ceased to retain majority in Dail Eireann.
The President might refuse as generally there should not
be elections outside of the 5 year cycle as this causes
instability. The President will see if it is possible to form a
new Government without an election (a coalition).
How do we tell if the Taoiseach has ceased to retain a
majority? There are 4 signals:
Motion of no confidence.
Motion of confidence in himself to try show confidence
(backhanded approach).

Losing at the second stage of a bill proposal (Breaking the

WHIP).
Losing on a major bill (Breaking the WHIP).
Art. 13.2.3 President can arrange at any time a meeting
with both Houses.
Art. 13.3.1 Bill must be sent to the President for
signature.
Art. 13.8.1 President is not accountable when acting in
exercise of his powers.
This is balanced/countered by Art. 13.12 where he can be
put under review for misbehavior.
Art. 28
Art. 28.1 Govt shall consist of 7-15 members appointed
by the President (Junior Minister by-pass this rule).
Art. 28.2 Executive power of the State is controlled by
the Government, subject to the Constitution.
Art. 28.3.1 War can only be declared with the assent of
Dail Eireann.
ii) Executive Power: Executive Privilege; Cabinet
Confidentiality
To begin, we will look at Executive Prerogative. This is a
residual power (remaining portion of the Crowns original
power). It is not found in the Constitution however and this
is why we must look to case law.
Some traditional executive privileges include:
Conferring titles/issuing honors (In Ireland Art. 40.2.1
prohibits this)
Issue & withdraw passports (This is being subjected to
more laws over time)
To refuse to dissolve Parliament (Art. 13.2.2)
But there are still some things we are yet to deal with;
Executive Privilege, Treasure Trove and Sovereign
Immunity. These are all part of the Executive Prerogative
but have not been dealt with by the 1937 Constitution or
legislation. We must instead look to case law.
Executive Privilege to whomever/whatever holds it, the
power to withold certain types of information, where there

are competing interests involved (e.g. classified security

files, military intelligence etc.)
An English case on this matter is:
***Duncan v Camell Laird [1942] AC 642
the HMS Thetis (Navy submarine) sunk and 99 officers
died. The relative of the deceased sued the ship builders.
However, the Government wanted the details of the
submarine to be kept confidential due to the war efforts.
Held: Admiralty files are not to be disclosed.
However, the HofL took it at face value that non-disclosure
was the best option no question were asked of that
decision. What happens when the Govt ask for this same
rule to be applied in less serious situations (Ministers
spending, tax spending etc.?)
*****The State (C) v Minister for Justice [1967] IR 106
It was held here that [t]he executive power of the State s
not the same as a specific ad hoc power conferred by
statute upon a Minister or some other member of the
executive
********Murphy v Dublin Corporation [1972] 2 IR 215
This case concerned a compulsory purchase order of
property under the Housing Act 1996. The State claimed
that they had a right to withhold relevant evidence from a
civil action by its own judgment.
Kenny J in the HCt noted that there was no absolute right
to withold documents. He felt there were two general
rules which should guide the court in reaching such a
decision.:
There are classes of documents which ought not to be
produced under any circumstances (e.g.
military/diplomatic matters, proposed legislation
There is a catch 22 scenario here: If a Court would require
a Minister to say why a document should be kept
privileged, he must expose it to a certain degree.
Walsh in the SCt:
He first outlines the doctrine of separation of powers and
explains its importance, then goes on to describe the
function of the judiciary, namely the administration of
justice. He says that withholding documents is
overstepping the boundary to some degree, however, he

recognizes that these are competing public interests, but

goes on to say that it is judicial power which will decide
which public interest will prevail.
It must be the judges who make the final call.
He rejected Kenny Js class of documents test. He said
that no such thing exists and each document must be
decided on its own merits.
The function in this case was declared to not be an
executive power.
****Ambiorix Ltd v Minister for the Environment [1992] 1
IR 277
Case concerned the Urban Renewal Act 1956 which
incentivized development in certain areas. It was argued
that we (the public) should know the reasons why certain
areas were mentioned and others werent.
The HCt ordered the production of documents.
The SCt, per Finlay CJ grounded its argument in a system
of checks and balances. He had 3 conclusions:
Executive power cannot prevent judicial power from
examining documents so as to decide whether to publicize
them or not.
The Court does not need to see the document to make a
decision.
No class of document is exempt.
****Attorney General v Hamilton (No.1) [1993] 2 IR 250
Case concerned the Beef Tribunal (See supra).
Burkes legal team argued that he should not have to
expose confidential cabinet meetings.
In the HCt, OHanlon J ruled that an absolute ban was
unconstitutional.
The SCt (Finlay CJ, Hederman J, OFlaherty J; McCarthy J,
Egan JJ dissenting) held that the cabinet meeting
documents should be kept confidential.
Finlay CJ even stated the documents could not be revealed
by a subsequent Government.
Hederman J noted that if it were permissible to compel in
any circumstances the disclosure of the content of
discussions which take place at Government meetings the
executive role of the Government as envisaged by the
Constitution would be undermined, perhaps even destabilized.
In response to this decision, the 17th Amendment of the

Constitution, 1997 came to the fore. From this. Art. 28.4.3

came to be:
iii) Executive Power: Prerogative; Sovereign Immunity
**********Webb v Ireland [1988] 1 IR 353
Facts: Father and son using metal detector discovered
Hoard. These are worth a lot of money (Sothebys
estimates; 5-8 mil. and NM estimate 2.5-3 mil) and
huge historical significance. They were trespassers when
finding artifacts. National Museum requested the Hoard to
be given up in a letter to Webb which stated that they will
be honorably treated.
National Museum made offers:
Webb 10,000
Land Owners 25,000 This was accepted.
This cases concerned the prerogative of Treasure Trove.
Issues: Is Ireland entitled to the Hoard (Right of Treasure
Trove)? Are the owners of the land the owners of the
artifacts? Are Webb & Webb, as founders, entitled to
ownership?
Law: Both the 1922 Irish Free State Constitution must be
taken into account. We are trying to first ask the question
of whether the right of treasure trove exists (as this will
trump Webbs and landowners rights, if either have any)
The Articles we need to consider are:
1922 Constitution:
Art. 2 Assertion of independence all authority is derived
from the people.
Art. 11 All resources (geographic sovereignty) belong to
the Irish Free State all royalties and franchises.
Art.51 Executive authority is vested in the King (this is
why we call the 1922 Const, compromised).
Art. 73 Pre-1922 laws will transfer for continuity.
1937 Constitution:
Art. 5 Ireland is a sovereign and independent State.
Art. 10 Similar to Art. 2 of 1922 Constitution.
Art. 49.1 All powers, functions, right and prerogatives in
1922 Constitution fall to the people.
But, did the prerogative exist in the 1922 Constitution?
Art. 50.1 Subject to the Constitution, laws will transfer.
So, did the right to treasure trove exist the enactment of

first, the 1922 Constitution and then, did it successfully

transfer to the 1937 Constitution?
HCt:
Blayney J looked to ****Byrne v Ireland as a precedent.
Here it was decided that all prerogatives prior to the 1922
Constitution, due to Art. 2 of the 1922 Constitution were
inconsistent and therefore not carried over by Art. 73.
SInce the right of treasure trove did not exist in the 1922
Constitution, Art. 49.1 in the 1937 Constitution could not
have carried the right over. Therefore, there is no right of
treasure trove.
In this respect, since the landowners had signed away
their rights by accepting the payment from the National
Museum, Blayney J ordered that the Hoard either be
returned to Webb (him paying for the restoration work) or
he be paid the difference.
However, the SCt disagreed with this finding. On appeal:
Issue 1: Does the plaintiff (Webb) have ownership rights?
Law: Owners rights > finders rights, but the owners
rights now belong to the State following the pay-off.
Does the trespass vitiate any claim?
Criminal Offense Act and National Monuments Act 1930.
even if not classified as trespassers on entry, they would
become so on breaking the ground. As trespassers they
should not acquire any rights of ownership.
There is a twist however: Customary law provides the
finder of artifacts an ex gratia payment and therefore no
both the plaintiff and defendant want to argue that the
right of treasure trove exists
Issue 2: Does the right of treasure trove exist?
Law: Finlay CJ agrees with the HCt in that the prerogative
did not carry over per Art. 49.1 of the 1937 Constitution.
Instead he sees Art. 10 all royalties and franchises
including the sovereignty of the State. By virtue of Art. 11
of the 1922 Constitution, as extended by Art. 10 of the
1937 Constitution, the right of treasure trove exists.
Summary: Sovereignty > right of treasure trove.
Finlay CJ found that Webb was not disentitled by trespass
to an ex gratia payment.
Walsh J instead uses Art. 5 to find a right of treasure trove.
***********Byrne v Ireland [1972] IR 241
Plaintiff injured herself whilst waling on a street. She

attempted to sue the State.

HCt Murnaghan J
SCt Walsh J, Budd J, FItzgerald J and ODalaigh CJ,
OKeefe P dissenting.
Arguments by P:
State is a juristic person (legal fiction).
State can only act through its agents
State sovereignty implies that the State is nationally
independent, not that it is free from the law internally
(Sovereign only from an external perspective).
The States powers are always defined and limited (Art.
10, 40-45) and therefore the State is subject to the
Constitution and therefore not internally sovereign.
Her injury was due to negligence of servants of the State.
HCt:
No, P cannot sue Ireland. Murnaghan J looks at how
Ireland and State are used in the Constitution.
Sometimes they are used in a geographical sense,
sometimes in a demographic sense etc. He questioned
how a perhaps geographical mass could be sued and saw
the impracticalities with suing the State who would
exactly be responsible? He found the State to be
sovereign in all respects.
SCt:
Walsh J located the sovereignty in the people, rather than
the State. This is based in the authority of Art. 6. He then
asked the question of whether judicial powers of the
government which is exercised by the judiciary is
exercisable so as to bind the State itself.? The answer
disagreed with Murnaghan J in the HCt. Walsh J cited Art.
13.8.1, 15.3 and 45 so as to show explicitly where the
State is immune from suit. He went on to say that it they
intended Ireland to be free from suit, they would have
provided so explicitly.
Walsh J also found that prerogatives did not succeed the
1922 Constitution by virtue of Art. 2. He saw that Art. 2
rejected the power of the King.
Topic 12 Executive Function: External Relations
Features of International Law
International law can be either very specific & technical

(e.g. treaties on whaling, civil aviation) or very general

and aspirational (e.g. charters on fundamental rights).
People do not usually vote for treaties indirect
democratic legitimacy
Each nation decides for itself if it wants to be bound:
Therefore it is inherently more difficult to enforce.
Consent of the Nation-State:
Monism
Dualism
National & International legal orders are unitary.
National & International legal orders are not unitary.
Act of ratifying international law constitutes into
incorporation into the national legal order
International
law must be specifically incorporated into national law in
order for it to be applicable.
Displaces national law
Does not displace national law
Can be invoked by citizens and can be applied by judges.
Cannot be invoked by citizens and cannot be applied
by judges.
Per Art. 29.6 Ireland is a dualist state.
i) International Law (Articles 29.1, 29.2, 29.3)
***State (Summers Jennings) v Furlong [1966] 1 IR 183
Case concerned the extradition of a man during the
Troubles pursuant to Part III of the Extradition Act 1965. He
sought to rely on the Rule of Speciality, which provides
that you cannot be prosecuted in a new state, for
something you have already been prosecuted for. (Art. 14
on the European Convention on Extradition) Ireland was
not a signatory so the plaintiff here sought to rely on Art.
29.3 of the Constitution.
Held: Art. 29.3 is not to be read in this fashion, it cannot
overrule the Oireachtas. Per the Irish interpretation of the
Constitution, it translates into a guide as opposed to a
rule

***Kavanagh v Governor of Mountjoy Prison [2002] IR 97

Kavanagh was convicted by the SCCt of 7 offenses under
the OASA 1939 (designed to catch IRA members). The
SCCt however does not afford the same rights and
protections as an ordinary court does. Kavanagh sought to
rely on the ICCPR to quash his conviction as it finds the
OASA 1939 to be in contravention of it.
Held: The notion that the views of a Committee, even fo
admittedly distinguished experts could prevail against the
concluded decision of a properly constituted court is
patently unacceptable.
***ACT Shipping v Minister for Marine [1995] 3 IR 406.
Art. 38(1) if the International Court of Justice State
confirms that customary law is accepted.
This case concerned the Right of Refuge (an
internationally recognized customary law). A German ship
was stranded off the coast of Bantree. There was a 10m
hole in the side of it. The Minister did not allow the right of
refuge to it.
The plaintiff sought redress in domestic law that there is a
prima facie right of refuge which had transpired into Irish
domestic law from customary international law.
Barr J in the HCt: Held: Art. 15(2)(1) (law making power
exclusive to Oireachtas) does not inhibit the evolution of
customary law into domestic law. The constitutional
provision relates explicitly to the making of law.
Customary law is not made in this sense, it evolves over a
period of time through conduct which becomes widely
accepted.
The right of refuge has merged into Irish law. However,
that right was not absolute (e.g. oil spill) and so the
Minister was entitled to deny it refuge.
Irish courts are much more open to Customary law than
they are to Treaty law.
*****Boland v An Taoiseach [1974] IR 338
The format of this case is slightly different: Here, the
plaintiff sought that the Government should not agree a
treaty until a referendum.
Sunningdale Agreement 1973 established the Council of
Ireland.
Clause 5:

Irish Govt wont accept there will be a change in the

status of Northern Ireland unless a majority of people in
NR want that change.
GB recognizes that NI is a part og GB, but if a majority
want to become Irish, this could happen.
Kevin Boland argued that this clause was in contravention
of Art. 2.3 of the Constitution and only a referendum could
place this into law.
Held:
Fitzgerald CJ took the view that the court had no power to
intervene unless the Govt was acting in clear disregard of
its powers conferred by the Constitution.
Budd J felt that this matter was one of policy and it was
not for the courts to intervene.
ii) European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR Act
2003)
Council of Europe/ECtHR
The Council of Europe is separate from the European
Union (EU).
It was established in 1949 and has 47 member states. The
ECHR is a formulation of the Council of Europe and the
ECtHR interprets the convention. It sits in Strasbourg. It is
a supernational court.
The structure of the ECHR is such that it identifies a right
and then gives ways in which that right may be inhibited
or limited.
To bring a case before the ECtHR you must be comply with
Art. 35 (Admissibility criteria):
Exhausted domestic remedies
Wait 6 months after final hearing
Cannot be anonymous
Not substantially similar to another case already heard.
Not manifestly ill-founded/abuse of the right of
individual application
Significant disadvantage suffered by the victim.
These criteria are malleable however (e.g. ABC v Ireland).

***In re OLaighleis [1960] IR 93

Plaintiff arrested under s.30 of the OASA 1939 sought to
rely on the ECHR,
Maguire CJ noted that there was an insuperable obstacle
to importing the provisions of the ECHR in the form of Art.
15-29.6 of the Constitution. Also, the Court could not
accept the idea that the primacy of domestic legislation
would be displaced by the State becoming a party to the
ECHR.
This is similar to **Kavanagh and **Summer Jennings
In 2003, the Oireachtas enacted the ECHR Act 2003. Some
important aspects of it concerning its relationship with
Irish law are:
s.2 When interpreting Irish law, the courts should try to
do so in line with the ECHR (Double-construction test)
s.3(1) Every organ of the State shall perform its
functions in such a way that is compatible with the ECHR,
subject first to domestic law however.
s.3(2) If a person suffers loss/damage/injury in respect of
(1), they may recover damages.
s.4 Notice shall be taken of ECtHR decisions.
s.5 If Irish law is incompatible, a declaration is to be
issued
s.5(1) HCt or SCt may make sucha declaration
s.5(2) A declaration of incompatibility shall not a) affect
the validity, continuing enforcement of law b) shall not
prevent proceedings.
**********McD v L & M [2010] 2 IR 199
This is the most important decision by the SCt on what
we think of the ECHR.
Facts: Two women asked McD to be a sperm donor. He
understood that he would not have any rights, but became
attached and applied under s.6(a) of the Guardianship of
Infants Act 1964. The lesbian couple wished to defeat any
right he had. Note: They were not recognized as a family
under Irish domestic law so nothing can help them in Irish
law they seek Art. 8 of the ECHR (respect for private and
family life) but the ECtHR had never said that same sex
couples have rights under Art.8.
HCt per Hedigan J finds in favor of the couple and defeated

McDs statutory rights. However the SCt found ruled

against the couple and said that McDs statutory rights
still existed.
Three stages to the judgment (conflict between SCt and
HCt):
Place of ECHR law in hierarchy of law sources.
Role of national judges vis-a-vis Irish and ECHR law
Implications for an individual applicant seeking to rely on
ECHR law before the Irish Courts
HCt per Hedigan J:
Recognizes that there are no explicit rights afforded to
same sex de facto families in Irish law. However he goes
on to say that this does not necessarily preclude the Court
from recognizing certain rights and duties (he is saying
there are some gaps in the Constitution and is trying to fill
them. This however is contrary to the doctrine of
separation of powers, presumption of constitutionality etc.
etc.). He connected the silence in Irish law to ECHR law.
Domestic courts/judges have the primary obligation to
interpret and apply the ECHR (this is atypical). He feels the
European Court is more of a supervisory body and is
subsidiary to the national systems safeguarding human
rights.
From the two principles recognized above, he comes to
the conclusion that silence in the ECHR, and due to the
fact that no case law had recognized same sex couples as
constituting families, it must be regarded that they have
rights under Art.8
SCt per Murray CJ
Ireland is a dualist state. In this sense national law >
international law.
The duty of the courts is to uphold and enforce the
Constitution that is what judges say in their oath. The
HCt had no jurisdiction to apply directly the provisions of
the Convention in that manner.
The ECHR is a living document.
***Foy v AntArd Chlaraitheoir [2007] IEHC 470
Concerned a transgender seeking to have her birth
certificate changed (See supra).
With the Civil Registration Act 2004, the court issues a
declaration of incompatibility and as a result Foy is
perhaps entitled to an ex gratia payment under s.3(2) of

the ECHR Act 2003.

There are four consequences of such a declaration:
Taoiseach must notify the Dail and Seanad.
Reasonable expectation that the order will be taken
seriously
Applicant can apply for ex gratia payment
Court will order the Govt to pay all legal costs.
iii) European Union Law (Article 29.4)
https://lawinireland.wordpress.com/constitutional-law/

Same-sex marriage in the Republic of Ireland ... the Irish

High Court held in Zappone v. Revenue Commissioners
that ... Revenue Commissioners case on a Canadian .

BRUTON THREATENS LOCK-OUT OF TEACHERS!

October 22, 16

Support ASTI Teachers, GRA Gardai, and AGSI Sergeants

and Inspectors
They are not in Breach of Lansdowne RD Agreement. They
are not a party to it!
For Full Restoration of Pay, allowances, working hours and
conditions of employment generally!!!
ASTI Teachers have no obligation to continue UNPAID
Supervision and Substitution Duties beyond the end of the
Haddington RD Agreement on July 1
FEMPI IMPOSED Penalties such as an increment freeze on
members of unions who refuse to voluntarily enter an an
industrial relations agreement with the employer is a
breach of the right to free Trade Unions.
Penalising a new teacher who joins ASTI rather than TUI in
a mixed Union School by freezing increments and refusing
to pay for supervision and substitution is a breach of the
International Labour Organisation(ILO) on the right to
Freedom of Association .
Members of TUI had little Choice But To sign the yellow
document after Officers of TUI Capitulated by advising
them to do so and refusing to protect any teacher who
didnt sign the document
TUI MUST NOT ALLOW ITSELF TO BE USED BY
GOVERNMENT TO BREAK ASTI DISPUTE
TUI EXECUTIVE MUST INSTRUCT MEMBERS NOT TO SIGN
THE YELLOW DOCUMENT! NO STRIKE-BREAKING!!

TUI MUST INSIST THAT All MONIES DUE TO MEMBERS

UNDER LANSDOWNE RD BE PAID UNCODITIONALLY AND
IMMEDIATELY-There is no requirement that members apply
individually for benefits in the TUI-Depatment of Education
Agreement. The Department is breaching that Agreement
by requiring TUI members to apply individually as a
condition for payment imposed solely by the employer.
THE ONLY FUNCTION OF THE INDIVIDUAL APPLICATION IS
TO SINGLE OUT ASTI MEMBERS FOR PUNISHMENT UNDER
FEMPI ANTI-TRADE UNION LAW-NO COLLABORATION WITH
ANTI-UNION LAWS!The Department of Education is
requiring this only in schools where there are members of
TUI and ASTI. This is because the Department cannot use
Deduction at Source lists to identify ASTI members
because of Data Protection Law
In 1913 William Martin Murphy required employees of his
tramway company to sign a yellow document I am no
longer a member of Larkins Union. If they had done this
ITGWU members would have been selectively sacked.
They all refused to do it. Murphy responded with a total
lock-out
In 2016, Department of Education is seeking that TUI
members outside core vocational schools individually sign
a document stating that they are members of TUI and
therefore are entitled to pay increases under Lansdowne
RD and are not due to be penalised under FEMPI. This will
enable the Department to use FEMPI ANTI UNION LAW (So
Described ON OFFICIAL TUI Banners at Leinster House
Protest) to selectively punish ASTI members under FEMPI.
Also new entrants and non-union members can join TUI to
avoid penalties
TUI and ASTI have an agreement under which transfers of
membership are not allowed when either union is in
dispute. This is being honoured by TUI
BUT this is not enough in the circumstances where the
anti-trade union law FEMPI is on the statute book
There must be a moratorium on all recruitment to unions
at second level until the ASTI dispute is over. OTHERWISE
TEACHER SOLIDARITY WILL BE SET BACK FOR DECADES!
Above all, all TUI members must be instructed not to write
the yellow letter to the Department.
Did TUI members have to write ltters individually to the

Department of education to claim any of the benefits of

previous agreements? NO!
The only function of the required letter is to allow the
Department of Education to single out ASTI members for
punishment in schools where members of both unions
exist.
Department Circular is included here;
http://www.asti.ie/news/latest-news/newsarticle/article/circular-on-application-of-fempi-for-astimembers/
SEE ALSO ON THIS BLOG: ICTU LED BY SIPTU/ IMPACT IS
UNDERMINING THE RIGHT TO FREE TRADE UNIONS BY
COLLUDING WITH THE FINANCIAL EMERGENCY MEASURES
IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ACTS FEMPI (2013, 2015)
Full Discussion http://wp.me/pKzXa-gw How ICTU Failed
US!
Extract from Dail Exchanges on Continuation of FEMPI
Full Dil Record
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates
%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2016063000
009?opendocument#G00500
Deputy Seamus Healy(IND): A Cheann Comhairle
An Ceann Comhairle: Very briefly, I will take you
Deputy Seamus Healy(IND): Surely the Minister is not
telling us that the Government will extend this emergency
legislation this draconian, anti-trade union legislation
that introduced swingeing cuts to pay, pensions and
conditions of employment of public servants without a
debate in this House. I thought we were supposed to have
new politics in this Chamber. This is old politics. This is the
Government bulldozing through legislation without any
opportunity to discuss or vote on it.
Dail sitting suspended for 5 minutes by Ceann Chomhairle
after heated Exchanges
AFTER RESUMPTION
Deputy Seamus Healy(IND): To clarify, is the Ceann
Comhairle telling us that the Government is prepared to
defer the renewal of this legislation until after the debate
in the House?
An Ceann Comhairle: I am not telling you that at all.

Deputy Seamus Healy(IND): Then what are you telling

us? A debate in a weeks time or a fortnights time is of
very little value if the legislation is already extended, if
young teachers, garda and nurses cannot even pay for
their rental accommodation
An Ceann Comhairle: You have made your point.
Deputy Seamus Healy(IND): and if we still have a twotier pay structure in those professions.

Howlin RUBBISHES HEAVY IOT WORKLOADS IN SEANAD TO

JUSTIFY DRACONIAN ANTI-TRADE UNION PROVISIONS OF
FEMPI
Full Seanad Debate on FEMPI Yesterday
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates
%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/seanad2015112
400002?opendocument#CC00100
From Chair, Dublin Branch TUI RMA 086-4183732
EXTRACT FROM SEANAD DEBATE
Senator Fidelma Healy Eames:
In text below ; . If someone is teaching 20 hours a week
with an average of four hours preparation per lecturing
hour, they are incredible hours and are twice the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,
OECD, average. Does the Minister want quality teaching
and outcomes or to have the lecturers running around like
headless chickens? The Minister should not damage the
profession. That is what is happening. I am passionate
about this because I know the price the country will pay if
we do not keep our standards high.
If it is over, the Minister should not hurt some over others.
As we have all agreed, and the Minister agreed in the Dil,
a pension is a property right and the right to property is
the second highest right in this land, after the right to life.
How is this fair? The Minister should please assure our
colleagues that their pension rights will be restored and
give the date for that.
The overwhelming vote of members in the Teachers Union
of Ireland, for example, not to accept the Lansdowne Road
agreement is due in large measure to the fact that the

agreement is utterly oblivious of teachers working casual

hours. It is the worst job in the country. The Minister
should listen to what I say. These people have had to
spend up to six years training to be teachers, four years to
get a basic degree and two years for a higher diploma, H.
Dip. If some of those poor devils have only two classes a
day that makes up ten or 12 hours a week, they cannot
bank those and draw down social welfare for two or three
days because the work carries across five days. Now,
according to the Oireachtas Library and Research Service
notes on this, if they earn up to 24,000 in casual pay,
they will not qualify for any of these restoration measures.
Is that true? If it is, the Minister is giving them the greatest
kick in the tail. Approximately half of second level
teachers under the age of 35 are in the unacceptable
situation of being in part-time and or temporary
employment. The Lansdowne Road agreement does not
address this problem.
Lecturers in institutes of technology are on 18 to 20 hours
a week. I was a lecturer in a teacher training college. We
had a very high number of lecturing hours too but a good
lecturer does three things: lecturing, which includes
teaching and assessment; research; and connecting with
the community, the town and the gown. If someone is
teaching 20 hours a week with an average of four hours
preparation per lecturing hour, they are incredible hours
and are twice the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development, OECD, average. Does the Minister want
quality teaching and outcomes or to have the lecturers
running around like headless chickens? The Minister
should not damage the profession. That is what is
happening. I am passionate about this because I know the
price the country will pay if we do not keep our standards
high. I would like to hear the Ministers response and on
Committee Stage, we will have an opportunity to tease
this out further. I want the Minister to answer Senator
Craughwells question on whether the Whip will be applied
to this Bill.

From Chair, Dublin Branch TUI RMA 086-4183732 Give

him his Answer TO_Morrow AT The Gates of the Institutes!
Staff in clerical management in the health services are
working an extra two hours per week. Teachers are
working an extra three hours per week. Academics are
working an extra 78 hours per year while staff in local
government are working an extra two hours per week. In
the context of picking out one group that one feels is hard
done by, one would not pick out the people who are doing
an extra 30 hours per year when others are asked to do an
extra two and a quarter hours per week. We needed
people to step up to the plate in respect of the
emergency.Minister Howlin
Minister Howlin on Seanad Record
Deputy Brendan Howlin: Information on Brendan Howlin
Zoom on Brendan Howlin I mentioned the point made by
Senator Sheahan. Senator Norris spoke about Members of
the Oireachtas. I have not excluded them from the
benefits of this. I have not excluded any group from the
benefits of this for a very good reason. Again, I want to be
clear about this. This is emergency legislation because
cutting pay is a very unusual thing to do and can only be
done in very clear circumstances when there is a national
imperative to do so. I previously outlined the criteria for it
based on the legal advice we have. One criterion is that
the emergency must exist. The question of whether it still
exists is a fair one. It still exists but the position is
improving and we can unwind it gradually as things
progress is made. Second, do the measures have uniform
application? In other words, are they arbitrary in respect of
any group? I cannot pick any group and say that I am
going to exclude one category of public servants because I
think they do not work hard enough or because it might be
popular, for example, to exclude politicians. That is not
possible. One cannot discriminate in this way in this type
of legislation. The third issue is that there must be a
contribution from the generality of the legislation that
makes a contribution to the State. I can tell the House that

2.2 billion fits that bill. We need that money.

I will move on to the issue of additional hours and garda,
an issue that was also raised by Senator Craughwell. It is
important to put these things on the record of the House.
Garda have agreed and have worked an extra three days
per year. That is 30 hours a year. Civil servants are
working an extra two and a quarter hours per week.
Nurses, doctors and support staff in health are working an
extra one and a half hours per week. Staff in the HSE are
working an extra two hours per week. Staff in clerical
management in the health services are working an extra
two hours per week. Teachers are working an extra three
hours per week. Academics are working an extra 78 hours
per year while staff in local government are working an
extra two hours per week. In the context of picking out
one group that one feels is hard done by, one would not
pick out the people who are doing an extra 30 hours per
year when others are asked to do an extra two and a
quarter hours per week. We needed people to step up to
the plate in respect of the emergency. We will unwind this
legislation but this will have to be done on a collective
basis. It cannot involve one group saying that it alone will
not participate in the agreement. Everybody is entitled to
do that but they cannot say that they are demanding all
the benefits of the agreement but they are not prepared to
abide by the difficult aspects it contains. That is not
possible. Why should a clerical officer working in a Garda
station work extra hours if the person beside them says
they will not do so but that they still want the benefits of
pay restoration? We negotiate and agree these things.
That is the way the system works and it does not work on
the basis of people saying I have rejected it and,
therefore, I can have the benefits but not the
responsibilities or the burdensome bits of it. I will move a
bit faster. I am probably too long-winded. Senator
Kathryn Reilly supports the Bill, which is welcome. She
referred to the position of low and middle income earners
under the LRA which was exclusively about low and middle
income earners pay. A public servant on 25,000 who is
not highly paid will benefit under the Bill to the tune of
7.5%. He or she will get 1,875 back. A public servant on

175,000 I am not sure what public servant that is will

get back 0.6% or 1,000. It is, therefore, geared towards
the
Howlin
Staff in clerical management in the health services are
working an extra two hours per week. Teachers are
working an extra three hours per week. Academics are
working an extra 78 hours per year while staff in local
government are working an extra two hours per week. In
the context of picking out one group that one feels is hard
done by, one would not pick out the people who are doing
an extra 30 hours per year when others are asked to do an
extra two and a quarter hours per week. We needed
people to step up to the plate in respect of the
emergency.Minister Howlin

Minister Howlin on Seanad Record

Deputy Brendan Howlin: Information on Brendan Howlin
Zoom on Brendan Howlin I mentioned the point made by
Senator Sheahan. Senator Norris spoke about Members of
the Oireachtas. I have not excluded them from the
benefits of this. I have not excluded any group from the
benefits of this for a very good reason. Again, I want to be
clear about this. This is emergency legislation because
cutting pay is a very unusual thing to do and can only be
done in very clear circumstances when there is a national

imperative to do so. I previously outlined the criteria for it

based on the legal advice we have. One criterion is that
the emergency must exist. The question of whether it still
exists is a fair one. It still exists but the position is
improving and we can unwind it gradually as things
progress is made. Second, do the measures have uniform
application? In other words, are they arbitrary in respect of
any group? I cannot pick any group and say that I am
going to exclude one category of public servants because I
think they do not work hard enough or because it might be
popular, for example, to exclude politicians. That is not
possible. One cannot discriminate in this way in this type
of legislation. The third issue is that there must be a
contribution from the generality of the legislation that
makes a contribution to the State. I can tell the House that
2.2 billion fits that bill. We need that money.
I will move on to the issue of additional hours and garda,
an issue that was also raised by Senator Craughwell. It is
important to put these things on the record of the House.
Garda have agreed and have worked an extra three days
per year. That is 30 hours a year. Civil servants are
working an extra two and a quarter hours per week.
Nurses, doctors and support staff in health are working an
extra one and a half hours per week. Staff in the HSE are
working an extra two hours per week. Staff in clerical
management in the health services are working an extra
two hours per week. Teachers are working an extra three
hours per week. Academics are working an extra 78 hours
per year while staff in local government are working an
extra two hours per week. In the context of picking out
one group that one feels is hard done by, one would not
pick out the people who are doing an extra 30 hours per
year when others are asked to do an extra two and a
quarter hours per week. We needed people to step up to
the plate in respect of the emergency. We will unwind this
legislation but this will have to be done on a collective
basis. It cannot involve one group saying that it alone will
not participate in the agreement. Everybody is entitled to
do that but they cannot say that they are demanding all
the benefits of the agreement but they are not prepared to
abide by the difficult aspects it contains. That is not

possible. Why should a clerical officer working in a Garda

station work extra hours if the person beside them says
they will not do so but that they still want the benefits of
pay restoration? We negotiate and agree these things.
That is the way the system works and it does not work on
the basis of people saying I have rejected it and,
therefore, I can have the benefits but not the
responsibilities or the burdensome bits of it. I will move a
bit faster. I am probably too long-winded. Senator
Kathryn Reilly supports the Bill, which is welcome. She
referred to the position of low and middle income earners
under the LRA which was exclusively about low and middle
income earners pay. A public servant on 25,000 who is
not highly paid will benefit under the Bill to the tune of
7.5%. He or she will get 1,875 back. A public servant on
175,000 I am not sure what public servant that is will
get back 0.6% or 1,000. It is, therefore, geared towards
the lowest paid.

FEMPI 2015 Gives HUGE Pay RISES TO VERY HIGH

EARNERS
PENSIONER BELOW 12,000 Euro GETS NOTHING
IS THE CONTRIBUTION OF PENSIONERS TO RESOLVING
THE FINANCIAL CRISIS PROPORTIONAL?
2012 Serving Public Servant
Taoiseach
Tanaiste
Minister
M of State
TD
200,000
184,405
169,275
130,042
92,942
Post FEMPI 2013
185,350
171,309.
157,540
121,639
87,528
Restorations FEMPI 2015
14,650
13,096
11 ,735
8,403
5,414
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
Total Restoration 2015
15,650
14,096
12,735
9,403
6,414

Salary Post FEMPI 2015

201,000
185,405
170,275
131,042
93,942
% of 2012 Salary
100.5%
100.54%
100.59%
100.76%
101.07%
The maximum restoration a pensioner can get under the
Bill is 1680 E per year. None of the above have private
property in the exchequer except the pensioner
Association Of Garda Seargents and Inspectors To Stop
Working Free Hours- Attack Labour HOWLINS Anti-Trade
Union Bill-FEMPI 2015
From Irish Examiner 25/11/2015
The association expressed deep disappointment at the
Governments proposal to an incremental pay freeze as
part of the Financial Measures in the Public Interest Bill
2015.
Deputy general secretary John Jacob said: The AGSI
national executive is very disappointed that despite
implementing all of the terms of the Haddington Road
Agreement, our members now face an incremental pay
freeze from July 2016.
He said: The Haddington Road Agreement placed certain
obligations on our members including working an
additional 30 hours unpaid overtime which we complied
with willingly, among other terms.
However, despite Governments commitment to a review
a specific term under the Haddington Road Agreement,
which was due to be concluded by June 2014 we are a
long way from it being finalised.
Mr Jacob said that the Government had failed to recognise
the full commitment of AGSI members to Haddington
Road.
We suffered pay cuts, worked 30 hours for free, and
engaged fully in that agreement to help the Government
turn the economy around during the worst financial crisis
this country has witnessed.
Despite this we are threatened with an incremental pay
freeze at a time when we should be working together to
improve morale within the force morale which is
extremely low and which has been recognised as such by

our commissioner
IN Dil, Sinn Fein voted for FEMPI ANTI-TRADE UNION BILL!
Official TUI, ASTI Banners outside the Dail said: FEMPI
BILL-ANTI-Trade UNION, Anti -Worker, Anti-Democratic
EVEN Shane Ross voted against the Bill
But Sinn Fin joined FG, Lab, FF, Social Democrats in
voting for the Bill!
Dil Record
FEMPI BILL 2015
Question put:
The Dil divided: T, 109; Nl, 16.
T
Nl
Adams, Gerry.
Boyd Barrett, Richard.
Aylward, Bobby.
Broughan, Thomas P.
Barry, Tom.
Collins, Joan.
Breen, Pat.
Coppinger, Ruth.
Bruton, Richard.
Daly,
Clare.
Burton, Joan.
Fitzmaurice, Michael.
Buttimer, Jerry.
Fleming, Tom.
Byrne, Catherine.
Halligan, John.
Byrne, Eric.
Healy, Seamus.
Calleary, Dara.
Higgins, Joe.
Cannon, Ciarn.
Mathews, Peter.
Carey, Joe.
McGrath, Finian.
Coffey, Paudie.
OSullivan, Maureen.
Collins, ine.
Pringle, Thomas.
Collins, Niall.
Ross,

Shane.
Colreavy, Michael.
Mick.
Conaghan, Michael.
Conlan, Sen.
Connaughton, Paul J.
Conway, Ciara.
Coonan, Noel.
Corcoran Kennedy, Marcella.
Costello, Joe.
Cowen, Barry.
Creed, Michael.
Daly, Jim.
Deasy, John.
Deering, Pat.
Doherty, Pearse.
Doherty, Regina.
Donohoe, Paschal.
Dowds, Robert.
Doyle, Andrew.
Durkan, Bernard J.
Farrell, Alan.
Feighan, Frank.
Ferris, Martin.
Fleming, Sean.
Grealish, Noel.
Griffin, Brendan.
Harrington, Noel.
Harris, Simon.
Hayes, Tom.
Healy-Rae, Michael.
Heydon, Martin.
Howlin, Brendan.
Humphreys, Heather.
Humphreys, Kevin.
Keating, Derek.
Kehoe, Paul.
Kelleher, Billy.
Kelly, Alan.
Kenny, Enda.
Kenny, Sen.
Kirk, Seamus.

Wallace,

Kitt, Michael P.
Kyne, Sen.
Lawlor, Anthony.
Lynch, Ciarn.
Lyons, John.
Mac Lochlainn, Pdraig.
McCarthy, Michael.
McConalogue, Charlie.
McDonald, Mary Lou.
McEntee, Helen.
McFadden, Gabrielle.
McGinley, Dinny.
McGrath, Michael.
McLellan, Sandra.
McLoughlin, Tony.
McNamara, Michael.
Mulherin, Michelle.
Murphy, Catherine.
Murphy, Eoghan.
Nash, Gerald.
Naughten, Denis.
Neville, Dan.
Nolan, Derek.
Noonan, Michael.
Caolin, Caoimhghn.
Cuv, amon.
Fearghal, Sen.
Rordin, Aodhn.
Snodaigh, Aengus.
OBrien, Jonathan.
ODea, Willie.
ODonnell, Kieran.
ODonovan, Patrick.
ODowd, Fergus.
OMahony, John.
OReilly, Joe.
OSullivan, Jan.
Perry, John.
Phelan, Ann.
Phelan, John Paul.
Rabbitte, Pat.
Reilly, James.

Ring, Michael.
Ryan, Brendan.
Sherlock, Sean.
Shortall, Risn.
Smith, Brendan.
Spring, Arthur.
Stagg, Emmet.
Stanley, Brian.
Tibn, Peadar.
Tuffy, Joanna.
Twomey, Liam.
Wall, Jack.
Tellers: T, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg; Nl,
Deputies Seamus Healy and Clare Daly.
Question declared carried.
41 Deputies, including the 3 Renua deputies, did not vote
TUI Calls Official Protest Against FEMPI BILL WED NEXT 45.30 Leinster House Main Gate, Kildare St
TUI LETTER TO All DAIL DEPUTIES CALLS FOR CHANGES To
FEMPI 2015 Bill to remove penalty clauses on serving
union members and to fully restore pension cuts to
pensioned members All of these offending FEMPI 2015
provisions should be deleted or amended as appropriate
-TUI Letter Further Down
From: President TUI Sent: 16 November 2015 To All
Executive Members
Subject: Protest against the Draconian and other Negative
aspects of the FEMPI 2015 Bill (SEE TUI LETTER TO ALL
DIL DEPUTIES BELOW)
Dear Colleagues,
Arising from the Executive meeting last Friday TUI is
staging a protest outside of the Dil on Kildare Street this
Wednesday, 18th November, between 4pm and 5 30pm.
The protest is against the objectionable aspects (please
see the letter sent by TUI to all members of the
Oireachtas) of the FEMPI 2015 Bill. I have been informed
by the Garda that 100 people is the maximum number
that can be accommodated in front of the Dil. We would
be grateful if you could contact Branch Officers in your
area (those adjacent to Dublin) with a view to both

encouraging and ascertaining how many members might

be available to attend. We will also send an email to
branches, schools and colleges. In the event that more
than 100 members were to turn up the surplus can be
accommodated in nearby Kildare Place and we can
organise a rota for the protest. Please get back to me with
any queries or information that you might have.
Kind Regards,
Gerry Quinn,President,Teachers Union of Ireland
73 Orwell Road, Rathgar,Dublin 6
ATTACK ON THE RIGHT TO FREE TRADE UNIONS BY
LABOUR PARTY
Penalties on Unions and Anti-Union Laws in Labour
Howlins Bill -Speech by Seamus Healy TD in Dil on
Committe Stage of FEMPI Bill 2015
Forcing unions by to sign up to an agreement favoured by
government is a measure reminiscent of the corporate
state of Mussolini, Franco and Salazaar. It is an attack on
the right to free trade unions
Gardai and Teachers and lecturers in secondary schools
and Institutes of Technology wish to continue to abide by
the industrial relations agrreements to which they are a
party- theHaddington Rd Agreement which expires on July
1,2016.
GARDAI and teachers/lecturers are not seeking any extra
money
Minister Howlin through amendments in this Bill is
attempting to force these employees to abandon this
agreement. He is attempting to force them to continue
additional hours and duties which are damaging the
policing service and the education system.
Forcing unions by to sign up to an agreement favoured by
government is a measure reminiscent of the corporate
state of Mussolini, Franco and Salazaar.
That A Labour Party Minister should introduce such
measures taking effect in 2016 must be making Connolly
and Larkin spin in their graves.
My amendments seek to remove these powers
TUI Calls on Dil Deputies to Vote Against Penalty Clauses
in Howlin Bill-FEMPI 2015-full letter below
Garda Rep. Assoc.(GRA) warns Government Against

Punitive Legislation
Seamus Healy TD(087-2802199) Seeks to Remove AntiUnion Clauses from Howlin Bill
Gardai Oppose Lansdowne Rd, Take Similar Position to TUI,
ASTI
ALL UNIONS MUST SUPPORT TUI CALL TO REMOVE ANTIUNION CLAUSES From BILL
TUI LETTER TO All DAIL DEPUTIES CALLING FOR CHANGES
To FEMPI 2015 Bill to remove penalty clauses on serving
union members and to fully restore pension cuts to
pensioned members
All of these offending FEMPI 2015 provisions should be
deleted or amended as appropriate TUI Letter
TO:
Members of Dil ireann 3rd November 2015
The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest
Bill (FEMPI) 2015
Dear Deputy,
The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest
Bill (FEMPI) 2015 contains a number of highly
objectionable and punitive provisions which should be
deleted or amended. Section 4 is draconian and seeks to
force unions into the Lansdowne Road Agreement (LRA). If
passed into law it will extend the potential to freeze
increments for teachers and lecturers from beyond 2016
to 2018.
This could lead to a loss of thousands of euro for teachers
and lecturers throughout their careers. This threat is
disproportionate and wrong and must be stopped.
Likewise, the threat in Section 10 to the restoration to the
teachers salary scale of payment for Substitution and
Supervision (S&S) must be removed. Thousands of
teachers have been carrying out this work since 2013 on
the understanding that payment was deferred to 2017 and
2018. Any reneging on these Haddington Road Agreement
(HRA) provisions (which involve reciprocal and significant
productivity by teachers) will cause very serious industrial
unrest.
The question needs to be asked: If teachers do not carry
out this S&S work, who will, given that this is work most
effectively done by teachers? If this work is to be done it
will have to be paid for one way or the other.
The Public Service Pension Reduction (PSPR), which was

imposed on the pensions of retired public sector workers,

will be removed by the end of 2017 for approximately
65,000 of the 90,000 whose pensions were cut. However,
there is no commitment to have the remaining PSPR
removed. The majority of our colleagues, retired or soon to
retire, who have given invaluable service to society are
adversely affected by this.
All of these offending FEMPI 2015 provisions should be
deleted or amended as appropriate.
The overwhelming vote of members (92% on a 60%
turnout) of the TUI not to accept the LRA is due in large
measure to the fact that the LRA is utterly oblivious of
1
Casualisation. A very significant proportion of
teachers and lecturers have part-time hours/low pay,
insecure employment or both. The LRA pay increases in
January will benefit few of these. About half of second
level TUI members under the age of 35 years are in the
unacceptable situation of being in part-time and/or
temporary employment. The LRA does not address this
problem.
2
Lecturing hours far in excess of international norms:
Staffing levels in Institutes of Technology are wholly
inadequate, with the result that Lecturers have lecturing
hours far in excess of international norms. Institute of
Technology (IoT) lecturers lecture for 18 or 20 hours a
week. The international norm is about 8 to 10 hours. Since
the recession began, funding for the IoT sector has been
cut by 32% and lecturer numbers have fallen by 10%
while student numbers have increased by over 20%. This
is unacceptable, unfair and unsustainable. Not only does
the LRA not address this problem but it contributes to the
extension of the problem beyond 2016 to 2018. The
inevitable result of this failure to staff institutes
adequately is that the quality of service to students suffers
as does the reputation of the Institutes.
3
Bureaucratisation of teaching and lecturing. Research
and experience show that teaching in Ireland has become
increasingly pressurised for a variety of reasons. Increased
and often unnecessary bureaucratic work is a large part of
the problem. Currently teachers in England are leaving the
profession in huge numbers during the early career stage
because of workload problems. We do not want to

replicate that destabilising phenomenon in this country.

However, the LRA does not address this problem.
4
Lack of appropriate career structures for
educationalists in Further Education.
5
LRA Paragraphs 3.2 and 4.Specifically in respect of
the LRA, there is considerable concern because of the lack
of written clarification on paragraphs 3.2 and 4. While a
verbal reassurance in this regard was provided by the
Labour Relations Commission in Lansdowne House during
the negotiations, this assurance is required in writing.
Rather than threatening educationalists with draconian
measures, which would punish them for the rest of their
careers, it would be more appropriate for the government
to talk to the TUI about how best to address and resolve
the issues outlined above in a manner that protects and
enhances the integrity and quality of the Irish education
system.
Yours sincerely,_______________________________
_______________________________
Gerry Quinn
John MacGabhann
President
General Secretary

On RTE News at one, to-day Nov 8, Gen Sec PJ STONE

warned government not to attempt to punish his members
for their stance.
The Garda Representative Association (GRA) has said its
members will refuse to work an additional 30 hours that
was initially imposed on the force under the previous
Haddington Road Agreement.TUI in a letter to All Dil
Deputies has called on them to Vote Against Penalty
Clauses in Howlin Bill-FEMPI 2015 which goes into
Committee Stage In Dil this week.
Minister Howlin has tabled amendments to FEMPI 2013 to
enable him to compel union members to continue extra
hours for a further 3 years
But Deputy Seamus Healy TD has tabled amendments to
the Howlin Bill as circulated which have the effect of
removing completely all power from the minister to freeze
increments and other payments to public servants who

refuse to continue the extra hours and duties.(see below)

The extra duties and hours were to end at the latest by
June 2016 but they are to be continued under the
Lansdowne Rd Agreement.
TUI says it simply wants to abide by the existing
agreement until it expires on July 1, 2016.
Amendments Submitted by Seamus Healy TD 0872802199
FEMPI BILL 2015
Amendment
In Line 31, P6 insert
Section 7 of the Act of 2013 is amended by the deletion
of Subsection 1
Explanation: The Ministers amendments seek to continue
coercive power by amending section 1 of FEMPI 2013
This amendment deletes the coercive power from FEMPI
2013. If it were passed by the Dil, the coercive power of
the Minister would cease immediately.

FEMPI BILL 2015

Amendment
Add after Financial Emergency Measures in the public
Interest Act 2013 at the end of 10 (5) on line 33 Page 13
or in a sectoral agreement or where in any event the
work, e.g. substitution and supervision duties in schools,

is being done.
Explanation: Under Haddington Rd Agreement teachers
were to receive a payment for S&S duties to compensate
for removal of the S&S allowance. Public servants in other
areas were to receive similar compensations. Minister
Howlin is seeking to take powers under the Bill to block
this compensation. This amendment denies the Minister
the power to do this.
The Garda Representative Association (GRA) has said its
members will refuse to work an additional 30 hours that
was initially imposed on the force under the previous
Haddington Road Agreement.
Howlin(Labour) proposes to Freeze Increments of Members
of Unions which Oppose Lansdowne RD Agreement for a
further 2 years from July 1, 2016
Any reneging on these Haddington Road Agreement
(HRA) provisions (which involve reciprocal and significant
productivity by teachers) will cause very serious industrial
unrest.-TUI
TO:
Members of Dil ireann from Teachers Union of
Ireland
3rd November 2015
The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest
Bill (FEMPI) 2015
Dear Deputy,
The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest
Bill (FEMPI) 2015 contains a number of highly
objectionable and punitive provisions which should be
deleted or amended. Section 4 is draconian and seeks to
force unions into the Lansdowne Road Agreement (LRA). If
passed into law it will extend the potential to freeze
increments for teachers and lecturers from beyond 2016
to 2018.
This could lead to a loss of thousands of euro for teachers
and lecturers throughout their careers. This threat is
disproportionate and wrong and must be stopped.
Likewise, the threat in Section 10 to the restoration to the
teachers salary scale of payment for Substitution and
Supervision (S&S) must be removed. Thousands of
teachers have been carrying out this work since 2013 on
the understanding that payment was deferred to 2017 and
2018. Any reneging on these Haddington Road Agreement

(HRA) provisions (which involve reciprocal and significant

productivity by teachers) will cause very serious industrial
unrest.
The question needs to be asked: If teachers do not carry
out this S&S work, who will, given that this is work most
effectively done by teachers? If this work is to be done it
will have to be paid for one way or the other?
All of these offending FEMPI 2015 provisions should be
deleted or amended as appropriate.
The overwhelming vote of members (92% on a 60%
turnout) of the TUI not to accept the LRA is due in large
measure to the fact that the LRA is utterly oblivious of
1
Casualisation. A very significant proportion of
teachers and lecturers have part-time hours/low pay,
insecure employment or both. The LRA pay increases in
January will benefit few of these. About half of second
level TUI members under the age of 35 years are in the
unacceptable situation of being in part-time and/or
temporary employment. The LRA does not address this
problem.
2
Lecturing hours far in excess of international norms:
Staffing levels in Institutes of Technology are wholly
inadequate, with the result that Lecturers have lecturing
hours far in excess of international norms. Institute of
Technology (IoT) lecturers lecture for 18 or 20 hours a
week. The international norm is about 8 to 10 hours. Since
the recession began, funding for the IoT sector has been
cut by 32% and lecturer numbers have fallen by 10%
while student numbers have increased by over 20%. This
is unacceptable, unfair and unsustainable. Not only does
the LRA not address this problem but it contributes to the
extension of the problem beyond 2016 to 2018. The
inevitable result of this failure to staff institutes
adequately is that the quality of service to students suffers
as does the reputation of the Institutes.
3
Bureaucratisation of teaching and lecturing. Research
and experience show that teaching in Ireland has become
increasingly pressurised for a variety of reasons. Increased
and often unnecessary bureaucratic work is a large part of
the problem. Currently teachers in England are leaving the
profession in huge numbers during the early career stage
because of workload problems. We do not want to

replicate that destabilising phenomenon in this country.

However, the LRA does not address this problem.
4
Lack of appropriate career structures for
educationalists in Further Education. Specifically in respect
of the LRA, there is considerable concern because of the
lack of written clarification on paragraphs 3.2 and 4. While
a verbal reassurance in this regard was provided by the
Labour Relations Commission in Lansdowne House during
the negotiations, this assurance is required in writing.
Rather than threatening educationalists with draconian
measures, which would punish them for the rest of their
careers, it would be more appropriate for the government
to talk to the TUI about how best to address and resolve
the issues outlined above in a manner that protects and
enhances the integrity and quality of the Irish education
system.
Yours sincerely,
_______________________________
_______________________________
Gerry Quinn
John
MacGabhann
President
General
Secretary

Howlin to intervene in row on overtime for garda

Niall OConnor and Tom Brady
PUBLISHED06/11/2015 | 02:30
1Justice Minister Frances Fitzgerald has asked her Cabinet
colleague Mr Howlin to intervene in a bid to resolve the
row
Public Expenditure Minister Brendan Howlin has been
asked to intervene in a row surrounding working
conditions in An Garda Siochana, as officers threaten to
turn down overtime offers from January.
The Garda Representative Association (GRA) has said its
members will refuse to work an additional 30 hours that
was initially imposed on the force under the previous
Haddington Road Agreement.
The trade union last week overwhelmingly rejected the
new public sector pay deal, known as the Lansdowne Road

Agreement, because it involved a continuation of the

additional 30 hours per year.
Unless the additional 30 hours is removed following a
review, officers will be advised not to volunteer for
overtime.
But it has now emerged that Justice Minister Frances
Fitzgerald has asked her Cabinet colleague Mr Howlin to
intervene in a bid to resolve the row. The decision was
communicated to GRA members in an internal memo,
seen by the Irish Independent.
The GRA delegation advised the minister of all of the
discussions that took place on the Lansdowne Road
Agreement. We further advised the minister that the
question of working additional hours for free was no longer
an option, the memo states.
Mr Howlin spearheaded the Lansdowne Road Agreement,
which has been accepted by the majority of unions. Its
understood he is due to meet senior GRA figures later this
month to discuss their concerns over the 30 additional
hours.
As revealed by the Irish Independent yesterday, the GRA
met with Ms Fitzgerald in Leinster House and a series of
issues relating to the force were discussed. These included
garda resources, morale within the force and rural crime.
The GRA warned Ms Fitzgerald that communities are
seriously suffering as a result of the rural crime crisis.
Ms Fitzgerald was also told that soaring insurance costs
have emerged as a major factor behind the epidemic.
Premiums
A growing number of families whose homes are targeted
by burglaries are failing to report the crimes for fear of the
impact it will have their premiums, according to the GRA.
Aside from insurance costs, the GRA told Ms Fitzgerald
that crime victims are also failing to report incidents
because they no longer have immediate access to their
local garda as a result of cutbacks.
The meeting was attended by GRA president Dermot
OBrien, vice president Ciaran ONeill, general secretary PJ
Stone and deputy general secretary John Healy.
Sources described the meeting as amicable and open
and said Ms Fitzgerald also expressed concern for
members on the ground on the back of the brutal murder

of Garda Tony Golden in Dundalk last month.

VOTE NO TO LANSDOWNE ROAD

IMPACT GRASS ROOTS: VOTE NO TO LANSDOWNE RD
AGREEMENT!!
NURSES, CLERICAL, ADMINISTRATIVE, PROFESSIONAL
STAFF
Rotten Deal! Vote No!
It is a very bad deal for all public servants. The increases
provided are minimal even for those
on low and middle incomes. A person on 30,000 Euro per
annum will get an extra gross income
of just over 1000 euro per year or 700 Euro per year after
deductions or 14 Euro per week
For this the employee will work the extra 2 hours per week
in the current agreement which
is being extended for a further two years. For the same
reason the 4 days holidays will still be lost each year.
Without Lansdowne Rd these would have expired this time
next year.
Unionised employees in the private sector, including many
who have had no pay cut,
are to get similar or greater pay rises. In effect, there is
almost no restoration of pay cuts, just the same rise as
those in private sector. But for us the extra hours and lost
holidays will continue for 3 years from today. Prices have
risen by 10%
since the pay cuts and extra taxes such as water charges
and property tax must be paid in addition
to rip-off interest rates on mortgages and huge childminding fees.
AS ALWAYS IMPACT NATIONAL EXECUTIVE HAS
RECOMMENDED A YES VOTE
BUT THE VAST MAJORITY OF SPEAKERS AT THE 300
STRONG NATIONAL EXECUTIVE CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL
HELD RECENTLY SPOKE AGAINST THE AGREEMENT!!!
We are heartened by the recommendation of Teachers
Union of Ireland, OPATSI the plasterers union and the Irish
Medical Orgaisation to members to vote against this
Agreement.
It is a disastrous Deal. What Can You Do ? VOTE NO and

Spread the Word!

Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill
2015: Second Stage
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates
%20Authoring/WebAttachments.nsf/
($vLookupByConstructedKey)/seanad~20151124/$File/Dail
y%20Book%20Unrevised.pdf?openelement
ICTU LED BY SIPTU/ IMPACT IS UNDERMINING THE RIGHT
TO FREE TRADE UNIONS BY COLLUDING WITH THE
FINANCIAL EMERGENCY MEASURES IN THE PUBLIC
INTEREST ACTS FEMPI (2013, 2015)
The essence of the right to free trade unions is the right to
organise and associate freely and to reach agreement or
not to reach agreement with an employer on a voluntary
and unrestricted basis unimpeded by legislative coercion.
FEMPI coerces union members to reach a largely
predetermined agreement with public service employers
irrespective of the wishes of its members. This resticts the
right to organise and associate freely since individual
employees can avoid penalties under FEMPI by joining a
compliant trade union.
Media have disseminated the narrative that teachers(ASTI)
and gardai(GRA) are sufering penalties because they are
in breach of the Public Service(Agreement (Lansdowne
Road Agreement) to which they are a party. THIS IS
TOTALLY INCORRECT.
ICTU is not a trade union. It is a convening centre for
affiliated trade unions and, as such, ICTU can only
recommend framework agreements such as Lansdowne
RD Agreement to sovereign individual trade unions.
ASTI and GRA were a party to an agreement in the
Framework of the Public Service Agreement known as
Haddington RD Agreement. This Agreement expired on
July 1, 2016.
The members of ASTI and of GRA have rejected their
employers proposals of a new agreement in the
framework of Lansdowne RD which was recommended by
ICTU.
The state which is also their ultimate employer is now
imposing penalties on teachers and gardai BECAUSE THEY
REFUSED TO SIGN UP TO PROPOSALS WITH WHICH THEIR
MEMBERS DISAGREE.

THIS IS A CLEAR BREACH OF THE RIGHT TO FREE TRADE

UNIONS
Despite a motion calling for an end to FEMPI being passed
at ICTU BIENNIAL DELEGATE CONGRESS, ICTU executive
council has agreed to conduct industrial relations in the
framework of the oppressive anti-trade union FEMPI ACTS
(Thanks to the Northern Ireland unions for their support for
the anti-FEMPI motion at the ICTU BDC)
The State-ICTU collusion involves the following
manoeuvre: There are no penalties for members of noncompliant unions in the Haddington Rd or Lansdowne Rd
Agreements. The penalties are prescribed by law under
FEMPI ACTS(2013,2015). The anti-trade union law gives
power over individual unions to ICTU executive council.
Why would the compliant executive council call for its
abolition??
Further material on this issue can be read further down on
this page -Wind UP FEMPI NOW
This collusion by ICTU executive council with anti-union
laws sets a very dangerous precedent for future
governments who wish to introduce anti-union legislation.
It is also sets a dangerous precedent for other European
governments.
The Italian Fascist leader Mussolini converted trade
unions into an arm of the state-corporatist trade unionism.
The ICTU position is a step in this direction.
As FEMPI Constitutes emergency legislation, ministers are
saying that it will be wound up over time-I suspect that
they will find ways to retain it in some form unless it is
abolished under pressure of mass action. However, the
formal winding up of FEMPI would remove the power of
ICTU executive council over individual unions in practice.
IS this the reason that SIPTU is advocating the conversion
of ICTU from a CONFEDERATION to a FEDERATION? (SEE
Jack OConnor Speech below)
All trade unionists owe a debt of gratitude to AST and GRA
for standing up to anti-union laws thus exposing ICTU
collusion.

SIPTU PROPOSES NEW ICTU CLAMPDOWN ON POWER OF

INDIVIDUAL TRADE UNIONS-Speech by Jack OConnor,
General President, SIPTU.

(Full Speech further Down)

ICTU To Become FEDERAL system with final power over
unions at Executive Council.
NO call for end to violation of principle of free trade unions
under FEMPI ACTS
On 100th Anniversary of the 1916 Rising-No return to
Connolly objectives of Sovereign Irish Unity and a 32County Socialist Republic
SIPTU SUPPORTED THE LABOUR PARTY IN THE OUTGOING
FG/LAB Austerity Government
UNITE,The Union, dissaffiliated from the Irish Labour Party
during the period of the last government
OConnor called for Labour Party To Re-enter Government
after Election
Meanwhile, Siptu president Jack OConnor said his
personal view is that the Labour Party should use its
mandate, if it can, in the interest of working people and
those who depend on public services.
It is clear, he said, that either Labour makes a
contribution to stable government or there is another
election. Irish Times,April 16, 2016
Notes
ICTU is not a trade union. It cannot negotiate agreements
on behalf of union members. It is a convening centre and a
CONFEDERATION. It can only recommend industrial
relations agreements to individual trade unions.It cannot
instruct unions to come to any agreement including any
particular framework agreement such as Lansdowne RD
Agreement with the employer of its members. Currently it
cannot force ASTI to come to an Agreement with the
employer of its members. Instead the Government is
providing penalties under emergency legislation ( FEMPI
ACTS), thus violating the principle of free trade unionism.
ICTU Executive Council is collaborating with this legislation
by not opposing it (despite resolutions passed at ICTU biennial Congress). All unions who negotiate public service
agreements under duress while FEMPI is in place is
collaborating with it.
The recommendations of the commissions which Jack
OConnor is now promoting in his speech(below)
recommend that ICTU become a FEDERATION. This would
give final power over the individual afiliated unions to

ICTU (Will unions organised only in Northern Ireland(eg

NIPSA) agree with this?)
Paradoxically, if the FEMPI anti-trade union laws are ended
it will reduce the current power of ICTU over individual
unions. There would be no penalty for not conforming with
national framework agreements (eg Lansdowne Rd,
Haddington RD Agreements).
ICTU is currently dominated by a SIPTU-IMPACT-PSEU
alliance with support from INTO and some smaller unions.
This alliance has a built-in majority on executive council on
matters affecting members in 26-counties only)
ICTU-General Secretary Patricia King SIPTU, Treasurer Joe
OFlynn (SIPTU); Vice-Presidents Kevin Callinan (IMPACT),
Sheila Nunan (INTO), Executive Council Members (33 in
total)- Jack OConnor (SIPTU),Ethel Buckley (SIPTU), Gene
Mealy (SIPTU), Ethel Buckley (SIPTU),Shay Cody (IMPACT),
Tom Geraghty (PSEU), Marie Levis (IMPACT),Gene Mealy
(SIPTU),Deirdre OConnor (INTO),Jack OConnor
(SIPTU),Teresa Walsh (INTO), Noel Ward (INTO) (current
President is Brian Campfield of NIPSA and their are 5 other
members representing members in Northern Ireland)
Definitions
A FEDERAL system of government is one in which a nation
is ruled by a central government under which there are
smaller subdivisions of government. It is a two-tiered
system of government.
A CONFEDERAL system is a mode of government in which
a number of smaller states CHOOSE to delegate some of
their policy making rights to a central body.
A Trade Union Strategy to Win for Working People- SIPTU
General President, Jack OConnor.
Speech at the Mother Jones Festival, Cork, 2016
Extract
We are now entering a new and more dangerous phase in
the evolution of the crisis of capitalism and of European
and global history. What has happened is that the politics
has now caught up with the economics as we always said
it inevitably would and it is manifesting itself in a sharp
swing in most cases to xenophobic nationalism and the
radical right. It is no overstatement to say that we are on
the road to catastrophe. This leads through the disorderly
collapse of the euro which would inevitably result in levels

of deprivation and societal break down beyond anything

that can be visualised in our everyday imagination. It
would end in a regime of competing nation states and
ultimately in regional wars.
I should say at this point that unless the policies of onesided austerity or even fiscal neutrality as they now call it,
combined with the race to the bottom in the world of work,
are abandoned immediately the scenario I describe above
is not some vague possibility but is actually inevitable.
What is to be Done?
These (Reports) envisaged developing a stronger, more
united, more coherent movement, organised in a federal
rather than a confederal congress. This, while respecting
the autonomy of each individual trade union, would
facilitate co-ordination of collective bargaining and
organising across each of the individual sectors of the
economy in both jurisdictions on the island. Such coordination would optimise the prospects for the
negotiation of the best possible agreements with
employers who respect their employees right to organise.
Simultaneously, it would enable the deployment of
irresistible force in support of workers seeking to organise
where unions are not recognised.
FULL SPEECH
Comrades and friends,
This years Mother Jones Festival takes place against the
background of the continuing trauma of the most serious
crisis in global capitalism since the 1930s. It is important
to say from the outset that this is a demand side crisis
largely attributable to exponentially growing inequality in
what we know as the developed world.
The phenomenon manifests itself in the world of work or
the labour market in the form of mass unemployment,
increasing precariousness and social insecurity on an
unprecedented scale. This is increasingly evident in
Ireland, Europe and the West.Precarious work, of course,
is not new in the developing world where it has been the
order of the day for a long time.
It falls to the trade union movement to step up to the task
of reasserting human priorities in the workplace and
ultimately in the wider economic and social paradigm. It is

important to stress this because in the culture of business

unionism this tends to be taken for granted or even lost
sight of altogether. It is also important to say that trade
union organisation is the only way to address the task.
More important, it is crucial to assert that the trade union
movement in Ireland still has the capacity to meet the
challenge and to win for working people. Indeed, this is
the fundamental premise of this short paper here this
evening.
However, to do so, our movement must transform itself,
ideologically, culturally and structurally.
In practical terms, it is a challenge which must be met at
an industrial, pedagogical and political level.
In order to approach it, we must disabuse ourselves of a
number of deeply held myths and misconceptions. One of
these, for example, is that the dramatic growth in the,
post- Lockout, Irish Transport and General Workers Union
between Easter Week 1916 and the end of 1918 was
primarily attributable to the resistance offered during the
Lockout itself and the subsequent events which occurred
throughout the decade of rebellion. The fact of the matter
is that what happened had more to do with the Munitions
Act. This was because, in 1917, the legislation which had
been put in place by the government in the United
Kingdomto maintain industrial peace for the duration of
the war was extended to Ireland. Agricultural Wages
Boards which had been set up across the UK to determine
wages and conditions to guarantee the food supply were
then put in place in Ireland as well. Virtually immediately,
agricultural labourers found that the most effective way to
secure improvements was by joining a trade union and
they flocked to the ranks of the ITGWUin their thousands.
It quickly established itself as the dominant union in the
sector, absorbing smaller land and labour unions along the
way. Membership, which had fallen to somewhere between
3,500 and 5,000 by the time of the Easter Rising,
increased to 68,000 by the end of 1918 and 120,000 in
1920. Obviously, the sentiment engendered by the
Lockout, the Rising and the War of Independence
influenced developments but they were not the primary
reason for the growth in union membership. The
institutional arrangements put in place for conciliation and

arbitration over a whole range of industries also resulted

in a very dramatic rise in trade union membership and
density across every single region of the UK.
That phenomenon has replicated itself repeatedly in all
circumstances in which conditions favourable to the
growth of union membership have presented e.g. during
the post war period across Europe, the period following
the economically regenerative 1960s and the period
following entry into the EEC in Ireland. The purpose of this
reference is to debunk the myth that declining union
density in the Ireland or indeed throughout the developed
world is in some way attributable to some kind of intergenerational or cultural disconnect. It could be argued that
such exists but it is consequence rather than the cause of
the phenomenon.
The simple fact of the matter is that working people and
indeed people generally for that matter will organise in
one of two circumstances or better still when a
combination of both exist. These are:
6
When they believe they can win and
7
When they have no other alternative.
That rule applies throughout the history of industrial
societies and in all circumstances irrespective of
generational dynamics. It therefore follows that the
challenge we must overcome is to instill a belief in people
that they can actually win by organising.
Of course, the reality is that the balance has shifted quite
dramatically against organised workers and in favour of
capital over the past quarter of a century or more. This is
attributable to the complex interaction of an array of
global factors, each of which merits an entirely separate
paper on their own. However, for this evenings purpose I
will simply cite the most significant of them:
5
The fall of the Soviet Union more than a quarter of a
century ago. This immediately virtually quadrupled the
global supply of labour available for exploitation by capital
(from about 750,000 to two billion when China is
included).
6
The extension of the process of globalisation. This
imposed the exploitative employment standards of the
developing world in the marketplaces of the West.
7
The decline of manufacturing in the developed

economies.
8
The expansion of household credit and indebtedness
in response to the collapse of real incomes.
9
The ultimate global collapse of 2008.
10 The decline of social democracy and the shift to the
centre right in the political arena.
Lenin wasnt wrong when he said the crisis of social
democracy is the crisis of capitalism.
In Europe, in particular, the response which has been
employed since 2010 (and earlier in our case) has been
one of retrenchment austerity combined with a race to
the bottom in the workplaceto maximise
competitiveness. This, as we know, has resulted in the
generation of mass unemployment particularly among the
young in several European countries which has not been
seen since the immediate post war years, accompanied by
precariousness and hopelessness which is increasingly
evolving into desperation.
We are now entering a new and more dangerous phase in
the evolution of the crisis of capitalism and of European
and global history. What has happened is that the politics
has now caught up with the economics as we always said
it inevitably would and it is manifesting itself in a sharp
swing in most cases to xenophobic nationalism and the
radical right. It is no overstatement to say that we are on
the road to catastrophe. This leads through the disorderly
collapse of the euro which would inevitably result in levels
of deprivation and societal break down beyond anything
that can be visualised in our everyday imagination. It
would end in a regime of competing nation states and
ultimately in regional wars.
I should say at this point that unless the policies of onesided austerity or even fiscal neutrality as they now call it,
combined with the race to the bottom in the world of work,
are abandoned immediately the scenario I describe above
is not some vague possibility but is actually inevitable.
I turn then to the question as to What is to be done?.
After all we are not the EU Commission, the Council of
Ministers or the governing board of the ECB. We are not
even the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC).
What can the trade union movement under pressure in a
small country in the western periphery of Europe actually

do? Well, it remains to be seen but our obligation is to do

everything that we can in our own space.
First and most importantly, we must address the
ideological question. Our movement is comprised of an
array of organisations founded on the basis of different but
not incompatible premises. A number of our unions are
vocational organisations formed to promote the interests
of those employed in a particular profession, vocation,
trade or craft. Others are more general in character
formed to promote the interests of members but in the
context of a wider historical mission towards an egalitarian
society. As long as we function on the basis that,
irrespective of the prevailing conditions in the economy
and more particularly in society, the cause of a particular
vocation or trade or craft can be furthered independently,
we cannot make real progress. We have to face up to the
challenge of influencing the conditions within which we
organise and operate as distinct from simply promoting
the cause of a particular group in a context which is
determined by others.
The other concept that must be debunked is the notion
that it is in some way our role to provide an antagonistic
voice against management in those businesses and
institutions which recognise their employees right to
organise and be represented by trade unions. This thinking
is fundamentally flawed. Our task is to optimise the quality
and the security of our members employment in these
businesses and institutions. It therefore follows that we
must be at the forefront of the thrust to enhance
productivity and innovation instead of getting in the way
of it as we sometimes do. The fact of the matter is that the
security and quality of our members employment is
entirely dependant on the prosperity of the enterprises in
which they work. Moreover, the key to good working
conditions and indeed standards of living generally is
exponentially increasing productivity. I emphasise,
because it will undoubtedly be misrepresented, that this is
not about increasing the drudgery or onerousness of work.
Actually, it is precisely the opposite.
There is another complementary reason for this approach
and that is to minimise employer hostility. We have to
reverse the current equation in which we can sometimes

find ourselves impeding the prospects for an enterprise

that engages in collective bargaining instead of actually
enhancing them. Meanwhile, we fail to confront those who
do not respect their employees right to organise or be
represented by trade unions. This equation is graphically
evident in any analysis of the deployment of trade union
resources as between servicing members where we are
recognised and organising to confront those who do not
afford recognition. It is a fundamentally flawed strategy
and it is doomed to failure. The reality of it is that, apart
from workers, we should be able to demonstrate that
employers who recognise trade unions also enjoy an
advantage over those who dont.
The second criterion I mentioned at the outset arises in
the pedagogical arena. This is at least two-dimensional.
In the first instance, we have a responsibility to equip
workers to assert their own interests by knowing their
rights and understanding how to vindicate them. At a
collective level, that extends to developing a greater
understanding among our members and workers generally
of the nature and character of the forces and influences at
work in capitalist society. This applies both in terms of the
economics of the companies in which people may work
and the wider political arena as well.
In parallel with this, we equally have a responsibility as
has been the case with the craft unions of the past to
facilitate the education, training and development of our
members and workers in the enhancement of their skills.
This is particularly applicable in the rapidly changing
dynamics of the modern labour market where skills and
competencies are becoming redundant almost as rapidly
as they are appearing.
The third criterion I mentioned at the outset relates to the
political arena. As long ago as the new unionism of the
1880s, our leaders recognised the necessity to compete
for political influence and power in order to overcome the
limitations of what could be achieved through workplace
collective bargaining. This saw the development of
political funds and political affiliations to the labour and
social democratic parties. Today, in the light of the crisis of
social democracy and the increasing diffusion of political
representation on the left, there is a need for a more

nuanced approach. However, this is not an argument for

the depoliticisation of trade unionism. Indeed, quite the
opposite is the case. However, our political activity should
focus on shifting the entire fulcrum of the debate in
society in a manner which prioritises human
considerations and egalitarian objectives as distinct from
promoting one political party. The aim must be to frame
the architecture of the political centre ground.
On the face of it, this seems an awesome challenge. Yet it
is still entirely within the capacity of the trade union
movement in Ireland as things stand at present but it
cannot be undertaken successfully by any single trade
union. Thus, we must have the courage and vision to
make the changes that will enable us to accomplish it. The
roadmap was outlined in the recommendations of the
report of the Commission on Trade Union Organisation to
the biennial delegate conferences of the Irish Congress of
Trade Unions, in Killarney in July 2011 and then in Belfast
in July 2013 the centenary of the Lockout.
These envisaged developing a stronger, more united,
more coherent movement, organised in a federal rather
than a confederal congress. This, while respecting the
autonomy of each individual trade union, would facilitate
co-ordination of collective bargaining and organising
across each of the individual sectors of the economy in
both jurisdictions on the island. Such co-ordination would
optimise the prospects for the negotiation of the best
possible agreements with employers who respect their
employees right to organise. Simultaneously, it would
enable the deployment of irresistible force in support of
workers seeking to organise where unions are not
recognised.
This capacity would be reinforced by the development of a
fully resourced research capacity, a new workers college,
an independent workers controlled media platform and the
opening of trade union centres in every major town on the
island.
The elements are actually reflected in the One Cork
project which is underway on a small scale here in this
city.
As we stand today, we have the capacity to ensure that
workers can organise to win but that will not remain the

case indefinitely. The sands of time are ebbing away. It is

time to wake up and smell the roses!
Documents referred to in our introduction to Jack
OConnors address:
Report of the Commission on the Irish Trade Union
Movement A Call to Action
Jack O Connor A Call to Action Final version
Future Positive Trade unions and the Common Good
Jack OConnor TradeComReport_web

Wind Up FEMPI NOW!

Will Union Members be forced to vote on the outcome of
talks with the FEMPI Gun to their heads?
From Irish Examiner To-day
The level of GRA militancy will be gauged when frontline
garda debate a motion that the association pursues
whatever action necessary should the government
choose to discriminate or punish them for rejecting the
terms of the Lansdowne Road Agreement.
The Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors (AGSI)
annual conference warned they will risk breaking the law
by considering strike action, seriously escalating their
dispute.
The actions include AGSI members marching to the Dil in
uniform, picketing the offices of Government ministers and
TDs, and possibly taking strike action.
WHY IS ICTU EXECUTIVE COUNCIL THE MOST GROVELLING
TRADE UNION LEADERSHIP IN THE EU?
I wrote the bulk of the material below before the
recession. However the betrayals by the ICTU leadership
during the recession were even more shocking and
continue to be so!!!
Above all the entering into industrial relations agreements
backed by legislative sanctions against employees whose
unions refuse to agree or sign upto them is a betrayal of
the principle of free trade unions. The Haddington Rd
Agreement included pay cuts and extra duties and
working hours. It was enforced by the Financial
Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Acts 2013,2015
which imposed the terms of the agreement by law and

imposed penalties on union members whose unions did

not register such an agreement with their public sector
employer.
The agreement by ICTU that unions could be coerced into
agreements through legal penalties is sure to be used as a
precedent by future governments. As pointed out by
UNITE-The UNION, the principle could easily be extended
to the private sector.
This was a historic Betrayal by ICTU Leaders. Almost all
members of the executive council of ICTU were and are
general secretaries or othe senior paid officials
The appeal to desist which I issued is carried here in the
form of a letter to the Irish Times
May 26,2013
Dear Editor,
Appeal to Trade Unions To Reject FEMPI Bill
The Financial Emergency Provisions in the Public Interest
Bill gives government power to unilaterally cut pay and
pensions , to change allowances, to freeze increments and
to change conditions of service including working hours in
the public service. It enshrines a more penal version of the
original government demands made to unions in the
recent Croke Park 2 process in law.
It has a key coercive clause. It contains a provision for a
suspension of incremental progression for three years for
all public servants unless they are covered by a collective
agreement that modifies the terms of the incremental
suspension and which has been registered with the Labour
Relations Commission. THis means that unless a trade
union signs up to the agreement, even if the pay of
members is under 65,000, its members increments will be
frozen for 3 years
Union members or executives may vote for or against
Croke Park 2 as revised. That is their privilege and their
right. But if trade unions do not immediately reject this
Bill by declaring that it will not register an agreement with
a public service employer under its provisions, what are
the consequences? They would be forcing their members
to vote on current proposals with the only choice being
Haddington Road or worse. They would be enabling the
government to impose the legislation on all other unions
and public service workers.

By doing this they would be becoming quasi-arms of

government. They would be assenting to a version of
corporatism which would undermine the right to Free
Trade Unions and to free trade union activity by individuals
in the public service. They would be assenting to an
unprecedented erosion of trade union rights in Ireland into
the indefinite future.
Unions can make this legislation unworkable if they refuse
to register their agreement with the LRC even if they
agree to Haddington Rd.
As a former President of TUI and a former member of the
executive of Dublin Council of Trade Unions, I appeal to all
unions to reject this bill by making it clear immediately,
that irrespective of their decision on Haddington RD, they
will not register such an agreement under the provisions
of this anti-worker, anti-trade union bill.
Paddy Healy
88 Griffith Court
Fairview
Dublin 3
086-4183732
086-4183732

Benito Mussolini And BrendanFEMPI Howlin

Trade Unions as an Arm of the State
Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform Brendan
Howlin. Photograph: Gareth Chaney/Collins
Fianna Fils plan to repeal the Financial Emergency
Measures in the Public Interest Act (Fempi) would cost
more than 1 billion a year and undo many of the public
service reforms of recent years, according to Minister for
Public Expenditure and Reform Brendan Howlin.Irish
Times Feb 20 2016
Croke Park II rejected as two major unions vote No
RTE Wednesday 17 April 2013 13.05
The Croke Park II proposals included pay cuts, increment
freezes and longer working hours for no extra pay
The Croke Park II proposals to cut the public sector pay bill
have been comprehensively rejected by public sector
workers.
Two of the countrys biggest trade unions, SIPTU and the

Irish National Teachers Organisation, have voted against

the deal, meaning it will not now be ratified.
The proposals included pay cuts, increment freezes and
longer working weeks for no extra pay.
The rejection is seen as a blow for the Government, which
needs to secure 300m in savings from the public sector
pay bill this year . . . . .
RTE NEWS
Tuesday 07 May 2013 16.41
ICTU, General SecretaryDavid Begg says there has to be a
negotiated settlement of the dispute over Croke Park II
The General Secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade
Unions, David Begg, has said unions who say they are not
willing to accept any cuts or changes to working
conditions are not being realistic.
Irish Examiner
Bilateral talks on pay deal the way forward
Monday, May 06, 2013
By Stephen RogersIrish Examiner Reporter
The Irish Congress of Trade Unions (Ictu) has offered to
coordinate bilateral talks between the Government and
public service trade unions on an agreement to replace
the failed Croke Park II proposals.
Ictu general secretary David Begg claimed unions who are
not willing to take cuts or changes to their working
conditions are not being realistic.
There followed a talks process which led to the
Haddington Rd Proposals and the Financial Emergency
Measures in the Public Interest Act (2013)
Unite Backs Motion Opposing Haddington Road Pay Deal
Dan Keenan, In Belfast
Last Updated: Monday, June 24, 2013, 11:57
Unite, the largest trade union in Britain and Ireland, has
backed an emergency motion at its Belfast conference
opposing the Haddington Road proposals on public sector
cuts.
Proposing the motion, Unite regional secretary Jimmy
Kelly, said: Three times the Government has attacked the
wages and conditions of public sector workers. This year
the first attempt at cutting wages under Croke Park II was
massively rejected by public sector workers, in some cases

even contrary to the recommendations of their own

unions.
He said the Government, following this, had again resorted
to coercive anti-union legislation designed to impose
wage cuts and put a gun to public sector workers;
heads(Financial Emergency Measures in Public Interest
Act FEMPI Act)
Not only did this constitute a gross interference in
workers rights to ballot freely, it also sets a precedent
which may be used against private sector workers in
similar circumstances, he added
He said the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) must
launch an immediate campaign to have the legislation
repealed and he called on the trade union movement to
secure the support of the Labour Party in calling for repeal.
RTE NEWS
Begg defends Pensions Authority appointment
Friday 15 January 2016 20.27
David Beggs appointment to the chair of the Pensions
Authority has sparked controversy
Former general secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade
Unions David Begg has defended his appointment as new
chair of the Pensions Authority.
Tnaiste and Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton
offered Mr Begg the role last week.
Pensions Authority role not a crock of gold, says David
Begg
Friday, January 15, 2016By Juno McEnroePolitical
Correspondent
Former trade union leader David Begg has defended his
appointment as chairman of a State board, saying his
20,500-a year pay for the role is not a crock of gold.
The former ICTU general secretary also confirmed to the
Irish Examiner that he is considering running as an
Independent for the Seanad.
Mr Begg said he had been approached about becoming
chairman of the Pensions Authority, a position which pays
around 100,000 over a five-year period.
There has been criticism of his appointment, made directly

by Tnaiste Joan Burton this week, which did not involve

an appointments process or it being advertised.
Instead, Ms Burton, in her capacity as Social Protection
Minister, used a little-known clause in public appointment
rules to appoint Mr Begg.
Lack of transparency about the appointment, as well as Mr
Beggs previous support for Labour as a trade union
leader, has led to charges of cronyism.
Mr Begg strongly disputes this. I didnt seek it, I was
asked to do it, a month or six weeks ago. I said at the time
I wasnt expecting it.
RTE NEWS
Begg defends Pensions Authority appointment
Friday 15 January 2016 20.27
David Beggs appointment to the chair of the Pensions
Authority has sparked controversy
Former general secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade
Unions David Begg has defended his appointment as new
chair of the Pensions Authority.
Tnaiste and Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton
offered Mr Begg the role last week.
It sparked controversy as the job did not go through the
public service advertising or the appointments process.
Some politicians also claimed Mr Begg did not have
relevant experience for the position.
A Labour spokesperson said State board appointment
rules are
allowed to be flexible when there is clear evidence of an
individuals expertise and ability to do the job.
Speaking on RTs Morning Ireland, David Begg said Ms
Burton having initially approached him in relation to the
post six weeks ago felt he had particular expertise in
the area.
He said he was honoured to be offered the difficult and
challenging job but it was not something he would have
volunteered for.
Mr Begg also rejected allegations that he currently held
other public appointments and insisted he was not going

to be driven out of his new position.

However, he went on to say: If there is a problem here, if
the Government or the Labour Party have a difficulty with
this, I have no problem if they want to rethink the
situation. I wont stand in the way of all of that.
Pensions Authority role not a crock of gold, says David
Begg
Friday, January 15, 2016
By Juno McEnroePolitical Correspondent
Former trade union leader David Begg has defended his
appointment as chairman of a State board, saying his
20,500-a year pay for the role is not a crock of gold.
The former ICTU general secretary also confirmed to the
Irish Examiner that he is considering running as an
Independent for the Seanad.
Mr Begg said he had been approached about becoming
chairman of the Pensions Authority, a position which pays
around 100,000 over a five-year period.
There has been criticism of his appointment, made directly
by Tnaiste Joan Burton this week, which did not involve
an appointments process or it being advertised.
Instead, Ms Burton, in her capacity as Social Protection
Minister, used a little-known clause in public appointment
rules to appoint Mr Begg.
Lack of transparency about the appointment, as well as Mr
Beggs previous support for Labour as a trade union
leader, has led to charges of cronyism.
Mr Begg strongly disputes this. I didnt seek it, I was
asked to do it, a month or six weeks ago. I said at the time
I wasnt expecting it.
NO HOUSEHOLDS Derived From Central bank Report Q1
2015
Irish State No. Of Households 1,658,243 CSO 2011
ICTU Statement on FEMPI 2015!
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL IGNORES MOTION PASSED AT ICTU
Biennial Delegate Congress
Despite BDC Motion 36 from ASTI PASSED!!!!!!!!!
FEMPI and Pay & Conditions of Public Sector Workers WED
July 8,2015

Session 4 : Public Services

Motion 36 )
That this Conference demands:
i. That the Government repeals all aspects of the FEMPI
legislation, and
ii. That any future attempt by the government to impose
unilateral changes to the pay and working conditions of
public sector workers be vigorously opposed and rejected
by the ICTU.
Association of Secondary Teachers, Ireland
Proposer : Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland
News ArchiveICTU WEBSITE
1
BOGUS SELF EMPLOYMENT IN CONSTRUCTION MAY
HAVE COST TAXPAYER OVER 600 MILLION[News] Issued
3 Dec 2015
2
CONGRESS CALLS FOR CRIMINALISATION OF WAGE
THEFT[News] Issued 27 Nov 2015
3
PARIS ATTACKS: AN OUTRAGE AGAINST CIVIL
SOCIETY & HUMAN DECENCY[News] Issued 14 Nov 2015
4
MAKING THE CASE FOR PROGRESS: STATEMENT
FROM CONGRESS NORTHERN IRELAND[News] Issued 6
Nov 2015
5
EXPERT REPORT CONFIRMS URGENT NEED TO
TACKLE LOW HOUR WORK ABUSE[News] Issued 3 Nov
2015
6
EU COMPETITIVENESS BOARDS COULD CAUSE WAGE
RACE TO THE BOTTOM[News] Issued 23 Oct 2015
CONGRESS PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE APPROVES
LANSDOWNE ROAD AGREEMENT
16 Sep 2015
The Public Services Committee (PSC) of the Irish Congress
of Trade Unions (ICTU) has voted to approve the
Lansdowne Road Agreement.
The deal was approved by an aggregate ballot of the PSC
at a meeting this afternoon (Wednesday 16th September
2015).
The Lansdowne Road Agreement extends the main
provisions of the Haddington Road Agreement until
September 2018, and restores around 2,000 to the pay of
most public servants in three phases between January
2016 and September 2017. The pay restoration will be
achieved through a combination of adjustments to the

public service pension levy and a partial reversal of the

2010 public service pay cuts.
Individual unions balloted their members on the terms of
the agreement through the summer months. The
agreement was endorsed by members of the Irish Nurses
& Midwives Organisation (INMO), SIPTU, the Irish National
Teachers Organisation (INTO), MLSA, TEEU and IMPACT. In
recent days the Civil and Public Services Union (CPSU) and
the Irish Federation of University Teachers (IFUT) also
voted to approve the deal.
Shay Cody, General Secretary of IMPACT and chair of the
PSC, said that the Lansdowne Road Agreement marked a
significant step forward for workers after seven years of
pay cuts, and reflected a growing trend for wage
improvements across many sectors of the economy since
2014.
Workers in the public and private sectors have faced
huge challenges during the economic crisis. Pay
improvements across all sectors are a crucial element of
the countrys continuing economic recovery. More money
in workers hands will largely be spent in the local
economy, improving living standards and, most
importantly, contributing to the job growth which has now
developed, he said.
Public sector pensions were the subject of a separate
engagement with the Congress Public Services Committee
and the Alliance of Retired Public Servants during
Lansdowne Road talks last May, as pensions are not
directly covered by the agreement. Pensions will be
increased by way of a reduction in the pensions related
deduction (Public Service Pension Reduction PSPR) made
from pensions in payment.
Press Releases April 28th, 2015
Minister Howlin invites the Public Services Committee of
ICTU to discussions on an approach to commence
unwinding of the Financial Emergency Measures in the
Public Interest (FEMPI) legislation
Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Mr Brendan
Howlin T.D., has invited the Public Services Committee of
ICTU to discussions on an approach to commencing the
unwinding of the Financial Emergency Measures in the
Public Interest (FEMPI) legislation.

Speaking this afternoon, the Minister noted:

Having discussed the matter with my Government
colleagues, I have now invited the representative
organisations for public servants to enter discussions with
public service management on how best to unwind the
FEMPI Acts, while maintaining in place the productivity,
reform and industrial relations structures provided for
under the Haddington Road Agreement.
Discussions on pay will, of course, take place in the
context of the States fiscal position and the pace of
financial recovery for this year and 2016. The Minister
noted that the recovery in Irelands fiscal position is in no
small part due to the contribution of public servants to
keeping the cost of the public service pay bill at
sustainable levels.
The Minister said:
I believe that all public servants fully understand that we
are not discussing the immediate restoration of pay, but a
more gradual and sustainable approach in line with the
improvements in the economy under this Government.
The legal position concerning the financial emergency
legislation, which has underpinned the reductions to date,
has to be addressed as part of putting in place sustainable
pay setting arrangements in the public service for the
future.
Apart from the pay measures, the public service has
embarked on a very ambitious programme of workplace
reform. Public service productivity has been boosted
through additional workplace hours, new shared services,
unprecedented redeployment of staff, a 10% reduction in
numbers, reforms of sick and annual leave and so on, with
ongoing reform now a daily reality for all public servants.
I expect that all sides to these discussions will meet with
the aim and intention of making an agreement that is fair
to all involved those who are dependent on public
services, employers, and public servants themselves and
an agreement that sustains the continuing economic
recovery.
The talks will begin in May.
ENDS
Note to Editor:

The Public Services Committee of ICTU includes the

majority of trade unions with a mandate to represent
public servants. Parallel discussions will be organised with
associations representing members of An Garda Siochana
and the Defence Forces.
A separate process of consultation is underway with an
association representing public service pensioners.
The Financial Emergency in the Public Interest Acts 2009
2013 comprise five pieces of primary legislation under
which cuts in gross rates of pay and pension, and a
pension related deduction, were applied to the income of
serving and former public servants to assist in the process
of reductions in public expenditure. The Minister is
required under the Acts to present an annual review (by
30 June each year) of the legislation to the Houses of the
Oireachtas.
April 28th, 2015|Press Releases
CONGRESS TO MOUNT CAMPAIGN FOR REPEAL OF
EMERGENCY FEMPI LEGISLATIONICTU
Statement ????????
BUT this never happened!-ICTU continued to negotiate
with government with FEMPI ACT in Place-This is the
greatest betrayal by a trade union leadership in Irish
history!!!!
ICTU STATEMENT 4 Jul 2013
The Congress Biennial Delegate Conference (BDC) 2013
today (July 4) unanimously passed an emergency motion
in support of a vigorous and robust campaign to bring
about the repeal of the Fiscal Emergency Measures in the
Public Interest legislation that applies to public sector
workers in the Republic of Ireland. The motion reads:
EMERGENCY MOTION NO: 2 FISCAL EMERGENCY
MEASURES IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST
Conference, noting that the Fiscal Emergency Measures in
the Public Interest Act undermines the principle of
collective bargaining in the public sector and concerned
that this may set a precedent for the private sector; noting
that the legislation provides extraordinary powers to
government ministers to unilaterally vary terms and
conditions of employment; noting that there is no
specified end period for this emergency legisalation; and

finally noting that this anti trade union legislation has

been introduced in the centenary of the 1913 Lockout,
calls on the incoming Executive to mount a vigorous and
robust campaign against this legislation and anti-worker
legislation in both jurisdictions with the goal of seeing it
repealed.
The motion was propsed by Unite, CPSU, INMO, IBOA.
Quango veteran Des is back in his old haunts
Shane Ross
PUBLISHED12/10/2014 | 02:30 Irish Independent
1
TUNE IN: Former chairman of the Risk Committee at the
Central Bank Des Geraghty also runs with the Wran Boys
of Sandymount. Photo: Tom Burke
The scene: tomorrow at the department of Public
Expenditure and Reform. A meeting between Public
Expenditure Minister Brendan Howlin and ace Central
Banker Des Geraghty.
Brendan Howlin: Good morning, Comrade Des. Good to
see you. Congratulations on your reappointment to the
board of the Central Bank. I thought we should have a
short chat in case anyone raises your continued good
fortune in the Dail or on one of those tiresome
committees.
Des Geraghty: Surely none of those dossers have
noticed?
Brendan: We tried to slip it through, but with all the
palaver about John McNulty and Imma, some nosy
opponent is likely to ask if you did an interview for the job
or even to question your financial skills. Best to be
forearmed!
Des: Good thinking. You must be able to make a case that
I have the necessary expertise, Brother Brendan. You
cannot be too careful with quango boards, after all the
hullabaloo. No problem, let us speak openly, we have
known each other for a long time, right back to my days at
the head of Siptu.
Brendan: Longer than I care to remember. I shall always

be grateful for Siptus loyalty to me in Wexford. I have

been holding my clinics in the local Siptu office for
decades.
I was reading your qualifications Comrade, for the board
on the Central Banks website. They look threadbare. Can
we pad them out a bit? Any chance of a financial angle?
Des: Sure, its there in black and white: once upon a time
I was a full member of the, er Economic and Monetary
Affairs and Industrial Policy Committee, in the European
Parliament albeit 20 years ago.
Brendan: I thought you only did two years out there in
Brussels?
Des: Yes, I was co-opted when Proinsias de Rossa came
home to join the Cabinet.
Brendan: Not a full term. So what have you done since?
Des: Oh, Ive served on buckets of other boards.
Brendan: Brilliant. Which ones? Would any of them give
us cover for saying you had an expertise in finance?
Des: FAS, brother Brendan. I served the people of Ireland
on the board of FAS for 10 years. Finance was our forte.
We got into the height of financial trouble. Great
experience for another spin at the Old Lady of Dame
Street.
Brendan: The less said about FAS the better. Were you on
the board when Rody Molloy and some of the brethren
junketeered across the Atlantic to sunny Florida?
Des: Er yes, I was but I never took a single trip.
Brendan: OK, but what did you do about the
shenanigans ? Did you know? Did you blow the whistle?
Sorry Comrade, Im forgetting myself. No doubt your
vigilance slipped, but only momentarily, when the FAS top
brass and some of the social partnership directors were
slumming it, travelling business class to sample the joys of
Orlando .
I guess we had better not big up the risky FAS escapades
especially as you were chairman of the key Risk
Committee of the Central Bank in recent years. What shall
I tell my cabinet colleagues about your ability to be
vigilant?
Des: Forget the vigilance bit. Tell them that I got an
honorary degree in Laws from UCD in 2008, just before the
FAS scandal broke.

And tell them that UCD honoured my negotiating skills as

a Siptu leader, recognising that I was a champion of social
partnership.
And tell them that the citation on the day that I received
my gong stated that I helped to bring on the Celtic Tiger.
I , DOCTOR Des Geraghty, fuelled the boom.
Brendan: Er at the time UCD were probably giving you
credit for benchmarking. Better to bury that little ghost.
Was that the same day that quango queen Olive Braiden
was awarded an honorary degree? Any of the other usual
suspects win an honorary degree from UCD?
Des: Yes. Angela Kerins, the Rehab lady got one of those
yokes a few years earlier. Angela had served on the board
of FAS International Consulting. Perhaps she should be on
the board of the Central Bank too?
Brendan: Look Des, I have announced new guidelines for
semi-state appointments. You were re-appointed a day
after I took this initiative. We need to show that you would
easily jump through the latest hoops, even though they
will not come into force until November.
Could you fill in a few gaps in your CV? And do not give
me all that guff about being President of Siptu. That no
longer washes.
Des: Why not ? Surely Siptu is synonymous with integrity,
efficiency, selflessness and thrift?
Brendan: Come on. I cannot see myself saying that to the
Dail with a straight face. We are in trouble. Which of your
great achievements has the Central Banks website left
out?
Des: OK. It leaves out that I have a superb political
pedigree. And it never even mentions my various
incarnations.
In 1969 I was a member of the party I love: Labour. After
that I gained unparalleled political experience. I was a
member of Sinn Fein, Official Sinn Fein and Sinn Fein the
Workers Party. I succeeded militant left winger Sean
Garland as General Secretary of the Workers Party.
I was a member of New Agenda and the Democratic Left,
before I finally ended up reunited with your lot in Labour,
Brendan.
Brendan: You were a sticky? A bloody sticky? God help us.
Did you ever win a seat in Europe, a Dail seat or a Seanad

seat?
Des: Never , my political outings were a flop. I was better
at taking the patronage stuff.
Brendan: Your volatile political record is not a selling point
for putting you back on the board of the Central Bank.
Are you an accountant? An economist? A regulator?
Perhaps you have special skills that will be particularly
appropriate in view of the Central Banks new rules on
mortgages? Do you have an expertise in housing?
Des: Bingo. I was made chairman of the Affordable
Homes Partnership by Bertie Ahern in 2005. Critics called
it a social partnership quango. I knew better. It was set
up to deliver affordable housing to the underprivileged of
Dublin.
Brendan: What happened to it?
Des: It was dissolved in 2010 but it was a brave
experiment. Well worth the money.
Brendan: Great, you probably learned a lot about housing
, mortgages, loans and risk? How much did you earn as
chairman?
Des: Im not sure. Certainly 30,000 a year in 2006 and
in 2007. It was difficult to add up, because I was coining it
in other quangos. FAS paid me 14,000 a year. Before that
I was lucky enough to be on the well-paid RTE Authority.
Ah Brendan, I was King of the Quangos in those days.
Brendan: And today you have to settle for the 15,000
Central Bank board fees and your lousy pension from
Siptu?
Des: No, not quite. Two years ago your Labour colleague,
Pat Rabbitte, recognised my earlier experience on the RTE
Authority and appointed me to the TG4 board thats
another 12,600 a year.
Brendan: Bravo. What age are you now, Des? Would you
not think of hanging up your boots?
Des: Brendan, that is ageist. No interviewer would be
allowed to ask me that. For your information, I will be 71
this month. Never gave retirement a second thought.
When you have my lifelong experience of quangos it
would be shameful to put it to waste.
Brendan: I never thought of that . You are the perfect
candidate. Why did I ever doubt you?-Sunday
Independent

Patricia King to be the new head of Ictu

Former Siptu vice president has been involved in trade
union movement for 25 years
Wed, Jan 21, 2015, 12:00 Updated: Wed, Jan 21, 2015,
12:03
Martin Wall
Patricia King has been appointed as the new general
secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.
Photograph: The Irish Times/Frank Miller

Siptu vice president Patricia King is to be the new general

secretary of theIrish Congress of Trade Unions (Ictu), the
umbrella body for the trade union movement in Ireland.
She succeeds David Begg who has retired after 14 years in
the position.
She has also served as a member of the RTE Authority and
the National Roads Authority
Sunday Indo Business
http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/follow_button.ab4ec33f
73214445796a87ce54aee452.en.html#_=144973928832
5&dnt=false&id=twitter-widget0&lang=en&screen_name=Independent_ie&show_count=f
alse&show_screen_name=true&size=m
GRECO Report on Corruption in Ireland
Full Report
http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/evaluations/rou
nd4/GrecoEval4(2014)3_Ireland_EN.pdf
Posted: 21 Nov 2014 01:46 AM PST
Elaine Byrne 21/11/14
The Council of Europe (GRECO) today published its fourth
evaluation round report on corruption in Ireland.
Corruption prevention in respect of members of
parliament, judges and prosecutors contains eleven
recommendations.
The recommendations are a timely intervention into the
debate on political reform much of which campaigners
for reform have been advocating for some time. No
surprises here the strong focus on judges pay is

interesting though. Much of it is echoes the European

Commission report on corruption in Ireland published
earlier this year.
RECOMMENDATIONS
POLITICIANS
1. The existing ethics framework be replaced with a
uniform and consolidated values-based normative
framework encompassing the ethical conduct of members
of parliament including their staff as appropriate
covering various situations of conflicts of interest (gifts
and other advantages, third party contacts including
lobbyists, accessory activities and post-employment
situations etc.) with the aim of providing clear rules
concerning their expected conduct;http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/evaluations/rou
nd4/GrecoEval4(2014)3_Ireland_EN.pdf
For Democratic Reform of Unions by Members from Within!
No Legislative Interference!
Why are most General Secretaries and Senior Trade Union
Officials Encouraging Unprecedented Capitulation by Trade
Unions? Is it because they are eligible for pre- and postretirement Jobs from Government?Introduction
September 2014
ICTU CONFERENCE UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED AN
EMERGENCY MOTION ON THE FISCAL EMERGENCY
MEASURES IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST LEGISLATION at its
meeting in Belfast in June 2013:The following motion,
sponsored by the INMO, Civil and Public Services Union
(CPSU), UNITE and the Irish Bank Officials Association
(IBOA) was unanimously adopted by the ICTU Biennial
Delegate Conference:
Conference, noting:

that the Fiscal Emergency Measures in the Public

Interest Act undermines the principle of collective
bargaining in the public sector and concerned that this
may set a precedent for the private sector;

that the legislation provides extraordinary powers to

government Ministers to unilaterally vary terms and
conditions of employment;

that there is no specified end period for this

emergency legislation; and

that this anti trade union legislation has been

introduced in the centenary of the 1913 lockout;

calls on the incoming Executive to mount a vigorous, and
robust, campaign against this legislation with the goal of
seeing it repealed.
It should be noted that SIPTU, IMPACT, PSEU and the
teachers unions voted for this resolution after they had
used the Act to force members to accept the Haddington
Rd Agreement under which conditions of employment and
pensions were significantly worsened. Nothing whatever
has been done to implement the resolution in the year
since it was passed-surprise! surprise!
The unions proposing the motion were only too correct
when they included in the motion the fact that they were
concerned that this may set a precedent for the private
sector. Indeed in its recommendation to members to
reject Croke Park 2, the TEEU rightly gave as one of the
reasons that the cuts would knock-on to the private sector.
Employers in the private sector, as expected, have now
intensified their assault on pay and conditions. Bausch and
Lomb, the Greyhound bin company and numerous
employers about the country are imposing pay cuts and
other worsening of conditions, often, after Labour
Court/LRC intervention. For example Bulmers CiderShowerings and a chemical company , both in Clonmel,
have recently imposed pay reductions. The attempt by
Iarnrd ireann to cut pay has just succeeded.
And why wouldnt employers go on the offensive? Public
service unions, including SIPTU, have been telling
members for months that they had to vote for cuts under
the Haddington Rd Agreement lest worse befall them
under the FEMPI Act. Indeed, after the vast majority of
public servants had rejected Croke Park 2, ICTU Gen Sec
David Begg intervened and went on Radio Eireann to
say that unions who said that no cuts in the public service
pay bill were acceptable were being unrealistic!!!!
Private sector employers are now taking him at his word!!!
The slogan; an injury to one is the concern of all is not
solely or even mainly based on altruism but on
enlightened self interest!.
What is happening at the top of the trade union
movement is a degree of betrayal of Irish workers

interests that is unprecedented.

Engaging in talks in the context of statutory pay and
pension cuts by Lenihan under Fianna Fil, failing to
oppose FEMPI while Howlin and FG/Lab was piloting it
through the Dail and continuing negotiations in its
shadow, allowing government to deduct Home Tax from
pay, agreeing for the first time, under Croke Park 1, that
permanent public servants could were liable for
compulsory redundancy and therefore had to agree to cuts
to avoid it-this level of compliance by trade unions is
unprecedented in Irish trade union history and is also
unsurpassed in any of the European bailout countries.
SURPRISE! SURPRISE!
The motion calling on the incoming Executive(of ICTU) to
mount a vigorous, and robust, campaign against this
legislation(FEMPI) with the goal of seeing it repealed was
passed unanimously but completely ignored by the
general secretaries on the executive council in the past 15
months!
WHY ARE TRADE UNION LEADERS DOING THIS?
My earlier analysis carried below has been further
vindicated by recent developments
June 2011
AFTER CROKE PARK I
The ongoing destruction of conditions of service
established over decades under the Croke Park Deal
threatens the very survival of trade unions.Now the ICTU
President is reported as giving qualified support to the
formation a new government which is committed to
eliminating 25,000 public service jobs. Blair Horan,CPSU
General Secretary and member of the Executive Council of
ICTU, also spoke in favour of the Programme for
Government on behalf of a branch of the Labour Party.
Clerical officers represented by CPSU will be a key target
for job elimination with consequent work overload for
those remaining.
Will hundreds of thousands of members continue to pay
dues to a body which has failed to protect them from pay
cuts, pension levy, recruitment moratorium and which
even offered up their existing conditions of service to
government in December 2009? The answer is: not for
very long unless there are major changes! One leading
public service trade unionist has described the Croke Park

Deal as a suicide note by trade unions .

ICTU IMPLICATED IN BANKING BUST!
The Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of
Ireland has responsibility for ensuring prudence in
banking. The Irish Banks borrowed and lent in recent years
in a manner that has led to effective national bankruptcy.
The General Secretary of ICTU, David Begg was a director
or board member of the Central Bank for 15 years up to
the middle of 2010. The General Secretary and the
Executive Council of ICTU which he serves have a case to
answer. The facts are set out here.
Social Partnership in recent has underpinned a systematic
government policy of undermining the tax base through
concessions to the super-rich and increased dependence
on unstable transactional taxes based on a construction
bubble. By their actions, ICTU leaders supported this neoliberal policy despite the verbal warnings issued by it from
time to time.
These policies pursued by trade union leaders preceded
their historic capitulation in the Croke Park Deal and abject
failure to protect members from recent budgets which
heaped the burdens of recession on low and middle
incomes and protected the rich.
At a minimum the general Secretary of ICTU, David Begg
and ICTU President, Jack OConnor should resign. Their
track record undermines the ability of the trade union
movement to lead a fight back against the
impoverishment of members and of the majority of the
population not to speak of the national humiliation and
subordination to the international financiers represented
by the IMF and the EU.
This pamphlet is based on a discussion which took place at
the National Public Service Alliance meeting held in
Teachers Club on Monday Nov 1. Material supporting the
points made has been added by the author.
Among the conclusions drawn was that the contractual
position of General Secretary must be fundamentally
altered to provide for election, regular re-election and
democratic removal from office for failure to pursue
agreed union policy. This must be addressed immediately
through rule changes at national trade union conferences.
Other conclusions are also outlined at the end of this

pamphlet.
The pamphlet gives examples of the many remunerations
and funded trips abroad available to serving and retired
trade union leaders arising out of appointments to public
service posts and nomination to public boards by
government. The number and extent of the rewards
involved have hugely increased under social
partnership.
The dependence of trade union officialdom on continued
government agreement to Deduction at Source
arrangements and on government funding of internal
union education activities under partnership is
discussed.
Is remaining within partnership arrangements irrespective
of the policies and actions of government against
members the over-riding principle determining the
approach of the caste of general secretaries who control
the trade union movement? Readers will be in a position
to give an answer to this question after reading this book.
The unions affiliated to ICTU represent over 600,000
members in Ireland. It is by far the biggest civil society
group in the country. Despite recent reverses, it has the
potential to wield devastating power in resisting
employers and governments acting for the wealthy. Such
action was never more necessary as government and
opposition agree to intensify the process of loading the
problems arising from the delinquency of the rich and of
the government on the poor and middle income earners.
This is being done with the full backing of the International
Monetary Fund and the European Commission. For
example, the success of the recent Claiming our Future
initiative is heavily dependent on the restoration of trade
unions as accountable fighting organisations free of
dependence on government.
The abject failure of the leadership of Irish trade unions,
which essentially resides in general secretaries, to protect
the pay and working conditions of members, the level of
welfare benefits and public services provision, is outlined
and discussed.
Recent Major Retreats by General Secretaries (ICTU)
Refusal to offer any significant resistance other than
verbal opposition to removal of the Christmas bonus and

the imposition of benefit reductions on social welfare

recipients by government
Support for neo-liberal or Thatcherite government
policies through social partnership which led to an
economic collapse throwing an additional 350,000 out of
work and forcing tens of thousands to emigrate
Consenting to a recruitment ban or moratorium which is
devastating public services including health, education,
social care and many other essential services
Acquiescing to cuts in public service pay
Acquiescing to a pension levy on all public servants
which is a selective and discriminatory tax
Offering huge worsening of conditions of service of
public servants and temporary pay cuts for all public
servants to Government in December 2009, in return for
government agreement to make pay cuts temporary.
Conceding the right to government (for the first time in
Ireland and the UK) to make permanent public servants
redundant in talks leading to Croke Park Deal
Calling off the campaign of stoppages and
demonstrations in support of ICTU Economic and Social
policy- There is a Better Fairer Way before entering into
negotiations that led to the Croke Park Deal
After Budget 2011, acquiescing to cuts in public service
pensions, a reduction in pay and huge worsening of
pensions of incoming public servants, reductions in social
welfare payments and increased taxation of low and
middle incomes.
Letter by Shay Cody Chair Public Services Committee
ICTU and Gen Sec IMPACT to Dail Deputies
The above series of events represents a historic retreat by
the caste of general secretaries and senior full-time
officials which form the executive council of ICTU and its
Public Services Negotiating Committee. Shay Cody,
successor to Peter McClune as General Secretary of the
biggest public service union IMPACT recently (Nov 2010)
wrote a letter to Dail deputies. Shay Cody is also Chair of
the Public Services Committee of ICTU. The content of the
letter is indicative of the extent of the retreat which the
IMPACT leadership is willing to countenance.
Date 17 November 2010 18:25
Subject Croke Park Agreement

Dear Deputy,
I am writing as general secretary of Irelands largest public
service trade union to briefly update you on the ongoing
implementation of the Croke Park agreement and related
reforms, which are essential to help meet the challenges
currently facing Ireland.
You may be aware that the Minister for Finance recently
met officers of the ICTU Public Services Committee and
confirmed that the Government remains committed to the
agreement, on the understanding that it will quickly
deliver substantial savings and reforms. Leaders of the
main opposition parties have also given public support to
the agreement on the understanding that it will deliver
substantial savings and reforms.
On foot of this, union representatives on the Croke Park
national implementation body, including myself, have
continued to press management for tangible proposals
that either:
Produce savings
Avoid future costs
Bring service improvements and/or
Deliver quantifiable efficiency improvements.
Departmental action plans for reform, which are required
under the agreement, have now been produced across the
public service and these include real measures that will
deliver savings or maintain services as substantial savings
are made though the public service recruitment
moratorium and other staff reductions.
I have personally pressed management very hard to
ensure that the agreement is implemented quickly,
effectively and transparently to deliver the savings
necessary to avoid further cuts in public service pay and
to ensure that the agreed reforms deliver on the objective
of protecting and prioritising services as budgets and
staffing levels continue to fall. The staff redeployment
measures agreed under Croke Park are particularly
significant in this regard.
As well as the pay cuts of 2009 and 2010, big ticket
changes that will produce huge savings have so far
included:
Staff reductions of over 11,000 in the last 18 months
with more to come

 The newly-announced scheme to reduce health staff

numbers by 5,000 through voluntary redundancies
The abolition of 25 agencies, with more to come
A halving in the number of VECs
The introduction of new pension arrangements for new
recruits to the public service
The implementation of other changes put forward in
sectoral action plans, which will collectively result in very
significant changes.
None of these measures has so far led to significant
reductions in service provision.
I would be happy to give you more detailed information on
the ongoing implementation of the Croke Park agreement,
or to respond to your specific questions on related
developments. You can contact me by emailing Bernard
Harbor at bharbor@impact.ie.
Yours sincerely
Seamus Cody
General Secretary
IMPACT trade union
Hard pressed public servants including hospital staff will
find the statement by Cody None of these measures has
so far led to significant reductions in service provision
absolutely astounding.
There is a Trident Consultancy Report to the three
teaching unions which analyses the proposed Pension
Scheme for New Entrants to the Public Service which is
included in big ticket changes that will produce huge
savings mentioned by Shay Cody in his letter. The Report
concludes that the return from the compulsory pension
scheme will be less than the employee contribution unless
the pensioner lives beyond 95 years. In effect there will be
no employer contribution, a circumstance which is
contrary to law in private sector pensions. Incidentally,
there will be no savings for government for 47 years when
the pensions are due to be paid.
Clearly the IMPACT leader has agreed to this outrageous
scheme.
After Budget 2011
I have distributed the Email message below to activists in
the National Public Services Alliance 14/12/2010: Subject:
ICTU, Most Unions silent on Pension Cut

Only IFUT and TUI proposed doing anything about Public

Sector Pension Cuts. INTO and INMO mentioned the cuts in
statements. There was no mention of the cuts on Websites
of the following bodies: ICTU, SIPTU, ASTI, CPSU, PSEU,
IMPACT.
While INTO, ASTI, TUI are running a campaign against the
pension rip-off of new public servants announced in the
Budget, there is no mention of this issue by the silent
unions above.
It is believed that ICTU has refused to oppose the new
pension Scheme which is in effect a tax because the
individual gets less out than was contributed unless
he/she lives to 95 (Trident Report to Teaching Unions).
There is no proposal by any union to do anything about
the pay cut for new entrants to the public service. This
decision breaches a whole range of existing industrial
relations agreements and agreed circular letters.
Was there a Secret Deal between Government and the
General Secretaries Group called ICTU?
It is already widely believed that the government intends
to take our conditions of service under the Croke Park Deal
and to cut our pay again when this process is completed.
The Review of the Croke Park Deal in conjunction with
IMF/EU in 9 months time which was recently announced
lends credence to this belief.
Minister Lenihan met an ICTU delegation before the
Budget. He assured them that there would not be a new
cut in public service pay in the budget.
Was there a quid pro quo? Did ICTU agree a whole range
of savings at the expense of public servants. No action
of any kind was proposed at the mass demonstration
sponsored by ICTU (before budget)
In addition to the matters mentioned above several other
budgetary measures reduced the public service pay bill as
I pointed out-
There was much protestation by ICTU against the cut in
the minimum wage and Claiming our Future organised a
petition against it. But ICTU has made no proposal to
oppose it through any form of industrial action. A proposal
by UNITE The UNION for a campaign of industrial action
against the budget was sidelined by the ICTU executive
council.

No general secretary has sought to effectively and

persistently oppose the range of concessions by ICTU
outlined above.
This suggests that the fundamental problem is not one of
individual leaders, however compliant or determined they
may be in representing members. It resides in the current
role of general secretaries in individual unions and the
related composition of the executive council of ICTU.
Members, through ballots, through national congresses,
through election of executive members, have negligible
effective control over general secretaries for reasons
outlined further on in this document.
Some of the items in the bullet points above need further
elaboration. This is particularly so as ICTU leaders have
recently attempted to disclaim any responsibility for the
current economic collapse.
ICTU explanations are carried below.
ICTU Defends its Record
Firstly, we read the following in the recent ICTU pre-budget
submission:
Congress in Social Partnership, Not in Government
( ICTU Pre-Budget Submission, Autumn2010)
Some people seem to really believe that Congress, as
one of the Social Partners in Ireland, is actually part of the
Government. Thus they think Congress sets policy and so
we must share in the blame for the bust. Not so. Congress
makes submissions to Government and discusses them
with officials.
Contribution of SIPTU President, Jack OConnor can be
heard in full on the ICTU Website as he chaired the Lord
Skidelsky lecture. Click here
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/10161557#utm_campaign
e=synclickback&source=deniedbyhost&medium=101615
57
Or http://www.ictu.ie/
David Begg, ICTU General Secretary, made his
contribution at the TASC Conference which was covered in
Irish Times on Monday October 25 by Reporter Marie
OHalloran. Click here
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1025/1
224281952146.html
Jack OConnor said that the mistake that was made was to

give members to understand that election outcomes could

be balanced by social partnership. The unions did not do
enough to ensure that the best Minister for Finance in the
history of the state, Rory Quinn, remained in power. The
clear implication was that there was nothing wrong with
social partnership itself either in conception or content.
David Begg blamed the people not the General
Secretaries.
Irish people are not the same as French people, he said.
Irish people are much more conservative. Social
democracy has never taken root in Ireland.
He said most Irish workers would not thank me for
creating havoc in Ireland as they would see it.
It was absolutely important for any trade union
movement, if it purports to lead social movements, to
align itself as far as it can with what the people of the
country are willing to do.
He said if trade unions pushed what is perceived by the
population to be a narrow class interest beyond what is
good for the whole population, what you will create is a
fascist backlash.-Irish Times, Monday, October 25
ICTU and the Central Bank
In domestic legislation the legal basis for the role of the
CBFSAI (Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of
Ireland)in this field (in addition to the
Eurosystemderivedrole) is set out in the Central Bank Act,
1997:Part II Regulation of Payment Systems. In
addition,Section 7 of the Central Bank and Financial
Services Authority of Ireland Act, 2003 includes the
objective of promoting the efficient and effective
operation of payment and settlement systems.
At a domestic level, regulation (or oversight) of payment
systems is principally aimed at promoting the orderly
functioning of such systems, thereby minimising systemic
risk in order to protect the banking system as a whole
from the possible domino effects that could occur if one
or more of the credit institutions participating in a
payment system were to encounter credit or liquidity
problems. Paul O Brien, Deputy Head of Payments &
Securities Settlements Department, Central Bank,
Financial Stability Report 2004

ICTU General Secretary, David Begg was a director and

member of the board of the Central Bank from 12/05/95
until recent months (2010), a period of 15years. His tenure
covered the period between 2003 and 2008 when that
body allowed banks to borrow huge sums abroad which
have now led to the insolvency of all major banks.
Before he became governor of the Central Bank, Professor
Honohan in Economic and Social Review (Summer 2009)
said:Irish banking system had been, in effect, on a lifesupport system since September 2008.-.Complacency
resulted in the banks fuelling the late stage of an obvious
construction bubble with massive foreign borrowing,
leaving them exposed to solvency and liquidity risks which
in past times would have been inconceivableAt the end of
2003, net indebtedness of Irish banks to the rest of the
world was just 10 per cent of GDP. By early 2008 that had
jumped to over 60 per cent
In the 2007 report, issued at year end, the then governor,
John Hurley said in his foreword: However,Irish banks
have negligible exposure to the sub-prime sector and they
remain relatively healthy by the standard measures of
capital, profitability and asset quality. This has been
confirmed by the stress testing exercises we have carried
out with the banks. Begg did not issue a dissenting
minority report. We are unaware of any explanation by
David Begg or by the Executive Council of ICTU which he
serves. He has recently(2010) been replaced on the Board
of the Central Bank by Des Geraghty, former General
President of SIPTU.
Extracts from recent Central Bank Reports are carried
below. The report issued at end 2007 has particular
relevance due to its proximity to the emergence of the
banking crisis.
Central Bank Report 2009Extracts
The Board has overall responsibility for the system of
internal financial control in the Bank, which is
designed to safeguard the assets of the Bank and to
prevent and detect fraud and other irregularities.
To discharge this responsibility, the Board has established
an appropriate organisational structure.
In this regard, the Audit Committee of the Board meets
periodically with the Internal and External

Auditors and members of the Management of the Bank to

discuss control issues, financial reporting
and related matters. The Internal and External Auditors
have full access to the Audit Committee.

Membership
Audit Committee/Audit and Risk Management Committee
2009
David Begg (Chair), Alan Gray, Deirdre Purcell,
Gerard Danaher, Alan Ashe.
Extracts From Central Bank Report 2007
The of the Board as at 30 April
Governors Foreword
The Irish financial sector was, of course, impacted like all
others by these global developments. Medium- to longterm funding was not as readily available on wholesale
markets as had been the case. However,
Irish banks have negligible exposure to the sub-prime
sector and they remain relatively healthy by the standard
measures of capital,profitability and asset quality. This has
been confirmed by the stress testing exercises we have
carried out with the banks.
I would like to thank Patrick Neary, Chief Executive of the
Financial Regulator and all his team for their ongoing
cooperation and support.
Finally, I pay special tribute to all the management and
staff of the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority
of Ireland for rising to, and meeting, the challenging times
we faced in 2007.
John Hurley
Governor
(Financial Regulator, Patrick Neary has recently (2009)
taken early retirement. In recent months, he had come
under heavy fire for not stress-testing the banking sector
hard enough, downplaying the risk of rising bad debts on
substantial property loans and, most recently, his handling
of the directors loans controversy at Anglo Irish Bank.Irish Times, January 10, 2010)

Stress-Tests of the Domestic Banking Sector

A key tool used to inform our assessment of the strength

of the banking system is

stress testing, whereby banks assess their resilience to
plausible, but extreme,
economic scenarios. During the year, the Bank continued
to develop its stress testing
procedures and participated in two Eurosystem task forces
on stress
testing. This afforded an opportunity to benchmark our
approach in this area
against methodologies used internationally. The results of
a top-down stress test
were published in the Financial Stability Report 2007. The
results of that exercise,
notwithstanding some important caveats,suggested that
the banking sectors shock
absorption capacity remains strong.John Hurley,
Governor

Membership
Audit Committee 2007
David Begg (Chair), Martin
ODonoghue, Deirdre Purcell*,Alan Ashe**
The Internal Audit Department independently and
systematically reviews the controls in place and reports
to the Board Audit Committee on a regular basis. The
Audit Committee approves the Internal Audit Plan
and work programme. In addition, the Audit Committee
meets with and receives reports from both external
auditors. The Chairman of the Audit Committee reports to
the Board on all significant issues considered by the
Committee and the minutes of meetings of the Audit
Committee are circulated to the Board for consideration at
subsequent meetings of the Board.
The Board-level Committee structures have been designed
so that the Board and the Irish Financial
Services Regulatory Authority work closely together to
ensure that their respective obligations in relation to the
control of expenditure and the management of operational
risk are managed within a consistent and complete
framework.

I can confirm that the Board reviewed the effectiveness of

the system of internal financial controls during the year
ended 31 December 2007.
John Hurley, Governor David Begg, Director 17 June 2008
SOCIAL WELFARE CUTS
On simple grounds of human solidarity it was most
regrettable that ICTU did not launch a huge campaign of
resistance to such cuts. In addition, it was clear that
increasing numbers of union members were being thrown
out of work and would be subjected to such cuts.
Cuts in social welfare undermine wages as impoverished
workers are forced to accept work at low rates. This is one
of the reasons why trade unions have traditionally
opposed lowering of welfare rates. How could trade unions
appeal to the public to defend their members against pay
cuts if the poorest of the poor were being cut?
The abolition of the Christmas bonus had been announced
in summer 2009. It was an open secret that cuts in social
welfare were due in the budget. The neglect of the trade
union leaders on this issue had a direct effect on the
ability of the government to impose direct pay cuts on
public servants. When trade union leaders offered
temporary pay cuts in December 2009, there was unrest
among Fianna Fail backbenchers. This was mainly because
they had been told by Ministers that there would be
permanent cuts in social welfare rates in the budget due
within days. How could they defend the welfare cuts to
constituents if public service pay was not to suffer similar
cuts? This facilitated the Government in rejecting the
capitulatory offer by union leaders of temporary pay
cuts and the four sectoral documents containing huge
worsening of conditions of service of public servants. ( see
PETER McLOONE , Chairperson Public Services Committee,
ICTU, IrishTimes,Tue, Dec 08, 2009)
The government promptly pocketed the worsening of
conditions offer to pick it up later in Croke Park Deal and
made straight cuts in public service pay. The government
was cheered on by employer bodies and the very rich as
these cuts made it easier to cut pay in the private sector.
(The recent Labour Court recommendation that statutory
minimum pay rates in the construction sector be reduced
is a direct result.) How could experienced negotiators on

the trade union side allow themselves to be trapped like

this? If it was their own pay and conditions they were
negotiating, would they fall into such a trap? They wished
to stay in a partnership type relationship with government.
They knew that they could evade accountability for their
actions and unfortunately they were right.
ICTU Not Responsible For False Boom and Real Bust?
Statements by ICTU leaders including the statement that
they were in partnership not in government are carried
above. ICTU can also point to various warnings by ICTU to
government about the dangers of the property bubble and
other aspects of government policy.
The important thing is what the ICTU did, not what it said.
Like politicians, trade union leaders have become adept at
spinning words to cover their tracks.
Social Partnership Agreements were not merely about pay.
They were agreements on general economic and social
policy. The Towards 2016 Agreement concluded in 2006 at
the height of the false boom was such a strategic plan for
ten years. The actions to be taken under the Agreement
were:
With monetary policy set by the European Central Bank,
macroeconomic policy is now essentially concerned with
management of the public finances, incomes policy and
structural reform. The key principles referred to,
particularly sustainability and prudent fiscal policy, will
guide the management of the public finances.
The following strategies will be pursued within the
Governments budgetary and economic framework:
A Fiscal Policy which will provide sufficient room for
manoeuvre to meet our obligations in the event of an
economic downturn;
Page 5
Government capital investment ratio in the order of 5% of
GNP, to provide the level of investment required to tackle
the economys infrastructural deficit;
Taxation Policy designed to maintain and strengthen the
competitive position of the economy, foster improvements
in productive capacity, economic and social development,
and equity, while maintaining a sound fiscal stance. The
Government will seek to maintain a tax policy at EU level
that fosters economic growth and employment, without

the requirement of tax harmonisation at all levels;

A Public expenditure profile that reflects the growth in the
economy, provides for investment in a sustainable way in
public services, and a public expenditure allocation and
management system that optimises value for money,
including implementation of public procurement reforms.
T2016.pdf (ICTU Website)
Clearly the actions above were actions of government to
which ICTU was assenting for ten years.
The sections were drafted to include words which IBEC,
ICTU and Government could spin to their respective
audiences.
For example fostering equity in taxation is buried in the
middle of the Taxation Policy action. This would serve to
verbally cover the rear end of the General Secretaries. The
reality was that the government was making huge tax
concessions to the rich and pursuing a fiscal policy of
undermining the reliable income tax base and replacing
the shortfall with unstable transactional taxes on house
sales. It is ironic to note the agreed action: A Fiscal Policy
which will provide sufficient room for manoeuvre to meet
our obligations in the event of an economic downturn in
the light of the recent fiscal collapse.
The absence of an insistence on specific changes in fiscal
policy by ICTU means that it was assenting to a
continuation of the neo-liberal or Thatcherite policy that
led to the bust. The income gap between rich and poor in
Ireland was among the worst in the world. Yet there is not
a specific measure by taxation or otherwise to address this
matter. PD ministers McDowell and Harney were openly
lauding the concept of income inequality to foster
enterprise.
Clearly the agreement to foster tax equity was totally
hypocritical on all sides and the commitment was akin to
the charity that covereth a multitude of sins.
In the context of government practice at the time, it is
clear ICTU assented in practice to the totally neo-liberal
right wing government policy of the day. The failure of
David Begg, then on the board of the Central Bank, to
blow the whistle on the grossly excessive borrowing by
banks which was being permitted by the Central Bank
must be seen in this context.

National Economic and Social Council (NESC)

This partnership body provides research and analysis
which underpins partnership agreements. At the height of
the false boom in 2006, current ICTU president Jack
OConnor and the ICTU general secretary were on the
council together with their economic advisers. There was
no mention in the Report of the NESC (2006) of overborrowing by banks though ICTU, Business and the
Department of Finance are represented on the board of
the Central Bank as well as on the NESC. Though the
report did point to risks arising from a downturn in house
prices and an international economic downturn, the
overall prognosis for the economy was positive.
In Chapter 1 of the Report, it is stated: The public
finances are in a healthy position. The slowdown in the
growth of current public expenditure that occurred was
consistent with the recommendations of the Council.
However, the reductions in public capital expenditure in
2003 and 2004 differed from what was recommended by
the Council. These cuts will be partially reversed with the
large budgeted increase in expenditure in 2005.
In fact the tax base had been undermined over the years
by concessions to the rich and revenue was unduly
dependent on transactional property taxes such as stamp
duty. The public finances were an accident waiting to
happen. Yet the trade union leaders assented to this
Report. There was no dire warning about imminent
collapse in banking and public finances. Indeed
government was entitled to conclude that its economic
policy had been endorsed by the social partners. The
government through several General Secretaries of
departments of state, who sit on the NESC, assented to
the Report together with the ICTU leaders. (Incidentally,
the professors of the state economic research agency,
ESRI, also assented to the Report!!)
ICTU Pre-Budget Submission (2011)
Some aspects of the current ICTU pre-budget submission
are very useful(Pre-budget submission, ICTU website). It is
shown in the submission that income inequality Ireland is
worse than in 21 of the 30 OECD countries and also: Irish
earnings, wage rates and salaries are still below those in
most competitor countries.2 The total cost of employing

workers in Ireland is well below the cost in nearly all

developed competitor countries. Total labour costs in
Ireland are 22nd lowest out of 30 OECD developed
countries.3 However, it is seldom mentioned that
Irelands productivity was 2nd highest in the world after
Norway and ahead of the US in 2006 and will still be close
to the top performers. Even adjusting for Transfer Price
Fixing by multinationals, it will still be in the top 10
countries in the world.
Total current public expenditure in Ireland was cut from
40.2% of GDP back in 1994 to 30.2% in 2007, according to
the EU Commission. The average in Europe also fell in the
EU 15 from 46.2% in 1994 to 42.5% a drop of almost 4%.
So was Irish day to day spending out of control? The
answer is no.
Further, according to the European Commission, Final
consumption expenditure by general government in
Ireland is much lower than in most other EU states. In
2007, it was 16% of GDP compared to 23.1 in France, 25.1
in the Netherlands, 22.2% in Belgium or 20.5 in EU15 and
the same in EU27. So the evidence is that IRISH PUBLIC
SPENDING IS LOW compared to other countries in Europe.
It is at the same level as the US by this criterion
Indeed, the Commission on Taxation report contains a
table (page 54) outlining just how unequal income
distribution is. And this is based only on disclosed income.
It shows that 8500 persons or tax units earned over
275,000 in 2006 a total of 5.8bn. On this total they
paid just 1.9bn in tax on income. Indeed the combined
income of these high-earners equalled that of 165,000
earners further down the earnings scale.
While this information is useful, it does not occur to ICTU
that the existence of gross income inequality, hugely
inequitable taxation and low wages is an indication of
abject failure of the ICTU approach after 23 years of socalled social partnership!!!
The collapse of state finances and the banking system
merely confirms this failure
The Perks of Social Partnership
Recent hearings before the Public Accounts Committee
have highlighted mismanagement and junketing at FAS
and the unbelievable story of the National Health and

Local Authority Levy Fund to which large lodgements were

made by HSE and Local Authorities. Though two prominent
SIPTU members were signatories to the account, SIPTU
has stated that it had no knowledge of the fund. It is
alleged that 31 foreign trips in which union officials and
state officials participated were financed from the fund.
The hearings continue. One of the Reports of the PAC
Hearings which appeared in the Irish Times is worth
reading in full
Public money controlled by Siptu officials funded 31 trips
COLM KEENA, Irish Times Fri, Oct 08, 2010
OVERSEAS TRAVEL: PUBLIC MONEY controlled by two
senior Siptu officials was used to pay for at least 31
foreign trips over the past six years, the Dil Committee
on Public Accounts heard yesterday.
An inquiry by HSE auditor Dr Geraldine Smith has resulted
in 29 people being identified as having gone on 31 trips,
some of them on multiple occasions. The people involved
are civil and public servants and trade union officials.
Dr Smith said that because the fund controlled by Matt
Merrigan and Jack Kelly was used for the trips, the HSE
had no related documentation. She had established some
of the details from interviews with HSE and other
personnel and other methods.
The money in the account controlled by the Siptu officials
came from the budget of the Skill programme, which was
designed to provide training to low-paid health sector
workers.
Mr Merrigan and Mr Kelly are believed to have travelled on
a number of the trips. They and others travelled to New
York in March 2004 and Boston in March 2007. Mr Merrigan
travelled to New York in January 2005, March 2006,
February 2007 and May 2008.
Alan Smith, who ran the Skill programme, travelled on 22
trips according to a list produced by Dr Geraldine Smith.
One trip in October 2008 was to the US, Australia, Hong
Kong and the UK. Mr Smith has since availed of the public
service severance package.
Pat Harvey, the former chief executive of the North
Western Health Board, Peter McLoone, the former head of
Impact, Kevin Callinan of Impact, and Peter Bunting of the
Irish Congress of Trade Unions, are among those listed as

having travelled on trips paid for by the fund.

Mr McLoone is listed as having travelled to Boston in 2007
and Mr Harvey to New York in March 2006. The committee
was told the HSE had some information as to the purpose
of the visits, but it had no formal written records of the
purpose and outcomes of the trips. This was because they
were organised through the fund controlled by the Siptu
officials.
The secretary general of the Department of Health,
Michael Scanlan, said his department had identified trips
on which officials had travelled funded by the account.
Some were additional to those listed by Dr Smith.
He said an official had gone to Vancouver, Canada, in
March 2003. Bernard Carey of the department had gone
on a partnership visit to New York from March 13th to
20th, 2004.
Three officials had gone to St Paul, Minnesota in
September 2004. In March 2005, Frank Ahern had gone on
a trip to the US and Australia and in March 2008, by which
time he was retired, he had gone to Savannah, Georgia. In
March 2005, Eddie Flood had gone to New York.
In March 2006, an official had gone on an employer/union
study visit to New York. Mr Carey had gone to New York
between March 13th and 23rd, 2007. In October 2008, Jim
Breslin, an assistant secretary at the department, had
gone to Australia. Mr Breslin was at yesterdays meeting.
In March 2009, Mr Carey and Mr Ahern had gone to New
York. Mr Carey is also an assistant secretary in the
department. Some officials brought their wives with them
on some trips, but paid for them out of their own
resources.
The committee also heard that an official from the
Department of Finance, Tom Dowling, had gone on eight
out of the 31 trips identified by Dr Smith. Five of these
were to the UK and three to the US. Mr Dowling retired in
October 2009.
Some of the costs incurred on the trips were subsequently
recouped unvouched through Skill by the Siptu officials, Dr
Smith said in her audit report on the matter.
2010 The Irish Times
We also read in Irish Independent Oct 7, 2010
SIPTU official got 1,000 a day from HSEs 2.35m slush

fund
By Eilish ORegan and Ann Marie Walsh,
Irish Independent, October 07 2010
A FORMER trade union boss was entitled to fees of up to
1,000 a day for chairing each meeting of the group
overseeing the controversial state training scheme for
health workers, the Irish Independent has learned.
SIPTUs Billy Attley chaired the steering group for the
60m Skill training scheme, which will be at the centre of
a hearing by the Dail Committee on Public Accounts today.
A damning internal Heath Service Executive (HSE) audit
has found that 2.35m paid into a SIPTU account to
administer the scheme was poorly accounted for, with
money lavished on foreign study trips, taxis and a private
pension.
The union announced last night that it had lodged
348,000 with the Commissioner for Oaths in good faith.
This is equal to a sum that the auditors found could not be
accounted for.
A SIPTU spokesman again insisted that the account was
not in the control of the union. But he said the union had
told the HSE it would reimburse any expenses that could
not be properly accounted for.
Expenses
Mr Attley, who was appointed to the chair in 2004, told
this newspaper he was entitled to up to 1,000 for
chairing each meeting, but only claimed half that for halfday meetings held every second month.
Mr Attley said he was also entitled to unspecified expenses
that he did not claim.
The audit report showed that he had been paid 26,750
up to the end of 2009.
He rejected claims that the steering group was at fault for
not monitoring the 2.35m fund, saying its brief was to
approve training programmes.
We had no control over finance. We had no role in that
area that was the responsibility of the HSE, he added.
The report revealed yet more waste of the 2.35m. It
found :
The Skill office clocked up service costs of 526,444, none
of which were tendered for.
One journey involved a taxi from Dublin to Kilkenny, a

wait for the client and a return to Dublin at a cost of 432.

Another involved a journey from St Jamess Hospital in
Dublin to Tullamore, returning to the capital via Louth and
Dublin Airport, at a cost of 544.
In evidence to the audit committee, one of the union
officials with access to the account said the Department of
Health gave him the grant with no guidelines or terms and
conditions as to how the money should be spent.
Eilish ORegan and Ann Marie Walsh
Funding of Trade Union Education by Government
Trade union education and training activities became
heavily dependent on state funding under partnership. An
example is set out in the press report below from the Irish
Examiner. When activists questioned such dependency in
the past, they were routinely told that the funding had no
strings attached
We were soon to learn otherwise!
Fs fund paid out 4.5m to two unions
By Conor Ryan, Political Correspondent
Irish Examiner, Monday, September 06, 2010
A MASSIVE 4.5 million was paid out to SIPTU and ICTU
from the misspent Fs training package which has caused
the European Commission to withhold 57m in social
funding.
However, the main union involved has said the benefits it
received from this training fund, the Competency
Development Programme (CDP), had nothing to do with its
vociferous defence of the continued existence of Fs after
news of Europes actions broke.
At the weekend Jack OConnor, president of SIPTU and the
Irish Congress of Trade Unions, said Ruair Quinn of the
Labour Party was completely wrong in his call for closing
down Fs.
Mr Quinn had made his comments after the Department of
Education confirmed the last round of European social
funding (2000-2006) worth 57m had been withheld and
the next tranche (2007-2013), worth 211m is frozen,
pending an audit of how Fs spent the money.
A major part of this was the CDP, which was focused on
programmes for workers who wanted to up-skill.
The commission has already said Ireland had serious
questions to answer in how Fs paid out money to a

multitude of private companies to provide training.

Since 2004 SIPTU College received 2.06m from Fs under
the CDP. ICTU was paid 2.46m. In 2008 alone SIPTU
College was paid 862,644 and ICTU received 1,338,064.
These figures were published by website The Story.ie.
These revelations have raised questions about the
relationship between senior trade union officials and
government under partnership
In the next section, we set out the remunerations of
general secretaries including salaries, pensions and fees
from state bodies.
Pay and other Incomes of General Secretaries
General secretaries (General Presidents in SIPTU) are
normally paid in accordance with the salaries of the
highest grades in the civil service. While practices differ
across unions, a small public sector union would typically
pay its general secretary on the assistant secretary scale
reaching 147,036 in the fourth year of service. The
salaries of the general secretaries of the bigger unions
would typically relate to the higher Deputy General
Secretary and Secretary General scales below. While
unions must purchase pensions in the private sector, the
pensions in payment are roughly similar to equivalent
public service pensions. Despite the salary equivalences,
salaries of general secretaries were generally not cut in
accordance with the public service pay cut effective from
Jan 1, 2010.
Revised pay with effect from 1 March 2008 for General
Service Grades.
Circular 5/2008 Appendix 1A
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
128,535 134,378 140,707 147,036
DEPUTY SECRETARY
173,217
SECRETARY GENERAL
216,516
Senator Shane Ross and Nick Webb of the Sunday
Independent have authored a book called Wasters
(2010). They are hostile to the trade union movement and
they wish that social partnership should be replaced by an
even more neo-liberal system.
They continually peddle the myth that the first

benchmarking award for middle earners in the public

service was excessive at 8.9%. In fact public servants had
not received any catch up award with their established
private sector comparators for the previous 9 years and
the award was far less than adequate to bridge the gap.
Senators,TDs, Ministers and general secretaries did
benefit hugely from the separate benchmarking of higher
grades to chief executives of private companies. For
example, the maximum of the assistant secretary grade in
the civil service increased from E95,487 in 2003 to
E147,036 in 2008, an increase of over E50,000!! Increases
for higher grades were even larger.
However the Chapter on the Social Partnership Industry
is interesting and it is worth remembering that it has been
scrutinised for vulnerability to libel action by the authors
legal team. While NPSA dissociates from the elitist
denigration of the humble beginnings of trade union
leaders and even their personal appearance in the right
wing narrative, the financial facts cited appear to be
correct. A general secretary in service would receive the
remunerations mentioned below in addition to salary,
while a retired general secretary would receive the
remunerations in addition to pension
Extracts from The Social Partnership Industry, Wasters,
Nick Webb and Shane Ross
A brief flavour of the Chapter entitled The Social
Partnership Industry is included here:
Meanwhile, nearly all the top union leaders were landing
handy part-time state positions. Peter McLoone, boss of
the public-service union IMPACT, not only held the chair at
FAS for 24,000 a year but was appointed a director of the
Labour Relations Commission at 14,000 a year. Senator
Joe OToole finished up his term as president of ICTU, only
to find himself on the board of the Irish Auditing and
Accounting Supervisory Authority at around 9,000 a year
and as the ICTU nominee on the Personal Injuries
Assessment Board at a fee rising to 14,000 in 2008.
Christy Kirwan, formerly head of the Irish Transport and
General Workers Union, had earlier totted up several other
semi-state board posts including Aer Rianta and the chair
of FAS; he even landed a Taoiseachs nomination to the
Senate courtesy of Labour leader Dick Spring as far back

as 1983.
SIPTUs Patricia King, another loyal survivor of the 2002
PVGs, notched up lucrative terms on the RTE Authority and
the National Roads Authority. Hardly a union leader with a
partnership pedigree was forgotten.
One particularly useful vehicle for rewarding socialpartnership veterans in the twilight of their careers was
the office of rights commissioner. Rights commissioners
were creatures of the Labour Relations Commission,
established under partnership deals to promote the
improvement of industrial relations. The LRCs first chief
was Kieran Mulvey a former general secretary of the
powerful teachers union ASTI who in 1989 had sought a
nomination for Fianna Fail in the Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown
constituency; its board included not only Peter McLoone
and Peter Bunting of ICTU but also Brendan McGinty of
IBEC. Rights commissioners were appointed to investigate
workers grievances under various acts of the Oireachtas.
By 2008 their number had expanded to fifteen after a
promise made to ICTU in the most recent partnership
agreement, Towards 2016. In April 2010 the Rights
Commissioner Service admitted to us that in 2009 each
commissioner was paid a per diem fee of Euro 470
The spokesman also noted, incomprehensibly, that most
commissioners `work a five-day-week basis, others choose
to operate a lesser regime in terms of availability. Those
who work the five days get 2,350 a week for their
trouble, comfortably exceeding 100,000 a year
(As hearings are held all over the state expenses are
significantPH)

He (Des Geraghty) had been on the board of FAS, the

national training and employment agency, for nearly ten
years.
For nearly twenty years, eight seats on the board of FAS
were reserved for the favourite sons of the big employers
and the unions. The chairmanship of the board with its
24,000 salary rotated between a top boss at the big
employers outfit, IBEC, and a union chief. Geraghty was
one of the insiders who drew 14,000 a year for the
privilege of sitting comfortably beside so many other

`social partners.Four months after the UCD conferral, FAS

would be exposed as a hotbed of waste, junketry and
mismanagement. A year later, at the end of 2009, the
entire seventeen-member board of FAS, including
Geraghty, was forced to exit, some exposed as junketeers,
others (like Geraghty) simply ineffective.
In 2005 a little quango called the Affordable Homes
Partnership (AHP) was created under the terms of the
most recent social-partnership agreement. The Minister
for the Environment, Dick Roche, offered the chair to
Geraghty, who accepted. The chairmans fee was settled
at 13,000. Geraghty received only 8,000 in 2005
because it was a short year, but the quango paid him
30,000 in 2006, another 30,000 in 2007 and 25,000 in
2008. Add that to his fee at FAS, his pension as
general secretary of SIPTU and other perks, such as a
stipend from his post as chairman of the Irish Print and
Packaging Forum, and an observer might conclude that
Geraghty has been in the right place at the right time.
(Des Geraghty was recently appointed to the Board of the
Central Bank to replace ICTU General Secretary, David
BeggPH)
Billy Attley was one of the first social-partnership
quangsters. He retired as general secretary of S I P T U at
the age of sixty in 1998, having helped to deliver four
partnership deals to Fianna Fail governments. He was
picked by Bertie Ahern as one of the original trade-union
directors of FAS, and served for years alongside his pal,
chairman John Lynch, and another trade unionist, Christy
Kirwan. There is no known record of a moments discord
on this chummiest of boards. Billy Attley had torn himself
away from the joys of FAS long before the board was
forced to leave office; but he made up for the loss
elsewhere. Despite his friendship with Bertie, he
maintained his Labour Party membership, a link that did
him no harm when he was appointed to the RTE Authority
by Labour minister Michael D. Higgins in 1995.
Attleys good working relationship with Bertie probably
landed him his seat on the board of Eircom in 1999. This
was a real jackpot: the part-time job carried an annual fee
of 48,000.
-Wasters extracts end here

We recall from Irish Independent report carried above

SIPTUs Billy Attley chaired the steering group for the
60m Skill training scheme, which will be at the centre of
a hearing by the Dail Committee on Public Accounts
today.
The (HSE) audit report showed that he had been paid
26,750 up to the end of 2009. Irish Independent
Threats to Union Officials by Government
After the pay cut in the public service which was effective
from January1, 2010, the strike movement of the previous
year was not resumed but works to rule were
implemented across the public service. The Report below,
from the Irish Times describes the situation very well.
Already the membership of the new FAS board had been
announced in Mid-January. The Board had previously been
chaired by IMPACT Gen SEC, Peter McLoone, Chair of
Public Services Committee ICTU, and a number of trade
union representatives also sat on it.
The new board did not contain a single trade union
representative.
Government plan to clamp down on services to unions
MARTIN WALL, Industry Correspondent, IRISH TIMES, Sat,
Jan 23, 2010
THE GOVERNMENT is to consider proposals next week to
clamp down on services and facilities which it provides to
trade unions representing staff in the public service.
The proposals, which will be contained in a memorandum
for Government drawn up by the Department of Finance,
come as industrial action across the public service in
protest at pay cuts following the budget last month get
under way in earnest.
Among the issues to be examined by the Cabinet is the
facility which allows union subscriptions to be deducted at
source from the pay of public service staff.
The Government is also expected to consider the future of
officials on the State payroll who currently work on local
partnership issues between unions and Government
departments and
bodies.

The material in the article above could only have come

from the Department of Finance.

Government was threatening to remove the perks of

partnership from full time officials. Appointments to state
boards would end. Would state funding of trade union
education and training dry up?
Deduction at Source
Trade union officials of Public Service are paid from the
proceeds of Deduction at Source. Union members
authorise the state to deduct union subscriptions from
their pay cheques. This is a hugely more effective means
of collecting union dues than collection from individual
members by local trade union representatives. Trade
Union head offices receive large financial transfers on a
regular and predictable basis.
If this facility were withdrawn union finances would be
endangered. Unions representing general clerical and
manual grades such as SIPTU and IMPACT would be
particularly badly hit as a system of direct debits from
bank accounts would be more difficult to put in place
among low paid members.
A drop in revenue to union head offices could be very
large. Unions had already failed to prevent a pay cut and a
selective tax called a pension levy on public servants.
Would the members pay up every week and how would
dues be collected even if they were willing? The old
system of dues collection by shop stewards is virtually
non-existent in the public service.
Would union officials have to take a pay cut? Would there
be redundancies of union officials?
The General Secretaries on the Public Services Negotiating
Committee sought to get into talks. Committee chair Peter
McLoone was on the board of the Labour Relations
Commission. Kieran Mulvey, former ASTI general
secretary, and CEO of the Commission soon intervened to
call the government and unions together. This process
culminated in the Croke Park Deal.
Compulsory Redundancies in the Public Service
However, there was another problem. From the talks in
Nov/Dec 2009, the union leaders knew that the
government would be demanding huge concessions. How
could these be sold to union members? How could it be
imposed on individual unions? Already, thousands of jobs
had been eliminated under the public service recruitment

embargo and the vast majority of public servants were

heavily overloaded and public services were being cut
back.
A key strength of grass-roots public service trade
unionism has always been the understanding that
permanent whole-time public servants could not be made
redundant. This was also understood to apply to holders of
Contracts of Indefinite Duration (CIDs).
NPSA can find no public threat by Government
representatives to make permanent wholetime public
servants compulsorily redundant prior to the opening of
negotiations. The moratorium/recruitment ban relies on
non-replacement for job elimination.
While there is no statutory provision for public service
permanency, it is strong custom and practice stretching
back to the era of British rule. This is reinforced by the fact
that public servants employed prior to the mid-nineties
are not covered by the Redundancy Payments Scheme.
There are no compelling legal judgements in this state on
the issue. However, the British Law Lords found in favour
of a public servant on the issue stating that permanence
in the public service meant retention in employment until
pensionable age. A contrary decision by a lower court was
overturned.( McClelland v Northern Ireland General Health
Services.)
Any redundancy could be contested in court. Irrespective
of the law, public service unions were in a position to insist
that permanence to retiring age was a condition of
employment in industrial relations terms. Compulsory
redundancy could be contested in the Labour Court and it
would form a legitimate basis for industrial action. The
Public Services Negotiating Committee sought legal
advice.
It says that the legal advice is that public servants can be
made redundant under law.
PSC then decided to seek an assurance in an industrial
relations agreement with government (Croke Park Deal)
that public servants would not be made compulsorily
redundant!
Though it may appear to be a reasonable action to the
uninformed, this was a historic retreat by the general
secretaries on the PS (Negotiating Committee)

What are the implications of seeking the incorporation of

such an assurance in a time- limited industrial relations
agreement?
It is a clear concession that public service permanency is
not a legal entitlement though this had never been
decided by a court. Legal advices often differ in such
circumstances.
It is also a clear concession that government had a right in
industrial relations practice to make permanent public
servants redundant.
Experienced negotiators would know that immediately
such concessions were made, the government would
demand huge concessions from the trade union side for
the inclusion of such an assurance in a Public Services
Agreement.
Furthermore, after the current agreement expires,
government would be expected seek further concessions
for the renewal of the assurance in any new agreement.
The Croke Park Agreement contained two clauses relevant
to this issue.
6. The Government gives a commitment that compulsory
redundancy will not apply within the public service, save
where existing exit provisions apply. This commitment is
subject to compliance with the terms of this Agreement
and, in particular, to the agreed flexibility on
redeployment being delivered. To that end, the
redeployment arrangements referred to below will include
opportunities for re-skilling and re-assignment as a key
method to retain and secure employment in comparable
roles in the public service.
28. The implementation of this Agreement is subject to no
currently unforeseen budgetary deterioration.
It is not widely understood that the government escape
clause (28 above) applies to the no compulsory
redundancy clause (6 above) as well as to the assurance
of no further pay cuts and the process of pay restoration.
Government could renege on the conditional no
compulsory redundancy assurance at any time because
of the current unforeseen budgetary deterioration which
led to the intervention of the IMF.
The threat of redundancy is now being used to pressurise
members of unions which voted no to the Deal to

comply with it or lose their jobs. (The threat that the

pensions of public servants, members of non-compliant
unions, retiring in 2011 would reflect the pay cut is also
being used)
Experienced general secretaries could be expected to
foresee that this is precisely what would happen.
The concession by General Secretaries that permanent
public servants could be made redundant was, indeed, a
historic retreat. It was such a huge retreat that a special
congress of each individual union should have been called
to discuss the matter before the assurance was sought.
Not alone did this not occur, but none of the many trade
union executive members who attend NPSA meetings can
recall the matter being explained to the executive of their
union before the negotiations.
The biggest retreat in Public Service trade union history
took place without many trade union executives and
executive members being aware of what was happening
and its implications.
Sun Back in its Heaven!!!
Sept 29,2010
The Minister for Finance, Mr Brian Lenihan, TD, has today
appointed five members to the Central Bank Commission
with effect from Friday, 1 October.
As provided for in legislation, the terms of office of the first
appointees will vary in length in order to ensure that
future vacancies on the Commission will be staggered. The
appointees and their terms of office are as follows:
Professor John Fitzgerald (5 years)
Mr. Max Watson (5 years)
Mr. Michael Soden (4 years)
Mr. Des Geraghty (4 years)
Professor Blanaid Clarke (3 years)
From http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php//the-centralbank-commission
As pointed out above, there was no trade union
representative among government nominees to the board
of Fs which was announced in January 2010 before the
Croke Park Deal was done.
As can be seen from the above announcement in the wake
of the Croke Park Deal, the sun is back in its heaven.
Former SIPTU President Des Geraghty was appointed to

the Board of the Central Bank with effect from October 1,

2010 . David Begg is no longer serving on that body.
Technically Social Partnership Agreements may be dead
but the Social Partnership Industry is back in business.
General Secretaries Must Be Brought Back Under the
Control of Members
Current ICTU President and Siptu General President, Jack
OConnor should resign. Current ICTU General Secretary,
David Begg should also resign. All the members of the
executive council of ICTU in the past decade, but
particularly in the 2003 to 2008, period have a case to
answer.
David Begg, ICTU General Secretary, was a member of the
board of directors of the central bank for 15 years until
mid-2010. This included the 2003 to 2007 period when
Irish banks were allowed to borrow an additional
50% of Gross Domestic Product of the country. The banks
then lent the money in a manner that led to national
economic disaster.
Both ICTU and SIPTU employ professional economic
advisors whose services are available to the leadership.
General Secretary David Begg
David Begg became General Secretary of the Irish
Congress of Trade Unions in 2001. For five years prior to
that he was Chief Executive of Concern Worldwide, an
international humanitarian organisation working in 27
countries and with offices in Dublin, London, Belfast, New
York and Chicago. He is also a Director of the Central Bank
(since 1995), a Governor of the Irish Times Trust, non
Executive Director of Aer Lingus, a member of the National
Economic and Social Council (NESC), and of the Advisory
Board of Development Co-operation Ireland. He also sits
on the Executive Committee of the European Trade Union
Confederation (ETUC). (ICTU Website)
General President
Jack OConnor has been General President of SIPTU since
2003, having been re-elected in 2006 for a second term.
He is also President of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions
(ICTU) since July of 2009 and served previously as Vice
President from mid-2007. He has been a member of the
Executive Council of Congress since 2001. (SIPTU Website)
ICTU remained in social partnership with a government

which led the country into bankruptcy, a condition which is

now causing untold hardship to working people, the
unemployed and their dependents. Partnership
agreements were not narrow wage agreements. As shown
above in relation to the ten year long agreement Towards
2016, they effectively assented by their actions to an
economic and social policy of government which led to
disastrous outcomes for members. In the private sector
members have been forced to accept redundancies, pay
cuts and devastation of pension schemes. After 23 years
of social partnership there is no legal requirement on
employers to recognise trade unions. An EU directive
protecting the pensions of private sector workers has not
been transposed into law. The pensions of British workers
in the Waterford-Wedgewood Group are protected up to
90% of value by law. The Irish workers in the same Group,
former employees of Waterford Crystal, are taking legal
action under EU law to recover their pensions. In the
public sector, pay cuts and pension levies have been
imposed on the watch of the the current executive
council and officer board of ICTU. At the request of ICTU, a
Public Service Agreement (Croke Park Deal) has been
brokered under which conditions of service established
over the past fifty years are being removed. Public
Services are being devastated under a staffing
moratorium which does not protect caring and educational
services with 2000 nursing posts already eliminated.
It all happened under the watch of the current leadership.
They have led members into misery and full retreat.
The leadership of the caste of General Secretaries and
Senior Trade Union Officials has failed.
Why are general secretaries currently beyond the control
of members?
Firstly, general secretaries are permanent employees and
are normally not subject to re-election. Most are members
of a single Branch of SIPTU. As permanent employees they
are not subject to the outcomes they negotiate. They have
career interests which are separate from the interests of
the members they represent. Except for the very large
unions, they sit alone on the executive council of ICTU.
Even where a large union has more than one
representative, each is invariably a senior full-time official.

SIPTU and IMPACT together have a majority in ICTU. These

two unions effectively decide who gets the nomination to
public boards, who gets the post-retirement job as a rights
commissioner, labour court judge etc. Any general
secretary who stands up to them will get no preferment.
The same is true for sub-general secretary officials in the
big unions. The lucrative post-retirement job is now
structured into the career path of general secretaries.
General secretaries have developed very sophisticated
manipulation techniques. Among these is the combination
of militant talk with practical collaboration. The SIPTUIMPACT nexus can tolerate strong public opposition by the
smaller unions in initial voting on national agreements.
The general secretaries of the no to Croke Park unions
are forgiven for their initial stance. This stance is seen as
necessary to deliver up recalcitrant members later. But
once SIPTU/IMPACT has expressed its majority within ICTU,
general secretaries would not be forgiven for failing to
bring their unions into line. The absence of any sustained
opposition by a single general secretary to the plainly
disastrous policies of the ICTU leadership speaks volumes.
During social partnership all the main business of unions is
done through ICTU. The caste of general secretaries and
senior full time officials who sit on the executive council of
ICTU have complete control of information and they
habitually collaborate together to ensure this is so. This
allows them to withhold information or to give partial
information to national executives until their desired fait
accompli is in place. Because none of the elected
members of national executives including elected
presidents have first-hand knowledge of the proceedings
of the executive council, the executive is highly vulnerable
to manipulation by general secretaries. Because sectoral
talks within national negotiations take place under the
auspices of ICTU, lay presidents can be ( and have been)
excluded from vital talks. In recent months the secretary
of the Public Services Committee (ICTU) urged unions to
send only one official to a meeting of the negotiating
committeeno tales out of school there.
General secretaries are in constant contact with other
general secretaries in the sector and with the employer
negotiators. This allows them to bring processes forward

in stages until there is no way back for the elected

representatives when they realise what is happening.
Planned scheduling of executive meetings of different
unions in the sector is common. The meeting of the
weakest executive is scheduled first. After the desired
objective is passed there, this result is used to pressure
the next executive into compliance.
There is nothing new in the collaborationist tendencies of
full-time officials. James Connolly himself remarked on
such negative tendencies before his death. The difference
in approach between the militant Big Jim Larkin and the
conservative Willie OBrien split the old ITGWU (now
reunited in SIPTU) for decades. There were always some
preferments available to some general secretaries.
What is new is the overwhelming extent of the rewards
available to senior union officials under social partnership.
There is effectively one for everyone in the audience
provided they stay in line
Huge preferments on the nomination of the government
with whom they negotiate are available to the most
prominent union leaders.
General secretaries can also distribute minor preferments
including junkets to members of national executives
helping them to maintain control. Under partnership
minor preferments and junkets are now routinely made
available to some favoured branch officers, giving a
further instrument of control to head offices.
Why are elected Presidents and elected national executive
members unable to control and direct general secretaries
though they are empowered to do so under rule?
(NPSA relies here on the experience of several former
union presidents and current and past executive members
who participate in its deliberations).
Firstly, many presidents and executive members have no
wish to control general secretaries as they form part of
cliques centred on the general secretary. The extent of the
largesse available to general secretaries for allocation to
executive members is a factor here. In addition the extent
of expenses paid in most unions not only tends to attract
the wrong type of full-time official but also the wrong type
of executive member. Many executive members and
Presidents owe their election to the general secretarys

clique in the branches.

National executive members who genuinely wish to
control officials on behalf of their members face an
impossible task though some presidents and executive
members have achieved important victories. It is a victory
to merely survive a period in office without being
compromised.
National executive members and Presidents face regular
re-election. General secretaries, even where originally
elected, do not normally face re-election. The general
secretary has a vast array of contacts including contacts
with other general secretaries in the sector, contacts with
employer representatives, contacts with journalists,
contacts with the retained union solicitors, and
importantly contacts with members of the general
secretarys clique in the branch of each executive
member. The permanent general secretary is in a powerful
position to trip up an elected person and to damage
their prospects of re-election. Often, understandably, lay
presidents require expert assistance
in order to operate on the national stage, a role to which
they are unaccustomed and for which they have no
training. If the general secretary withholds such assistance
or is trying to trip them up, the president would face
serious difficulties. Faced with this, most presidents allow
the general secretary to determine policy and to lead the
union. This often means allowing the general secretary to
allocate nominations to partnership bodies and to
distribute junkets to favourites.
Bringing Smaller Unions into Line
General Secretaries of smaller unions face a problem if
their union has opposed a national pay agreement with
which SIPTU/IMPACT has agreed. ICTU is not a trade union
and has no power to conclude industrial relations
agreements. Each individual union must be brought into
line. The general secretary will not be forgiven if his union
does not accept the SIPTU/IMPACT decision. He will be cut
out of preferments such as rights commissioner
appointments and nominations to public boards. He must
ensure, firstly, that the smaller unions do not combine
together to oppose SIPTU/IMPACT. Then in collusion with
colleague general secretaries an order of business is

agreed. The union whose opposition is weakest is

pressurised into capitulating fist. Then this capitulation is
used to pressurise another union into submission. This
process is continued until the remaining hard-line unions
are isolated and crushed. This process has been made
more effective in considerations of the Croke Park Deal as
members of recalcitrant unions can be threatened with
compulsory redundancy and further pay cuts.
The Old Legal Advice Trick
National executives of trade unions routinely deal with
complex matters. A diligent national executive member
may demand legal advice. The General secretary may
agree.
The General Secretary, perhaps together with a compliant
President, meets the legal adviser. Crucially, this enables
the general secretary to brief the lawyer and frame the
questions. Often, the solicitor receives a large volume of
business from the union and wishes to remain in favour
with the general secretary. If the legal answers are not
entirely helpful to the general secretary, he can give a
report of the legal advice to the executive rather than
written legal advice signed by the lawyer. The
manipulation of legal advice is a key tool of general
secretaries.
Officialdom Cloning Itself
It is usual for ICTU officials to sit on interview boards for
the appointment of officials, including new general
secretaries, of affiliated unions. Also, the current general
secretary of the individual union is almost always on the
interview board. The ICTU official and the general
secretary are well known to each other. The ICTU
representative is often chosen by the general secretary.
The possibility of a candidate not meeting the approval of
the caste of general secretaries and/or who is opposed to
partnership being appointed is very remote. Dumping of
unwanted officials of powerful unions on smaller unions is
not unknown.
As I have said in the introduction to this pamphlet, the
ongoing destruction of conditions of service established
over decades under the Croke Park Deal threatens the
very survival of trade unions. Will hundreds of thousands
of members continue to pay dues to a body which has

failed to protect them to pay cuts, pension levy,

moratorium and which even offered up their conditions of
service to government in December 2009? The answer
is:not for very long. One leading public service trade
unionist has described the Deal as a suicide note by trade
unions .
How are General Secretaries to be brought under control
This task is of extreme urgency if trade unions are to be
restored as genuine fighting organisations championing
the interests of members as a central priority.
The first requirement is that general secretaries should be
elected by members and, even more crucially, should be
subject to re-election at frequent intervals. I am
completely opposed to any governmental or legislative
interference in this area. The trade unions must be
renewed from within.
Changes of union rules should be proposed at national
congresses to effect these changes. Re-election at
intervals of 3 years would be appropriate.
Unions should ensure that representatives on all ICTU
bodies are lay elected officers in service or on short
sabbatical (not long-term secondment) who are subject to
re-election.
Control of information and the timing of its release has
always been crucial to the survival of powerful elites. An
adviser, member of the national executive, should
accompany the representative to every meeting at ICTU.
Such adviser should serve for two years only with renomination precluded.
There is no ICTU rule confining eligibility for election to the
executive council to general secretaries. Over the years,
general secretaries have established a custom and
practice that they hold these positions.
It is totally inappropriate that a caste of permanent
general secretaries can meet alone at ICTU and make
decisions about which national executives may have
insufficient knowledge. Some of these decisions are
effectively irreversible.
It should be part of the conditions of employment of
general secretary that s/he cannot take up employment in
the public service for two years after severance. The
Labour Party has recently proposed that a two year ban on

civil servants taking up employment with private

companies with which they engage in office should replace
the current one year restriction. Similar principles also
sometimes apply in private sector employment.
Activists making such proposals will be accused of
questioning the integrity of the general secretary. This is
not so. A systemic problem, not the qualities of an
individual, is being addressed. These are normal principles
of accountability. Accountability, like justice, must not only
exist but must be seen to exist. Such accusations have
always been made against those advocating true
democracy.
Representation on public bodies can often be helpful for
trade union members. Full-time officials should be
precluded from accepting such appointments while
serving or after severance. Lay members should be
nominated to such positions for a time limited period only
with re-nomination precluded.
Contracts of employment of general secretaries should be
revised to provide for removal from office for failure to
uphold union policy in all dealings. A specific offense
should be written into disciplinary codes and a fair
procedure for processing an allegation in this regard
should be put in place.
Remuneration of full-time officials should be directly
related to the pay of those they represent and should not
exceed the maximum basic pay of members subject to an
upper limit of 100,000 Euro indexed to future inflation.
Where members on a number of scales are represented,
statisticians would have no difficulty in establishing a
basket of scales maxima and an appropriate multiplier to
establish a salary scale.
This would ensure that the general secretary would be
subject to the outcomes negotiated for members.
The model of leadership of unions by general secretaries
has failed
The above proposals may sound drastic. But they are
necessary to rescue the Trade Union movement from the
debacle into which members have been led. The negative
tendencies in permanent officialdom identified by James
Connolly almost 100 years ago have led to support for
disastrous government policies with attendant

unemployment and emigration, to acquiescence to pay

cuts and to surrender of hard-won conditions of service in
state employment under the Croke Park Deal.
The implementation of these proposals is a matter of
urgency. It takes priority over policy determination. Policy
has very little effect if it can be made ineffective by the
general secretary and colleagues on the executive council
of ICTU.
Union activists may have further proposals which will be
discussed at future meetings of NPSA.
Readers are invited to submit suggestions.
Paddy Healy March 2011
Fianna Fil Protect Noonan from EFFECTIVE SCRUTINY ON
NAMA FIRESALE
Mr Fleming said he would like to assure Mr Noonan that he
will be questioned strictly in connection with the sale
process, saying the questioning will be strictly kept to the
mechanics of the sale process and the ministers
involvement in it.
Mr Fleming said: He is one of the links in the chain in
relation to this sale process.
He was involved in correspondence personally; he was
involved in personal phone calls on the matter.
I do want to assure the minister, and I as chairman of the
PAC know fully the remit of the committee, we will not be
straying into governmental decisions; policy issues by the
department.
We will keep it strictly to the mechanics of the sale
process and the involvement of the minister in the sale
process, he added.
Later, he told RT News that questions seeking to
establish if there was any Government policy to encourage
NAMA to accelerate sales of its loan portfolio, and what
impact that might have had on the controversial Project
Eagle deal at the centre of controversy, would have to be
addressed by a Commission of Inquiry and not by the PAC.
------------------------------------------Ronnie Hanna,now out on bail, who was named in the
Spotlight probe, was the former head of Namas Asset
Management in Dublin Headquarters, writes Niamh Horan
This weekend, a source close to the BBC Spotlight
investigation told the Sunday Independent: The team are

still quietly plugging away. This is only the tip of the

iceberg. There will be more to come.
PUBLISHED Sunday Independent 18/09/2016 | 02:30
Businessman Frank Cushnahan is the name on everyones
lips this weekend after he was secretly recorded accepting
a 40,000 cash payment from a Nama borrower.
But the bombshell footage, reported by BBCs Spotlight
programme, has thrown another man into the centre of
controversy: former head of Namas asset management,
Ronnie Hanna.
In the video, Mr Cushnahan alleged he had influence over
Mr Hanna and suggested that he would have Mr Hannas
assistance in getting the developers loans out of Nama in
return for a fee. Ronnie and I are thick as thieves, he
told the property developer.
In March of this year, both Mr Hanna and Mr Cushnahan
were arrested on allegations of fraud by the National
Crime Agency (NCA), which is investigating Namas 1.2bn
sale of its Northern Ireland property portfolio to US firm
Cerberus, and released on bail. Mr Hanna, like Mr
Cushnahan, has strenuously denied any wrongdoing, but if
Mr Cushnahans secretly recorded claims are true, it brings
the scandal to the heart of Namas headquarters in Dublin.
Excerpts from Full Article Below
A source close to the BBC investigation told the Sunday
Independent that both Mr Hanna and Mr Cushnahan were
very influential and big powerful players in Northern
Ireland business and banking circles and go back over
many years.
In 2010, Mr Hannas career change from Ulster Bank to
Nama raised eyebrows among lifelong friends. As a source
explained: We were all very surprised it was a very
leftfield move.
Mr Hanna immediately became central to Namas
operations in Dublin. He reportedly had the power of life
or death over developers.Two months later, Mr Ronans chief legal counsel, Mr
Williams, wrote on Mr Ronans behalf to Finance Minister
Michael Noonan. In the letter dated September 6, 2012, he
outlined the sequence of events leading to the collapse of
Treasury Holdings and raised grave concerns regarding
Namas actions to that point.

Nama was accused of losing a vast amount of money for

Irish taxpayers through the sale of the jewel in Treasurys
assets: Londons iconic Battersea Power Station, which the
agency sold for 600m but is now expected to generate
profits of up 10bn.
In recent months it has emerged that, on March 31 2014,
Mr Hanna met John Snow, the head of Cerberus, the day
before the US fund bid to buy the loans, worth 4.5bn.
Three days later, Cerberus bid just 1.2bn for the loans,
which was accepted by Nama. Six months later, Mr Hanna
unexpectedly left the agency.
Main Article Continued
So who is Ronnie Hanna- and how much power did he
wield over Irish property developers and their assets?
A graduate of Belfasts Queens university, Mr Hanna (57)
worked for 30 years in Ulster Bank, Belfast. He was said to
have been well thought of by senior bankers and quickly
moved into the world of credit when the crash hit in 2008,
eventually working his way up to Head of Global
Restructuring at the bank.
Friends of Mr Hanna describe him as a typical Northern
Protestant.
He was seen as one of the pillars of society in the North.
A source close to the BBC investigation told the Sunday
Independent that both Mr Hanna and Mr Cushnahan were
very influential and big powerful players in Northern
Ireland business and banking circles and go back over
many years.
In 2010, Mr Hannas career change from Ulster Bank to
Nama raised eyebrows among lifelong friends. As a source
explained: We were all very surprised it was a very
leftfield move.
Mr Hanna immediately became central to Namas
operations in Dublin. He reportedly had the power of life
or death over developers.
He has overseen the sale of assets belonging to Irelands
biggest property developers including Derek Quinlan,
Treasury Holdings Johnny Ronan and Richard Barrett,
Michael OFlynn, Harry Crosbie and Joe OReilly.
They were among some of the biggest losers when Nama

set off with seeming abandon in selling off what effectively

were Irelands crown jewels London assets such as
Battersea Power Station, the Knightsbridge Estate, and a
major stake in the world famous Claridges, Berkeley and
Connaught hotels for knockdown prices to vulture funds
and other international investors.
The decision to take out Treasury Holdings in particular
raised serious questions about Namas conduct.
In 2012, when Treasury appealed the decision against
Nama bosses who had called in their loans, Ms Justice
Mary Finlay Geoghegan ruled in favour of Nama and
Treasury Holdings lost on a technicality.
However, in her written summary, Ms Justice Geoghegan
was highly critical of Nama. In a public indictment of the
agency, she found it acted unfairly and unreasonably
against the developers because it did not fulfil its
obligation to give a fair hearing to proposals which could
have saved the company.
Two months later, Mr Ronans chief legal counsel, Mr
Williams, wrote on Mr Ronans behalf to Finance Minister
Michael Noonan. In the letter dated September 6, 2012, he
outlined the sequence of events leading to the collapse of
Treasury Holdings and raised grave concerns regarding
Namas actions to that point.
Nama was accused of losing a vast amount of money for
Irish taxpayers through the sale of the jewel in Treasurys
assets: Londons iconic Battersea Power Station, which the
agency sold for 600m but is now expected to generate
profits of up 10bn.
Meanwhile, this weekend one developer who has not yet
exited Nama- and who has worked with Mr Hannadescribed him as very, very tough and abrupt.
He said: He had the power to make or break any of us.
A friend who would sometimes meet Mr Hanna socially
during his time working with Nama said: He was
definitely an outsider in Dublin so he could disassociate
from developers when he had to make decisions and I
know that made his work easier for him.
The friend, who would drink socially with Mr Hanna,
described him as lonely in Dublin, adding: He would get
the train down early on a Monday morning and come back
up here to Belfast late on a Friday evening. He seemed

under a lot of stress during his time with Nama. You could
see it in his face.
He aged hugely in the few years he was in Dublin and he
didnt look great. He looked absolutely wrecked when I
met him.
He went on: I do know there was huge political pressure
and Nama had to produce and deliver quickly and thats
why very, very fast decisions were made. He was in a
tough place. The atmosphere inside was very politically
sensitive. Some developers appeared to have no chance
to survive. People wanted blood and that was it. Politicians
wanted results quickly.
Speaking about learning that his friend was embroiled in
the Project Eagle controversy, the source said: We were
all shocked. I dont think he was the type of man who
could do such a thing. I hope there will be an investigation
to figure out what the hell happened. There is something
definitely amiss [with the Nama controversy], things dont
add up.
In recent months it has emerged that, on March 31 2014,
Mr Hanna met John Snow, the head of Cerberus, the day
before the US fund bid to buy the loans, worth 4.5bn.
Three days later, Cerberus bid just 1.2bn for the loans,
which was accepted by Nama. Six months later, Mr Hanna
unexpectedly left the agency.
Under Dail privilege, Independent TD Mick Wallace said Mr
Hanna was part of a cabal to seek payment for effecting
the biggest property deal in the history of the State.
In March of this year both Mr Hanna and Mr Cushnahan
were arrested by police, who seized documents and
computers during raids on properties in Belfast. Nama
belatedly lodged a complaint to the Standards in Public
Office Commission in relation to its Northern-based former
adviser Frank Cushnahan. When asked why Nama hasnt
also lodged a complaint to the Standards in Public Office
Commission in relation to its southern-based former
adviser, Ronnie Hanna, a spokesperson for Nama refused
to comment.
This weekend, commentators have suggested that Nama
is trying to keep the controversy north of the border, for
fear of it spilling into its dealings in its Dublin office.
Deputy Mick Wallace claimed that there is a strong

reluctance to deal with the controversy due to the fear

that allowing a few cracks to develop could lead to the
collapse of the Nama edifice.
This weekend, a source close to the BBC Spotlight
investigation told the Sunday Independent: The team are
still quietly plugging away. This is only the tip of the
iceberg. There will be more to come.
Sunday Independent
Will Shane Ross, John Halligan, Finian McGrath Protect
Noonan and NAMA From INVESTIGATION??
NOONAN WILL NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE PUBLIC
ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON NAMA
FIRE-SALE-MINISTER VERADKAR ON THE WEEK IN
POLITICS ON RTE
GOVERNMENT WANTS TO CONFINE STATUTORY INQUIRY
INTO NAMA TO PROJECT EAGLE-VERADKAR
NOONAN PRESSURISED NAMA TO SELL OFF ASSETS
QUICKLY THOUGH PROPERTY PRICES WERE RISING
COSTING THE STATE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS
This is confirmed by people with knowledge of the
agencys dealings. In his letter to the Minister for Finance
decrying the C&AG report, Nama chairman Frank Daly
pointedly remindedMichael Noonan that it was operating
on his instructions when it accelerated the sale of its loan
book.
Daly reminded Noonan this approach was endorsed by
you during the agencys 2014 review, when it adopted
the target of 80 per cent of senior debt (a cumulative total
of 24 billion) by the end of 2016.-Irish Times 15/09/2016
As you know this ambitious target, which has not alone
been achieved but exceeded some nine months ahead of
schedule, could not have been attained without the sale of
some large loan portfolios at market value, Daly
reminded the Minister.
This sounds a lot like: hold on, pal this was your idea all
along.
There is some truth to it. Noonan had long been of the
view, even before he became Minister for Finance, that
Nama needed to accelerate loan disposals, to put a floor
on the market, to get things moving. This process

necessarily required offloading properties which would

subsequently rise in value. That is what happens in a
rising market.-Irish Times 15/09/2016

Kenny, Noonan and Labour Ministers Gave Away Billions

in Bank of Ireland Shares
Wilbur Ross Celebrates Huge Windfall Gain in BoI Shares
on Bloomberg TD
Kenny Refused Call of Seamus Healy TD to Sack Noonan
The answer to the Deputys question is that the Minister
for Finance will not be sacked
Seamus Healy TD Leaders Questions 05 March 2014
Watch and Listen
WUAGWordpress http://wp.me/p1Uvd5-z3
Statement Seamus Healy TD March 2014
In the course of his speech on the Governments Economic
Plan , Seamus Healy TD called on the Taoiseach to Correct
the Dail Record on the disastrous sale of shares in BoI
which he totally misrepresented to the Dail yesterday.
READ Full Dail Record BELOW
He said:
In July 2011, that financial wizard Michael Noonan sold
1.123 Billion of government shares in Bank of Ireland to
Wilbur Ross and a North American Consortium. Now the
shares are worth 3.8 billion. Wilbur thinks Michel Noonan
and Richie Boucher are marvellous!! The reason the
shares rose is that investors have been assured by Michael
that BoI is a pillar bank. Recently Michael saved Wilbur
and the mainly private owners of BoI a further 325m at
the expense of the state when he voluntarily sold 1.3
billion in preference shares which the bank couldnt
redeem to a third party.
Yesterday the Taoiseach said in answer to me at Leaders
Questions Mr Ross investment in Bank of Ireland meant
there was less of a capitalisation requirement for the
taxpayer. This is totally untrue. The sale of 1.123 billion in
state shares had no effect on capitalisation. It merely
meant that 1.123 billion of state shares was replaced by
1.123 billion of shares held by the north American
consortium of vulture capitalists. I call on the Taoiseach to
correct the record of the house. It is a disservice to

democracy if a Taoiseach can tell a blatant untruth to the

house to cover up the fact that Wilbur Ross and associates
walked away with 2.7 billion euro in Irish Peoples money
because of the ideological position of the government
Healy Calls for Dismissal of Noonan as Governments helps
Vulture Capitalists walk away with 2.7 Billion of Irish
Money
Deputy Seamus Healy: The Taoiseachs and the
Governments ideological commitment to private banking
has ripped off the taxpayer and the people. The value of
Wilbur Rosss and his North American vulture capitalist
friends shares in Bank of Ireland has more than trebled,
from 1.1 billion to 3.8 billion. They are now selling
6.75% of Bank of Ireland for 690 million, at a huge profit,
while retaining 30%. I raised this issue during Leaders
Questions on 7 November 2013 when I said:
In April 2013, on Bloomberg television, Wilbur Ross, the
American vulture capitalist, described Bank of Ireland as
his best investment anywhere in the world during the
financial crisis. In July 2011 the Government sold State
shares in Bank of Ireland to a consortium of North
American vulture capitalists for 1.123 billion. The effect
of the sale is that the State now owns 15% of Bank of
Irelands shares at a net cost of 4 billion, while these
vulture capitalists own 37% at a cost of 1.123 billion. The
fire sale of Bank of Ireland shares has handed Wilbur Ross
and his wealthy associates a capital gain of 2 billion. No
wonder he was celebrating on television. They are onto a
sure winner in the future.
This is all too true. Not alone had the people bailed out
Bank of Ireland, the Government had guaranteed the
shares would rise by designating Bank of Ireland a pillar
bank. It made no sense. Now in the media Wilbur Ross is
lavishing praise on Richie Boucher and the Government.
Why would he not? With no risk, he and his partners
trebled their investment. Will the Taoiseach tell the people
the truth? Will he tell them that while they were being
fleeced in budget after budget, owing to the Taoiseachs
ideological commitment to the privatisation of banking, he
has cost them 2.7 billion which has gone straight into the
pockets of Wilbur Ross and his North American friends. If a

person ran a sweet shop in the way Deputy Michael

Noonan handles State investments, he or she would not
be long in business. Will the Taoiseach sack the Minister
for Finance who proposed this rip-off to the Cabinet the
rip-off of taxpayers and the people in what was and is a
fire sale?
The Taoiseach: The answer to that question is No. I was
not sure whether the Deputy was going to propose that
Anglo Irish should have been made a pillar bank, if one
was to follow through on his dissertation. There are two
things he should bear in mind. First, the fact that Mr. Ross
invested in Bank of Ireland meant there was less of a
capitalisation requirement for the taxpayer. Second, there
will be no legacy debt attached. When the Minister for
Finance brings his memo to the Government with a
recommendation to dispose of the States element of
ownership of Bank of Ireland, the taxpayer will make a
profit. Therefore, the taxpayer was saved from further
capitalisation of Bank of Ireland and when the Government
decides to dispose of its shares, the taxpayer will make a
profit. I am no fan of banks. As the Deputy is well aware,
what has happened from the point of view of the
Government is that it has put in place a set of targets and
requirements for banks and the Central Bank: to offer
every mortgage holder in distress a sustainable offer by
the end of the year; establish the Personal Insolvency
Agency; meet the requirement for SME lending; and
provide the opportunity to open doors for greater access
to credit in order that people can do business and create
jobs.
The answer to the Deputys question is that the Minister
for Finance will not be sacked; the taxpayer will make a
profit on the disposal of the shares we own in Bank of
Ireland.
Deputy Seamus Healy: I thank the Taoiseach for his
response, but, once again, we have heard the usual smoke
and mirrors blather. The fact is that the Governments
ideological commitment to private banking has gone even
further. As bad as the Wilbur Ross affair was, the taxpayer
has been ripped off again, as recently as December 2013.
This happened when Bank of Ireland was unable to call or
buy all of the preference shares held by the Government.

On that occasion the Government voluntarily sold the

excess shares to a third party at a knockdown price to
facilitate the bank. The Government rushed deliberately to
complete that sale before 31 March 2014, when those
shares will be worth an additional 325 million. In addition,
the whole operation meant the States share in the bank
was reduced by another 100 million. The Government,
therefore, lost 425 million in the deal. How can the
Taoiseach continue to support a Minister for Finance who
has stood over such a rotten and shameful deal for the
taxpayer?
The Taoiseach: As I pointed out, we cannot have a
functioning economy without functioning banks. When the
Government was elected to office, we had a banking
system which was completely dysfunctional, had gone off
the rails and required radical restructuring. This happened
with the putting in place of the pillar bank system.
The Deputy asked if the Minister for Finance would be
sacked. The answer to that question is No. We have a
duty to the Irish taxpayer to see
Deputy Seamus Healy: The Taoiseach is standing over
that.
The Taoiseach: that money paid into banks can be
recovered to the greatest extent possible given the
catastrophic economic mess left by those who went before
us.
Deputy Seamus Healy: Shame.
The Taoiseach: In the case of Bank of Ireland the fact that
Mr. Ross invested in the bank meant that the Irish
taxpayer had to put less money into the bank than it
might have had to do.
Deputy Seamus Healy: When did the Taoiseach sell
shares for 425 million?
The Taoiseach: When the State, on the recommendation
of the Minister for Finance, decides to dispose of its equity
there the taxpayer will make a profit. That is our
commitment, our duty and responsibility to the Irish
taxpayers not to leave them at a loss, given the scale of
what was inherited here.
Deputy Willie ODea: It was 3 billion less than the
Taoiseach would have paid.
STORMONT CRITICISES NOONAN JUDGEMENT IN

PROCEEDING WITH SALE

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/stormontcriticises-noonans-judgment-in-going-ahead-with-16bnnama-sale-34527429.html?
NOONAN NOT ABLE TO HALT PROJECT EAGLE SAYS
DEPARTMENT-Irish Times
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/commercialproperty/noonan-not-able-to-halt-project-eagle-sale-saysdepartment-1.2569898#.VuPBx20tcuk.mailto
Newspaper commentators seem to have forgotten that the
FG-Lab Government ,through Finance Minister Michael
Noonan,sold risk free shares in Bank of Ireland Pillar
Bank(Cant Fail!) to Wilbur Ross in 2011
3 years later Wilbur had walked off with a total profit of
500m Euro by selling on the shares!
An official who worked on the sale project in Dep of
Finance was appointed to a senior position in BoI whose
board was joined by Wilbur Ross! (Following an appeal to
the Ceann Comhairle by Seamus Healy TD, Noonan was
forced to confirm this in PQ Reply to Seamus Healy TD)
Seamus Healy TD asked Taoiseach Kenny at Leaders
Questions in the Dail to sack Noonan following this but
Kenny refused and defended Noonan
Noonan also authorised the transfer of 1.2 Billion in state
owned shares in AIB into the AIB pension fund owned by
contributors and pensioners. As a result senior people who
wrecked the bank retained huge pensions though small
share holders had lost their life savings
Nama was allowed to sell assets worth over 6 billion to
vulture fund Cerebus for less than 2 billion Euro
The sale of Nama properties in NI for a song to a single
remaining bidder is nothing new.
The Cushnahan affair, though important, is small change
Noonan and Nama refused to appear before the Stormont
Committee investigating the Scandal
OECD ADVOCATES AGGRESSIVE MOVE TO THE RIGHT IN
IRELAND
Water charges, property tax and home repossession too
low !
Tories already implementing these policies in Northern
Ireland
See also Poorest People Pay Most Tax

http://wp.me/pKzXa-mX
The world capitalist think tank ,OECD, has advocated a
further move to the right in Irish economic policy.
The report said repossessions in Ireland should be
accelerated and repossession of collateral on nonperforming loans is inefficient. Taxes on companies and
income tax should be reduced and transferred to property
and consumption (VAT etc). Already, the lowest 10% of the
population pay the highest proportion of their income in
tax due to the weight of indirect taxes in Ireland. OECD is
seeking to worsen this position. It wants water charges
and property tax increased and enforced. It wants VAT
applied to transactions currently exempt.
Right wing commentators often try to confuse the public
by stating that the rich pay a huge portion of their income
in tax and the system is therefore progressive. In this
they are counting only income tax and omitting indirect
taxes. They also omit to mention that the rich have a
totally disproportionate share of income.
The OECD recommendations form part of a major shift to
the right world-wide. This is particularly marked in
Europe since the recession. In the early decades of the EU,
when the major powers sought to set up a large common
home market, we had cohesion funds and other grants.
Now we have the Fiscal Treaty and huge repayments from
programme countries including Ireland to financial
institutions in Germany, France etc. The new British allTory government is moving even further to the right.
Welfare cuts, public spending cuts and anti-trade union
laws are the order of the day. These policies are having a
large effect in Northern Ireland and are the main
contributor to the political crisis there.
We now have austerity policies being implemented north
and south and worse to come.
The clear response should be an All-Ireland campaign
against austerity!
Water charges, property tax and home repossession
numbers low OECD Ireland report
Irish Independent PUBLISHED15/09/2015 | 10:18
Irelands budget deficit remains too large and public
spending pressures here are rising, a global think tank has
warned.

In its latest assessment of Ireland, the Paris-based

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) said today that the tax base must be broadened
and more must be done to control health spending
although it did acknowledge that economic recovery is
underway.
It welcome the introduction of water charges, but noted
that they remain among the lowest in the OECD. Revenue
from the property tax, the OECD said, is also low by
international standards.
It also said more must be done to accelerate through the
courts the resolution of non-performing home loans that
require repossession.
The organisation said rising property prices pose risks, and
advised more housing supply was needed and a more
developed rental market, but it cautioned against giving
any subsidies to first time buyers.
The Paris-based organisation also warned that productivity
growth here has been falling for some time.
Although Irelands multinational sector thrived during the
crisis, the domestic SME sector is still lagging behind
despite the shift away from the low productivity
construction sector, with much lower levels of
competitiveness, productivity and R&D spending, the
report said.
The report said strengthening competition in the legal
sector and in the ports is required.
The OECD said more must be done to increase investment
in water quality, as quality fails EPA standards in some
areas, as well as more supports for the long-term
unemployed, as well as disadvantaged schools.
It said economic growth in Ireland last year was the fastest
in the OECD.
The organisation is forecasting growth here of 5pc this
year and 4pc next year.
The report, however, did say that strong economic growth
had returned to the country and that a robust, broad
based recovery was underway.
BERTLESMAN INSTITUTE: IRELAND VERY RICH BUT AMONG
WORST IN WEALTH DISTRIBUTION
Irish Examiner Sept 16
The growing number of poor people in crisis-hit countries

and among young people threatens the existence of the

EU, warned the prestigious German think-tank which
carried out the study.
Despite Ireland being one of the richest countries in the
EU, the study reveals we are nearly last when it comes to
distribution of wealth, ranking 18th in the bottom-third
of the EU(28) countries along with Greece, Romania,
Bulgaria, and Latvia.
Irish Times Sept 16
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/irelandurged-to-do-more-for-its-vulnerable-population-1.1929914
Germanys Bertelsmann Foundation ranked Ireland 18th
among the EU 28 members, below Poland and Slovakia, in
a survey of social justice in Europe.
The foundation cited Ireland as an example of how high
GDP per capita did not translate automatically into social
justice for the population. Ireland has a similarly high
GDP per capita,similar to Sweden, but ranks considerably
below average when it comes to social justice and counts
as one of the biggest losers in the country comparison,
the report noted. (Irish Times)
It is true that public finances are in an appalling state.
But this is because:
1)successive governments have refused to impose
sufficiently high taxes on the incomes and assets of the
super-rich Irish to pay for necessary public services
2) The current and previous government have agreed that
the citizens of the state should pay the 67 Billion Euro
which LARGE international investors had lent to privately
owned Irish Banks when the banks crashed.(small
shareholders were not rescued)
The official statistics on incomes and assets set out below
show the obscene wealth of the super-rich Irish at this
time. In summary, the top 10,000 income recipients have
average declared incomes of 595,000 euro per year each.
The financial assets (shares, bank deposits) of Irish
households had already climbed back above 2006 boom
levels in 2012
From 2010 to 2012 the wealth of the top 300 Irish rich has
increased by 12 Billion Euro from 50 Billion to 62 Billion or
a gain of 200 million euro each ( Nick Webb,Business
Editor, Sunday Independent, March 11 2012)

The overwhelming majority of the super-rich are active in

the private sector of the economy.
BUT ALL RECENT GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS FOR INCOME
TAX RELIEF WOULD GIVE GREATEST BENEFIT TO THE
SUPER-RICH AND NOTHING TO THE POOREST!!

NET FINANCIAL ASSETS OF HOUSEHOLDS NOW 60 BILLION

ABOVE BOOM LEVEL-CENTRAL BANK REPORT 2015
BUT NOT A PENNY IN ASSETS TAX IS PAYABLE ON THESE
FINANCIAL ASSETS!!! These are part of the personal
wealth of individuals not of Companies
Central Bank Report 2015 says net financial assets of
households have increased by + 8 (-4.7)=12.7 Billion in
2015
Net Financial Assets
2015
192,076 m
Peak Boom
2006
132,032 m
Gain
60,044m
0r by factor of 1.45
Up by almost 50% since Peak Boom level
Net financial assets of households
2015
192,076 m
Net Financial Assets Bust
2008
69,218
Gain
122 ,8 58 m or by factor of 2.77
CSO 2014
The most recent INSTITUTIONAL SECTOR ACCOUNTS
issued by the Central Statistics Office(CSO) show that the
Net Financial assets of Households in 2014 were
considerably( c 41 billion Euro) above PEAK BOOM LEVELS
in 2006. There is no levy, charge or tax on the vast bulk of
these large assets nor has there been as the assets grew
over the last 5 years. These assets include shares, bank
deposits, Insurance policies etc but do not include homes,
letting properties, farms or other fixed assets.Mortgage
debt, Credit card debt, and loans held by individuals are
negative financial assets. They are subtracted from gross
finacial assets to get the net figure. Consequently the
gains of the very rich, those who have net positive assets,
have been enormous.
There is no wealth tax on these financial assets. However
there is a wealth tax on homes and dwelling houses (Local
Property Tax) irrespective of the income of the owner
however low.
Interest and dividends are income and are liable to income

tax.

The obscenely unequal and unfair distribution of wealth in

Ireland (See Further Down)
is replicated in the Entire Capitalist World
62 richest have more wealth than 50% of worlds
population!
Richest 1% now wealthier than the rest of the world,
Oxfam says
blomberg Jan 18
The charity called on governments to intensify efforts to
reduce inequality
Oxfam says the richest 1% of the worlds population own
more than the rest of the world
The charity called on governments to intensify efforts to
reduce inequality
The richest one per cent is now wealthier than the rest of
humanity combined, according to Oxfam, which called on
governments to intensify efforts to reduce such inequality.
In a report published on the eve of the World Economic
Forums annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, the antipoverty charity cited data from Credit Suisse in declaring
the most affluent controlled most of the worlds wealth in
2015. Thats a year earlier than it had anticipated.
Oxfam also calculated that 62 individuals had the same
wealth as 3.5 billion people, the bottom half of the global
population, compared with 388 individuals five years
earlier. The wealth of the most affluent rose 44 per cent
since 2010 to $1.76 trillion, while the wealth of the bottom
half fell 41 percent or just over $1 trillion.
The charity used the statistics to argue that growing
inequality poses a threat to economic expansion and
social cohesion. Those risks have already been noted in
countries from the US to Spain, where voters are
increasingly backing populist political candidates, while
its sown tensions on the streets of Latin America and the
Middle East.
It is simply unacceptable that the poorest half of the
worlds population owns no more than a few dozen superrich people who could fit onto one bus, said Winnie
Byanima, executive director of Oxfam International.
World leaders concern about the escalating inequality

crisis has so far not translated into concrete action.

Oxfam said governments should take steps to reduce the
polarisation, estimating tax havens help the rich to hide
$7.6 trillion. Politicians should agree on a global approach
to ending the practice of using offshore accounts, it said.
Dont just look at the very bottom, who have nothing, but
look at the bottom 50pc they own almost nothing of the
country.These are the facts. This is not opinion. This is
Ireland.-David McWilliams
DIVISION OF NET WEALTH IN IRELAND-David McWilliams
As the election looms its worth looking at the real division
of wealth By David McWilliams
To View Charts paste this link into browser:
http://olearylp.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/17thDecember-2015.pdf
A little while ago, I presented a programme on RT called
Irelands Great Wealth Divide. The aim of the
documentary was to highlight the significant and
persistent divide in wealth that exists in Ireland. The
reason it is an important issue to highlight is that even
when the economy recovers, the benefits will not be
evenly or even remotely evenly spread and this wealth
divide has significant, long-term ramifications for the
health of the society.
At the time of screening, there were some people who, like
climate change deniers, continued to express the opinion
that the wealth divide in Ireland was not a big deal and
that it might be overstated.
This is not the case, and in the past few weeks, two other
major studies one by TASC and one by the OECD have
added to the canon of work proving that the divide in
wealth in this country is a serious issue and that in the
past few years, the divide between the income of those at
the very top and those at the bottom has also increased.
This divide is important, because if people get left behind
they may give up hope. Having wealth or having even a
meagre stake in society changes the way people view
themselves and the way they view the future.
For example, consider this one experiment involving a
group of poor American families. Some of the parents
were given a small savings fund, which was to be set aside
for their childrens university fees when the kids grew up.

The kids were then assessed for cognitive reasoning every

two years and, by the fourth year, the children whose
parents had the small education fund were performing
better in all tests than those who hadnt received the fund.
The implication of this is that the parents with this small
stake in the future were changing their own behaviour
towards their childrens education, such as reading to
them, paying more attention to their homework and so on.
This is extraordinary, because it reveals what having a
stake in society, having something to aim for, does to
people. It focuses people and gives them something to
believe in.
If people have something small a savings fund, a bit of
wealth, a sense that they matter and that their future is in
their hands they change their behaviour for the better.
Now armed with this type of thinking, look at the two
almost identical charts. These show how wealth is divided
in Ireland. One chart represents the estimates of the
international bank Credit Suisse and the other represents
the findings of the Household Finance and Consumption
Survey. These charts are taken from the recent TASC
paper published last week entitled The Distribution of
Wealth in Ireland. I urge you to read it if you have any
interest in the future of this society.
If we look at the share of the wealth owned by the top
10pc, top 5pc and top 1pc in Ireland, we see similar
evidence produced by both reports. According to the
survey carried out by the CSO the top 10pc own 53.8pc of
the wealth of this country; the top 5pc own 37pc of the
wealth; and the top 1pc own 15pc.
FIGURE 1 HFCS CHART
According to Credit Suisse, the concentration at the top is
even stronger. Its estimates suggest that the top 10pc
own 58.6pc of the wealth; the top 5pc own 46.4pc; and
the top 1pc own 27pc. Even taking into account the slight
disparity, the concentration of wealth at the very top in
both studies is extraordinary on any democratic basis.
FIGURE 2 CREDIT SUISSE CHART
Indeed, because the CSO data is from a survey in which it
asked people to declare their wealth, there is a very strong
possibility that at the very top the very rich decided to
understate their wealth, so the very rich might have

played down their assets. The difference between the two

is the split within the 10pc; not the split between the top
10pc and the rest. In both studies, the top 10pc own over
half the wealth of the country.
The interesting aspect of these studies is the sense that
Irish people know things arent right. We feel that
something is not right and every time we are asked we
say that we would prefer the society to be fairer. In the
programme Irelands Great Wealth Divide we conducted
our own survey, where we asked people what they
thought was the gap between the top 20pc and next 20pc
and so on, down to the people at the bottom. We asked
what you thought the gap was, then what you thought it
ought to be and then we revealed what it actually was.
The gap between what you thought it was, what you
thought it ought to be and what it is in reality is a huge
one.
The consensus from a Red C poll of 1,000 people
commissioned for the documentary was that Irelands
richest 20pc had 60pc of the countrys wealth and that the
poorest 20pc have 11pc.
The reality? The most affluent 20pc in Ireland actually own
73pc of the countrys wealth and the poorest 20pc own
just 0.2pc. As for the top 5pc, their combined wealth is
nearly double that of the entire squeezed middle.
Now look at the people at the bottom in Ireland in the two
charts. While there are slight variations, the overall
message is very clear. The charts are broken down into the
top 10pc and down to the bottom 10pc.
Dont just look at the very bottom, who have nothing, but
look at the bottom 50pc they own almost nothing of the
country.
These are the facts. This is not opinion. This is Ireland.
As we head into an election year, its worth considering
just how many people are being left behind, how many are
being shut out. Consider how many people wake up with
no hope, no stake, no way of seeing how they play a role
in our society, no way of seeing a road map to a better
future.
Thats what the wealth gap is all about. It is undeniable
and it is persistent. Shouldnt this be the main electoral
issue next year in the year that we celebrate the

centenary of a Republic that was supposed to cherish all

the children equally?
But will it be?
Top 10,000 had greater income than IFA General Secretary
over 7 years.
Over the 7 years,he got 3.5 million, they got 4.16 million
each. The top 10,000 club, almost exclusively private
sector, are to get just below 11 million EXTRA between
them next year and every subsequent year from Lab/FG
government in tax and USC concessions in Budget 2016
Average Gross Income of top 10,000=595,000 Each(PQ
reply from Minister Noonan to S Healy TD)
Total Gross Income of TOP 10,000=5.95
Billion=5950,000,00 Euro
USC and Tax Concessions- Budget 2016
Employees
6,667 X 902=6,013,634
Self Employed: 3,333X 1452=4,839,516
Total
10,000
=10,853,150
(assuming one third self-employed and two thirds of
10,000 are employees. calculation:Deloitte Budget
calculator)

AVERAGE INCOME OF TOP 10,000 is Above that of IFA

General Secretary
IFA General Secretary on 535,000 Euro per year in 2013
Top 10,000 income recipients have average salary above
this (Dil Reply to Seamus Healy TD by Finance Minister,
Noonan)
Top 10,000 Average Income 595,900 % AFTER TAX
INCOME 364,000
TOP 10% or
165,820 Households own 53.8% of all net household
wealth or almost 2 million Euro each
Total Irish Household Net Worth 595.7 billion in Quarter 1,
2015 up 2.2% over 3 months 19/08/2015
(These are the personal property of Irish PEOPLE, not of
banks or of companies etc)
TOP 10% or 165,820 Households own 53.8% of all net
household wealth or almost 2 million Euro each
http://www.centralbank.ie/publications/Documents/Quarter
ly%20Bulletin%20No.%203%202015.pdf

TOTAL NET FINANCIAL ASSETS of Households were 165

Billion in 2013. Increase in Financial Assets from the 2008
(Bust) to 2013 was 93 billion or an increase 51% of
Gross Domestic Product(GDP) . There has been further
annual increases since then. There is no wealth tax on
these massive gains. Finacial assets are shares,bonds,
bank deposits etc less mortgages, credit card debt, etc. As
the value of homes is excluded, financial assets are more
heavily weighted towards the super-rich than all wealth.
Most households with a mortgage are likely to have
negative financial assets though not in negative equity.
Incomes of Super-Rich (Individuals and Jointly Taxed
Couples-Reply to Parliamentary Question)
Top 0.46% 10,000
Total Income 5,959m
Income
per Year Each 595,900
Top 1%
21,650
Total Income 8,742 m
Income
per year EACH 403,760
Though 80% to 88% of this income is technically subject
to income tax at 40%, these are paying a maximum of
27% of there overall income in income tax. They are major
beneficiaries of tax breaks. They all received 747 Euro per
annum in tax relief in Budget 2015!
See Further Down for Full Details
DISTRIBUTION OF NET WEALTH AMONG Top 1% 16,582
Net Worth= 15% of 595.7 billion = 89.36 Billion Per
Household 5.389 Million
Top 5% 82,910 Net Worth=38% of 595.7 billion
=226.37 billion
Per Household 2.730 Million
Top 10% 165,820 Net Worth= 53.8% of 595.7 billion
=320.49 billion Per Household 1.933 Million
UPDATE MAY 12
TOP 10% OWN OVER HALF OF IRISH WEALTH
Irish Examiner Tuesday, May 12, 2015
By Peter ODwyerReporter
More than half of the countrys net household wealth rests
in the hands of just 10% of the population, while people in
less well-off sectors of society owe more than they own.
CSO research shows the top 10% of the countrys richest
households own 53.8% of net wealth defined as real
and financial assets minus debt.
The top 5% of households can lay claim to almost 38% of
net wealth while 15% of the wealth lies in the pockets of

the richest 1%.

At the opposite end of the scale, the data paints a darker
picture as the poorest 20% of households owe more than
they own.
The figures illustrate the two-tier society that has
developed across the country, partly as a result of
government policy, according to Fr Sean Healy of Social
Justice Ireland.
These figures emphasise that it was profoundly wrong of
the Government to prioritise the better-off in society in the
last four budgets, said Fr Healy. As resources become
available in Budget 2016 and beyond, priority should be
given to those hit hardest during the recession Irelands
poorest.
With some of the countrys richest individuals
experiencing large-scale losses in the past seven or so
years, the level of inequality has not risen to a major
degree. However, low- and middle-income families have
been badly affected.
Some people on exorbitantly high incomes have lost out
despite recent budgets favouring them and, consequently,
inequality has not risen dramatically, said Fr Healy.
However, those already struggling to survive have been
stretched even further. This was not an accident, this was
the result of Government decisions.
With the Government flagging an equal split of additional
funding between spending increases and tax cuts when it
announced the budget in October, a much fairer manner
of distributing the benefits of recovery would be to put
twice the amount into restoration of services, Fr Healy
said.
Recent research by the Central Bank points to a higher
level of wealth inequality in Ireland than the eurozone
average. However, it is less than that in the US.
Research indicates that countries with higher economic
inequality suffer from greater unemployment, social
instability, and reduced investment, although other
academics dispute these effects.
Although open to a degree of statistical error due to the
challenges in accessing relevant data, the Irish wealth gap
appears to have widened over time, according to Tom
Healy, a director of the Nevin Economic Research Institute.

Since the 1980s, a range of factors, including taxation

policy, changing demographics, and house price
fluctuations may have driven the changes.
Research carried out by Brian Nolan of the ESRI in 1987
showed that the top 10% of the population then owned
42% of net household wealth as opposed to 53% in
current times. The top 1% then owned 10% of net wealth.
This has now risen to 15%
Mr Healy said wealth distribution has not tended to feature
in public discourse here to the same degree as in some
other European countries.
While comprehensive data are hard to come by, Thomas
Piketty in his book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century,
managed to track the main trends and composition of
wealth in a number of large countries such as Britain,
France, and Germany, Mr Healy said.
Here in Ireland, discussion of wealth has been an underresearched and under-reported area until comparatively
recent times.
Mr Pikettys best-selling book put the distribution of
income and wealth back in the public consciousness last
year.
Update April 29
Political Promises In Spring Statement As Government
Allows Super-Rich To Make Huge Gains While It Crucifies
The Poor With Austerity And Water Charges
Deputy Seamus Healy TD (Tipperary) Speaking in Dil
yesterday
This Spring Statement is effectively an election manifesto
of sorts with the bulk of the promises made to be
implemented after the next general election. It is a series
of political promises but we know well what happens to
political promises. They are made to be broken, according
to the former Minister for Communications, Energy and
Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, who said that is what
politicians do at election time they make promises they
fully intend to break after the election. That is what
happened in 2011 and this Government cannot be trusted
or believed. What we have heard today in this Spring
Statement is effectively pie in the sky.
It is important to note what this Fine Gael-Labour Party
coalition promised in 2011 and what it did with its

promises and commitments. We heard a lot about a

democratic revolution but we hear very little about it
nowadays. Fine Gael told us that it would burn the
bondholders and that not another cent would be given to
the banks. The Labour Party went even further and said
that it would be Labours way and not Frankfurts way. Its
infamous Tesco-style advertisements promised no cuts to
child benefit, opposition to domestic water charges and so
forth. It contained very specific promises and lines such as
Look what Fine Gael have in store for you and Fine Gael
Every Little Hurts. The Labour Party in government went
on to cut child benefit, with a loss of up to 1,500 for
many families. A Labour Party Minister is now
implementing the introduction of domestic water charges,
having gone around north Tipperary in the last election
campaign asking people to vote for him to ensure that
Fine Gael could not introduce such charges. We were also
told that the Labour Party would protect the vulnerable, a
point to which I will return later.
This Fine Gael-Labour Party Government continued the
austerity of the Fianna Fil-Green Party Government and
did exactly the opposite to what it had promised.
Government policy in the past four years has deliberately
increased the income and assets of the super rich in
society. It ensured that austerity affected only low and
middle income families while there was a recovery for the
wealthy and the super rich. The Minister for Public
Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, spoke about
sharing the fruits of economic growth. He said that a
functioning society is a fair one, where the fruits of
economic growth are shared among all of the people,
which demonstrates both dishonesty and hypocrisy. We
know for a fact, as referred to by other speakers, that very
wealthy people have increased their income and assets
hugely during the course of this recession. An article in the
Sunday Times last weekend pointed out that Irelands
super wealthy now have a combined wealth that
surpasses the heights reached at the peak of the Celtic
tiger era. Irelands 250 richest people have increased their
wealth by more than 15% in the past year to 75 billion,
equivalent to 30% of Irish GDP. The number of Irish
billionaires has increased from nine last year to 13 this

year. There have been huge increases in the financial

assets of the super rich as confirmed by the Central
Statistics Office. The increase in assets from the time of
the bust in 2008 to 2013 was 93 billion or an increase of
51% of GDP and there have been further increases since
then. The situation is exactly the same with regard to
income.
A very small proportion of very wealthy people have huge
incomes. The 10,000 wealthiest have average incomes of
595,000 per year, a figure supplied to me by the
Minister, Deputy Noonan. That wealth situation was
confirmed about a month ago by the Sunday Independent
rich list of the 300 wealthiest people in Ireland. Those 300
people have 84 billion between them. So the super-rich
have done very well out of this recession while ordinary
people have paid for it which they had no hand, act or part
in creating.
On the other hand, it is instructive to look at what has
happened to ordinary low and middle-income families. A
recent Central Statistics Office report, the SILC report,
shows that 400,000 children are living in households
experiencing multiple forms of deprivation, of whom
135,000 are suffering daily material deprivation. The
number of children living in consistent poverty has
doubled from 6% to almost 12%.
The Labour Party claimed it would protect the vulnerable
and particularly social welfare recipients. What is the
record of the Labour Party and the Tnaiste in social
welfare? She protected the social welfare recipients and
low and middle-income families but I am afraid the cuts
she introduced in recent budgets have devastated
ordinary people and undermined the social welfare
system.
It is important to mention some of those cuts, which I call
the dirty bakers dozen cuts: child benefit was cut by up to
1,500 per annum per family; cuts to the back-to-school
allowance; cuts to maternity benefit; cuts to the fuel
allowance; abolition of the telephone allowance; cuts to
the household benefits package; cuts to jobseekers
allowance; new qualifications for State pensions
particularly affecting women who are out of the workforce
to rear their families; the carers respite grant was cut by

325; farm assist payments cut; back-to-education

allowance cut; exceptional needs payment cut; increase in
eligibility for State pensions; taxation of maternity benefit;
abolition of illness benefit for widows and lone parents
who work; huge cuts, of course, to one-parent families
with another huge cut coming on 2 July; cuts to rent
allowance; and abolition, unbelievably, of the very small
bereavement grant.
The so-called recovery is a recovery for those who are
already wealthy and it certainly means continued austerity
for low and middle-income families. The public does not
trust or believe the Government. They know that what the
Government says does not transfer into action. They know
that middle and low-income families have been crucified
by the Government. They want to see the Government
going to the country and calling a general election. The
Government has absolutely no mandate for what it has
done. The public believe that it simply cannot be trusted.
This Spring Statement is simply an election manifesto of
sorts, one that the public will not believe and one that
should be put to the country sooner rather than later.
Update April 17
HUGE RISE IN ASSETS OF SUPER-RICH
CONFIRMED BY CSO
As usual this aspect of the CSO release was ignored by
media
Increase in Financial Assets from the 2008 (Bust) to
2013 was 93 billion or an increase 51% of Gross Domestic
Product(GDP) . There has been further annual increases
since then.
These Assets have more than doubled. There is no wealth
tax on these massive gains.
In 2013 Net Financial Assets of Households were 26 Billion
Euro above 2006 boom level. The super-rich are now
richer than they were at the height of the boom
Between 2011 and 2013 NET FINANCIAL ASSETS OF
HOUSEHOLDS INCREASED BY OVER 40 Billion EURO
Only 17 billion of this was due to paying down debt giving
a rise of 23 billion due to appreciation of financial assets in
the two years concerned.
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2014 at constant (2012)
prices is 181.33 Billion Euro-Central Statistics Office(CSO)
As financial assets of many households are negative due

to mortgage, credit card and loan debt, it is a reasonable

assumption that the net financial assets of the wealthiest
5% are comparable to the net financial assets of all
households at 165 Billion Euro
Central Statistics Office(CSO) April 15,2015
Institutional Sector Accounts Table 5B
http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/pisanff/institutionalsectoraccountsnonfinancialandfinancial2013/financialaccounts/table5bfinanci
albalancesheetend-years20092013consolidatedliabilities/#.VTDYutzF-QE
Financial assets include shares, bank deposits and
insurance policies on the positive side. Liabilities, which
are deducted to get net financial assets include mortgage
debt, credit card debt and bank loans to households (eg
car loans)
Financial assets do not include any fixed assets such as
homes, buy-to-lets, farms, land, business premises or
factories and workshops.
As there has been major appreciation of property values
as well as financial assets , the increase in the overall net
wealth of the super-rich since 2008 is far greater than
indicated by the financial figures below
Financial Assets Households(millions) TA=total assets
TL=total liabilities
NA=Net Assets
TA
TL
NA
2006
310,899
172,052
138,848
2007
310,711
199,036
111,675
2008
281,650
209,774
71,876
2009
306,338
207,272
99,066
2010
316,375
194,250
122,125
2011
315,028
190,056
124,972
2012
333,654
179,554
154,100
2013
342,735
177,805
164,930
2014
348,092
168,716
179,376

Irish Rich Get New 25 Billion Bonanza as 135,000 Children

Suffer Multiple Deprivation!
The Contrast Could Not Be More Stark!!!!!
In 2013 Net Financial Assets of Households were 26 Billion

Euro above 2006 boom level and more than double

2008 bust level. Gross Financial Assets were 18 billion
above the 2006 peak level.
In 2013, net financial assets of households rose again by
25 billion, only 7 billion of which was due to paying down
debt.
The Gains For the Rich got virtually no media coverage as
usual
These are the most recent statistics issued by The Central
Statistics Office (CSO).In another recent release by the
CSO, the SILC Report, it is shown that we now have
400,000 children living in households experiencing
multiple forms of deprivation and 135,000 children are
suffering daily material deprivation. The number of
children living in consistent poverty meaning they are
living both at risk of poverty and experiencing deprivation
doubled from 6 per cent to just under 12 per cent
between 2008 and 2013
Financial assets include shares, bank deposits and
insurance policies on the positive side. Liabilities, which
are deducted to get net financial assets include mortgage
debt, credit card debt and bank loans to households (eg
car loans)
Financial assets do not include any fixed assets such as
homes, buy-to-lets, farms, land, business premises or
factories and workshops.
Total F. assets
Total Liabilities
NET F. Assets
2006
310,899
172,052
138,848
2007
310,711
199,036
111,675
2008
281,650
209,774
71,876
2009
304,885
206,620
98,264
2010
311,372
194,219
117,153
2011
310,093
189,982
120,111
2012
324,381
184,467
139,914
2013
342,735
177,805
164,930
Nov 30
Anglo Bondholder List Leaked
International Financial Institutions Which invested in Anglo
and to whom an Irish Government Paid Out 30 Billion Euro.
We are now paying off the money borrowed for this

purpose to other international financial institutions!

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/list-of-bondholders-inanglo-irish-bank-leaked-110903209-237728261.html#=
UPDATE Department of Finance Confirms Budget 2015
Give-Away to Rich
Department of Finance Press Officer Confirms that those
on incomes over 100,000 Euro will gain a net 747 Eur per
year from the combination of the tax and USC measures in
Budget 2015
Sir, The editorial Taxing the self-employed (October
24th) stated that the divide between PAYE workers and
self-assessed workers has widened further with the
Governments decision to make the self-employed pay an
11 per cent rate of universal social charge on earnings
over 100,000. To suggest the divide has widened as a
result of changes introduced in Budget 2015 is simply not
true.
The marginal tax rate for the self-employed earning over
100,000 has not altered with the changes introduced in
Budget 2015. In 2014 self-assessed workers earning over
100,000 face a 55 per cent marginal tax rate comprised
of 41 per cent income tax, 10 per cent USC and 4 per cent
PRSI. Following the introduction of the measures
introduced in Budget 2015, a self-assessed worker earning
over 100,000 will continue to pay 55 per cent tax;
however it will now be comprised of 40 per cent income
tax, 11 per cent USC and 4 per cent PRSI.
These changes to rates will result in an increase in net
income for the self-employed taxpayers at all income
levels.
The factual position is that a single PAYE worker and a
single self-assessed worker earning 100,000 will see an
increase of 747 in their net income in 2015, as a result of
the Budget 2015 changes. Yours, etc,
BRENDAN LOUGHNANE,
Press Officer,
Department of Finance,
Dublin 2.
UPDATE
Ireland More Prosperous than France and
Germany!! Irish Examiner Nov 3
It might sound like a contradiction, but austerity hasnt
ruined our prosperity, according to a global study.

A report by the influential Legatum Institute places Ireland

12th out of 142 countries in its annual prosperity index,
published today. That maintains the position we held last
year and may signal an end to the slide that has seen us
drop from a high of ninth in 2009. It also puts us one place
ahead of Britain, and, somewhat surprisingly, two places
ahead of Germany, while France could only manage 21st,
Spain 26th and Italy 37th.
Norway makes the number one slot for the sixth year in a
row. The index does not measure economic performance
alone, but assesses countries on 90 indicators which are
then collated under eight headings.
August 30,2014
Because of the publicity given to bankruptcies of very rich
Irish people, it maybe inferred that the Irish rich generally
are doing very badly. But it must be remembered that for
every developer who bought over-priced sites and assets,
there was another person or persons who has the large
sum of money paid by the developer.
Many people also wrongly believe that Ireland has become
a very poor country due to the banking crash. This may
lead them to excuse cuts by government in spending on
health, education and other public services.
BUT NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!!!
Ireland is still one of the wealthiest countries in the world.
Gross Domestic Product (total of all goods and services
produced) per head of population in Republic of Ireland is
greater than that in Germany, France and the UK (Nevin
Economic Research Institute Report 2012)
Irish Examiner Sept 16
The growing number of poor people in crisis-hit countries
and among young people threatens the existence of the
EU, warned the prestigious German think-tank which
carried out the study.
Despite Ireland being one of the richest countries in the
EU, the study reveals we are nearly last when it comes to
distribution of wealth, ranking 18th in the bottom-third
of the EU(28) countries along with Greece, Romania,
Bulgaria, and Latvia.
Irish Times Sept 16
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/irelandurged-to-do-more-for-its-vulnerable-population-1.1929914

Germanys Bertelsmann Foundation ranked Ireland 18th

among the EU 28 members, below Poland and Slovakia, in
a survey of social justice in Europe.
The foundation cited Ireland as an example of how high
GDP per capita did not translate automatically into social
justice for the population. Ireland has a similarly high
GDP per capita,similar to Sweden, but ranks considerably
below average when it comes to social justice and counts
as one of the biggest losers in the country comparison,
the report noted. (Irish Times)
It is true that public finances are in an appalling state.
But this is because:
1)successive governments have refused to impose
sufficiently high taxes on the incomes and assets of the
super-rich Irish to pay for necessary public services
2) The current and previous government have agreed that
the citizens of the state should pay the 67 Billion Euro
which LARGE international investors had lent to privately
owned Irish Banks when the banks crashed.(small
shareholders were not rescued)
The official statistics on incomes and assets set out below
show the obscene wealth of the super-rich Irish at this
time. In summary, the top 10,000 income recipients have
average declared incomes of 595,000 euro per year each.
The financial assets (shares, bank deposits) of Irish
households had already climbed back above 2006 boom
levels in 2012
From 2010 to 2012 the wealth of the top 300 Irish rich has
increased by 12 Billion Euro from 50 Billion to 62 Billion or
a gain of 200 million euro each ( Nick Webb,Business
Editor, Sunday Independent, March 11 2012)
The overwhelming majority of the super-rich are active in
the private sector of the economy.
BUT ALL RECENT GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS FOR INCOME
TAX RELIEF WOULD GIVE GREATEST BENEFIT TO THE
SUPER-RICH AND NOTHING TO THE POOREST!!
Read also UPDATE:Poorest Pay Most Tax on this Blog
http://wp.me/pKzXa-mX
Average Per Capita Wealth
Gross Domestic Product (total of all goods and services
produced) per head of population in Republic of Ireland is
the 7th highest in EU-Higher than Germany, France and

the UK (Nevin Economic Research Institute Report 2012)

WEALTH OF IRISH SUPER-RICH
Financial Assets of Households
(Table 3 Institutional
Sector Accounts Central Statistics Office 2012)
Total financial assets
Total Liabilities
NET
Financial Assets
2006
310,899
172,052
138,848
2007
310,711
199,036
111,675
2008
281,650
209,774
71,876
2009
304,885
206,620
98,264
2010
311,372
194,219
117,153
2011
310,093
189,982
120,111
2012
324,381
184,467
139,914
These figures show that net personal financial assets of all
households have increased by 68 billion or by almost
100%(almost doubled since the low point of 2008 and
both total financial assets and net financial assets are now
above the peak 2006 level. (Table 3 Institutional Sector
Accounts, CSO 2012)
Financial assets are mainly shares and bank deposits, the
bulk of which are held by the rich. Houses, farms and
business premises are not financial assets and are
not,therefore, included. The liabilities are bank
loans,overdrafts, credit card debt, and household
Mortgage Debt, the bulk of which are held by those on low
and middle incomes
Thus the total financial asset figure is the better measure
of the assets of the rich as many households have
negative net financial assets.
Average Per Capita Wealth
GDP per capita is the 7th highest in EU-Higher than
Germany France and the UK (Nevin Economic Research
Institute Report 2012)
(This wealth is distributed most unfairly. According to
Central Statistics Office (CSO) this unfairness has been

worsened by the state budget for 2014- PH)

Incomes of Irish Super-Rich
The table below is compiled from a table issued by
Minister for Finance, Michael Noonan in reply to a
parliamentary question on Oct 3, 2012 . It is based on
projections by the Revenue Commissioners of expected
earnings and expected revenue in the current year(2012)
given the distribution of incomes in 2009 and subsequent
developments. NB Below Revenue=tax+PRSI+USC.
Effective tax rate includes income tax, PRSI and Universal
Social Charge
Income Tax 2012
Below NO.=number of earners; G.I.=Gross Income of all
earners ;
Av. I.=Average Income per Earner, REV.=Total Revenue
from all earners; E.T.R.=effective tax rate
Earners
NO.
G.I.
Av. I.
REV.
E.T.R
Top 10,000 10,000 5,959m 595,900 2,321 m 39%
Average AFTER TAX INCOME 364,000
Top 1% 21,650 8,742 m
403,760 3,349 m 38%
Average AFTER TAX INCOME
349,000
Top 5% 108,250 20,122 m 185,885 7,145 m 36%
Average After Tax INCOME
120,000
Top 10% 216,500 29,600 m 136,710 9,849 m 33%
Average after tax Income 91,500
8
Earners may be individuals or couples who have
agreed to be taxed jointly. Revenue commissioners do not
provide data for individuals only.
11
revenue=income tax+ PRSI +Univ. Soc. Charge
(effective
tax rate includes USC and PRSI)
Less than 6% of income recipients earning over 100,000
are in the public service and a large proportion of these
are medical consultants
All of the top 10,000 tax payers who have an average
income of 595,900 each (Reply by Michael Noonan to
parliamentary question) are in the private sector.
From 2010 to 2012 the wealth of the top 300 Irish rich has
increased by 12 Billion Euro to 62 Billion or 200 million
each ( Nick Webb,Business Editor, Sunday Independent,
March 11 2012)

POOREST IRISH PEOPLE PAY MOST TAX!

Poor People Pay most Tax-NERI Aug 28, 2014
NEW research from the Nevin Economic Research Institute
(funded by Irish Trade Unions) shows that the bottom 10%
of the Irish Population pays the highest percentage of their
income in tax whereas the richest 10% pay only 29.6% of
their income when all direct and indirect taxes are taken
into account.
BUT ALL RECENT GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS FOR INCOME
TAX RELIEF WOULD GIVE GREATEST BENEFIT TO THE
SUPER-RICH AND NOTHING TO THE POOREST!!
More detailed discussion on this matter can be found in
my post UPDATED: POOREST PEOPLE PAY MOST TAX on
this blog
FORMAL DECLARATION OF HOUSING EMERGENCY NEEDED
TO REDUCE OUTRAGEOUS MORTGAGE RATES
MINISTER NOONAN OPPOSES MOVE TO REDUCE RATES BY
CITING PROTECTION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS OF BANKS IN
THE CONSTITUTION
LENDERS CHARGE UP TO 5% INTEREST WHILE ACCESSING
MONEY FROM ECB AT 0%-MORTGAGE HOLDERS BEING
USED TO BAIL OUT BANKS
The protection of property rights in the constitution is not
absolute. It is subject to the public good. Governments
introduced a formal declaration of a financial emergency
to enable them to confiscate private property in
pensions.But the government is refusing to formally
declare a housing emergency which would enable the
private property rights of banks, vultures and landlords to
be overcome in order to halt evictions.
Now NOONAN has given another reason for the refusal-it
could prevent lenders being allowed to fleece mortgage
holders
These huge interest rates are making it impossible for
many householders to escape from mortgage distress
which means they are constantly threatened with eviction
From Irish Examiner 21/10/2016
Dil Report
Mr McGrath(FF) said banks here are being allowed by the
Central Bank to charge borrowers up to 5% when they
themselves are accessing the money at close to 0% rates.
Real constitutional issues will need to be considered as

this Bill is further progressed by the Oireachtas. As it is

drafted, the Bill will clearly impact on the existing property
rights of some creditors, Minister Noonan (FG) said.
SPEECH ON HOUSING AND EVICTIONS
Seamus Healy TD IN Dil
Listen Live
Seamus Healy TD - HOUSING CRISIS AND FAILED
CLONLARA EVICTION

<div class="player-unavailable"><h1
class="message">An error occurred.</h1><div
class="submessage"><a
href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AW346vAb0o"
target="_blank">Try watching this video on
www.youtube.com</a>, or enable JavaScript if it is
disabled in your browser.</div></div>
https://wuag.wordpress.com/2016/10/19/housing-crisisand-failed-clonlara-eviction/
Deputy Seamus Healy: The proposals in respect of social
housing in this budget are grossly inadequate. Housing is
a fundamental right of human beings but shamefully the
Taoiseach has written to the EU seeking permission to
borrow the money required to build social housing. Ireland
does not have the sovereignty to house its own people.
There are 140,000 people on local authority waiting lists
and in the first four months of this year an additional
3,527 have been added to that figure. This probably
underestimates the situation because people now availing
of the housing assistance payments, formerly rent
supplement, are being removed from local authority lists.
We need an emergency house building programme of at
least 10,000 houses per year to address this situation. The
Governments target of 47,000 houses to be provided
between now and 2021 will fall far short of dealing with

the problem. In 2021 we will be, as we are today, in a

housing crisis. There is an absolute necessity to declare a
housing emergency. The Minister for Housing, Planning,
Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, said
publicly in July that he believed we had a housing crisis.
The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy
Donohoe, signed off on an emergency measure to ensure
that public service pensioners were deprived of their
pensions under the Financial Emergency Measures in the
Public Interest Act 2015 but this Government refuses to
declare a housing emergency which is absolutely
necessary to halt evictions generally and in rented and
mortgaged properties. The Government, through the
banks it owns, Allied Irish Banks, AIB, and Permanent TSB
is effectively allowing evictions. It is also allowing them
through other banks, and landlords, including vulture
funds. These evictions are continuing. As a result, many
unfortunate families have been devastated by suicide.
A shocking eviction was attempted last week in Clonlara in
County Clare. I demand that the Minister for Justice and
Equality instruct the Garda to investigate the conduct of
security companies at that failed eviction of a family. Will
the Minister establish what security companies were
involved and did those security firms possess an execution
order for taking possession of that family home? Did they
present an execution order to the owners of the property?
If they had no execution order or did not present it to the
family, were they guilty of trespass? Were all the security
firms involved in this horrific event licensed according to
the law? Had all the individuals involved in this attempted
repossession legal authority for their actions? Were all the
individuals registered employees of the security firms.
Were children unlawfully detained during that incident?
Were all involved acting on behalf of the Bank of Ireland in
which the State has a significant shareholding? This was a
shocking and horrific attempted eviction. Thankfully, it
failed. In a year when we celebrate the 100th anniversary
of 1916, when we promised to cherish all the children of
the nation equally, what would Pearse and Connolly and
the signatories to the Proclamation think of the eviction
battering ram of 2016?

I compliment the family, their friends and neighbours, and

the anti-eviction task force which successfully stopped this
eviction. People power stopped this eviction. People power
will force this Government to stop evictions and to declare
a housing emergency. The sooner the Government does
that, the better.
CLARE FM REPORT REVERSAL OF ATTEMPTED EVICTION AT
CLONLARA
http://www.clare.fm/news/garda%C3%AD-investigateallegations-assault-following-attempted-clonlara-eviction
CLARE FM WEBSITE
GARDA INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ASSAULT
FOLLOWING ATTEMPTED CLONLARA EVICTION
18 October, 2016 08:18
9
General
Garda are investigating allegations of assault following an
attempted eviction in South East Clare.
Its understood the court-sanctioned reposession of a
home in Clonlara on Friday has since been abandoned.
A video of the incident was posted on Facebook in recent
days.
The video of the attempted court-sanctioned eviction in
Clonlara has been viewed tens of thousands of times since
it was uploaded to facebook on Friday.
It appears to show a number of men, believed to be from a
security company, being confronted by members of the
Anti Eviction Taskforce.
Its understood the eviction was subsequently abandoned,
after family members gained access to the home, which
had been sealed off with steel shutters.
A senior Garda Spokesperson has confirmed to Clare FM
that members of An Garda Sochna responded to a callout to the area to prevent a breach of peace.
An allegation of assault has been made, but no arrests
have yet been made.
Garda are continuing with their investigations.

REPORT ON CLONLARA HOME SEIZURE BY LIAM DEEGAN

ON FACEBOOK
(Seamus HEALY TD HAS PUT DOWN A PARLIAMENTARY

QUESTION ASKING MINISTER FOR JUSTICE FRANCIS

FITZGERALD TO INSTRUCT THE GARDAI TO INVESTIGATE
ALL THE ALLEGATIONS SET OUT IN LIAM DEEGANS
REPORT)
THE LAND OF SHAME AND WHERE BAILIFFS PLAY HIDE
AND SEEK FROM THE LAW
THE CIRCUIT COURT
In another illegal and shameful attempt at an eviction by
the Bank of Ireland, again in County Clare and this time on
a mother with seven children. The mother of seven had
been understood to be in the Circuit court on Tuesday last
having an appeal heard and had arrived home only to find
that one or more security companies had broken into the
house.
The possession order had originally been given in the
Circuit Court on the basis of rateable valuation as
previously used in civil bills by the banks. It is not yet clear
as to why the Circuit Court dismissed the families appeal
on Tuesday.
Ironically the Circuit Courts are still hearing cases based
on rateable valuation even though it has been ruled that
the Circuit Court no longer enjoys any such jurisdiction
due to a judgement given by Ms Justice Murphy some
months ago and added to by having had the verdict
subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal within the last
number of weeks.
CHILDREN LOCKED IN A BEDROOM
The security companies involved immediately moved in to
take possession, having been seen by passers-by to be
hanging around the area earlier that morning. Metal
shutters were fitted to the most of the windows and doors
of the property to stop anybody trying to enter or leave,
with the exception of one bedroom window which
remained unfitted with the shutters.
Meanwhile, members of the family have claimed that they
remained locked inside the property unable to access
bathrooms and the kitchen area as security personnel
remained in situ with them. Calls were made for help by
the family and as more family, neighbours and friends
arrived at the scene, the situation appeared to turn nasty
with one security man seen to block and assault a man
trying to gain entry into the house to get access to the

children locked in a bedroom by security personnel.

Witnesses allege that the security team had taken chairs
and mattresses from the childrens bedroom leaving them
nowhere to sleep. Two of the children have further alleged
that they were physically assaulted by members of the
security team in the bedroom.
According to eyewitnesses and a video shown on social
media sites and seen by thousands of people, the security
operative with grey hair and clearly seen in the video is
alleged to have assaulted a man attempting to gain entry
and can be seen to leave the house to confront another
bystander in the garden. It appeared from the video that a
verbal altercation ensued between the two men, with the
security operative going head to head with the other man
in a very intimidating manner and then seen to back off.
The identity of that particular security operative has now
been established as Kevin Maguire from Carrigaline in
County Cork. Maguire was not wearing any form of
identification including any Private Security Authority
issued ID card and refused to identify himself when asked
to by people at the scene. The PSA register has no record
of Maguire as an individual licence holder under that
name.
According to his LinkedIn profile, Maguire claims to work
as a director for Senture Security Limited; however there
is no record of him or anyone of that name on record in
the CRO acting as a company director. Maguires wife Mary
is listed instead as a director of Senture Security Ltd.
Further to that Maguires wife Mary also is named as a
director of Secure Management Solutions Limited with an
address in Citywest, Dublin 24. Maguire, according to his
LinkedIn profile has claimed that he is a director of this
company and again there is no record of him in the CRO
listed as holding such a position.
According to sources, Maguire was on the board of
management of Carrigaline Community School from 2012
and was made Chairman during the period of 2014 to
2015.
SECURITY COMPANIES ON SITE
The primary security company/companies allegedly
involved were named locally and on social media as
Nightsafe Security Services Ltd and Active Security

Management Ltd, both with the same address in Melitta

Rd in Kildare town and both owned by ex-soldier Ross
Howard and fellow director Tristan Hogan. Their website
has a Vina Skehan (otherwise known as Vina Horgan)
listed as sales director.
After an initial investigation it was discovered that HorganSkehan who was clearly witnessed to be in attendance at
the attempted eviction is not registered with the Private
Security Authority (PSA) under either of her assumed
surnames. Another individual who goes by the name of
John McShera and who is living in Boyle, County
Roscommon was later identified as one of the security
personnel from his Facebook profile and by witnesses on
the ground and is alleged to be unregistered with the PSA
under that name.
Another member identified on social media and by
witnesses at the scene was named as Anthony Hobbs from
Kerry. Hobbs is alleged to be unregistered with the Private
Security Authority under that name.
Another individual clearly identified at the scene was
named as Czech national, Roman Fako. Although Fako is
registered with the Private Security Authority, it is
understood from sources that information pertaining to his
licence has been passed to the Private Security Authority.
Other members of the security team have now taken down
their Facebook pages after they were identified by
eyewitnesses at the scene. However ongoing
investigations are continuing into confirming their
identities.
NO ID WORN BY SECURITY
None of the security personnel wore any form of PSA
issued ID card and had refused to identify themselves
when questioned. Witnesses have indicated that they will
be making complaints to the PSA about Nightsafe Security
Services Ltd and their sister company Active Security
Management Ltd, a company that Horgan-Skehan claims
that she also works for, according to her Facebook page.
THREATS
It is further alleged that Horgan-Skehan when contacted
by telephone by an individual who had been at the
eviction attempt claimed that she has now resigned from
the company and that G4S Security has taken over and

that there would be 40 people sent from G4S to take the

house back. No one from G4S turned up at the site.
On Saturday evening, in a telephone call with an individual
who was on scene, Vina Horgan-Skehans sister had made
claimed that Horgan-Skehan was in hospital and that she
was distressed and suicidal. The sister went on to claim
that everyone blocking the eviction would be held liable if
Vina Horgan-Skehan was to commit suicide.
She also claimed that Garda have all of the names and
that arrests would be made. She went on to state that
the Sunday World was going to do a story on the
individuals who were present at the scene.
However, claims were made by eyewitnesses that Vina
Horgan-Skehan was heard and seen to physically threaten
a female bystander with actual bodily harm and that she
(Horgan-Skehan) had allegedly shouted to the bystander
that she would dig the head off her.
It was further noted and observed that Horgan-Skehan had
used threatening language in a Facebook private message
sent to one individual who had been at the scene and in
which Horgan-Skehan was seen to have threatened an
individual with words to the effect of Get your facts right,
the guards will be dealing with you and I have your
address, youll be dealt with.
It is alleged by eyewitnesses that Vina Horgan-Skehan
took an active part in the eviction attempt as seen on the
many videos circulating on social media. It was further
alleged that Horgan-Skehan was seen back at the property
later that night (Saturday) by witnesses who were still on
scene.
The directors of Nightsafe Security Services Ltd and a
sister company Active Security Management Ltd were
contacted for a response. A man calling himself Ian
refuted any allegations put to them in regard to their
legality of their actions at the scene. He also refuted
allegations made by Horgan-Skehan that G4S were now
the new owners of Active Security Management Ltd. When
it was pointed out that they were using unlicenced
operatives in evictions, Ian refused to engage any
further after an initial denial of same and ended the call.
Nightsafe Security Services Ltd/Active Security
Management Ltd has failed to reply to emails sent to their

office.
CONFUSION OVER COMPANIES AT THE SCENE
There was some confusion in the initial stages as to which
security company or even how many security companies
was involved. AOC Specialist Services of Ratoath, Co.
Meath were contacted for clarification as to their role in
the eviction. They have not responded to any telephone
calls made to their company.
It should be noted that AOC Specialist Services acting on
behalf of Bank of Ireland employed ex-detective Garda
Michael Murphy at a previous attempt at an illegal eviction
in Corofin County Clare some months back.
Murphy has now lodged an affidavit into the courts
claiming that he was obstructed from carrying out his duty
as agent for the bank and is looking for a committal order
against an Anti-Eviction Taskforce member and the home
owner Tommy Collins. This was the attempted eviction
where the security men wore balaclavas and taped up the
registrations of their cars in a misguided attempt to hide
their identities.
Another company named for its part in the latest eviction
was Dwellguard owned by John Murray and based in
Ballincollig in County Cork. Dwellguard supplied and fitted
the shuttering on the family home. Murray was not
available for comment at the time of publication.
Sources have indicated that allegations are now being
made that the some of the security personnel were being
paid cash in hand as they are not employees of some of
the companies named here. These same sources have
indicated that they have bought the matter to the
attention of the Revenue Commissioners and the
Department of Social Protection.
The Department of Social Protection now have opened an
investigation into certain named individuals who were part
of the security team.
NAME AND SHAME CAMPAIGN
Meanwhile, anti-eviction activists throughout the country
have vowed to step up the campaign to publically name
and shame companies and individuals actively involved in
evictions anywhere in the country. In a chilling warning, a
spokesman for the groups involved, stated that any
companies or individuals who take part in any eviction

attempt on a family home would be named and shamed

not just on social media but in other more visible and
public ways.
GARDAI ON SCENE
According to eyewitnesses, Garda only attended the
scene after as they had received a report of an incident on
Saturday but did not appear to get involved in any real
effort to assist the security companies. Garda left the
scene shortly thereafter and did not return.
Later on Saturday afternoon, family members, neighbours
and friends peacefully removed the security companies
occupying the premises and regained possession of the
family home.
THE AUTHORITIES NEED TO GET TOUGH
In what is becoming glaringly obvious, security companies
are using unregistered individuals while hoping not to get
caught in the act. The Private Security Authority need to
be seen to be strictly enforcing the law surrounding the
misuse of licences or in many cases the enforcement of
the law on security companies that use unlicenced people
as appears to be the case in this story. It further appears
and is alleged that criminals from other countries are
routinely slipping through the vetting process and are
obtaining licences using false personal details.
The security industry already has a bad name and its
about to get a lot worse. This is a nightmare scenario for
any law abiding security company trying to rise above the
severely tarnished image presented by security companies
who have a lot less regard for the law.
Banks must also be taken to task in regards to their
liability in using unlicenced operators, and legal action
needs to be taken against them accordingly for shirking
their responsibility in the matter. It is now quite clear that
the law is being flouted by some security companies and
the banks jointly, and wholeheartedly supported by a very
questionable judicial system operating on the Circuit Court
level.
It seems incredulous that the security industry still has its
cowboys even after the big clean up by the Private
Security Authority. It would make sense for the law abiding
security companies to push the cowboys out of the market
and help mop up what is essentially an important industry

mainly populated by decent people just looking to make a

clean living.

Family Home With Several Children In Clonlara Co Clare :

Possession Recovered
by PEOPLE POWER AND ANTI- EVICTION TASK FORCE
AFTER HOUSE SHUTTERED UP
BY SECURITY FIRM EARLIER IN THE DAY
Congratulations To All Involved
Footage of the events which took place on Friday Oct 14
can be found by clicking below and scrolling down to view
several posts
Patrick Hannon
https://www.facebook.com/banjo.hannon?fref=ts

Homeless at Increased Risk of Suicide-Official ReportGerry Raleigh, Director of National Office of Suicide
Prevention on RTE
Stop Evictions! Stop SUICIDES!
HEART-FELT APPEAL FROM KEN SMOLLEN-TIRELESS ANTIEVICTION CAMPAIGNER
I was talking to Paddy Healy on the phone earlier today.
Paddy works tirelessly for his brother, Independent TD for
Tipperary Seamus Healy. Both of these men are the only
people who work within the confines of Leinster House and
who are actively calling on the Government to declare an
Official Housing Emergency However, they are alone and
receive little or NO support (you cant be upsetting the
markets).Its unfortunate that in order to make the other
removed from reality elites sit up and take notice, that its
now becoming necessary that members of some family in
Ireland do the unbelievable brave thing of being willing to
speak about a family member who has taken their own life
as a result of being in mortgage distress and facing the
horrifying thought of facing one of the EVICTION Courts.
The death of homeless man Jonathan Corrie close to The
Dail made the elites take notice of the homelessness
crisis.The elites are not interested in attending any of the
EVICTION Courts, and are so removed from reality to think
they know what its like for people in this situation as all of
them spout on about distressed mortgage holders

approaching them in the comfort of their constituency

offices.NONE OF THEM have the faintest idea what so
many people are enduring on a daily basisIm not
expecting anyone to come forward to tell their own story
about a family member taking their own lives as a result of
this very hidden crisis, but its a terrible indictment on our
uncaring TDs that I should even have to ask and all I
can do is hope that someone is brave enough to do so!
Ministers John Halligan and Finian McGrath ,Shane Ross,
Boxer Moran, Sean Canney of the Independent Alliance
must Force Government to HALT ALL EVICTIONS NOW
EVICTION RELATED SUICIDES CONTINUE
Ken Smollens post on Facebook
It has just been confirmed to me in the last few minutes
that the father of a number of young children who was due
to appear before one of the EVICTION Courts this week has
sadly taken his own life. Out of respect for his family I will
not be naming the location. Suffice to say that our
uncaring TDs have more blood on their hands as they DO
HAVE the power to put a stop to the never ending
nightmare thats being experienced by thousands of
innocent victims of the bailed out banks and vulture
funds!
May he Rest in Peace-Ken Smollen
GOVERNMENT, FF, LAB, INDEPENDENT ALLIANCE ARE
RESPONSIBLE
But Sinn Fin and Independents for Change Must Share
Some of the Blame
ONLY Ruth Coppinger Dissented from Flawed
Recommendation
The Oireachtas Committee on Housing and Homelessnes
recommended that there be a pause in eviction
proceedings until new debt resolution procedures were in
place
Subject to advice of the Attorney General, the
Government should introduce legislation for a moratorium
on home repossessions until such time as the
Governments proposals are in place.
AND
The Government should urgently seek flexibility from the
European Commission on the application of the EU fiscal
rules to the financing of social housing
Surprise! Surprise! There is no halt to evictions (even on a

temporary basis) in Minister Coveneys housing plan.

Unfortunately Sinn Fin and Independents 4 Change(Mick
Wallace, Maureen OSullivan) went along with this easily
rejected recommendation. (The same attorney general
had advised Alan Kelly against it)
Shamefully, Taoiseach Enda Kenny has written a letter to
EU seeking flexibility under the Fiscal Treaty which would
give permission to Ireland to borrow money to build social
housing for the Irish People! This permission has not been
given.
Government has also consulted its own the Attorney
General, Labours M. Whelan but evictions have continued.
Hence, the government can claim to have complied with
two key recommendations of the Committee. But the
evictions and the suicides continue.
The anger at the continued evictions is more than
justified. However, my bother Seamus Healy TD(Tipperary)
has repeatedly called in the Dil for the formal declaration
of a housing emergency and a total halt to evictions. The
formal declaration of a housing emergency is required to
overcome the qualified protection of the private property
of banks and landlords in the constitution.
But Government,itself, continues to evict people through
banks owned by state (AIB, PTSB, EBS)
FG, FF, Lab, Ind. Alliance and, Unbelievably, Independents
for Change and Sinn Fin put those facing Repossession in
the Hands of The Attorney General who previously advised
that any significant interference with the private property
of Banks and/or landlords was a violation of
Constitution!!! In addition the recommended moratorium
on evictions is only for a few months!!!!!
(see Evidence of Alan Kelly to the Commission on
Constitutional Obstacles to Solving The Housing Crisis
further down)
Recommendation on Evictions
Subject to advice of the Attorney General, the
Government should introduce legislation for a moratorium
on home repossessions until such time as the
Governments proposals are in place.
Commission Fails to recommend a formal declaration of a
housing emergency by Government!!!!! This will enable
banks an landlords to continue evictions despite the spin

in the Commission Report

Even the Minority Report by Ruth Coppinger TD, Socialist
Party, fails to call for the formal declaration of a housing
emergency by the Dil
Oireachtas Committee on Housing and HomelessnesMajority Report
http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/committees/32
housingandhomelessness/Final-Report-.pdf
MINORITY REPORT
http://antiausterityalliance.ie/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/Housing-doc-2.pdf
The Minority Report makes some very good points,
particularly pointing out that the FISCAL TREATY must be
broken to enable the state to invest in housing. But the
advocacy of a referendum to change the constitution on
property rights and the right to a home, however laudable,
is not an emergency measure. It is no substitute for the
immediate formal declaration of a national housing
emergency by government to enable legal interference
with property rights in order to implement emergency
measures including a halt to eviction proceedings.
The Majority Report fails to call for breaking of the FISCAL
TREATY in order for the state to build adequate numbers
of social houses. Not alone does it put those facing
repossession in the hands of the Attorney General(a
member of the government), Chair Curran(FF) has
explained that the moratorium on evictions would only be
a short term measure for a few months. It would last until
government put in place the governments (inadequate)
measures on debt resolution.
To make things worse, The Fianna Fail Finance
Spokesperson, Deputy Michael McGrath says in the Irish
Examiner(18/06/2016) says that the recommendation to
pause repossessions is unworkable and SOMETIMES
KEEPING THE HOUSE IS NOT THE BEST ANSWER. In an
interview with the Irish Examiner, Mr McGrath said losing
the home and starting again may be best for some people
who can no longer afford to remain where they are.
Michael McGrath TD
Independents4Change was represented on the
Commission by Deputies Mick Wallace and Maureen
OSullivan. Following the failure of I4C to support an

amendment strengthening the Workers Rights Bill put

down by AAA-PBP, its complete acceptance of the grossly
deficient report is leading to queriess as to where it is
headed politically.
Sinn Fin took the same position as I4C. A piece by Eoin
Broin SF (member of the Commission) in the Irish
Independent 18/06/2016 points to no deficiencies in the
report and is quite complimentary of its FF and FG
members.
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/cowendetached-durkan-rambled-but-report-shows-tds-agreecure-34812099.html
The acceptance of the Fiscal Treaty by Sinn Fin has a
particular significance. The Treaty , in effect,removes the
fundamental right of the government to provide housing
for all citizens. How far has Sinn Fin travelled since
Coimhn Caolain TD opposed the Treaty in the Dil on
the grounds that it flies in the face of the 1916
Proclamation in its undermining of Irish sovereignty?
Even after FF through Finance Spokesperson Michael
McGrath pulled the rug on the moratorium on evictions
recommendation , Eoin OBroin (SF) wrote in an opinion
piece in Sunday Business Post 19/06/2016
The Committee also called on the government to urgently
request flexibility
from the European Commission on the application of fiscal
rules for investment
in tackling the crisisthe strength of the Report lies in the fact that all but one
of our 14 members
signed up to the final recommendations.
There is now strong support across the political spectrum
for greater state
involvement in the provision of social housing, the
regulation of the private
rental sector and targeted measures to meet the housing
needs of those most
neglected by past policies
Coming from a professed republican, the request for
permission from the EU to put roofs over the heads of the
Irish people is very strange. The notion of FF, FG who have
always favoured the rich, genuinely working to solve the

crisis is at best naive.

Alan Kelly TD (Labour) gave evidence to the Commission
on constitutional obstacles to solving the housing crisis.
(The protection of private property in the constitution is
not absolute-it is subject to right of government to provide
for the common good). Kelly was effectively quoting the
Attorney General who continues in the new government. It
is important to note that Brendan Howlin(Labour) who was
also a minister in the outgoing government claimed to
have overcome the constitutional obstacle to confiscating
private property in pensions in the FEMPI ACT by a formal
declaration of a Financial Emergency by Government and
the laying of a document certifying continuation of the
Financial Emergency every year.
My conclusion from the evidence of Alan Kelly (below) is
that the outgoing FG-Lab government was not prepared to
formally declare a national housing emergency and to lay
the documents before the Oireachtas. FG-Lab put the
rights of property before the common good. It continued
evictions, including evictions by banks it owns.
Evidence to Commission by Alan Kelly (Lab) TD- former
Minister for Housing
Mr Alan Kelly, former Minister, stated that legal advice
on Article 43 had stopped him from introducing a more
powerful vacant site levy, which would have imposed a fee
on developers who refused to build on unused land. He
said that it had also stopped legislation preventing
keeping houses vacant and laws that would protect
tenants from so-called vulture funds, which invest in
undervalued properties and then profit from selling them:
I was not hampered by political or financial obstacles. I
was blocked by the Constitution. (Advice to Sitting
Ministers either comes directly from the Attorney General
or is commissioned by the Attorney General-PH). Kelly
continued: From the time it is taking to introduce the
Vacant Site Levy in order to tackle land hoarding, to
protecting tenants from eviction in circumstances where
their landlord wishes to sell the property, and many other
issues, I was repeatedly blocked from making provision for
what I believed was the common good by the strength by
which property rights are protected under Article 43 of the
Constitution. I believe that we need to honestly re-

examine the balance between the protected and

legitimate property rights of individuals, as property
owners, and the wider needs and common good of society,
including housing needs. As a society we need to reflect
on the desired impact of the constitution here. I believe
that addressing these issues raises politically and socially
important issues which will have to be debated over the
coming years.
Letter To All Members of Oireachtas Committee on
Housing and Homelessness-Paddy Healy Wed 15/06/2016
A Chirde,
I am an activist in a campaign against eviction of
homeowners and tenants in the context of a the national
housing emergency as recently affirmed by Minister
Coveney.
Some of those who are having their homes being
repossessed are being evicted by the government which
is the owner of a number of banks including AIB and PTSB
I believe it would be outrageous for any member of the
Oireachtas Committee to agree to the issue of
recommendations on housing and homeless ness which
did not call for an immediate halt to all evictions.
In the case of Banks in majority state ownership no
legislation or constitutional change is required. The
government can simply issue an instruction to the banks it
owns. If the bank refuses to comply the Minister can call a
special general meeting of shareholders in order to put in
place directors who will carry out the instructions of the
owners. The Framework Agreement between Government
and Banks is a purely informal, non-legally binding
arrangement.
But, of course, all evictions should be banned in this
emergency. This would require emergency legislation
which could be completed in one day.
It would also be important for government to formally
declare a housing emergency and to lay a document
before both houses of the Oireachtas certifying that the
emergency exist. This would prevent landlords and banks
blocking the implementation of the legislation by
attempting to invoke the constitutional protection of
private property which is limited by the necessity to
provide for the common good.

I and my allies will hold each member of the Oireachtas

Committee responsible for future evictions who assents to
recommendations of the Committee which do not include
the emergency prohibition of all evictions until the
housing and homelessness crisis has been resolved.
Government is about to lay a document before both
houses by June 30 which will certify that a Financial
Emergency continues to exist. This, it believes is
necessary in order to protect confiscation of private
property in public service pensions from constitutional
challenge.
Yours sincerely
Paddy Healy
88 Griffith Court, Fairview, Dublin 3
086-4183732
PS I was very disappointed by the decision of the
Committee not to invite The Hub Ireland and Mr Ken
Smollen to address you
Your Recommendations will be discussed at a public
conference of anti-eviction activist to be held in Killeshin
Hotel Portlaoise before the end of this month-PH

PRESIDENT HIGGINS TELLS GOVERNMENT:

IGNORE FISCAL TREATY! BORROW NOW TO BUILD HOUSES
AND TO INVEST IN HEALTH AND EDUCATION
Well Done President Higgins!!
He (President Higgins) insists that seeking access for all
to housing, health and education what he calls values
for decent living are not wild, Bolshevik ideas.
And at a time of low interest rates, there is opportunity to
invest in these services. Better to spend now when money
is cheap, he appears to suggest, than be overly concerned
with sticking to EU fiscal rules.Paul Melia Irish
Independent 17/09/2016
Instead of borrowing the money to build the houses,
Taoiseach ENDA KENNY HAS WRITTEN TO THE EU SEEKING
PERMISSION! IRISH SOVEREIGNTY-HOW ARE YOU!!!
Seamus Healy TD has repeatedly told the government in
the Dil: STOP THE EVICTIONS: Borrow the money
immediately to build the houses and rescue the homeless!
Dont ask the EU. TELL the EU that the government is

doing it, he said.

Italy, Spain, Portugal and other countries are ignoring the
Fiscal Treaty when it suits them. We should do the same!
AS THE BUDGET APPROACHES, GOVERNMENT SHOULD
TAKE THE ADVICE OF PRESIDENT HIGGINS
From Martina Doyle and the HUB-IRELAND PHONE NO
01-5349118
A Sheriff has NO AUTHORITY to take a property
Even a receiver cannot trespass on your property
If they do, and you are fearful, call the Gardai, and tell
them that you fear for your safety.
Quote Section of the Section 13(1) of 1 of the Criminal
Public Justice Act, and ask the Receiver/trespasser to
leave.
If they refuse, they are committing a criminal offence
which can incur hefty fine or a prison sentence.
Stay in your homes. Fight the banks. We will help you. We
are FREE
ANOTHER HUGE TAX GIVEAWAY BY GOVERNMENT AND
Michael Tommy Cooper Noonan
How did the Government shaft mortgage holders and
taxpayers in one fell swoop?
The State may well have missed out on huge tax profits
through its sale of distressed home loans
Stephen Donnelly
Sunday Independent Published 10/07/2016 | 02:30
Questions to answer: Finance Minister Michael Noonan
the Government refused to let people bid on their own
distressed mortgages Photo: Tony Gavin
The Irish Government could be complicit in wholesale tax
avoidance by foreign investment firms, which are
generating huge profits in Ireland off the backs of Irish
mortgage holders.
Sarah and Dominic (not their real names) live in Kilkenny
with their two children. They bought their home in 2007.
The shop Sarah worked in closed during the recession
she lost her job and they started to fall behind on their
mortgage payments.
Theyre getting back on their feet now, but with lower
wages, theyre struggling to make full payments. Their

mortgage was with Irish Nationwide, which was

nationalised, so it ended up in state ownership, along with
about 13,000 other mortgages.
Two years ago, the Government sold these mortgages at
big discounts, mainly to US investment funds. The
Government refused to let individual mortgage holders bid
on their mortgages. Sarah and Dominics mortgage was
bundled with about 1,400 others and sold to Mars Capital.
According to finance minister Michael Noonan, this was
done with funds managed by Oaktree Capital
Management.
Oaktree is a very large US-based distressed-debt firm that
has bought up many of the mortgages sold by the
Government.
Until recently, we didnt know how big the discounts were
that the State was selling peoples mortgages at. Mars
Capitals newly filed 2015 accounts show they paid 42
cent in the euro.
Sarah and Dominics mortgage was about 350,000, so
Mars Capital got it for about 140,000 an amount the
couple could have afforded. Instead, they still owe the full
350,000 to Mars Capital and face the prospect of
eviction.
It gets better (or worse if you are Sarah and Dominic, or
an Irish taxpayer). Mars bought these 1,400 mortgages for
155m. About half of this was financed by a loan from
Citibank, with the remaining 80m being, presumably, the
funds managed by Oaktree Capital. The 2015 accounts
of Mars Capital forecast that this 80m investment will
harvest almost 400m (net of the Citibank loan) in
mortgage interest and principal repayments (so thats the
80m back, plus almost 320m extra, less administration
costs). And this is just Mars Capitals first estimate. It
assumes a level of non-payment on the mortgages they
bought. But as the Irish economy recovers and payment
rates improve, profits could become much higher.
In May 2014, Ireland was borrowing 10-year money at 2pc.
Mars Capitals accounts show them earning 14pc on their
80m, just taking into account mortgage interest
payments, from the likes of Sarah and Dominic. Why sell
an asset yielding 14pc when your cost of funds is 2pc? The
Irish State could have given every one of those Irish

mortgage holders a 60pc discount on their loan and still

have made 14pc per annum in repayments. Wasnt Nama
set up to do this?
However, it gets even better (and definitely worse, if you
are an Irish taxpayer). The funds managed by Oaktree
Capital Management seem to be accounted for in Mars
Capital as notes.
Essentially, the 80m was loaned to Mars Capital, and
Mars must pay it back, plus interest. The interest on these
notes is set at 10pc + variable residual.
In other words, the interest payable on the 80m can be
hiked to soak up any, and all, profit Mars Capital makes.
The accounts of Mars Capital clarify that these notes will
suck nearly all of the profits (interest and capital) from the
company in excess of the Citibank loan. The 2015
accounts claim exactly 1,000 as taxable profit, while
paying millions in interest on the notes.
This tax-management structure is similar to what is used
by some multinationals based in Ireland. Often, such notes
are registered in an offshore zero-tax location such as the
Cayman Islands, where their note interest payments are
made and accumulate tax-free, and get lent back to the
parent as needed. As such, the profits are taxed neither in
Ireland, nor in the US.
Irish accounting and legal firms provide the expertise to
the multinationals to help them minimise their tax
obligations. So what? Sure arent they providing jobs here?
Well yes, they are.
But if that same expertise is now being used to help
foreign investment firms suck huge profits out of Ireland
without paying tax on them, then were all worse off.
We dont know where are the loan notes of Mars Capital
located. We do know, from Oaktrees US SEC annual
filings, that many of their funds linked with European
distressed debt (ie Sarah and Dominics mortgage), are
listed in the Cayman Islands.
So, if the Mars Capital notes happen to have been issued
by an Oaktree Capital fund located in the Caymans (and
we have no evidence that they are), and if the interest on
the notes is adjusted in a way that leaves Mars Capital
with very little taxable profit (say the 1,000 filed for
2015), then not only will the State have missed the

opportunity to retain hundreds of millions of euro of value

(and maybe spare Sarah and Dominics family the threat
of eviction), it would also be the case that none of the
profits will be taxed in Ireland.
To be clear tax avoidance is, by definition, legal (as
opposed to tax evasion, which is illegal). There is no
suggestion that Mars Capital, or Oaktree Capital, have
done, or are doing, anything illegal. They are clever
investors who saw an opportunity and took it if they are
structuring their investments to minimise tax obligations,
then they are acting rationally. The Irish Government,
however, is not.
If very little tax ends up being paid in Ireland on the Mars
Capital deal, the tax leakage could reach well over 50m.
And this is a very small deal in the scheme of things if
other investment firms have structured their affairs to
avoid paying taxes here, the total missed tax take will be
in the hundreds of millions, conservatively.
Why did the Government not seek assurances from all
foreign bidders that their structures would ensure they
pay fair Irish tax on their Irish-generated profits? If some
bidders organised themselves to move their profits
offshore, did the Irish Government know? Did the
investment firms seeks assurances from the Government
that any proposed off-shoring of profits would be
acceptable? Just how complicit is the Government in what
could be large-scale tax avoidance on profits earned off
the backs of ordinary families trying to recover from the
collapse?
Best little country to do business in? I doubt Sarah and
Dominic would agree. Neither would those using our
underfunded public services and infrastructure.
RENT OF HOUSES ROCKETTING
FISCAL TREATY RESTRICTIONS ON GOVERNMENT
SPENDING AND BORROWING IS THE CAUSE
Taoiseach Enda Kenny has written a letter to EU seeking
permission to borrow money to house our people!!!
THe IRISH PEOPLE must establish ITS OWN SOVEREIGNTY
A 32-county assembly wielding Peoples Power is The
Answer

At the end of 2015, there were 139,359 or almost 140,000

people on local authority waiting lists for housing. This is
because virtually no local authority houses have been built
for years. Now due to the restrictions of the FISCAL
TREATY, Ireland is not allowed to borrow money to build
social houses. This is despite the fact that governments
can now borrow money ay rock bottom rates. Enda has
written a letter to EU seeking permission to borrow money
to house our people. Irish People have been reduced by
FF,Fg,Lab, Greens to the staus of beggars.
Now over 140,000 people have to seek private rented
accomodation to get a dwelling place!
Thousands of distressed mortgage holders are being
driven from their homes each year. They too must seek
rented accomodation.
Massive and growing demand-No additional supply!!!This
is driving the cost of rented accomodation through the
roof. The crisis is rendered even more acute when third
level colleges re-open.
The only answer is for The Irish People to establish its own
sovereignty

Stay in your homes-HELP IS FREE!

FROM Martina DOYLE THE HUB-IRELAND ON Facebook
PHONE NO 01-5349118
#thehubirelandrepealtheevictionbill
Dont suffer in silence.
There is help in hand.
It is FREE.
Stay in your homes.
If anybody tries to charge in our name, they are scamming
you.
Get a receipt
Please share as you never know who might need our help.
Thank you.
Seamus Healy TD Supports the Call by THE HUB-IRELAND
to Repeal the Land and Conveyancing Act, 2013
Seamus voted against The Land And Conveyancing Act
(2013)
Seamus Healy repeatedly Called for a Halt to Evictions and
the Declaration of a Housing Emergencyin the Dil

Irish Times:Minister Noonan Replies to Seamus Healy on

Evictions
Minister says no political interference in bank decision, but
progress being made
Irish Times Thu, Jan 14, 2016
Marie OHalloran
Minister for Finance Michael Noonan: I appreciate that its
very hard on people. I appreciate people have lost their
jobs and I appreciate how upset people are.
Banks have been dealing with the issue of home
repossessions reasonably well, according to Minister for
Finance Michael Noonan.
He said this idea of tens of thousands of houses being
repossessed is just not correct.
Mr Noonan said I appreciate that its very hard on people.
I appreciate people have lost their jobs and I appreciate
the concerns and I appreciate how upset people are.
But in a very extreme situation its been handled
reasonably well by the banks.
He was responding to Independent TD Samus Healy who
asked Mr Noonan, as the majority shareholder in AIB and
its subsidiary EBS as well as the majority shareholder in
Permanent TSB, to call a meeting of the boards of the
banks and to instruct them not to repossess family
homes.
He said that if the bank directors would not agree to that
then sack those members. You have the power to do that
as majority shareholder.
There are thousands of families in this country,
irrespective of what you say Minister, facing homelessness
by these banks, of which the Government is a majority
shareholder.
Mr Noonan said a relationship framework had been agreed
by the Governments predecessors in office that the
political side will not interfere in commercial decisions
and they did not want to politicise the banks.
It would be a very sad day for the country if you were
looking for a loan and your first port of call had to be your
local TD rather than the bank manager.
He said 207 houses were repossessed on foot of court
order and that is not the 10s of thousands of houses
thats sometimes recited on the commentary on this.

He said 121,000 mortgages on private dwellings had been

restructured and the success rate was 86.6 per cent.
So progressively the problem is being solved.
Mr Noonan said statistics from the Central Bank showed
that in the third quarter of 2015 (July, August and
September) legal proceedings were issued in 1,687 cases
of private mortgages.
There were 798 cases where court proceedings
concluded but arrears remained outstanding and the court
granted a repossession order in 329 cases.
A total of 422 properties were taken into possession by
lenders during the quarter and 215 were voluntary.
Its a very small amount to go through the system and
since the changes were made by the Minister for Justice
and that the money and Budgeting Advice Service are
assisting people before the courts that will diminish even
further, Mr Noonan added.
Government Evicts Families-Statement by Seamus Healy
TD
Jan 18 2016
This government is continuing to evict families from their
homes.
In the Dil last Thursday, I appealed to Minister Michael
Noonan to order the banks he owns to withdraw
repossession proceedings in light of the extreme housing
emergency which exists.
The Minister refused. This means that the government
has given the green light to the banks they own, to
continue to evict families.
Court Orders for repossession of 47 primary residences
were granted at Clonmel and Nenagh Circuit Courts in the
first 3 quarters of 2015. A further 8 buy-to-lets which also
house families were also repossessed. Banks are now
seeking a further 97 repossession orders for dwellings in
Tipp, of which 32 are being sought by AIB, EBS and
Permanent TSB which are owned by the Government
through Michael Noonan (FG) Minister for Finance
Minister Noonan claimed that the issue was being
reasonably handled by the banks. Totally misrepresenting
the situation, Mr Noonan quoted the 208 orders for
repossessions for the whole country for Quarter 3,2015 as
representative of the scale of the problem. COURTS ONLY

SIT FOR 1 OF THE 3 MONTHS IN QUARTER 3!! The Court

Service Figures for the whole country for Quarters 1 and 2
are 586 and 314 respectively.
The proposed Eviction of 97 Tipperary Families Must Be
Stopped Now!
Senior Minister Alan Kelly (Lab) and Minister of State
Hayes(FG) must now intervene at Cabinet to have a
Housing Emergency Declared and all repossession
applications withdrawn.
In particular they must force Minister Noonan to withdraw
the repossession applications by the banks he owns.
Land and Conveyancing Act 2013
Second Stage
T
12 Richard Bruton
13 Joan Burton
14 Ray Butler
15 Jerry Buttimer
16 Catherine Byrne
17 Eric Byrne
18 Ciarn Cannon
19 Joe Carey
20 Paudie Coffey
21 Michael Conaghan
22 Sen Conlan
23 Paul Connaughton
24 Ciara Conway
25 Ciara Conway
26 Michael Creed
27 Jim Daly
28 John Deasy
29 Jimmy Deenihan
30 Pat Deering
31 Robert Dowds
32 Bernard Durkan
33 Damien English
34 Alan Farrell
35 Frank Feighan
36 Peter Fitzpatrick
37 Charles Flanagan
38 Terence Flanagan

39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80

Eamon Gilmore
Brendan Griffin
Dominic Hannigan
Noel Harrington
Martin Heydon
Phil Hogan
Brendan Howlin
Heather Humphreys
Kevin Humphreys
Derek Keating
Paul Kehoe
Alan Kelly
Sen Kenny
Sen Kyne
Anthony Lawlor
Ciarn Lynch
Michael McCarthy
Helen McEntee
Nicky McFadden
Dinny McGinley
Tony McLoughlin
Michael McNamara
Eamonn Maloney
Peter Mathews
Olivia Mitchell
Mary Mitchell OConnor
Michelle Mulherin
Dara Murphy
Eoghan Murphy
Gerald Nash
Dan Neville
Derek Nolan
Aodhn Rordin
John OMahony
Joe OReilly
Jan OSullivan
Ann Phelan
John Paul Phelan
Pat Rabbitte
Michael Ring
Brendan Ryan
Alan Shatter

81
82
83
84
85
86
Nl
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41

Emmet Stagg
David Stanton
Joanna Tuffy
Liam Twomey
Jack Wall
Brian Walsh
Richard Boyd Barrett
Tommy Broughan
John Browne
Joan Collins
Niall Collins
Barry Cowen
Sen Crowe
Clare Daly
Pearse Doherty
Stephen Donnelly
Timmy Dooley
Dessie Ellis
Martin Ferris
Luke Flanagan
Tom Fleming
John Halligan
Samus Healy
Michael Healy-Rae
Joe Higgins
Billy Kelleher
Michael Lowry
Pdraig MacLochlainn
Charlie McConalogue
Mary Lou McDonald
Finian McGrath
Mattie McGrath
Sandra McLellan
Michel Martin
Catherine Murphy
Denis Naughten
Patrick Nulty
Caoimhghn Caolin
amon Cuv
Sen Fearghal
Aengus Snodaigh

42 Jonathan OBrien
43 Willie ODea
44 Thomas Pringle
45 Shane Ross
46 Risn Shortall
47 Brendan Smith
48 Peadar Tibn
49 Robert Troy
50 Mick Wallace
Question declared carried.
Voting was also as above on the Report and Final Stage of
the Land and Conveyancing Bill (2013)

3,041 families up for eviction in court in this month of July

A grand total of 3,041 families up for eviction in court this
month of July. Ignoring the mortgage arrears crisis is
fueling homelessness at a horrifying scale. I am tired
contacting all the people who are paid to care. What else
can we do?Martina Doyle, The Hub-Ireland
Limerick 146 and 5.
Dundalk 55 and 52.
Tullamore 19 and 71.
Waterford 34 and 18 and 20 and 70 .
Dublin 57 and 4 and 4 and 55 and 1 and 50 and 59 and 5
and 10 and 2 and 5 and 54 and 8 and 57 and 62 and 2.
Cork 72 and 98 and 32 and 87 and 20 and 5 and 59.
Monaghan 102.
Trim 75 and 80 and 76.
Carrick on Shannon 35.
Bray 125.
Castlebar 78.
Portlaoise 40 and 32.
Naas 9 and 71 and 101 and 16.
Letterkenny 89.
Cavan 39 and 100.
Wexford 43 and 60.
Kilkenny 33 and 40.
Sligo 30.
Roscommon 75.
Ennis 84.
Clonmel 46.

Nenagh 58.
Carlow 41.
Tralee 64.
A grand total of 3,041 families up for eviction, one month
= July.
John McManus Business Editor Irish Times: 23/07/2016
Housing plan looks very like a bailout for big builders
Its not that the Government cant bring down house
prices, more that they dont want to
Irish Times Sunday, July 24, 2016, 11:18
When it comes to sorting out the housing crisis, the
Government really has two choices. They can try to bring
down the price of houses to a level people can afford or
they can help people buy houses at their current
unaffordable prices.
Affordability is hard to define but for Irish purposes it
equates to the limit put by the Central Bank on how much
a bank can lend you, which is 3 times your gross
income. For two people on the average wage, this is about
245,000. This is not a million miles away from the
average house price in most places other than south
Dublin, but if you are a single-income or low-income
family, you are not buying a house any time soon.
The Government would argue they have done a bit of both
with the action plan for housing and homelessness
published this week, but the true picture will not be
clearer until the details of the measures to help first-time
buyers and house builders are unveiled at budget time. Of
the two options, bringing down house prices is by far the
hardest one. Assuming you could actually come up with a
way of doing it that did not borrow from the Khmer Rouge
handbook, it would still be deeply, deeply unpopular.
The losers would include pretty much everybody who has
a house. People would see their positive equity eroded or
their negative equity increased. The precarious buy-to-let
sector would be decimated. Builders and developers would
be ruined and the banks would be bust once again.
Strange though it may seem, a policy that underpins high
house prices is the rational political choice in a

representative democracy. Consequently, you should not

expect the measures announced this week to bring down
the price of houses to any significant degree. If you are in
any doubt, you should know that one of the bigger
developers, Cairn Homes, has welcomed the plan. Turkeys
dont vote for certain Christian winter festivals.
Downward pressure
Its not that the Government couldnt bring down the price
of houses. The main levers at their disposal are social
housing and rent controls. These are viable long- term
solutions to home ownership and if they are provided in
sufficient quantities at the right price, they exert
downward pressure on prices.
But the targets for social housing set out in the plan will
not put a tooth in the problem. The plan calls for the
construction of 125,000 houses by 2021, of which only one
in five or fewer will be social housing built by the
Government.
The rest will presumably be provided by the private sector,
and we can take it as read that they dont plan selling
these houses for any less than they are selling them at the
moment . They argue they are not even making money at
current prices.
If prices are not coming down and wages are not going up
and the Central Bank wont let banks lend people more
than they can afford, you get the sort of stalemate that
prevails in the Irish market. The Government, to its credit,
is trying to solve the problem by providing a limited
amount of cheap housing but the bulk of its effort seems
to be going into subsidising the building industry either
directly or indirectly.
The measures to be announced in the budget in October
are expected to include a 10,000 package for first-time
buyers and other measures to increase the profitability of
house-building. At best, this will allow more people to buy
houses at current prices and also allow more builders to
build profitably at current prices. At worst, it will trigger a
jump in prices.
No costing has been put on this part of the plan but if, for
arguments sake, you assumed that half of the buyers of
the 100,000 houses that will be built by the private sector
got the money, it would be 500 million over five years.

It represents a massive subsidy for an industry that is

fundamentally uncompetitive because it has overpaid for
land and is now sitting on sites, refusing to develop and
playing chicken with the Government. Those who worship
market forces would argue these builders should all be
made go bust and the price of land should drop, allowing
profitable house-building by new entrants. In a socialist
version of this fantasy, the State would then spend 500
million building 200,000 council houses.
It doesnt really matter because neither of these things are
going to happen. It may not be the Governments
intention but the housing plan looks like a massive State
bailout for an industry that is being protected from the
consequences of its mistakes. Sound familiar?
2016 irishtimes.com

Eviction Proceedings-No Pause in Government Action Plan

On Housing and Homelessness
FALSE PROMISE TO FIRST TIME BUYERS! Bonanza for
Developers!
Now we Know why the Oireachtas Committee refused to
invite Ken Smollen and THE HUB-IRELAND to address it!
Plan is just a pre-election gimmick
The Oireachtas Committee recommended that there be a
pause in eviction proceedings until new debt resolution
procedures were in place
Subject to advice of the Attorney General, the
Government should introduce legislation for a moratorium
on home repossessions until such time as the
Governments proposals are in place.
Surprise! Surprise! There is no halt to evictions (even on a
temporary basis) in Coveneys plan. Unfortunately Sinn
Fin and Independents 4 Change(Mick Wallace, Maureen
OSullivan) went along with this easily rejected
recommendation. (The same attorney general had advised
Alan Kelly against it)
But now government promises to introduce more
favourable resolution procedures for distressed mortgages
have been seriously watered down
The number of people presenting as homeless has
doubled in the last 12 moths
Opposition members of the Oireachtas Committee say the

Coveney Plan for building social houses contains half the

investment recommended by the committee.
The EU have been resisting informal government requests
to allow money to be borrowed by Ireland to build social
houses despite the restrictions of the Fiscal Treaty for
months..
NOW Taoiseach Kenny is going to WRITE A LETTER to the
EU asking that Ireland be allowed to borrow money to
house Irish people? (Decisive action that!!!)-Irish
sovereignty how are you?
Eoin OBroin (SF) wrote in an opinion piece in Sunday
Business Post 19/06/2016
The Committee also called on the government to urgently
request flexibility
from the European Commission on the application of fiscal
rules for investment
in tackling the crisisThe Committee should, of course. have recommended that
the government TELL THE EU THAT IRELAND WOULD BE
BORROWING THE MONEY TO HOUSE IRISH PEOPLE IN THIS
EMERGENCY, as advocated by Seamus HealY TD.
Instead Sinn Fin and Independents 4 Change joined FF
and FG in a shamefully compliant recommendation in the
frame work of the Fiscal Treaty
BONANZA FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPERS-FALSE PROMISE TO
FIRST TIME BUYERS
Before any extra houses are built, financial supports will
be given to first time buyers in the budget next October
(and backdated to to-day) to help them to purchase
houses! But there will be no freeze on house prices! In the
context of miniscule supply this cannot fail to raise the
price of houses. This will be of no benefit to first time
buyers but will provide a bonanza for developers. Others
moving jobs will also have to pay the higher prices!
Developers will also be given publicly owned land at cheap
leasing rates on which to build private houses.
IRISH HOUSING NETWORK-In effect, it looks like this will
mean leasing public land to private developers who will
decide whats affordable. Without secure rent controls and
more public housing this will leave people as vulnerable as
they are now, with evictions and rent hikes commonplace
as the markets decide peoples future for them. This

hasnt worked before and it wont work now.

According to Minister Coveney these measures willfix the
housing market!
NO Housing Emergency Formally Declared
Despite verbal recognition of a national housing
emergency by Minister Coveney earlier this year, no
formal declaration of a housing emergency will be laid
before the Oireachtas.
Such a declaration would enable the public good to outweigh the right to private property in accordance with the
Irish Constitution. Former Minister Howlin explained to the
Dil that annual certification of a financial emergency was
necessary to enable continued confiscation of private
property in pensions. Minister Donoghue has done this
recently
The absence of such a formal declaration could enable
banks an landlords to continue evictions even if the
government ordered a pause.
Also, it is at least possible that private owners (including
vulture funds) will be able to block even some of the
inadequate improvements contained in the Action Plan.
My DIT colleage, Dr Lorcan Sirr ( Faculty of the Built
Environment) has pointed out that thousands of dwelling
houses are becoming obsolescent each year, thus
reducing the number of houses available for habitation.
Government or local authorities are unable to intervene
unless the building becomes a physical danger to the
public. No account is taken of these obsolescences in the
government targets for housing provision.
The absence of the formal declaration of a housing
emergency enables the owners to resist any interference
with their private property no matter how outrageous their
disregard for the common good!
Misleading Government Spin
People Laughed at Richard Bruton when he said he would
create 100,000 jobs but he did it. Simon Coveney will
drive the housing plan in the same way-Brian Hayes
MEP(FG) on Today with Sean ORourke(RTE) 22/07/2016
In fact the government were cutting public service jobs
while jobs increased in private sector. These private sector
jobs were created despite the government austerity policy
due to favourable external circumstances-weak euro,

cheap oil, strong demand for multi-national exports

produced in Ireland. These circumstances are already
changing rapidly and a new world recession will
completely reverse them.
But government politicians never !miss an opportunity to
reinforce a misleading story!
CONCLUSION
Like many previous Plans and Reports this ACTION PLAN is
bound to fail
I believe that the government ACTION PLAN is a
combination of a pre-election gimmick and a bonanza for
private developers.
FINAL WARNING TO GOVERNMENT-HALT EVICTION
PROCEEDINGS NOW!
-KEN SMOLLEN
Next Saturday 25th June, the Standing Together meeting
at 1.30 pm in The Killeshin Hotel, Portlaoise can see real
progress being made in our fight against the bailed out
banks and the vulture funds who have engaged in a
hidden onslaught on thousands of decent, hardworking
citizens in our country and their families. There can be no
doubt that in years to come there will be an inquiry into
how and why 3 successive Governments not only allowed
the terrorising of so many of their own people but actually
gave this great injustice their full support. Such an inquiry
will undoubtedly lead to proper justice being meted out to
those directly responsible and also to anyone who helped
facilitate this wrong doing!
For real progress to be made it is imperative that all
genuine people, groups, political parties and other
determined organisations must work together. Any division
in this very justified campaign will not only please the very
many uncaring TDs in Leinster House; it will also lead to
failure to achieve our ultimate aim. That aim should be to
achieve fairness for our people and a fair and sustainable
solution to the mortgage distress crisis where families
should no longer have to go without some of the basic
necessities of life in order to keep a roof over their heads!
There can be no doubt that many of the people who will
attend on Saturday will be living through this ongoing
nightmare every day. Others attending will simply be

aware of the crisis and see the urgent necessity for a

resolution to be found. We can also be reasonably certain
that a number of politicians will also attend, with most if
not all of them being fully supportive of our unified
campaign.
It is for that reason that I urge anyone who intends to be
there on Saturday NOT to bring banners of any kind, and
NOT to bring coffins or coffin lids with slogans written on
them. This is NOT a protest meeting. IT IS a meeting
where we must give the Government a final warning or an
ultimatum that they must force the banks who operate
within this jurisdiction to find a fair and sustainable
solution for all mortgage holders, and while that solution is
being sought, that ALL Eviction proceedings in the courts
throughout Ireland be halted. We cannot afford to give
them or any of the media who will be present reason to
see us as just a group of disorganised protesters. We
MUST be seen as reasonable people demanding a
reasonable resolution to a hidden and growing
humanitarian crisis that affects probably well over ONE
MILLION people in our country!
I have requested that the reporter and camera crew from
RTE not to film or show the faces of anyone in attendance
unless they do so with the full permission of anyone
concerned. They have agreed to this and before any
filming or photo is taken of the attendance that it is done
from the back of the room with a warning beforehand. This
is to ensure that we protect the identities of everyone in
attendance. I would therefore ask that anyone who intends
to take photographs or film the proceedings to please
adhere to the same principle as we must not cause
distress of any kind to anyone in attendance.
It is highly likely that the uncaring TDs in Government will
call our bluff as many of them will be of the opinion that
there is very little we can do if they fail to take the
necessary and appropriate action in forcing the banks to
engage fairly with their customers and if they also fail to
ensure that there is a moratorium on the Eviction
proceedings in the courts.
This is where I am of the opinion that their thinking is very
flawed. I have no doubt that a properly organised group of
people can have a huge effect on the workings of the

courts, solicitors, MABS, the Personal Insolvency Service

and other such Government backed organisations and all
without the need for protest of any kind.
I have discussed such a plan with a handful of people and
it will be openly discussed at Saturdays meeting. I feel
that its better that it not be revealed until then for the
simple reason that we dont want to show our hand before
we need to. It will be simple to implement, does not
involve protests, but will require a minimum of about 10
dedicated people in each county that takes part. I believe
that together we can achieve great success by working
closely with people who genuinely want a resolution to this
desperate crisis.
On Saturday if we decide to implement this plan, it should
be enough to cause a huge ripple effect that will cause
major problems for the cosy cartel who obviously feel that
they will always have the upper hand. The more people
there are per county will result in our aim in those
counties being achieved in a shorter period of time.
Even though Saturdays meeting begins at 1.30pm, I and a
number of other people will be in the Killeshin Hotel,
Portlaoise from 11.30am. Its not for me to decide who the
seriously committed people are who will lead the way.
That decision must be made by each individual
themselves.
We must have a proper plan in place in order to succeed.
As the saying goes, If you fail to plan, you plan to fail!
Finally, thanks everyone for your continued support. I hope
to meet as many of you as possible before the meeting
and Im looking forward to meeting everyone else at the
meeting which must commence at 1.30pm sharp.
Ken
INVITATION TO TDs AND SENATORS-KEN SMOLLEN
Dear Member of the Oireachtas,
I would like to personally invite you to our third meeting in
The Killeshin Hotel, Portlaoise on Saturday 25th June at
1.30pm concerning the desperately hidden mortgage
distress crisis and the associated Courts repossession
hearings crisis that currently exists in Ireland.
Unfortunately the number of people taking their own lives
as a result of this hidden crisis continues to grow every

day. The vast majority of these deaths go unreported,

meaning that the problem remains a very hidden and
personal one for thousands of people in Ireland.
This is our 3rd such meeting and again all TDs, Senators
and MEPs are being invited to attend. We appreciate the
fact that a number of TDs and County Councillors
attended the two previous meetings. At the last meeting
it was unanimously agreed that all TDs should again be
invited to attend on Saturday 25th June.
Your personal attendance at the meeting in Portlaoise
would be very much appreciated, when this extremely
hidden crisis must be openly discussed and REAL solutions
found.
Since retiring from An Garda Siochana in 2012, I have
been highlighting the mortgage distress/eviction crisis and
working closely with many families in distress for the last
few years. It has been suggested by the many groups
who volunteer their help and support to families in
mortgage distress, that its possible there could be as
many as 10 people or even more taking their own lives
every single week.
I have attended many repossession courts throughout the
country to offer my support to the families who are being
summoned to the courts by the banks and many people
have told me their own harrowing stories of hardship and
desperation. One case involved a family who were
advised to go into bankruptcy. They raised the 4,000
required for the process by selling the cooker and all of
their furniture. They then removed the radiators from the
walls and sold them. The family, including their 14 year
old daughter are now living in a car in a secluded place
close to Tullamore.
It is very clear that the Personal Insolvency arrangement
and services such as MABS are not the solution and are
very far from resolving this crisis. This has led to a
number of voluntary groups coming together in an
attempt to offer genuine help to thousands of people who
simply have nowhere else to go.
The meeting in Portlaoise is not a protest meeting. It will
be attended by many families who find themselves in this
desperate situation and by others who are naturally
concerned by the continuing assault on thousands of

families by financial institutions.

We are attempting to find possible solutions to the crisis
and your attendance at The Killeshin Hotel, Portlaoise on
Saturday 25th June at 1.30pm would be very much
appreciated.
Kind Regards, Ken Smollen, 085 143 2898

FG, FF, Lab, Ind. Alliance and, Unbelievably, Independents

for Change and Sinn Fin put those facing Repossession in
the Hands of The Attorney General who previously advised
that any significant interference with the private property
of Banks and/or landlords was a violation of
Constitution!!! In addition the recommended moratorium
on evictions is only for a few months!!!!!
(see Evidence of Alan Kelly to the Commission on
Constitutional Obstacles to Solving The Housing Crisis
Below)
Recommendation on Evictions
Subject to advice of the Attorney General, the
Government should introduce legislation for a moratorium
on home repossessions until such time as the
Governments proposals are in place.
Commission Fails to recommend a formal declaration of a
housing emergency by Government!!!!! This will enable
banks an landlords to continue evictions despite the spin
in the Commission Report
Even the Minority Report by Ruth Coppinger TD, Socialist
Party, fails to call for the formal declaration of a housing
emergency by the Dil
MINORITY REPORT
http://antiausterityalliance.ie/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/Housing-doc-2.pdf
The Minority Report makes some very good points,
particularly pointing out that the FISCAL TREATY must be
broken to enable the state to invest in housing. But the
advocacy of a referendum to change the constitution on
property rights and the right to a home, however laudable,
is not an emergency measure. It is no substitute for the
immediate formal declaration of a national housing
emergency by government to enable legal interference
with property rights in order to implement emergency
measures including a halt to eviction proceedings.

The Majority Report fails to call for breaking of the FISCAL

TREATY in order for the state to build adequate numbers
of social houses. Not alone does it put those facing
repossession in the hands of the Attorney General(a
member of the government), Chair Curran(FF) has
explained that the moratorium on evictions would only be
a short term measure for a few months. It would last until
government put in place the governments (inadequate)
measures on debt resolution.
To make things worse, The Fianna Fail Finance
Spokesperson, Deputy Michael McGrath says in the Irish
Examiner(18/06/2016) says that the recommendation to
pause repossessions is unworkable and SOMETIMES
KEEPING THE HOUSE IS NOT THE BEST ANSWER. In an
interview with the Irish Examiner, Mr McGrath said losing
the home and starting again may be best for some people
who can no longer afford to remain where they are.
Michael McGrath TD
Independents4Change was represented on the
Commission by Deputies Mick Wallace and Maureen
OSullivan. Following the failure of I4C to support an
amendment strengthening the Workers Rights Bill put
down by AAA-PBP, its complete acceptance of the grossly
deficient report is leading to queriess as to where it is
headed politically.
Sinn Fin took the same position as I4C. A piece by Eoin
Broin SF (member of the Commission) in the Irish
Independent 18/06/2016 points to no deficiencies in the
report and is quite complimentary of its FF and FG
members.
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/cowendetached-durkan-rambled-but-report-shows-tds-agreecure-34812099.html
The acceptance of the Fiscal Treaty by Sinn Fin has a
particular significance. The Treaty , in effect,removes the
fundamental right of the government to provide housing
for all citizens. How far has Sinn Fin travelled since
Coimhn Caolain TD opposed the Treaty in the Dil on
the grounds that it flies in the face of the 1916
Proclamation in its undermining of Irish sovereignty?
Even after FF through Finance Spokesperson Michael
McGrath pulled the rug on the moratorium on evictions

recommendation , Eoin OBroin (SF) wrote in an opinion

piece in Sunday Business Post 19/06/2016
The Committee also called on the government to urgently
request flexibility
from the European Commission on the application of fiscal
rules for investment
in tackling the crisisthe strength of the Report lies in the fact that all but one
of our 14 members
signed up to the final recommendations.
There is now strong support across the political spectrum
for greater state
involvement in the provision of social housing, the
regulation of the private
rental sector and targeted measures to meet the housing
needs of those most
neglected by past policies
Coming from a professed republican, the request for
permission from the EU to put roofs over the heads of the
Irish people is very strange. The notion of FF, FG who have
always favoured the rich, genuinely working to solve the
crisis is at best naive.
Alan Kelly TD (Labour) gave evidence to the Commission
on constitutional obstacles to solving the housing crisis.
(The protection of private property in the constitution is
not absolute-it is subject to right of government to provide
for the common good). Kelly was effectively quoting the
Attorney General who continues in the new government. It
is important to note that Brendan Howlin(Labour) who was
also a minister in the outgoing government claimed to
have overcome the constitutional obstacle to confiscating
private property in pensions in the FEMPI ACT by a formal
declaration of a Financial Emergency by Government and
the laying of a document certifying continuation of the
Financial Emergency every year.
My conclusion from the evidence of Alan Kelly (below) is
that the outgoing FG-Lab government was not prepared to
formally declare a national housing emergency and to lay
the documents before the Oireachtas. FG-Lab put the
rights of property before the common good. It continued
evictions, including evictions by banks it owns.
Evidence to Commission by Alan Kelly (Lab) TD- former

Minister for Housing

Mr Alan Kelly, former Minister, stated that legal advice
on Article 43 had stopped him from introducing a more
powerful vacant site levy, which would have imposed a fee
on developers who refused to build on unused land. He
said that it had also stopped legislation preventing
keeping houses vacant and laws that would protect
tenants from so-called vulture funds, which invest in
undervalued properties and then profit from selling them:
I was not hampered by political or financial obstacles. I
was blocked by the Constitution. (Advice to Sitting
Ministers either comes directly from the Attorney General
or is commissioned by the Attorney General-PH). Kelly
continued: From the time it is taking to introduce the
Vacant Site Levy in order to tackle land hoarding, to
protecting tenants from eviction in circumstances where
their landlord wishes to sell the property, and many other
issues, I was repeatedly blocked from making provision for
what I believed was the common good by the strength by
which property rights are protected under Article 43 of the
Constitution. I believe that we need to honestly reexamine the balance between the protected and
legitimate property rights of individuals, as property
owners, and the wider needs and common good of society,
including housing needs. As a society we need to reflect
on the desired impact of the constitution here. I believe
that addressing these issues raises politically and socially
important issues which will have to be debated over the
coming years.
Letter To All Members of Oireachtas Committee on
Housing and Homelessness-Paddy Healy Wed 15/06/2016
A Chirde,
I am an activist in a campaign against eviction of
homeowners and tenants in the context of a the national
housing emergency as recently affirmed by Minister
Coveney.
Some of those who are having their homes being
repossessed are being evicted by the government which
is the owner of a number of banks including AIB and PTSB
I believe it would be outrageous for any member of the
Oireachtas Committee to agree to the issue of
recommendations on housing and homeless ness which

did not call for an immediate halt to all evictions.

In the case of Banks in majority state ownership no
legislation or constitutional change is required. The
government can simply issue an instruction to the banks it
owns. If the bank refuses to comply the Minister can call a
special general meeting of shareholders in order to put in
place directors who will carry out the instructions of the
owners. The Framework Agreement between Government
and Banks is a purely informal, non-legally binding
arrangement.
But, of course, all evictions should be banned in this
emergency. This would require emergency legislation
which could be completed in one day.
It would also be important for government to formally
declare a housing emergency and to lay a document
before both houses of the Oireachtas certifying that the
emergency exist. This would prevent landlords and banks
blocking the implementation of the legislation by
attempting to invoke the constitutional protection of
private property which is limited by the necessity to
provide for the common good.
I and my allies will hold each member of the Oireachtas
Committee responsible for future evictions who assents to
recommendations of the Committee which do not include
the emergency prohibition of all evictions until the
housing and homelessness crisis has been resolved.
Government is about to lay a document before both
houses by June 30 which will certify that a Financial
Emergency continues to exist. This, it believes is
necessary in order to protect confiscation of private
property in public service pensions from constitutional
challenge.
Yours sincerely
Paddy Healy
88 Griffith Court, Fairview, Dublin 3
086-4183732
PS I was very disappointed by the decision of the
Committee not to invite The Hub Ireland and Mr Ken
Smollen to address you
Your Recommendations will be discussed at a public
conference of anti-eviction activist to be held in Killeshin
Hotel Portlaoise before the end of this month-PH

PQ REPLY YESTERDAY TO SEAMUS HEALY TD-NOONAN

REFUSES TO HALT EVICTION PROCEEDINGS BY BANKS HE
OWNS DESPITE NATIONAL HOUSING EMERGENCY
ANNOUNCED BY MINISTER COVENEY
ONLY 301 Home Loans Repossessed Last Year By AIB,
PTSB-MICHAEL NOONAN
Repossessions of Home Loans are not frequent
amounting to 183 and 118 for AIB and Permanent TSB
respectively in 2015-Minister Noonan
Just as he did in a previous reply on in Jan 2016(Dail
Record further Down), Minister Noonan seeks to minimise
the horror facing families by misrepresentation and
omission of key information.
The 301 repossessions of family homes are 301 too many.
These are the 301 cases in which the state owned Banks
Only were granted repossession orders. (See I.T., KITTY
HOLLAND further down)
Noonan omits the no of repossession cases taken by the
state owned banks. Most of these never reach the stage of
the issuance of a repossession order. People are too
terrified to appear in court, of the publicity in small
communities, the stress on young children at school etc. it
is common to surrender the house and to go to live with
relations in often overcrowded conditions. Some have
committed suicide due to the extreme stress of the threat
of repossession.
Mr Noonan says he has no role in the matter of
repossessions by AIB, PTSB, EBS. He cites the Framework
Agreement with Banks. This Agreement has no statutory
force. Mr Noonan adheres to the Agreement in order to
wash his hands. Mr Noonan does have a role in evictions.
As owner of these Banks on behalf of the State, he
knowingly permits repossession cases to be taken though
he can forbid this.
Please recommend that all repossession proceedings
affecting dwelling houses, owned or rented, be halted
immediately
Paddy Healy
PQ as originally Submitted
To ask the Minister for Finance, Michael Noonan TD,
if, in view of the statement by Minister for Housing, Simon

Coveney TD that there is a NATIONAL HOUSING

EMERGENCY,
he will insist that Allied Irish Bank and its subsidiary the
Educational Building Society and Permanent TSB, which
are in majority State ownership, desist from seeking
repossession of family homes through the Courts and
withdraw all such existing applications before the Courts
and
if these bodies refuse to comply, will he call a special
general meeting of shareholders and use his majority
share-holding to dismiss and replace directors refusing to
comply with his instruction and
if he will make a statement on the matter ?
Seamus Healy TD 087-2802199
QUESTION NO: 175
DIL QUESTION addressed to the Minister for Finance
(Deputy Michael Noonan)
by Deputy Seamus Healy
for WRITTEN ANSWER on 14/06/2016
To ask the Minister for Finance if he will insist that a bank
and its subsidiary (details supplied) which are in majority
State ownership desist from seeking repossession of
family homes through the Courts and withdraw all such
existing applications before the Courts; in the event of the
bank and its subsidiary refusing to comply, if he will call a
special general meeting of shareholders and use his
majority share holding to dismiss and replace the directors
who refuse to comply with his instruction
REPLY.
As the Deputy will be aware, I have no role in the day-today running of the banks in which the State is a
shareholder. These institutions are run on an independent
and commercial basis and the details of the formal
relationship between my Department and these
institutions are set out in the respective Relationship
Framework Agreements, which can be found via the
following links.
AIB: http://finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/Allied-IrishBanks1.pdf
PTSB: http://finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/Relationship
%20Frameworks%20for%20the%20Irish%20Banks
%20Irish%20Life%20and%20Permanent.pdf

In relation to the individual institutions referred to in

details supplied Permanent TSB, Allied Irish Banks and
its subsidiary EBS:
AIB and Permanent TSB have informed me that they
prioritise keeping customers in their homes. Repossession
is a last resort. Repossessions of Home Loans are not
frequent amounting to 183 and 118 for AIB and Permanent
TSB respectively in 2015. In comparison AIB and
Permanent tsb have entered formal forebearance
measures in respect of 29,514 and 28,532 Home Loans
respectively at December 2015.
While there are some differences between the banks
referred to, their processes are similar. In cases where
customers do not meaningfully engage or do not engage
at all with the bank, reject the offer of a sustainable
mortgage restructuring solution or do not prioritise their
mortgage payment, both banks are likely to pursue
enforcement through the court process. Its important to
note that the initiation of legal proceedings does not
necessarily result in repossession and both banks seek to
engage constructively with borrowers at all times. Both
banks offer a wide range of solutions and operates
multiple engagement channels that facilitate the
maximum possible levels of engagement with customers
in difficulty.
Within the Programme for Government there are several
policy proposals detailed which are being worked on at
present. The objective of these proposals is to accelerate
the restructuring of mortgage arrears cases and keep
families in their homes in so far as possible.
Irish Times Report and Full Dail Record of Noonan Reply to
Seamus Healy TDs Call to STOP REPOSSESSIONS Further
Down
REPOSSESSIONS: NOONANS MASTER CLASSPaddy Healy
SPINNING TO MISLEAD ON REPOSSESSIONS IN THE DIL!
It is No Joke but Tommy Cooper Strikes Again!
State Owned Banks, AIB, EBS,PERMANENT TSB, are
seeking repossession of homes by court order throughout
the country.
Seamus Healy TD recently asked Minister for Finance
Michael Noonan in the Dil to instruct these banks to
desist from this.

Mr Noonan refused and stated that In a very extreme

situation, the issue is being handled reasonably well by
the banks.
In the course of his reply Minister Noonan quoted figures
from a Central Bank report which stated that in Quarter
3(July, August, September) 207 properties were
repossessed on foot of a court order. The idea that tens of
thousands of houses are being repossessed is just not
correct he said.
This statement is entirely deceptive though there is
nothing technically incorrect in it. It is not just that he
attempts to minimise the awful trauma for 207 families
which are losing their homes. A key tactic of the spinner
to deceive is the omission of key information.
Noonans 207 court orders for repossession are for 1
month only!!! Circuit courts do not sit in August and
September. Hence the Quarter 3 figures are for the
month of July only!
The full information provided by the Courts Service and
reported by Kitty Holland in the Irish Times Last November
is: Of the 1,088 court orders for repossession made in
the three quarters of 2015 up to September 30, 758 were
for primary homes, 131 were for buy-to-lets and 199 were
for other dwellings. -Irish Times
Courts Service: Repossession Orders in Circuit Courts 2015
Q1
314, Q2 586, Q3 188
There was a huge increase in possessions in the April to
June period. Mr Noonan omits this information, and picks
the figure for Q3 which he then implies is typical though it
contains one month( July) figures only! The reason the
Central Bank figure for Q3 (207) is slightly above the
Courts Service figure (188) may be that the Central Bank
figure contains High Court orders in addition to the Circuit
Court orders supplied by the Courts Service.
In time honoured fashion Spinner Noonan, to cover his
tracks claims that it is others who are misrepresenting the
situation! The idea that tens of thousands of houses are
being repossessed is just not correct he said. Additionally,
this allows him to suggest that the repossession problem
is really minimal and not nearly as bad as is being
represented.

No journalist or serious person has spoken about tens of

thousands of repossessions. 1,088 orders in the first 3
quarters of 2015 is already a disastrous figure!!!
For example, Kitty Holland, Irish Times Nov 12, 2015. says
: Banks have sought to repossess almost 4,500 homes
since the start of the year up to September 30, the latest
figures from the Courts Service of Ireland indicate-Kitty
Holland, Irish Times Nov 12, 2015.
This is in line with the Central Bank Report: During the
third quarter of 2015, legal proceedings were issued to
enforce the debt security on private dwelling house
mortgages in 1,687 cases (Central Bank Report).
Noonan invents the tens of thousands in order to
minimize a problem which is in fact already
disastrous-the oldest trick in the book of the spinner.
STATE DIRECTION OF BANKS IS UNTHINKABLE!-Noonan
The right of human beings to stay in their own homes is a
most important right. The vast majority of people in
mortgage difficulty are entirely blameless for their own
predicament. They were setting up homes at a particular
time. They may have had to move jobs or have been
transferred in their job at a particular time. They were
failed by the state and by its organs such as the central
bank and the financial regulator and by the government of
the day.
But Mr Noonan believes that there are superior rights and
superior interests and that the vindication of the rights of
householders to stay in their own home is a secondary
consideration even if families must be placed in hotel
rooms or hostels and may be dispersed.
Mr Noonan: Notwithstanding the fact that the State is a
shareholder in these institutions, I must ensure that these
banks are run on a commercial and independent basis to
ensure the value of the banks as an asset to the State
Finance Minister Noonan has already made clear his
intention to sell the state owned banks to private
investors. Clearly, he is concerned to maximise the sale
value of the banks.
Mr Noonan voted in the Dil to compensate in full
international investors who risked their funds in Irish
Banks. Money was borrowed from international financiers
to pay this compensation. Now Minister Noonan and the

FG/Labour Government are using the banks to collect

money originally paid to international investors in the
same banks from the Irish population. Accordingly, Banks
are allowed to charge interest rates to all Irish borrowers
which are well above average rates in other European
countries within the Eurozone. The value of houses in
Ireland has now risen. Hence the huge rise in
repossessions between Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 of 2015.
The Priority of Government is that the banks be fattened
up for privatisation
Mr Noonan also tries to give the impression that he has no
power to give instructions to state owned banks.
He says: There is a relationship framework, signed by my
predecessors in office, with the banks and the essential
component is that the political side will not interfere in
commercial decisions
Many listening may have got the impression that Mr
Noonan had no power to instruct the government owned
banks. The old omission trick! Mr Noonan omitted the
words voluntary from voluntary relationship
framework -And he blames his predecessors-Fianna
Fil- as well!
The truth is that Mr Noonan can withdraw from the
relationship framework at any time. He has taken a
political decision to continue to honour it-and to allow the
banks to evict Irish families!
He then drags up the notion that stopping state owned
banks from evicting people would lead to people applying
to their local TD for a loan and that the notion of state
owned and directed banks was preposterous! Of course
there have been state owned banks in Ireland for decades
and there have been such in other European countries for
even longer. There are well tried mechanisms for dealing
with the problem of people applying to politicians for
loans.
Noonan uses the image to cover up the responsibility of
the government for evicting people on the one hand and
extorting money to pay off international lenders from
mortgage holders and small businesses on the other..
Pontius Pilate Lives!!!
Mortgage Arrears Problem is Being Solved ProgressivelyNoonan

Noonan gives the impression that the mortgage arrears

problem is being progressively solved through helpful
measures put in place by his government. The truth is that
the problem of the banks is being solved by repossessing
homes and extending mortgages at exorbitant interest
rates for a greater number of years.
Crafty Capitalist Representative
Michael Noonan is a very crafty political representative of
the Irish super-rich, Irish big business and of foreign big
business. He is a master of spinning to deceive. He is
assisted in this by the editorial writers and by the media
political and economic correspondents. It would be simple
for these to expose him but they have a vested in not
doing so!
In fairness Kitty Holland in the Irish Times has accurately
reported the rate of actual repossessions and court
applications for repossession and columnist Fintan OToole
has exposed his Tommy Cooperstyle deception on tax
equity in favour of the very rich.
Dail Record Jan 14/2016 Home Repossession
Parliamentary Question from Seamus Healy TD to Minister
for Finance Ml. Noonan

Deputy Seamus Healyasked the Minister for Finance

if he will insist that Allied Irish Bank and its subsidiary the
Educational Building Society and Permanent TSB, which
are in majority State ownership, desist from seeking
repossession of family homes through the Courts and
withdraw all such existing applications before the Courts;
and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1426/16]
Deputy Seamus Healy: Allied Irish Banks, the Educational
Building Society and Permanent TSB are in majority State
ownership. They are adding to homelessness and the
housing crisis by repossessing family homes. I am asking
the Minister, as the majority shareholder, to instruct the
banks to desist from this practice.
Deputy Michael Noonan: I would like to thank Deputy
Healy for raising this question. As he is aware, I have no
direct function in the relationship between the customer
and PTSB, or AIB and its subsidiary EBS. Notwithstanding
the fact that the State is a shareholder in these
institutions, I must ensure that these banks are run on a
commercial and independent basis to ensure the value of

the banks as an asset to the State.

Decisions taken by the banks are a matter for the board
and management of the relevant institution. The
relationship framework agreements define the armslength nature of the relationship between the State and
the banks in which the State has an investment. The
banks are therefore entitled to pursue all options open to
them in order to realise the value of their impaired assets,
within the significant constraints imposed by their
regulator, the Central Bank and the law as it applies.
The Government has put in place a broad strategy to
address the problem of mortgage arrears and family home
repossessions. The primary focus of this strategy is to
support those home owners in difficulty with their
mortgage repayments and, in so far as possible, to avoid
repossession of family homes. In recent months, the
Government agreed measures to enhance awareness of
and access to the insolvency framework. We expanded the
mortgage-to-rent scheme, making it more accessible. In
addition, my colleague, the Minister for Justice and
Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, also introduced the
Bankruptcy (Amendment) Bill 2015, which will, among
other things, reduce the normal duration of bankruptcy
from three years to one year.
The Central Bank of Irelands code of conduct on mortgage
arrears also provides protection as it sets out
requirements for lenders dealing with borrowers who are
facing, or in, mortgage arrears on their primary residence.
It ensures that borrowers struggling to keep up mortgage
repayments are treated in a fair and transparent manner
by their lenders and that long-term resolution is sought by
lenders with each of their borrowers.
The number of mortgages in arrears continues to fall.
There are almost 121,000 restructuring arrangements in
place and the vast majority of these are working. The
figures demonstrate that most families can, working with
their financial institutions, find an arrangement to make
their mortgage commitments affordable. Active
engagement by indebted borrowers with their lenders is
key to achieving sustainable resolutions. I would urge
borrowers in arrears who have not already done so to take
that step by contacting their lender directly, or MABS, for

an independent assessment of their situation and advice

on available resolution options.
Deputy Seamus Healy: There is a tsunami of
homelessness in this country. Last November, the Dublin
Homeless Executive provided figures according to which
some 1,425 children in 677 families were in emergency
accommodation. The Dublin Simon Community said that
was unacceptable and shameful. Focus Ireland said that
the Government had failed these families. The Master of
the High Court, Mr. Edmund Honohan, criticised the banks
and accused them of hounding home owners to suicide.
[Deputy Seamus Healy: ] He criticised the fast-tracked
repossession regime that the Government has allowed to
be introduced in the courts. These banks are majority
owned by the State and it is open to the Minister to
instruct these banks to desist from repossessing family
homes. In Tipperary alone, 100 families are facing
repossession. The Minister should insist that this stop.
Deputy Michael Noonan: Deputy Healy raised the very
important issue of homelessness and the Minister for the
Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy
Alan Kelly, brought forward proposals last year that have
blunted the edge of this particular social crisis. Certainly,
over the Christmas period there was less sense of a crisis
with homelessness than there had been earlier in the year.
The measures introduced by the Minister, Deputy Kelly,
have been working and, please God, they will continue to
work.
On the wider issue of repossession, which was the topic of
the Deputys notified question, there is some interesting
data published by the Central Bank. During the third
quarter of 2015, legal proceedings were issued to enforce
the debt security on private dwelling house mortgages in
1,687 cases. During quarter three, there were 798 cases
where court proceedings concluded but arrears remained
outstanding. In 329 cases, the court granted an order for
repossession or the sale of the property. A total of 422
properties were taken into possession by lenders in the
quarter, of which 207 were repossessed on foot of a court
order. The remaining 215 were voluntarily surrendered or
abandoned. The idea that tens of thousands of houses are
being repossessed is just not correct. A small amount goes

through the system. With the changes made by the

Minister for Justice and Equality and with the Money
Advice & Budgeting Service assisting directly people
before the courts, I hope the number will diminish even
further. It is the policy of the Government to put
arrangements in place so that people can live in the family
home.
Deputy Seamus Healy: The Minister is the majority
shareholder in these banks and he has obviously given
permission to the banks to repossess family homes. He
could equally instruct these banks not to go down this
road and repossess family homes. He could call an
emergency meeting of these bank boards and instruct
them not to repossess family homes. I ask him to do so
immediately and if bank directors do not agree, they
should be sacked, as the Minister has the power to do so
as a majority shareholder. This is urgent and, irrespective
of the Ministers comments, thousands of families in the
country are facing homelessness because of banks in
which the State has a majority shareholding. The Minister
could give instructions to stop these repossessions and I
ask him to do so immediately.
Deputy Michael Noonan: There is a relationship
framework, signed by my predecessors in office, with the
banks and the essential component is that the political
side will not interfere in commercial decisions. That is for a
very good reason as we do not want to politicise the
banks. It would be a very sad day for the country if the
first port of call for a person seeking a loan had to be the
local Deputy rather than a bank manager.
Deputy Seamus Healy: We are not asking anybody to do
that at all.
Deputy Michael Noonan: There will be no political
interference with the banks. On the question of
repossessions, 207 houses were repossessed on foot of a
court order, which does not equate to the tens of
thousands of houses sometimes mentioned in
commentary. There are 121,000 restructured mortgages
on private dwellings, with a success rate of 86.6%. That
means the arrangements stick in just under 87% of cases.
The problem is being solved progressively. I appreciate it is
very hard on people and I can appreciate that people who

lost their jobs do not have money. I also appreciate the

concerns and how upset people are. In a very extreme
situation, the issue is being handled reasonably well by
the banks

Woman facing return to prison over refusal

Noonan: home repossessions being handled reasonably
well
Minister says no political interference in bank decision, but
progress being made
Irish Times Thu, Jan 14, 2016, 11:39 Updated: Thu, Jan 14,
2016, 12:03
Marie OHalloran
Minister for Finance Michael Noonan: I appreciate that its
very hard on people. I appreciate people have lost their
jobs and I appreciate how upset people are.
Banks have been dealing with the issue of home
repossessions reasonably well, according to Minister for
Finance Michael Noonan.
He said this idea of tens of thousands of houses being
repossessed is just not correct.
Mr Noonan said I appreciate that its very hard on people.
I appreciate people have lost their jobs and I appreciate
the concerns and I appreciate how upset people are.
But in a very extreme situation its been handled
reasonably well by the banks.
He was responding to Independent TD Samus Healy who
asked Mr Noonan, as the majority shareholder in AIB and
its subsidiary EBS as well as the majority shareholder in
Permanent TSB, to call a meeting of the boards of the
banks and to instruct them not to repossess family
homes.
He said that if the bank directors would not agree to that
then sack those members. You have the power to do that
as majority shareholder.
There are thousands of families in this country,
irrespective of what you say Minister, facing homelessness
by these banks, of which the Government is a majority
shareholder.
Mr Noonan said a relationship framework had been agreed
by the Governments predecessors in office that the
political side will not interfere in commercial decisions

and they did not want to politicise the banks.

It would be a very sad day for the country if you were
looking for a loan and your first port of call had to be your
local TD rather than the bank manager.
He said 207 houses were repossessed on foot of court
order and that is not the 10s of thousands of houses
thats sometimes recited on the commentary on this.
He said 121,000 mortgages on private dwellings had been
restructured and the success rate was 86.6 per cent.
So progressively the problem is being solved.
Mr Noonan said statistics from the Central Bank showed
that in the third quarter of 2015 (July, August and
September) legal proceedings were issued in 1,687 cases
of private mortgages.
There were 798 cases where court proceedings
concluded but arrears remained outstanding and the court
granted a repossession order in 329 cases.
A total of 422 properties were taken into possession by
lenders during the quarter and 215 were voluntary.
Its a very small amount to go through the system and
since the changes were made by the Minister for Justice
and that the money and Budgeting Advice Service are
assisting people before the courts that will diminish even
further, Mr Noonan added.
Government Evicts Families-Statement bySeamus Healy
TD
This government is continuing to evict families from their
homes.
In the Dil last Thursday, I appealed to Minister Michael
Noonan to order the banks he owns to withdraw
repossession proceedings in light of the extreme housing
emergency which exists.
The Minister refused. This means that the government
has given the green light to the banks they own, to
continue to evict families.
Court Orders for repossession of 47 primary residences
were granted at Clonmel and Nenagh Circuit Courts in the
first 3 quarters of 2015. A further 8 buy-to-lets which also
house families were also repossessed. Banks are now
seeking a further 97 repossession orders for dwellings in
Tipp, of which 32 are being sought by AIB, EBS and

Permanent TSB which are owned by the Government

through Michael Noonan (FG) Minister for Finance
Minister Noonan claimed that the issue was being
reasonably handled by the banks. Totally misrepresenting
the situation, Mr Noonan quoted the 208 orders for
repossessions for the whole country for Quarter 3,2015 as
representative of the scale of the problem. COURTS ONLY
SIT FOR 1 OF THE 3 MONTHS IN QUARTER 3!! The Court
Service Figures for the whole country for Quarters 1 and 2
are 586 and 314 respectively.
The proposed Eviction of 97 Tipperary Families Must Be
Stopped Now!
Senior Minister Alan Kelly (Lab) and Minister of State
Hayes(FG) must now intervene at Cabinet to have a
Housing Emergency Declared and all repossession
applications withdrawn.
In particular they must force Minister Noonan to withdraw
the repossession applications by the banks he owns.
Castlebar Court Anti-Eviction Protest
https://www.facebook.com/cashin3/videos/vb.1000012462
97556/1173381982713334/?type=2&theater
13/06/2016
We have being contacted by RTE Over the passed few
days over the selling of family home mortgages to vulture
funds across the county When Gerry O Boyle campaigned
in the last general election on this issue the matter was
not allowed to be high-lighted. Now it has come the light
with the assistance of Gerry O Boyle. RTE has decided to
do a documentary on corruption of Irish banks and the
cover up. RTE is now expected to do full coverage from
Castlebar Eviction Court on June the 13th
Men in balaclavas evict families for vulture capitalists
invited in by government to feed on the public
Irish
Mirror Pat Flanagan 15:33, 3 Jun 2016 Mass evictions loom
after it was revealed that 46,000 mortgages the
equivalent to all the homes in Drogheda and Dundalk are
now in the hands of vulture funds. The sight of men in
balaclavas attempting to evict families from their homes
as gardai stand idly by confirms that we are living in a

very sick state. Tens of thousands of families face being

evicted by the vultures. When a Government invites
vultures into our country to feed on the misery of families
in danger of losing their homes, you know Irish society has
lost its moral compass. The sight of men in balaclavas
attempting to evict families from their homes as gardai
stand idly by confirms that we are living in a very sick
state.Ireland is indeed a warped country which poisons
golden eagles and venerates vultures selling off thousands
of distressed mortgages at knockdown prices while
refusing to give homeowners a writedown.
It is perhaps a metaphor for a country in terminal social
decline where the vulnerable are fed to unscrupulous
wealth funds who have not the slightest inkling of concern
for their welfare.
There are few more reviled birds then the vulture yet our
Finance Minister is a fan and believes they play a pivotal
role in nature.
This is what he actually said: Vultures provide a very
good service in the ecology through cleaning up dead
animals that are littered across the landscape.
The dead animals he is talking about are the tens of
thousands of people whose mortgages have been sold to
foreign wealth funds without them having the opportunity
of doing a deal with their former lender.
Ulster Banks decision to sell 900 home mortgages to
vulture funds at a huge discount could lead to most of the
families involved being evicted from their homes.
This rotten bank is not only heartless, they are gross
hypocrites as they claim they do not do debt forgiveness
yet sell off huge property portfolios to vulture funds at a
fraction of their worth.
Ulster Bank is a private company which is in business for
profit, what possible excuse can the State have for selling
off thousands of homes in the middle of the worst housing
in our history.
Vulture lover Noonan recently had the gall to claim he
put safeguards in place to prevent the vultures kicking
people from their homes when the mass evictions have
already started.
Such protection as vultures give to lambs, said the 18th
century Irish dramatist Richard Brinsley Sheridan. he

could have been talking about our Finance Minister.

The spiralling number of evictions has not come about by
accident but as a result of actual Government policies
which specifically set out to sell off huge property
portfolios which could only be bought by vulture funds.
Around 90% of the States bad bank Namas assets have
been sold to international speculators who have got them
at a fraction of their true worth.
What is even more disturbing is that it appears the gardai
are allowing hooded agents of the vultures terrorise
families in the course of evictions as the Royal Irish
Constabulary did for absentee landlords in the 19th
century.
It is something of a sick joke that the country has been
losing the run of itself celebrating 1916 and the beginning
of the end of British rule when our government has
handed over the homes, and the lives, of tends of
thousands of families to anonymous foreigners.
Both Enda Kenny and Michael Noonan have taken time out
to actually meet and greet the vultures and invited these
scavengers to our country to feast on Irish families.
To help them digest the financial flesh the law here allows
wealth funds to avail of favourable tax deals which are
outside the reach of the Central Bank.
On the subject of the Central Bank, two years ago the then
Governor Patrick Honohan said he was very unhappy
about the sale of mortgage books to vulture funds and
highlighted the consequences for tenants.
But Fine Gael and Labour were determined that the
vultures be fed and allowed the sell-off which saw property
portfolios worth tens of billions of euro go ahead with
massive writedowns.
It is estimated that around 46,000 mortgages the
equivalent to all the homes in Drogheda and Dundalk are
now in the hands of vulture funds.
The newly-created Dublin Tenants Association has called
for new laws to stop vulture capitalists from forcing
families out of their homes.
DTA spokesman Patrick Bresnihan said: This is not a
natural disaster. The reality is government policy has been
to facilitate vulture funds at every turn, without any
research into the impact of international funds on the Irish

housing system.
The dreadful situation which families find themselves in is
a direct reflection of the ethos and ideology of the
previous government.
Vultures by their nature rarely attack healthy animals, but
will prey on the weak and sick and thats exactly what the
Coalition did.
So we shouldnt be too surprised about Michael Noonans
love of vultures its a case of birds of a feather flock
together
1,700 homes promised a year ago not one has been built
Irish Independent June 7,201
Some 1,706 homes were approved in May 2015. Another
134 were sanctioned the following July, and 890 last
January a total of 2,730 across 145 individual schemes.
The Irish Independent asked each local authority to
provide an update on how the projects were progressing.
Three Kerry, Offaly and Wexford failed to respond. The
data shows:
No social houses have been built by the local authorities
from the 2,730 sanctioned as long as a year ago.
Just 26 are under construction in Donegal, Tipperary and
Louth. Louth County Council said it expects 12 to be
completed this month.
Architects and design teams are only now being
appointed for many of the schemes. A significant number
have yet to proceed to planning.
Some units have been purchased Fingal has secured
44, Cork City another 28 and Louth another eight. But
some councils are only beginning to purchase homes now.
In some cases, including Cork and Galway, the number
of units has been increased, which has resulted in delays
as projects must be redesigned.
Some other projects have also been cancelled or
delayed.
In Longford, no work has started on 13 houses approved in
Lanesborough last July. Trial holes are being organised for
the site, the council said.
A land swap is also being organised with the HSE in Meath
to facilitate construction of 19 units in Summerhill,
approved in May 2015.

In one case a 3.1m scheme of 20 units at Strandhill in

Co Sligo construction work is not expected to begin until
November next year, 30 months after it was approved.
The minister said special teams would be sent into local
authorities to drive delivery.
Last year, 72 social houses were built, and around 1,160
acquired.
David Walsh Released unconditionally by High Court
03/06/2016
David had spent 4 days in Cork Jail. David was convicted
of criminal contempt in Waterford Circuit Court when he
insisted on representing his sister who was up for
repossession of her home.
David has done all those threatened with eviction a great
service
Well Done to Waterford the HUB-IRELAND and Noel
Brophy!
WOMAN LOSES HOME TO BANK AND HER BROTHER TO
PRISON
Press Release By THEHUB-IRELAND June 2, 2016
The Hub-Ireland DATE: 1-6-2016 PRESS QUERIES:
info@thehub-ireland.com (enter Press Query Subject line)
Tel: 01 534 9118 (office hours)
WOMAN LOSES HOME TO BANK AND HER BROTHER TO
PRISON At Waterford Circuit Court on Monday, a woman
lost her home and her brother was taken away to prison
after Judge Alice Doyle made a possession order in favour
of the bank and held the home-owners brother to be in
contempt of court.
He was sentenced to two weeks in prison and escorted out
of the courthouse by Garda after voicing his objections to
the proceedings in which the Judge had refused his sister
the right for him to represent her, as is allowable. The
home-owner had intended to defend her home because
she believed she had an arguable case and wished to
exercise her right to due process. She wished to bring
certain matters before the Judge for consideration before
any possession order would be given. However, she was
unable to afford legal representation and did not feel able
to carry out the role of representing herself in such an

already stressful situation, where she would be up against

the banks professional legal team, including a barrister. In
previous proceedings in the same case, but in front of a
Registrar, her brother had been allowed to represent his
sister.
On Monday, she had signed a Power of Attorney for her
brother to represent her again, but Judge Doyle disallowed
the request.
The Hub-Ireland, a voluntary group working to help
distressed mortgage-holders, is extremely concerned at
how mortgage cases are being dealt with by the judicial
system generally and for the personal plight of the woman
in this particular case, who has not only lost her home
without being able to present her defence, but has also
had to watch her brother being carried away to prison.
The Hub-Ireland is repeating its call for an end to the
Evictions Courts. Its members have been observing the
workings of such courts throughout the country and have
reported many similar cases where home-owners, who
could not afford to employ a legal team to match the
banks one, have their rights to justice severely
compromised as a result. This is wrong and it has to
stop, said Byron Jenkins of The Hub-Ireland. Tonight
there is a man in prison and a woman faces eviction,
having lost her home. This is a personal tragedy for this
family, but it also highlights all that is wrong about how
the mortgage-crisis has been dealt with. We again call on
the government and all in the political system to act
immediately to put an end to the barbaric suffering being
caused to good Irish people, whose only mistake was to
borrow to put a roof over their heads.
The Dil will break for summer holidays in a few weeks
time, but it will be a long hot summer for those facing
eviction as a result of political inaction, said Jenkins.
The Hub-Ireland is a voluntary, self-help community
organisation that offers free help, support and information
to homeowners who are in danger of eviction from their
homes by mortgage companies. It has launched a
campaign to have the Evictions Courts abolished and asks
for the public to support the initiative. It invites anyone in
mortgage distress to contact them at info@thehubireland.com or phone 01 534 9118.

/ends press release

Please Note: The Hub-Ireland has a number of expert
spokespersons who are available to appear as panelists on
radio and television programs dealing with the issues of
mortgage distress. They are also available to give
interviews to print media. Please contact The Hub-Ireland
at info@thehub-ireland.com (enter Press Query in Subject
line) or phone 01 534 9118 during office hours.
Brother of Woman Facing Repossession JAILED FOR TWO
WEEKS FOR CONTEMPT in Waterford Circuit Court
SHOCKING INHUMANITY OF EVICTION SYSTEM
He Had Been Prevented From Speaking on Behalf of his
sister in Court though she had given him her Power of
Attorney
Waterford The Hub-Ireland
In Waterford court today a man who had been given
power of attorney by his sister was denied by justice
Doyle the right to speak on behalf of his sister in opposing
the repossession of her home. When the man Questioned
the Judge he was put in contempt of court. Another man
questioned her decision also. He was also put in
contempt. Later both were questioned by garda and
brought back into court. The brother was jailed for two
weeks
Earlier,he had handed to the judge the document stating
that he had been given power of attorney by his sister.
The judge left the bench for 10min and came back with a
decision that he could not speak for her in court. She
wouldnt allow him question her jurisdiction in the matter.
She put him in contempt and later jailed him for two
weeks
He had repressented his sister 2 months earlier on the
same matter in front of a different judge who had agreed
to this procedure
Further Post on Facebook By HUB-Ireland
(A male young man appeared in court to swear the
affidavit on behalf of the bank. The signature on the
affidavit was that of a woman!!!-PH)
WANTED:
We need the ID of this child: this is the young man that
came to court yesterday as a competent witness for the

Banks: he was never sworn in / or gave his name; the only

words he uttered from the back of the courtroom was
Yes, after Judge Alice Doyle had asked did you sign the
affidavit for the Banks.
Funny that:: the deponent of the Affidavit was in fact a
woman, so how come??
The Judge then replied; thats good enough for me and
granted a possession Order on a Family Home and Jailed
the Brother for two weeks for contempt for wishing to
represent his sister.

The two hooded balaclava wearing individuals entering

the Garda Squad Car are not prisoners!
They are employees of a security company leaving the
scene having failed to evict a householder in Co Clare
recently
Stop Evictions Picket on Ennis Banks
DISAPPOINTMENT OVER CLARES TDS FAIURE TO ATTEND
DEMONSTRATION AT ENNIS BANKS
Clare FM 30 May, 2016
Clares Oireachtas representatives are being condemned
for their failure to attend a demonstration outside Ennis
banks this morning.
Groups led by Midwest Right2Change launched the picket
in protest at the repossession of houses by financial
institiutions, as well as the ongoing housing crisis.
As the sun shone down on Ennis town centre this morning,
groups picketing the towns three main banks say the
situation isnt so bright for many people facing
homlessneess across the county.
Todays protest, organised by Right2Change, began
outside Ulster Bank in the Height and from there moved
on to AIB and then onto Bank of Ireland.
A small group of public representatives and locals
highlighted their concerns following a recent high-profile
attempted eviction in Corofin.
One of them, Anti-Austerity Campaigner Niamh OBrien
says something needs to be done to stop banks from
reposessing homes.
Protestors hit out at Clares Oireachtas representatives for
failing to attend today.

Shannon Sinn Fin Counillor Mike Mc Kee says they need

to put pressure on the Government to deal with the
housing crisis.
Limerick City TD Maurice Quinlivan, who represents part of
Clare also attended todays protest.
The Sinn Fin representative is a member of the Dil
Homeless and Housing Committee and he says an
adequate Mortgage to rent scheme would help ease the
crisis for some families.

Noonan feeds the vulnerable to the vultures

Rather than Minister Noonan giving the unfortunate
mortgage defaulter a break, hes been fraternising with
their enemy
Carol Hunt, Sunday Independent, 29/05/2016
1Support: Michael Noonan will be happy with evictions
Photo: Tom Burke
The video footage is shocking. It shows a number of men,
hooded, black scarves covering their faces, attempting to
gain access to a private home. To even the most trusting
of observers, they dont look as if they can be up to any
good.
Beside them, the car they allegedly drove up in and
which we will see them later drive off in has no insurance
or tax disc displayed and the registration number is
covered over with tape. This is undoubtedly illegal.
Local men confront them, clearly agitated. Thankfully,
there are gardai present and the traffic violations are
quickly pointed out to them.
Except that, as the video footage unfolds, it becomes
disturbingly clear that the gardai have no intention of
noting these offences, that they are there purely to assist
the hooded men in gaining access to the house. They are
on the side of what looks like the bad guys.
Welcome to a modern-day Irish eviction. (There was a
doubling in the number of properties repossessed by
mortgage lenders in Ireland between 2010 and 2013, new
research has found.)
This time it fails. The heavy gang leave in their car which

still lacks a visible registration number. This time there

was no paperwork which allowed them to legally enter the
property but if members of the Anti-Eviction Taskforce
had not been present to vociferously, but peacefully,
protest, yet another family would have found themselves
homeless by nightfall.
Well, thats what happens isnt it? When you cant pay
your debts, when you fall behind on your mortgage, when
the bank lent you money with no questions or queries
beyond how much? and sure, would you not like a few
thousand more? But now, kiddo, its payback time.
Well, for some people it is anyway. But we know a few
things now that we didnt know back in 2007. We know,
courtesy of Ajai Chopra, that the EU issued an ultimatum
to Ireland at the time of the bailout. We know that the ECB
would not allow us to burn senior bondholders. We know
that we are still paying billions in interest because of this
unfortunate mistake.
We know this week, thanks to NTMA chief executive Conor
OKelly, that every worker in the country pays an extra
3,400 in tax every year compared with just 900 in 2007.
We know we were taken for a ride by banks, the
bondholders, and the head honchos in Europe as well as
our own crowd. And we know, as OKelly said, that our
State debt pile of 207bn, 102,000 per employee, is
easily the highest in Europe, by a mile. To be clear he
added: Its one of the highest ratios in the world.
Which may explain why so many people are finding it so
difficult to service 2007 mortgages with 2016 wages
(thats if theyre still lucky enough to be working).
Half the bloody economy is going into a black hole of debt
repayments. The average Irish worker took the hit for all
those bondholders and bankers who were allowed play
financial roulette with no consequences to themselves if
they lost everything.
Youd think the Government would feel a little bit sheepish
about that now, wouldnt you? Youd presume that they
would go a bit easy on Joe and Josephine Soap who were
unfortunate enough to need a mortgage when prices were
beyond the moon and the banks were happy to feed the
insanity? And youd certainly think that, in light of our
enormous State debt (remember, the highest in Europe,

by a mile!) Michael Noonan would still be in the market

for a bit of debt forgiveness from the EU or IMF.
Youd think, maybe theyd listen to people like those in
the Anti-Eviction Taskforce, The Phoenix Project, Irish
Mortgage Holders Organisation, The Hub and all those
other groups working at the coalface of people who are in
despair at the prospect of losing their homes, and maybe
ask the banks to share a bit of the risk, the cost, the
fallout?
But no, seemingly everything is going swimmingly in
Noonan Land, because earlier this month he said we didnt
need any deals on debt, because were in a pretty good
place now.
Which will come as news to the hundreds of thousands of
people in the country in mortgage distress particularly if
their mortgages have been sold on to vulture funds at
cheap prices not offered to them terrified to answer their
doors in case its the bailiff with a crowd of hooded men
and a few gardai backing them up.
It will also come as news to people like Fr Peter McVerry,
whose Trust last Friday appealed to the Government to do
more for people at risk of becoming homeless and
particularly the dangers that the vulture funds bring with
them.
Michael Noonan is a fan, seemingly. Of vulture funds. I
know, thats hard to believe, but then some people have
hard necks. They can afford to.
Fine Gael TD Catherine Byrne got terribly upset when
David Hall, of Irish Mortgage Holders Organisation (IMHO),
called Mr Noonan a vulture [fund] lover at an Oireachtas
Housing and Homelessness committee meeting recently.
After a face-to-face meeting with the minister, Hall said:
He was very clear about his love for vultures. We had a
very robust exchange in relation to it the self-confessed
predators. They circulate for five years, they suck an asset
dry and they move on.
Last week Ulster Bank announced that it would be selling
over 2,900 of its customers mortgages to vulture funds.
Of those, 900 are family homes, the others, one presumes,
are rental properties. (Most evictions in Ireland actually
arise when people cant pay escalating rents, as opposed
to mortgages.)

According to the recent report by the Debt and

Development Coalition Ireland (DDCI) our Government
wholeheartedly embraced vulture funds, which pretty
much tells you everything you need to know about their
attitude to Joe or Josephine mortgage problems. Or
families like my friend Danielles, who have just been
given a few months to leave the home they have rented
for 10 years.
Their landlord is sorry, but the mortgage has been sold on
to vulture funds and all he can do is commiserate and say
that they were exemplary tenants.
Like many other families in similar situations, they havent
a hope of finding affordable accommodation near their
jobs and childrens schools.
An EU-wide report headed up by NUIG academic Padraig
McKenna also found that there were relatively high
numbers of evictions (including illegal evictions) in the
[Irish] private rented sector. According to the DDCI
report, the arrival of vulture funds means an increased
likelihood of people being evicted from their homes.
Well, duh as my kids would say; it shouldnt take an
academic report to deduce that.
The people evicted will probably end up in hotels at the
States expense but hey, the vulture funds and Minister
Noonan is happy so thats all right so.
Groups like the Anti-Eviction Taskforce look set to have
their work cut out for them in the immediate future.
Welcome to the new politics, and old-style land
repossessions.

KEN SMOLLEN, THE HUB IRELAND BRIEF DEPUTIES AND

SENATORS AT LEINSTER HOUSE AT INVITATION OF SEAMUS
HEALY TD
CALL FOR STOP TO EVICTION PROCEEDINGS IN COURT,
FORMAL DECLARATION OF NATIONAL HOUSING
EMERGENCY BY DAIL
REPORT ON BRIEFING BY KEN SMOLLEN 18/05/2016
This evening is probably not a good time to write a report
on todays meeting with TDs, Senators and their
representatives in Leinster House as I usually need a day
to fully analyse any event or meeting.

However, it was an absolute pleasure to meet what I

would describe as three very like-minded people, namely
Byron, Adrienne and Martina in The Hub office in Dublin
before heading off to Leinster House. Adrienne had the job
of looking after callers to The Hub while Byron, Martina
and I went to the meeting where we first met Seamus
Healy TD and his brother Paddy. We had a cup of coffee in
the caf there while discussing the approach we would be
making when presenting our case on behalf of thousands
of people who find that they are the totally innocent
victims of the bailed out banks who want to legally steal
their family homes!
There were approx. 20 TDs present at different stages
during our presentation including the following Sean
Crowe, Eugene Murphy, Pat Buckley, Thomas Pringle, Dara
Calleary, Martin Ferris, Sean Fleming, Carol Nolan, Ann
Rabbitte, Eoin OBroin and others. Represented were
Richard Boyd Barrett and Joan Collins. Needless to say no
representative from either Fine Gael or the Labour Party
was there. It surprised me that not one representative of
the Independent Alliance made the effort either as all TDs
were invited there by Seamus Healy TD and by myself.
I began the presentation by describing to those present
what actually happens in the Eviction Courts and how
people are being treated in a shameful way in particular
by County Registrars. I described the intimidating
atmosphere in these places and the absolute horror,
despair and desperation that I see on a regular basis in
these awful places. I also informed them that during the
month of May alone there are well over 2,000 Eviction
cases listed in the courts throughout the country and with
an average of 3 or 4 members of each household it would
be the equivalent of the population of a large town being
hauled before the Eviction courts and thats just this
month alone. I also impressed on them that not only are
there approx. 100,000 families in mortgage distress but
that there could be a further 200,000 families going
without some of the basic necessities just to pay their
mortgages and that many of these people were also
slipping into mortgage distress. Again I said that with an
average of 3 to 4 people per household we are looking at

over ONE MILLION people in Ireland being in this awful

situation with no resolution in sight.
I then explained how the banks were refusing to engage
with many mortgage holders in any way even though the
banks claim that its the other way around. I also said to
them that the Government must FORCE the banks to
engage fairly with mortgage holders and that a fair and
sustainable solution must be found for ALL mortgage
holders before there would be any recovery for the people
of Ireland.
Martina then spoke about and gave an excellent
presentation on the Land & Conveyancing (Law Reform)
Act of 2013 [The EVICTION Act] and explained how it must
be repealed as it gives the bailed out banks easier access
to repossessing family homes.
Byron then gave an exception explanation of how The
Hub-Ireland is helping families every day for FREE and also
urged those present the need for an urgent solution to this
desperate crisis.
The politicians who were present then made their own
contributions with all of them agreeing that a real recovery
for the people of Ireland could only take place once the
people of Ireland were treated fairly by the banks. They
were all in agreement that they must act in the best
interests of the people that they represent.
Our next step with the help of Seamus Healy is to gain an
invitation to make a submission to the housing committee
where we can again impress on them the necessity for two
things 1) The urgent need for a STOP to be put on
EVICTION Court proceedings in the courts while the banks
are forced to find a fair and sustainable solution for all
mortgage holders and 2) To have an official EMERGENCY
declared in relation to this crisis. Such a declaration would
put a stop to Michael Noonans nonsense about the
Government being unable to interfere in private property
transactions.
All in all it was a very good day and Im sure that by
keeping the pressure on these people we can achieve real
change for the better, not only keeping families in their
homes but in the process, saving many lives.
I was not expecting to see Fine Gaels representative from
Offaly there as she was one of those who unashamedly

voted YES for the Eviction Bill and because there werent
any photo opportunities for her to take advantage of. I am
however extremely disappointed with the non-appearance
of the Fianna Fail TD for Offaly. When the meeting was
over he walked as we were talking outside the meeting
room, he looked and grinned, as much as to say Who let
those peasants into this important place.
Finally, I would like to thank Paddy Healy and his brother
Seamus for arranging this first meeting and I have
absolutely no doubt that we will now gain the support of
other TDs in our justified fight for fairness for thousands
of our people. With the help of these good men we
certainly hope to receive an invitation to make a
submission to the housing committee.
KEEP SUNDAY 19th JUNE FREE 1.30pm in the Killeshin
Hotel, Portlaoise EVERYONE WELCOME!
Thanks everyone,
Ken
Claire Byrne Live on Housing and Homelessness
http://www.rte.ie//sh/claire-byrne-live30003252/10576915/
Listen to First 30 minutes on Housing and Homelessness

Housing is national emergency says Simon Coveney,

Minister for Housing
Why does he not formally lay a certificate to this effect
before the Dil?
Because then there would be no constitutional prohibition
to stopping evictions and compusorily purchasing the
property of vulture capitalists in order to ease the housing
crisis
Why Cant State Just Borrow 10 billion at very low interest
rates to begin Building 50,000 publicly owned houses
immediately as advocated by David McWilliams Below? He
claims the loan would be self-financing at much lower than
current rents!
ANSWER? HINT -Read the provisions of the Fiscal Treaty!
David McWilliams IRISH INDEPENDENT 11/05/2016
Easy for the State to Build 50,000 houses ??
Lets examine how the State could involve itself in

financing a housing trust using the international financial

markets to massively reduce housing costs in Ireland.
Currently, the markets will finance any good opportunity.
When interest rates are zero, the obvious thing to do is
borrow for infrastructural projects and housing is the most
significant infrastructural development that one can think
of right now.
Lets look at the numbers.
Builders will tell you that building costs are around
120/130 a square foot. For a large scheme, this could be
lower and could move towards 100.
Now lets say that the average unit in Dublin or any urban
centre in Ireland is 1,400 square feet. This means that the
average building cost of a house/apartment of this size is
140,000. Add to this VAT of 13.5pc and we get 158,200.
Now on top of this there are professional fees for
architects and surveyors and the like. These could be 12pc
of the contract price plus 23pc VAT. So this is close to
19,000 on top of this price, bringing the 140,000 initial
cost, up with all the fees and taxes to around 166,000.
Then on top of this are development levies which are the
costs per unit that are added by the council to pay for new
roads, water pipes and sewage. These are typically 9,000
per unit. So we are now up to 175,000 per unit.
Now we have the cost of the build with all the charges and
taxes before we talk about site cost.
In 2011, Dublin probably had enough houses to deal with
the population. However, there should have been 60,000
built since to keep up with population growth but only
8,000 have been built, so we have a shortfall of around
50,000 for the sake of argument.
Imagine the State was to build or fund the build of 50,000
houses. At 175,000 each, this would cost 8.7bn. This is
a big number but the Irish State can borrow for 10 years at
1pc, according to Bloomberg yesterday. Therefore, the
State could issue a Housing Executive Bond, which it could
sell to Irish residents who are sitting on 94bn of deposits
in the Irish banking system. Servicing this debt would cost
87m per year.
Traditionally, countries dont pay back the principal of their
national debts, they simply roll it over.
So it would be prudent to suggest that we would do the

same for this Housing Executive Bond.

Now we have a situation where the total annual cost of
50,000 units is 87m. This means that the annual cost per
unit is 1,740. The implication is the rent that would be
needed to be charged per unit per year to pay the cost of
this build, funded by a Housing Executive Bond, is 1,740
per year. Lets round this up to 2,000 per unit per year, to
include maintenance.
So total rental cost of a new house or apartment is not
12,000 per annum, as is the case right now, but 2,000
per annum or 38 a week.
This is feasible. You have seen the numbers. The major
cost omitted is the site cost and this is where we come
into the land issue.
At a density of 60 units per hectare, this would mean
about 833 hectares of development land, or about 2,000
acres, is needed. There are 28,000 acres in Dublin in total
but just one bank, Ulster Bank, put a portfolio of 1,850
acres of development land up for sale this year. So the
development land portfolio of just one bank could almost
cover this total city requirement! Now we are talking.
The State could simply CPO this land at cost and be done
with it. You could add the repayment cost of this land to
the annual rent. This would bring up the annual cost of the
rent needed to cover everything to 3,000 per year or a
quarter of present average rent paid.
Thus, the great Irish housing crisis is solved for less than
60 per week for a family of four in return for a new
house, fixity of tenure and peace of mind!
Thats how its done in proper countries. The choice is
ours.
Lets join the 21st century and stop gouging each other for
the basic right of a roof over our heads.
Unlike the lads on the Magic Bus, these are the numbers,
no one is smoking funny stuff, just seeing things clearly
through the haze of vested interests and inertia.
Problem solved.

Organised by former garda Ken Smollen, this is yet

another meeting attended by many groups who are at the
coalface of the mortgage crisis. And a crisis it is
PUBLISHED08/05/2016 | 02:30 Sunday Independent

Vulture funds circle as mortgage crisis exacts its toll of

suffering
Thousands of homeowners left at the mercy of the banks
bear a burden of daily fear and uncertainty, with many
contemplating suicide, and some acting on those feelings,
writes Carol Hunt
My name is Sandy and I am in mortgage distress, says a
woman at the back of the room. She clears her throat and
continues: It was my little secret, because I told nobody,
I was too ashamed. My friends didnt know, my family
didnt know. I felt I had failed and I had made a huge
mistake. She pauses, I catch her eye and then look away,
embarrassed.
Were in the Hotel Killeshin Portlaoise. There are over 300
angry, frustrated and emotional people here all united by
a common goal of stopping the evictions.
Organised by former garda Ken Smollen, this is yet
another meeting attended by many groups who are at the
coalface of the mortgage crisis. And a crisis it is.
According to Smollen, as well as the 100,000 mortgages
currently in distress, there are another 200,000 in danger
of slipping into difficulty.
Plus, there are many small businesses and farms on the
brink of insolvency. Extrapolate that to include families
and that is over a million people affected, he says.
These are not accidental landlords or developers rescued
by Nama. These are people who cannot pay back Celtic
Tiger-size mortgages in a post-crash economy.
Consequently, they are faced with eviction by their banks
and, increasingly, by vulture funds.
They are ordinary people, most of whom have never asked
for anything or fallen into debt before and they are
shocked and sickened at the sudden realisation that they
may find themselves homeless.
These are the people for whom debt is seen as a sacred
obligation, a moral duty.
If they dont pay what they owe, the economy as we know
it will collapse and moral hazard will ensue.
Or so we are told.
So why isnt mortgage debt front-page news? Why isnt it
an issue garnering the same attention as those damned
water charges? Shame, is the simple answer. People are

sometimes quite literally dying of shame at the thought

that their friends and neighbours will find out their dirty
little secret.
Sandy wasnt given the option of choosing to get her
problem off her chest by sharing it with others in the same
situation. She didnt decide that she was going to be brave
and f**k the begrudgers.
She had been outed by her local newspaper, who put
details of her indebtedness on the front page.
Its obvious that the indignity and disgrace she feels still
rankle.
People will be too ashamed to come out and protest, she
insists. But there were some who disagreed with her.
One elderly man stands up and admits: The only wish
myself and my wife have is that we can die in our own
home Am I suicidal? he asks us as he clings to the
microphone. Yes, I am, he answers bluntly. Its a
companion of mine. Every morning I wake up and think of
it.
He looks around at the sea of emotionally distressed
faces. We need to tell our stories, he insists. There are
so many, many people in similar situations. We need
empathy we need a hug. We need to work with
everyone, but, he warns with the tired voice of a man
who has seen much betrayal and hurt, put your faith in
no one.
Ciaran Doyle explained that his mortgage was sold to
vulture funds without his knowledge. Smollen recalls how
one woman said she would rather set fire to my house
and set myself alight in it than hand it over to the
moneylenders.
Martina Doyle from The Hub Ireland (a voluntary
organisation which helps people in mortgage distress)
explains how the Land and Conveyancing Reform Act
2013, which gave clarity and comfort to the banks, has
led to the so-called eviction courts and needs to be
immediately repealed.
Her organisation gets phone calls of desperation from a
mother or father panic-stricken as to where they are going
to go, the single person who feels they have no rights, as
they are on their own, the elderly couple who are
frightened to death of the knock at the door that will drag

them out in front of their neighbours.

Examples are given of how the eviction courts can
intimidate such vulnerable people most of whom are
totally unused to courts of any kind.
There is a huge misconception in the public arena that
these people just dont want to pay their mortgages and
are freeloaders.
Anyone who thinks that, she says, just needs to come
to The Hub for just one day and listen to the calls we
take.
But still these people, in despair and anguish, are told, a
debt is a debt is a debt. They borrowed money from a
bank and they are therefore legally and morally bound to
pay it back. Unlike say, the well-heeled speculators who
found themselves in Nama.
Earlier this month, it was revealed by Michael Noonan that
Nama has written off debts totalling 1.5bn owed by just
80 debtors to the agency.
Noonan explained that the debt is only written off where
all of the underlying assets have been realised, there are
no further assets to be realised nor any additional
recourse available to Nama to recover borrowings from the
debtor.
Which is the same situation that would apply to most of
the ordinary people in unsustainable mortgage debt that I
have met up and down the country. And yet it doesnt.
Why one rule for one group and a much harsher one for
the other?
Because, bluntly, when debt is racked up by governments,
corporations, banks, or by privileged insiders, it can
always be renegotiated or written off. Thats how the
system works. Its only when debts are owed from the
poor to the rich that issues such as moral hazard are
introduced.
Only then does debt become a sacred obligation. Its a
way of keeping the cash/power flowing upwards. Its also a
way of keeping people in their assigned places.
In the past, precautions were taken to protect debtors
from unscrupulous lenders. Yet today it is creditors who
are protected at the expense of debtors, corporations at
the expense of citizens, banks at the expense of nations.
Theres no political will to solve this issue, said one man

at the Killeshin Hotel last week. Because there are no

votes in it. Unlike the water charges, people are too
ashamed to protest.
He may be right. An invitation was issued to every TD and
senator in Leinster House. Five attended none from the
last government parties. We know that people are going
to die [due to debt] he added.
Another man spoke passionately and bitterly of debtrelated suicides occurring daily as he urged people to act
now before there are further deaths.
You may think this is emotionally charged exaggeration,
but a recent survey by the Irish Mortgage Holders
Organisation (IMHO) found that of 488 people aged
between 29-70 who are in debt (questioned by clinical
psychologist Dr Eddie Murphy), 44pc said they felt
depressed all or most of the time; 31pc have had suicidal
thoughts in the past four weeks; 22pc had active plans to
kill themselves and 45pc indicated harmful levels of
alcohol abuse.
Now, just think of the thousands of people in mortgage
distress in this country and you can begin to imagine the
depth of human suffering in our midst.
So what can we do? This week, we heard promises about
putting pressure on banks to offer sustainable solutions
to those in mortgage distress and there are suggestions
for a new court to deal with arrears; but, judging by the
numbers at risk and the distress involved, this will not
suffice.
Certainly we need people to be offered split mortgages,
term extensions and long-term interest rate reductions.
But for many families, what is needed is debt-forgiveness.
And quickly. But the banks who brought the country to its
knees through their reckless lending and were rewarded
for doing so with billions of our euro wont play ball.
They are so confident of their power that they are
currently swindling variable-rate mortgage-holders with
high interest rates.
They are selling off homes to vulture funds at a cost not
offered to the now homeless occupiers. They are doing
pretty much as they please.
The new Government is making noises about putting
manners on them. But for many families in mortgage

distress, it may already be too late.

@carolmhunt
The Hub Ireland: http://www.thehub-ireland.com/ Phone:
01 534 9118
IMHO https://www.mortgageholders.ie/contact/
Phoenix Project Ireland 1850203040
Samaritans 116 123.
Aware 1800 80 48 48.
Pieta House 01 601 0000
Sunday Independent
NO COMITTMENT TO STOP EVICTIONS IN FF-FG DEAL FOR
GOVERNMENT
Protect the family home and introduce additional long
term solutions for mortgage arrears cases.
This is so vague that it could mean nothing.
There is no comittment to declaring a housing emergency
FF-FG DEAL on Minority Government
Securing Affordable Homes and Tackling Homelessness
Significantly increase and expedite the delivery of social
housing units, remove barriers to private housing supply
and initiate an affordable housing scheme
Retain mortgage interest relief beyond the current end
date of December 2017 on a tapered basis.
Increase rent supplement and Housing Assistance
payment (HAP) limits by up to 15% taking account of
geographic variations in market rents, and extend the roll
out by local authorities of the HAP, including the capacity
to make discretionary enhanced payments.
Protect the family home and introduce additional long
term solutions for mortgage arrears cases.
Improve supports and services for older people to live
independently in their own home, including a provision for
pension increases.
Provide greater protection for mortgage holders, tenants
and SMEs whose loans have been transferred to nonregulated entities (vulture funds).
GREAT ANTI_EVICTION MEETING Took Place Saturday,
April 30 IN PORT LAOISE
MEETING HAS GIVEN FG-FF 6 weeks to END EVICTIONS
Listen at Links Below

Port Laoise Anti-Eviction Meeting-Proceedings Part 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYkC_QrkZZoPort
Laoise Anti-Eviction Meeting-Proceedings Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=UX_2e8dPQLw&feature=youtu.be
Arrival of Vulture funds set to fuel evictions, report reveals
Irish Times Colm Keena
Last Updated: Tuesday, May 3, 2016, 01:00
The arrival of vulture funds in the Irish property market
means an increased likelihood of people being evicted
from their homes, according to a report published today.
The funds that have bought into the Irish commercial and
residential property market, mostly by way of buying loans
from State-owned institutions, will want to see big yields
on their investments, which in practice means squeezing
debtors hard.
The report entitled, From Puerto Rico to the Dublin
Docklands, Vulture Funds and Debt in Ireland and the
Global South, by the Debt and Development Coalition
Ireland (DDCI), said that while there is little research yet
available on the effect of vulture fund involvement in the
European property market, research from the US indicates
an increased likelihood of people being thrown out of their
homes.
DDCI is a coalition of Irish development, faith-based and
solidarity groups concerned about the effects of debt on
developing countries. It is chaired by Sorley McCaughey,
advocacy and policy officer with Christian Aid. The report
was written by Dr Michael Byrne of the UCD School of
Social Justice.
Distressed debt
Hedge funds or private equity funds that invest in
distressed debt vulture funds originally invested in
sovereign debt but since the financial crisis in 2008 have
moved into buying loans linked to the property market in
the US and Europe.
The Irish Government, according to the report, has
wholeheartedly embraced vulture funds and their entry
into the Irish market could not have occurred were it not
for two major public banking institutions, the National
Asset Management Agency (Nama), and the Irish Bank
Resolution Corporation (IBRC).

Nama is the public entity that acted as Irelands bad bank

for property loans issued by Irish banks, while the IBRC,
which is now in liquidation, took over the collapsed Anglo
Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide.
Locals priced out
The report says that these two institutions sold assets
under time pressure and did so at high discounts. Because
the loans were sold in large bundles or portfolios, local
investors were priced out. The two institutions sell big,
they sell quick, and they sell cheap, according to the
report.
This created a context which not only favoured vulture
funds, in a sense it meant that only vulture funds had the
financial fire power required to play this extremely high
stakes game. The fact that the Irish financial system is in
crisis means it was very hard or impossible for domestic
actors to obtain credit to invest in Irish real estate.
The creation of a direct link between Irish property and the
international financial system, via the vulture funds,
exposes the Irish economy and society to the possibility of
sharp shocks caused by events very much outside the
control of the Irish political or regulatory system,
according to the report.
Global vulture funds, most of them US-based, are
snapping up distressed debt linked to European property,
most especially in the UK, Ireland and Spain. Global groups
such as Cerberus, Lone Star Capital, and Blackstone, are
among the top investors here.
2016 irishtimes.com

Irish Times Report and Full Dail Record of Noonan Reply to

Seamus Healy TDs Call to STOP REPOSSESSIONS Further
Down
REPOSSESSIONS: NOONANS MASTER CLASSPaddy Healy
SPINNING TO MISLEAD ON REPOSSESSIONS IN THE DIL!
It is No Joke but Tommy Cooper Strikes Again!
State Owned Banks, AIB, EBS,PERMANENT TSB, are
seeking repossession of homes by court order throughout
the country.
Seamus Healy TD recently asked Minister for Finance
Michael Noonan in the Dil to instruct these banks to
desist from this.

Mr Noonan refused and stated that In a very extreme

situation, the issue is being handled reasonably well by
the banks.
In the course of his reply Minister Noonan quoted figures
from a Central Bank report which stated that in Quarter
3(July, August, September) 207 properties were
repossessed on foot of a court order. The idea that tens of
thousands of houses are being repossessed is just not
correct he said.
This statement is entirely deceptive though there is
nothing technically incorrect in it. It is not just that he
attempts to minimise the awful trauma for 207 families
which are losing their homes. A key tactic of the spinner
to deceive is the omission of key information.
Noonans 207 court orders for repossession are for 1
month only!!! Circuit courts do not sit in August and
September. Hence the Quarter 3 figures are for the
month of July only!
The full information provided by the Courts Service and
reported by Kitty Holland in the Irish Times Last November
is: Of the 1,088 court orders for repossession made in
the three quarters of 2015 up to September 30, 758 were
for primary homes, 131 were for buy-to-lets and 199 were
for other dwellings. -Irish Times
Courts Service: Repossession Orders in Circuit Courts 2015
Q1
314, Q2 586, Q3 188
There was a huge increase in possessions in the April to
June period. Mr Noonan omits this information, and picks
the figure for Q3 which he then implies is typical though it
contains one month( July) figures only! The reason the
Central Bank figure for Q3 (207) is slightly above the
Courts Service figure (188) may be that the Central Bank
figure contains High Court orders in addition to the Circuit
Court orders supplied by the Courts Service.
In time honoured fashion Spinner Noonan, to cover his
tracks claims that it is others who are misrepresenting the
situation! The idea that tens of thousands of houses are
being repossessed is just not correct he said. Additionally,
this allows him to suggest that the repossession problem
is really minimal and not nearly as bad as is being
represented.

No journalist or serious person has spoken about tens of

thousands of repossessions. 1,088 orders in the first 3
quarters of 2015 is already a disastrous figure!!!
For example, Kitty Holland, Irish Times Nov 12, 2015. says
: Banks have sought to repossess almost 4,500 homes
since the start of the year up to September 30, the latest
figures from the Courts Service of Ireland indicate-Kitty
Holland, Irish Times Nov 12, 2015.
This is in line with the Central Bank Report: During the
third quarter of 2015, legal proceedings were issued to
enforce the debt security on private dwelling house
mortgages in 1,687 cases (Central Bank Report).
Noonan invents the tens of thousands in order to
minimize a problem which is in fact already
disastrous-the oldest trick in the book of the spinner.
STATE DIRECTION OF BANKS IS UNTHINKABLE!-Noonan
The right of human beings to stay in their own homes is a
most important right. The vast majority of people in
mortgage difficulty are entirely blameless for their own
predicament. They were setting up homes at a particular
time. They may have had to move jobs or have been
transferred in their job at a particular time. They were
failed by the state and by its organs such as the central
bank and the financial regulator and by the government of
the day.
But Mr Noonan believes that there are superior rights and
superior interests and that the vindication of the rights of
householders to stay in their own home is a secondary
consideration even if families must be placed in hotel
rooms or hostels and may be dispersed.
Mr Noonan: Notwithstanding the fact that the State is a
shareholder in these institutions, I must ensure that these
banks are run on a commercial and independent basis to
ensure the value of the banks as an asset to the State
Finance Minister Noonan has already made clear his
intention to sell the state owned banks to private
investors. Clearly, he is concerned to maximise the sale
value of the banks.
Mr Noonan voted in the Dil to compensate in full
international investors who risked their funds in Irish
Banks. Money was borrowed from international financiers
to pay this compensation. Now Minister Noonan and the

FG/Labour Government are using the banks to collect

money originally paid to international investors in the
same banks from the Irish population. Accordingly, Banks
are allowed to charge interest rates to all Irish borrowers
which are well above average rates in other European
countries within the Eurozone. The value of houses in
Ireland has now risen. Hence the huge rise in
repossessions between Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 of 2015.
The Priority of Government is that the banks be fattened
up for privatisation
Mr Noonan also tries to give the impression that he has no
power to give instructions to state owned banks.
He says: There is a relationship framework, signed by my
predecessors in office, with the banks and the essential
component is that the political side will not interfere in
commercial decisions
Many listening may have got the impression that Mr
Noonan had no power to instruct the government owned
banks. The old omission trick! Mr Noonan omitted the
words voluntary from voluntary relationship
framework -And he blames his predecessors-Fianna
Fil- as well!
The truth is that Mr Noonan can withdraw from the
relationship framework at any time. He has taken a
political decision to continue to honour it-and to allow the
banks to evict Irish families!
He then drags up the notion that stopping state owned
banks from evicting people would lead to people applying
to their local TD for a loan and that the notion of state
owned and directed banks was preposterous! Of course
there have been state owned banks in Ireland for decades
and there have been such in other European countries for
even longer. There are well tried mechanisms for dealing
with the problem of people applying to politicians for
loans.
Noonan uses the image to cover up the responsibility of
the government for evicting people on the one hand and
extorting money to pay off international lenders from
mortgage holders and small businesses on the other..
Pontius Pilate Lives!!!
Mortgage Arrears Problem is Being Solved ProgressivelyNoonan

Noonan gives the impression that the mortgage arrears

problem is being progressively solved through helpful
measures put in place by his government. The truth is that
the problem of the banks is being solved by repossessing
homes and extending mortgages at exorbitant interest
rates for a greater number of years.
Crafty Capitalist Representative
Michael Noonan is a very crafty political representative of
the Irish super-rich, Irish big business and of foreign big
business. He is a master of spinning to deceive. He is
assisted in this by the editorial writers and by the media
political and economic correspondents. It would be simple
for these to expose him but they have a vested in not
doing so!
In fairness Kitty Holland in the Irish Times has accurately
reported the rate of actual repossessions and court
applications for repossession and columnist Fintan OToole
has exposed his Tommy Cooperstyle deception on tax
equity in favour of the very rich.
Dail Record Jan 14/2016 Home Repossession
Parliamentary Question from Seamus Healy TD to Minister
for Finance Ml. Noonan
3
Deputy Seamus Healy asked the Minister for
Finance if he will insist that Allied Irish Bank and its
subsidiary the Educational Building Society and Permanent
TSB, which are in majority State ownership, desist from
seeking repossession of family homes through the Courts
and withdraw all such existing applications before the
Courts; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
[1426/16]
Deputy Seamus Healy: Allied Irish Banks, the Educational
Building Society and Permanent TSB are in majority State
ownership. They are adding to homelessness and the
housing crisis by repossessing family homes. I am asking
the Minister, as the majority shareholder, to instruct the
banks to desist from this practice.
Deputy Michael Noonan: I would like to thank Deputy
Healy for raising this question. As he is aware, I have no
direct function in the relationship between the customer
and PTSB, or AIB and its subsidiary EBS. Notwithstanding
the fact that the State is a shareholder in these
institutions, I must ensure that these banks are run on a

commercial and independent basis to ensure the value of

the banks as an asset to the State.
Decisions taken by the banks are a matter for the board
and management of the relevant institution. The
relationship framework agreements define the armslength nature of the relationship between the State and
the banks in which the State has an investment. The
banks are therefore entitled to pursue all options open to
them in order to realise the value of their impaired assets,
within the significant constraints imposed by their
regulator, the Central Bank and the law as it applies.
The Government has put in place a broad strategy to
address the problem of mortgage arrears and family home
repossessions. The primary focus of this strategy is to
support those home owners in difficulty with their
mortgage repayments and, in so far as possible, to avoid
repossession of family homes. In recent months, the
Government agreed measures to enhance awareness of
and access to the insolvency framework. We expanded the
mortgage-to-rent scheme, making it more accessible. In
addition, my colleague, the Minister for Justice and
Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, also introduced the
Bankruptcy (Amendment) Bill 2015, which will, among
other things, reduce the normal duration of bankruptcy
from three years to one year.
The Central Bank of Irelands code of conduct on mortgage
arrears also provides protection as it sets out
requirements for lenders dealing with borrowers who are
facing, or in, mortgage arrears on their primary residence.
It ensures that borrowers struggling to keep up mortgage
repayments are treated in a fair and transparent manner
by their lenders and that long-term resolution is sought by
lenders with each of their borrowers.
The number of mortgages in arrears continues to fall.
There are almost 121,000 restructuring arrangements in
place and the vast majority of these are working. The
figures demonstrate that most families can, working with
their financial institutions, find an arrangement to make
their mortgage commitments affordable. Active
engagement by indebted borrowers with their lenders is
key to achieving sustainable resolutions. I would urge
borrowers in arrears who have not already done so to take

that step by contacting their lender directly, or MABS, for

an independent assessment of their situation and advice
on available resolution options.
Deputy Seamus Healy: There is a tsunami of
homelessness in this country. Last November, the Dublin
Homeless Executive provided figures according to which
some 1,425 children in 677 families were in emergency
accommodation. The Dublin Simon Community said that
was unacceptable and shameful. Focus Ireland said that
the Government had failed these families. The Master of
the High Court, Mr. Edmund Honohan, criticised the banks
and accused them of hounding home owners to suicide.
[Deputy Seamus Healy: ] He criticised the fast-tracked
repossession regime that the Government has allowed to
be introduced in the courts. These banks are majority
owned by the State and it is open to the Minister to
instruct these banks to desist from repossessing family
homes. In Tipperary alone, 100 families are facing
repossession. The Minister should insist that this stop.
Deputy Michael Noonan: Deputy Healy raised the very
important issue of homelessness and the Minister for the
Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy
Alan Kelly, brought forward proposals last year that have
blunted the edge of this particular social crisis. Certainly,
over the Christmas period there was less sense of a crisis
with homelessness than there had been earlier in the year.
The measures introduced by the Minister, Deputy Kelly,
have been working and, please God, they will continue to
work.
On the wider issue of repossession, which was the topic of
the Deputys notified question, there is some interesting
data published by the Central Bank. During the third
quarter of 2015, legal proceedings were issued to enforce
the debt security on private dwelling house mortgages in
1,687 cases. During quarter three, there were 798 cases
where court proceedings concluded but arrears remained
outstanding. In 329 cases, the court granted an order for
repossession or the sale of the property. A total of 422
properties were taken into possession by lenders in the
quarter, of which 207 were repossessed on foot of a court
order. The remaining 215 were voluntarily surrendered or
abandoned. The idea that tens of thousands of houses are

being repossessed is just not correct. A small amount goes

through the system. With the changes made by the
Minister for Justice and Equality and with the Money
Advice & Budgeting Service assisting directly people
before the courts, I hope the number will diminish even
further. It is the policy of the Government to put
arrangements in place so that people can live in the family
home.
Deputy Seamus Healy: The Minister is the majority
shareholder in these banks and he has obviously given
permission to the banks to repossess family homes. He
could equally instruct these banks not to go down this
road and repossess family homes. He could call an
emergency meeting of these bank boards and instruct
them not to repossess family homes. I ask him to do so
immediately and if bank directors do not agree, they
should be sacked, as the Minister has the power to do so
as a majority shareholder. This is urgent and, irrespective
of the Ministers comments, thousands of families in the
country are facing homelessness because of banks in
which the State has a majority shareholding. The Minister
could give instructions to stop these repossessions and I
ask him to do so immediately.
Deputy Michael Noonan: There is a relationship
framework, signed by my predecessors in office, with the
banks and the essential component is that the political
side will not interfere in commercial decisions. That is for a
very good reason as we do not want to politicise the
banks. It would be a very sad day for the country if the
first port of call for a person seeking a loan had to be the
local Deputy rather than a bank manager.
Deputy Seamus Healy: We are not asking anybody to do
that at all.
Deputy Michael Noonan: There will be no political
interference with the banks. On the question of
repossessions, 207 houses were repossessed on foot of a
court order, which does not equate to the tens of
thousands of houses sometimes mentioned in
commentary. There are 121,000 restructured mortgages
on private dwellings, with a success rate of 86.6%. That
means the arrangements stick in just under 87% of cases.
The problem is being solved progressively. I appreciate it is

very hard on people and I can appreciate that people who

lost their jobs do not have money. I also appreciate the
concerns and how upset people are. In a very extreme
situation, the issue is being handled reasonably well by
the banks

Woman facing return to prison over refusal

Noonan: home repossessions being handled reasonably
well
Minister says no political interference in bank decision, but
progress being made
Irish Times Thu, Jan 14, 2016, 11:39 Updated: Thu, Jan 14,
2016, 12:03
Marie OHalloran
Minister for Finance Michael Noonan: I appreciate that its
very hard on people. I appreciate people have lost their
jobs and I appreciate how upset people are.
Banks have been dealing with the issue of home
repossessions reasonably well, according to Minister for
Finance Michael Noonan.
He said this idea of tens of thousands of houses being
repossessed is just not correct.
Mr Noonan said I appreciate that its very hard on people.
I appreciate people have lost their jobs and I appreciate
the concerns and I appreciate how upset people are.
But in a very extreme situation its been handled
reasonably well by the banks.
He was responding to Independent TD Samus Healy who
asked Mr Noonan, as the majority shareholder in AIB and
its subsidiary EBS as well as the majority shareholder in
Permanent TSB, to call a meeting of the boards of the
banks and to instruct them not to repossess family
homes.
He said that if the bank directors would not agree to that
then sack those members. You have the power to do that
as majority shareholder.
There are thousands of families in this country,
irrespective of what you say Minister, facing homelessness
by these banks, of which the Government is a majority
shareholder.
Mr Noonan said a relationship framework had been agreed
by the Governments predecessors in office that the

political side will not interfere in commercial decisions

and they did not want to politicise the banks.
It would be a very sad day for the country if you were
looking for a loan and your first port of call had to be your
local TD rather than the bank manager.
He said 207 houses were repossessed on foot of court
order and that is not the 10s of thousands of houses
thats sometimes recited on the commentary on this.
He said 121,000 mortgages on private dwellings had been
restructured and the success rate was 86.6 per cent.
So progressively the problem is being solved.
Mr Noonan said statistics from the Central Bank showed
that in the third quarter of 2015 (July, August and
September) legal proceedings were issued in 1,687 cases
of private mortgages.
There were 798 cases where court proceedings
concluded but arrears remained outstanding and the court
granted a repossession order in 329 cases.
A total of 422 properties were taken into possession by
lenders during the quarter and 215 were voluntary.
Its a very small amount to go through the system and
since the changes were made by the Minister for Justice
and that the money and Budgeting Advice Service are
assisting people before the courts that will diminish even
further, Mr Noonan added.
Government Evicts Families-Statement bySeamus Healy
TD
This government is continuing to evict families from their
homes.
In the Dil last Thursday, I appealed to Minister Michael
Noonan to order the banks he owns to withdraw
repossession proceedings in light of the extreme housing
emergency which exists.
The Minister refused. This means that the government
has given the green light to the banks they own, to
continue to evict families.
Court Orders for repossession of 47 primary residences
were granted at Clonmel and Nenagh Circuit Courts in the
first 3 quarters of 2015. A further 8 buy-to-lets which also
house families were also repossessed. Banks are now
seeking a further 97 repossession orders for dwellings in

Tipp, of which 32 are being sought by AIB, EBS and

Permanent TSB which are owned by the Government
through Michael Noonan (FG) Minister for Finance
Minister Noonan claimed that the issue was being
reasonably handled by the banks. Totally misrepresenting
the situation, Mr Noonan quoted the 208 orders for
repossessions for the whole country for Quarter 3,2015 as
representative of the scale of the problem. COURTS ONLY
SIT FOR 1 OF THE 3 MONTHS IN QUARTER 3!! The Court
Service Figures for the whole country for Quarters 1 and 2
are 586 and 314 respectively.
The proposed Eviction of 97 Tipperary Families Must Be
Stopped Now!
Senior Minister Alan Kelly (Lab) and Minister of State
Hayes(FG) must now intervene at Cabinet to have a
Housing Emergency Declared and all repossession
applications withdrawn.
In particular they must force Minister Noonan to withdraw
the repossession applications by the banks he owns.
This can be done by government decision and does not
require legislation.
Seamus Healy T.D.
18/01/2016
Tel 087 2802199
Dail Record of Reply by Michael Noonan to Seamus Healy
TD on Repossessions (Jan 14) is carried below together
with article by Kitty Holland and other material from the
Courts Service
Homelessness is an Emergency-Minister
BUT GOVERNMENT CONTINUES TO EVICT FAMILIES
THROUGH BANKS IT OWNS

293 families and aprox 600 children have become

homeless in the first 3 months of this year in Dublin Alone
From FOCUS IRELAND
85 families became newly homeless in Dublin in March
and were referred to our family services.
These latest figures mean that 293 families and aprox
600 children have become homeless in the first 3 months
of this year alone in the capital.

These latest figures come following a record total of 125

families became homeless in Jan and 83 in Feb this year in
Dublin.
The number of families and children in homeless
emergency accommodation at a national level at a point
in time as of the end of February has shot up by a
staggering 112% in the last year from 429 families with
938 children in Feb 2015 to a current total of 912 families
& 1881 children.
These shocking new figures come just ahead of the Dail
sitting today and there is also a joint Meeting of the Cross
Departmental Team on Homelessness and the National
Homelessness Consultative Committee.
We are very worried that despite all the talk about
homelessness the caretaker Government has taken no
new actions to tackle this worsening crisis since the Dail
first sat over a month ago on March 10th.
Tackling the housing and homeless crisis must be at the
heart of any new Programme For Government, and we
previously issued a five point plan setting out the key
elements which should inform such a programme. These
demands include calling for a cast iron commitment to end
family homelessness with a firm target date to achieve
this and also a commitment to build 40,000 social homes
over the next 5 years.
We must remember that while the horse-trading to form
the new government is taking place more than 3 families
have become homeless every single day so far this year.
Todays joint meeting is a positive development to discuss
some pressing issues. However, it is important to stress
that there are a range of measures which can be put in
place while we wait for the new government to be formed
to ensure that they are not starting from scratch on
putting together a plan to tackle the housing and
homeless crisis.
Some of these urgent actions Focus Ireland is calling for
include:
Firm action to provide greater security for tenants in buyto-let properties as 27,492 of these properties are more
than 90 days in arrears. The Dail can easily fast-track
amendments to current legislation to provide this vital
protection for tenants as we wait for a new government to

be formed.
Taking action to raise rent supplement so it reflects
market rents as this will help to keep families and
individuals in their current homes and prevent them from
becoming homeless.
To confirm what action is required to ensure NAMA
delivers more social housing.
You can read more about this here:
http://bit.ly/300familieshomeless
HOMELESSNESS UP 50% AS SOUTH DUBLIN CO COUNCIL
DECLARES HOUSING EMERGENCY
The number of people accessing emergency shelters
across the State was up by almost 50 per cent in February,
compared to the same month last year, according to the
latest figures on homelessness.
The figures, from the Department of the Environment,
show there were 5,881 people in emergency
accommodation in February, which represents a year-onyear increase of 49 per cent. Among them were 1,881
children, which represents an increase of 101 per cent.
Simon Communities of Ireland spokeswoman Niamh
Randall said the figures were shocking and demonstrate
that existing measures to tackle homelessness are
failing.-Irish Times 14/04/2016
Open letter to Alan Kelly Dont blame the housing crisis
on the Constitution
Edmund Honohan
Master of the High Court
PUBLISHED03/04/2016 | 02:30
Sunday Indepenent
In an open letter to Alan Kelly, the environment minister,
the Master of the High Court Edmund Honohan says the
Constitution cannot be used as cover for political inaction
on the housing crisis
Dear Minister Kelly,
It is appropriate that you have, in this centenary year,
called for a debate about property rights in the
Constitution. Faced with repeated assertions about how
the right to property is legally watertight, politicians need
to recover control which they have ceded to the lawyers.
To do so they need to understand that the position is a lot
clearer than they have been led to believe.

Echoes of 1916: The Constitution in effect provides that

the State may expropriate private property if the
Oireachtas decides that to do so is for the common
good. Road widening is a good example.
Option A. At the moment there are long waiting lists for
housing and the private rental market is unable to provide
dwellings at affordable rents.
Consequently, if the Oireachtas is of the view that the
State should itself (or its local authorities) provide public
housing in the Common Good, the State can (and
probably, legally, should) decide not to wait the two/three
years needed to build social housing but instead to
immediately acquire houses now in private hands.
If the owners of these refuse to sell, acquisition can be by
compulsory purchase with full compensation assessed by
the arbitrator.
It so happens that there is a stock of such housing which
has recently been bought by vulture property
investment funds from Anglo, Irish Nationwide, Nama etc.
at knockdown prices. Compensation for these funds
would be that they would be repaid the price they paid for
the housing portfolios. That is the extent of their
Constitutional entitlement.
Option B. On the other hand, the Oireachtas might be
concerned to enhance tenants rights at the expense of
the landlords. Rent controls and the like are also a form of
expropriation if their effect is to rewrite contracts already
operational. And the common good rationale for such
interference with contracts is not as clearly unarguable as
with Option A.
Option A wins hands down and the timing is right.
Cue now the lawyers alternative analysis: that the
Constitution enshrines marketplace rules; that the
Supreme Court will determine what is the Common Good.
Publish the Attorney Generals advice to the Government
and have a fully informed debate.
But given that the Supreme Court has already decided, in
2000, that the provision of affordable housing is an
objective which is socially just and required by the
common good, what we do about it now is a political
decision, not a legal one.
The Constitution cannot be used as cover for political

inaction.
Sunday Independent
Dail Debate: Government Knowingly and Deliberately
Causing Homelessness-Seamus Healy TD
Deputy Seamus Healy: The outgoing Government,
knowingly and deliberately, created and caused
homelessness. I say this because the State owns Allied
Irish Banks, Permanent TSB and the Educational Building
Society. The Minister and current caretaker Administration
are allowing these financial institutions to evict people
from their homes. They can stop such evictions by telling
the banks to stop causing homelessness. No legislation is
required to do so because the Government, through the
Ministers for the Environment, Community and Local
Government and Finance, could issue a simple directive to
stop financial institutions from making people homeless.
The National Asset Management Agency which is owned
by the State is creating homelessness by evicting people
and selling residences and apartments to vulture funds
that are engaging in evictions. The State could also stop
this practice by issuing a simple instruction to NAMA. I
reiterate that the State is deliberately creating
homelessness and should stop doing so immediately.
I will refer briefly to the Tnaistes reference to the housing
assistance payment. The HAP scheme is an outrageous
rip-off of tenants, most, if not all, of whom must pay
differential rent to their local authority and a top-up to
their landlord, which is often as much as 50 per week.
The scheme should be stopped immediately.
If we are to address the homelessness and housing crisis,
the Government and the new Dil must declare a housing
emergency immediately. Otherwise, we will not be able to
deal with the problem. The Government should also take
up the offer made by the credit unions to provide between
5 billion and 8 billion to help address the housing
problem.
Deputy Mick Barry: I agree with the points made by
Deputy Seamus Healy. I will make several points about the
scandal that recently unfolded on the Eden estate in
Blackrock in Cork city where tenants in 35 apartments
received letters earlier this year terminating their leases

and giving notice to quit. Many of them had lived in the

properties in question for years. The letters were issued by
Grant Thornton, the receiver in charge of 127 apartments
on the estate, which was appointed by the State-owned
IBRC in November 2010. This is the latest chapter in the
saga of Anglo Irish Bank and the Irish Nationwide Building
Society.
KPMG has been the Government appointed liquidator of
IBRC since January 2013. As instructed by the Fine GaelLabour Party Government, the liquidators only interest is
in maximising the financial return to the State from the
carcases of Anglo Irish Bank and the Irish Nationwide
Building Society and it has no regard for the social impact
of doing so. In this sense, it is an even more heartless and
anti-social arm of the State than NAMA.
As of January 2016, IBRC had netted 2.1 billion from sales
such as those envisaged on the Eden estate. This sum has
not been used to address the housing crisis because most
of it has been ring-fenced for distribution among IBRCs
creditors which include Anglo Irish Bank subordinated
bondholders. Some of the money is intended to be used
for payment in full of certain employee and pension
claims prior to the date of liquidation. Does this include
pension payments to former members of Anglo Irish Bank
and Irish Nationwide Building Society management such
as Mr. David Drumm and Mr. Michael Fingleton?

NAMA (Really the Minister for Finance) Worsening Crisis

Through Sale of Homes to Vulture Funds.
Government also evicting Families through Banks it Owns
McPeake Auctioneers (Tyrellstown in Irish Times March 16)
The supply into the market from the builders is much
lower than the market needs, and that is because of a
number of reasons.
The first is that the control of sites into the market is
being controlled by a much smaller pool of players. The
big developers who were there all ended up in Nama or a
financial institution.
The financial institutions have all now basically all sold off
their loans and Nama is selling off the balance. All of those
loans have gone basically to these venture capital funds.
Its a problem thats been created, in particular, Namas

desire to do away with Nama, to be able to say Namas

now gone, isnt that great, but what youve really done is
transferred the whole stock of development land and a
considerable number of private residential properties, that
may be rented or may not be rented, into the hands of
people outside the country.
High Court Master, Edmund Honahan, urges State to
nationalise repossessed homes
The Master of the High Court has called on the
Government to nationalise repossessed homes and buyto-lets that banks have sold to speculators and investment
trusts and use them as social housing.
http://www.independent.ie/business/personalfinance/property-mortgages/high-court-master-urgesstate-to-nationalise-repossessed-homes-34282536.html
Homelessness is an Emergency-Minister
BUT GOVERNMENT CONTINUES TO EVICT FAMILIES
THROUGH BANKS IT OWNS
Its no Joke But More Tommy Cooper than Penn and Teller!
Irish Times Report on Dil Discussion Further Down
REPOSSESSIONS: NOONANS MASTER CLASSPaddy Healy
SPINNING TO MISLEAD ON REPOSSESSIONS IN THE DIL!
It is No Joke but Tommy Cooper Strikes Again!
State Owned Banks, AIB, EBS,PERMANENT TSB, are
seeking repossession of homes by court order throughout
the country.
Seamus Healy TD recently asked Minister for Finance
Michael Noonan in the Dil to instruct these banks to
desist from this.
Mr Noonan refused and stated that In a very extreme
situation, the issue is being handled reasonably well by
the banks.
In the course of his reply Minister Noonan quoted figures
from a Central Bank report which stated that in Quarter
3(July, August, September) 207 properties were
repossessed on foot of a court order. The idea that tens of
thousands of houses are being repossessed is just not
correct he said.
This statement is entirely deceptive though there is
nothing technically incorrect in it. It is not just that he
attempts to minimise the awful trauma for 207 families

which are losing their homes. A key tactic of the spinner

to deceive is the omission of key information.
Noonans 207 court orders for repossession are for 1
month only!!! Circuit courts do not sit in August and
September. Hence the Quarter 3 figures are for the
month of July only!
The full information provided by the Courts Service and
reported by Kitty Holland in the Irish Times Last November
is: Of the 1,088 court orders for repossession made in
the three quarters of 2015 up to September 30, 758 were
for primary homes, 131 were for buy-to-lets and 199 were
for other dwellings. -Irish Times
Courts Service: Repossession Orders in Circuit Courts 2015
Q1
314, Q2 586, Q3 188
There was a huge increase in possessions in the April to
June period. Mr Noonan omits this information, and picks
the figure for Q3 which he then implies is typical though it
contains one month( July) figures only! The reason the
Central Bank figure for Q3 (207) is slightly above the
Courts Service figure (188) may be that the Central Bank
figure contains High Court orders in addition to the Circuit
Court orders supplied by the Courts Service.
In time honoured fashion Spinner Noonan, to cover his
tracks claims that it is others who are misrepresenting the
situation! The idea that tens of thousands of houses are
being repossessed is just not correct he said. Additionally,
this allows him to suggest that the repossession problem
is really minimal and not nearly as bad as is being
represented.
No journalist or serious person has spoken about tens of
thousands of repossessions. 1,088 orders in the first 3
quarters of 2015 is already a disastrous figure!!!
For example, Kitty Holland, Irish Times Nov 12, 2015. says
: Banks have sought to repossess almost 4,500 homes
since the start of the year up to September 30, the latest
figures from the Courts Service of Ireland indicate-Kitty
Holland, Irish Times Nov 12, 2015.
This is in line with the Central Bank Report: During the
third quarter of 2015, legal proceedings were issued to
enforce the debt security on private dwelling house
mortgages in 1,687 cases (Central Bank Report).

Noonan invents the tens of thousands in order to

minimize a problem which is in fact already
disastrous-the oldest trick in the book of the spinner.
STATE DIRECTION OF BANKS IS UNTHINKABLE!-Noonan
The right of human beings to stay in their own homes is a
most important right. The vast majority of people in
mortgage difficulty are entirely blameless for their own
predicament. They were setting up homes at a particular
time. They may have had to move jobs or have been
transferred in their job at a particular time. They were
failed by the state and by its organs such as the central
bank and the financial regulator and by the government of
the day.
But Mr Noonan believes that there are superior rights and
superior interests and that the vindication of the rights of
householders to stay in their own home is a secondary
consideration even if families must be placed in hotel
rooms or hostels and may be dispersed.
Mr Noonan: Notwithstanding the fact that the State is a
shareholder in these institutions, I must ensure that these
banks are run on a commercial and independent basis to
ensure the value of the banks as an asset to the State
Finance Minister Noonan has already made clear his
intention to sell the state owned banks to private
investors. Clearly, he is concerned to maximise the sale
value of the banks.
Mr Noonan voted in the Dil to compensate in full
international investors who risked their funds in Irish
Banks. Money was borrowed from international financiers
to pay this compensation. Now Minister Noonan and the
FG/Labour Government are using the banks to collect
money originally paid to international investors in the
same banks from the Irish population. Accordingly, Banks
are allowed to charge interest rates to all Irish borrowers
which are well above average rates in other European
countries within the Eurozone. The value of houses in
Ireland has now risen. Hence the huge rise in
repossessions between Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 of 2015.
The Priority of Government is that the banks be fattened
up for privatisation
Mr Noonan also tries to give the impression that he has no
power to give instructions to state owned banks.

He says: There is a relationship framework, signed by my

predecessors in office, with the banks and the essential
component is that the political side will not interfere in
commercial decisions
Many listening may have got the impression that Mr
Noonan had no power to instruct the government owned
banks. The old omission trick! Mr Noonan omitted the
words voluntary from voluntary relationship
framework -And he blames his predecessors-Fianna
Fil- as well!
The truth is that Mr Noonan can withdraw from the
relationship framework at any time. He has taken a
political decision to continue to honour it-and to allow the
banks to evict Irish families!
He then drags up the notion that stopping state owned
banks from evicting people would lead to people applying
to their local TD for a loan and that the notion of state
owned and directed banks was preposterous! Of course
there have been state owned banks in Ireland for decades
and there have been such in other European countries for
even longer. There are well tried mechanisms for dealing
with the problem of people applying to politicians for
loans.
Noonan uses the image to cover up the responsibility of
the government for evicting people on the one hand and
extorting money to pay off international lenders from
mortgage holders and small businesses on the other..
Pontius Pilate Lives!!!
Mortgage Arrears Problem is Being Solved ProgressivelyNoonan
Noonan gives the impression that the mortgage arrears
problem is being progressively solved through helpful
measures put in place by his government. The truth is that
the problem of the banks is being solved by repossessing
homes and extending mortgages at exorbitant interest
rates for a greater number of years.
Crafty Capitalist Representative
Michael Noonan is a very crafty political representative of
the Irish super-rich, Irish big business and of foreign big
business. He is a master of spinning to deceive. He is
assisted in this by the editorial writers and by the media
political and economic correspondents. It would be simple

for these to expose him but they have a vested in not

doing so!
In fairness Kitty Holland in the Irish Times has accurately
reported the rate of actual repossessions and court
applications for repossession and columnist Fintan OToole
has exposed his Tommy Cooperstyle deception on tax
equity in favour of the very rich.
Noonan: home repossessions being handled reasonably
well
Minister says no political interference in bank decision, but
progress being made
Irish Times Thu, Jan 14, 2016, 11:39 Updated: Thu, Jan 14,
2016, 12:03
Marie OHalloran
Minister for Finance Michael Noonan: I appreciate that its
very hard on people. I appreciate people have lost their
jobs and I appreciate how upset people are.
Banks have been dealing with the issue of home
repossessions reasonably well, according to Minister for
Finance Michael Noonan.
He said this idea of tens of thousands of houses being
repossessed is just not correct.
Mr Noonan said I appreciate that its very hard on people.
I appreciate people have lost their jobs and I appreciate
the concerns and I appreciate how upset people are.
But in a very extreme situation its been handled
reasonably well by the banks.
He was responding to Independent TD Samus Healy who
asked Mr Noonan, as the majority shareholder in AIB and
its subsidiary EBS as well as the majority shareholder in
Permanent TSB, to call a meeting of the boards of the
banks and to instruct them not to repossess family
homes.
He said that if the bank directors would not agree to that
then sack those members. You have the power to do that
as majority shareholder.
There are thousands of families in this country,
irrespective of what you say Minister, facing homelessness
by these banks, of which the Government is a majority
shareholder.
Mr Noonan said a relationship framework had been agreed
by the Governments predecessors in office that the

political side will not interfere in commercial decisions

and they did not want to politicise the banks.
It would be a very sad day for the country if you were
looking for a loan and your first port of call had to be your
local TD rather than the bank manager.
He said 207 houses were repossessed on foot of court
order and that is not the 10s of thousands of houses
thats sometimes recited on the commentary on this.
He said 121,000 mortgages on private dwellings had been
restructured and the success rate was 86.6 per cent.
So progressively the problem is being solved.
Mr Noonan said statistics from the Central Bank showed
that in the third quarter of 2015 (July, August and
September) legal proceedings were issued in 1,687 cases
of private mortgages.
There were 798 cases where court proceedings
concluded but arrears remained outstanding and the court
granted a repossession order in 329 cases.
A total of 422 properties were taken into possession by
lenders during the quarter and 215 were voluntary.
Its a very small amount to go through the system and
since the changes were made by the Minister for Justice
and that the money and Budgeting Advice Service are
assisting people before the courts that will diminish even
further, Mr Noonan added.
Government Evicts Families-Statement bySeamus Healy
TD
This government is continuing to evict families from their
homes.
In the Dil last Thursday, I appealed to Minister Michael
Noonan to order the banks he owns to withdraw
repossession proceedings in light of the extreme housing
emergency which exists.
The Minister refused. This means that the government
has given the green light to the banks they own, to
continue to evict families.
Court Orders for repossession of 47 primary residences
were granted at Clonmel and Nenagh Circuit Courts in the
first 3 quarters of 2015. A further 8 buy-to-lets which also
house families were also repossessed. Banks are now
seeking a further 97 repossession orders for dwellings in

Tipp, of which 32 are being sought by AIB, EBS and

Permanent TSB which are owned by the Government
through Michael Noonan (FG) Minister for Finance
Minister Noonan claimed that the issue was being
reasonably handled by the banks. Totally misrepresenting
the situation, Mr Noonan quoted the 208 orders for
repossessions for the whole country for Quarter 3,2015 as
representative of the scale of the problem. COURTS ONLY
SIT FOR 1 OF THE 3 MONTHS IN QUARTER 3!! The Court
Service Figures for the whole country for Quarters 1 and 2
are 586 and 314 respectively.
The proposed Eviction of 97 Tipperary Families Must Be
Stopped Now!
Senior Minister Alan Kelly (Lab) and Minister of State
Hayes(FG) must now intervene at Cabinet to have a
Housing Emergency Declared and all repossession
applications withdrawn.
In particular they must force Minister Noonan to withdraw
the repossession applications by the banks he owns.
This can be done by government decision and does not
require legislation.
Seamus Healy T.D.
18/01/2016
Tel 087 2802199
Dail Record of Reply by Michael Noonan to Seamus Healy
TD on Repossessions (Jan 14) is carried below together
with article by Kitty Holland and other material from the
Courts Service
Homelessness is an Emergency-Minister
BUT GOVERNMENT CONTINUES TO EVICT FAMILIES
THROUGH BANKS IT OWNS
REPOSSESSIONS: NOONANS MASTER CLASSPaddy Healy
SPINNING TO MISLEAD ON REPOSSESSIONS IN THE DIL!
It is No Joke but Tommy Cooper Strikes Again!
State Owned Banks, AIB, EBS,PERMANENT TSB, are
seeking repossession of homes by court order throughout
the country.
Seamus Healy TD recently asked Minister for Finance
Michael Noonan in the Dil to instruct these banks to
desist from this.
Mr Noonan refused and stated that In a very extreme

situation, the issue is being handled reasonably well by

the banks.
In the course of his reply Minister Noonan quoted figures
from a Central Bank report which stated that in Quarter
3(July, August, September) 207 properties were
repossessed on foot of a court order. The idea that tens of
thousands of houses are being repossessed is just not
correct he said.
This statement is entirely deceptive though there is
nothing technically incorrect in it. It is not just that he
attempts to minimise the awful trauma for 207 families
which are losing their homes. A key tactic of the spinner
to deceive is the omission of key information.
Noonans 207 court orders for repossession are for 1
month only!!! Circuit courts do not sit in August and
September. Hence the Quarter 3 figures are for the
month of July only!
The full information provided by the Courts Service and
reported by Kitty Holland in the Irish Times Last November
is: Of the 1,088 court orders for repossession made in
the three quarters of 2015 up to September 30, 758 were
for primary homes, 131 were for buy-to-lets and 199 were
for other dwellings. -Irish Times
Courts Service: Repossession Orders in Circuit Courts 2015
Q1
314, Q2 586, Q3 188
There was a huge increase in possessions in the April to
June period. Mr Noonan omits this information, and picks
the figure for Q3 which he then implies is typical though it
contains one month( July) figures only! The reason the
Central Bank figure for Q3 (207) is slightly above the
Courts Service figure (188) may be that the Central Bank
figure contains High Court orders in addition to the Circuit
Court orders supplied by the Courts Service.
In time honoured fashion Spinner Noonan, to cover his
tracks claims that it is others who are misrepresenting the
situation! The idea that tens of thousands of houses are
being repossessed is just not correct he said. Additionally,
this allows him to suggest that the repossession problem
is really minimal and not nearly as bad as is being
represented.
No journalist or serious person has spoken about tens of

thousands of repossessions. 1,088 orders in the first 3

quarters of 2015 is already a disastrous figure!!!
For example, Kitty Holland, Irish Times Nov 12, 2015. says
: Banks have sought to repossess almost 4,500 homes
since the start of the year up to September 30, the latest
figures from the Courts Service of Ireland indicate-Kitty
Holland, Irish Times Nov 12, 2015.
This is in line with the Central Bank Report: During the
third quarter of 2015, legal proceedings were issued to
enforce the debt security on private dwelling house
mortgages in 1,687 cases (Central Bank Report).
Noonan invents the tens of thousands in order to
minimize a problem which is in fact already
disastrous-the oldest trick in the book of the spinner.
STATE DIRECTION OF BANKS IS UNTHINKABLE!-Noonan
The right of human beings to stay in their own homes is a
most important right. The vast majority of people in
mortgage difficulty are entirely blameless for their own
predicament. They were setting up homes at a particular
time. They may have had to move jobs or have been
transferred in their job at a particular time. They were
failed by the state and by its organs such as the central
bank and the financial regulator and by the government of
the day.
But Mr Noonan believes that there are superior rights and
superior interests and that the vindication of the rights of
householders to stay in their own home is a secondary
consideration even if families must be placed in hotel
rooms or hostels and may be dispersed.
Mr Noonan: Notwithstanding the fact that the State is a
shareholder in these institutions, I must ensure that these
banks are run on a commercial and independent basis to
ensure the value of the banks as an asset to the State
Finance Minister Noonan has already made clear his
intention to sell the state owned banks to private
investors. Clearly, he is concerned to maximise the sale
value of the banks.
Mr Noonan voted in the Dil to compensate in full
international investors who risked their funds in Irish
Banks. Money was borrowed from international financiers
to pay this compensation. Now Minister Noonan and the

FG/Labour Government are using the banks to collect

money originally paid to international investors in the
same banks from the Irish population. Accordingly, Banks
are allowed to charge interest rates to all Irish borrowers
which are well above average rates in other European
countries within the Eurozone. The value of houses in
Ireland has now risen. Hence the huge rise in
repossessions between Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 of 2015.
The Priority of Government is that the banks be fattened
up for privatisation
Mr Noonan also tries to give the impression that he has no
power to give instructions to state owned banks.
He says: There is a relationship framework, signed by my
predecessors in office, with the banks and the essential
component is that the political side will not interfere in
commercial decisions
Many listening may have got the impression that Mr
Noonan had no power to instruct the government owned
banks. The old omission trick! Mr Noonan omitted the
words voluntary from voluntary relationship
framework -And he blames his predecessors-Fianna
Fil- as well!
The truth is that Mr Noonan can withdraw from the
relationship framework at any time. He has taken a
political decision to continue to honour it-and to allow the
banks to evict Irish families!
He then drags up the notion that stopping state owned
banks from evicting people would lead to people applying
to their local TD for a loan and that the notion of state
owned and directed banks was preposterous! Of course
there have been state owned banks in Ireland for decades
and there have been such in other European countries for
even longer. There are well tried mechanisms for dealing
with the problem of people applying to politicians for
loans.
Noonan uses the image to cover up the responsibility of
the government for evicting people on the one hand and
extorting money to pay off international lenders from
mortgage holders and small businesses on the other..
Pontius Pilate Lives!!!
Mortgage Arrears Problem is Being Solved ProgressivelyNoonan

Noonan gives the impression that the mortgage arrears

problem is being progressively solved through helpful
measures put in place by his government. The truth is that
the problem of the banks is being solved by repossessing
homes and extending mortgages at exorbitant interest
rates for a greater number of years.
Crafty Capitalist Representative
Michael Noonan is a very crafty political representative of
the Irish super-rich, Irish big business and of foreign big
business. He is a master of spinning to deceive. He is
assisted in this by the editorial writers and by the media
political and economic correspondents. It would be simple
for these to expose him but they have a vested in not
doing so!
In fairness Kitty Holland in the Irish Times has accurately
reported the rate of actual repossessions and court
applications for repossession and columnist Fintan OToole
has exposed his Tommy Cooperstyle deception on tax
equity in favour of the very rich.
Repossessions of Dwellings by Court Order-From Courts
Service
(Q2)April to June 2015
1
Residence
buy-to-let
other
Total
383 97 106 586
(Q1)Jan march 2015
233 29 52 314
Q3 (July to September)
142
5
41
188
Q3 Central Bank
207 (properties)were
repossessed on foot of a court order.
Q1,Q2,Q3
758
131
199
1088
The data, released to The Irish Times, also shows 1,088
repossession orders were granted by the courts in the first
nine months of the year, almost 70 per cent more than the
644 granted in the same period last year and 350 per cent
more than the 240 granted in the period in 2013.
Of the 1,088 orders made, 758 were for primary homes,
131 were for buy-to-lets and 199 were for other
dwellings. Kitty Holland Irish Times Nov 12

These cases (court orders) in the statistics are not the

only cases in which a financial institution is foreclosing.
The vast majority of mortgages contain a foreclosure
clause which becomes operative, without the need for a
court order, if there is any failure in payment of
instalments.
Accordingly, only figures supplied by the credit
institutions would disclose the overall number of
properties being recovered or sold by credit institutions.Statement From Courts Service August 6,2015
Noonan in Dil Jan 14
Central Bank. During the third quarter of 2015, legal
proceedings were issued to enforce the debt security on
private dwelling house mortgages in 1,687 cases. During
quarter three, there were 798 cases where court
proceedings concluded but arrears remained outstanding.
In 329 cases, the court granted an order for repossession
or the sale of the property. A total of 422 properties were
taken into possession by lenders in the quarter, of which
207 were repossessed on foot of a court order. The
remaining 215 were voluntarily surrendered or abandoned.
Ml Noonan On the question of repossessions, 207
houses were repossessed on foot of a court order(in 2015ph), which does not equate to the tens of thousands of
houses sometimes mentioned in commentary. Jan 14
More than 7,000 dwellings targeted by lenders up to 2015,
says Courts Service
Thu, Nov 12, 2015, 01:00
Kitty Holland
Some 889 applications for repossession were refused by
the courts so far this year. Photograph: Getty Images
Banks have sought to repossess almost 4,500 homes since
the start of the year, the latest figures from the Courts
Service of Ireland indicate.
These are in addition to the 7,100 dwellings lenders had
already moved to repossess by January 1st, 2015.
The figures, covering the first nine months of the year,
show lenders lodged 4,440 civil bills for repossession
across the States 26 circuit courts.
Some 3,638 (82 per cent) of these are for primary homes,
89 (2 per cent) are for buy-to-lets with 713 (16 per cent)
for other dwellings.

However, the number of bills lodged is down compared

with the same period last year when 6,420 bills were
lodged, indicating a possible levelling off in repossession
activity by the banks.
The data, released to The Irish Times, also shows 1,088
repossession orders were granted by the courts in the first
nine months of the year, almost 70 per cent more than the
644 granted in the same period last year and 350 per cent
more than the 240 granted in the period in 2013.
Of the 1,088 orders made, 758 were for primary homes,
131 were for buy-to-lets and 199 were for other
dwellings.
Dail Record Jan 14
Home Repossession
3
Deputy Seamus Healy asked the Minister for
Finance if he will insist that Allied Irish Bank and its
subsidiary the Educational Building Society and Permanent
TSB, which are in majority State ownership, desist from
seeking repossession of family homes through the Courts
and withdraw all such existing applications before the
Courts; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
[1426/16]
Deputy Seamus Healy: Allied Irish Banks, the Educational
Building Society and Permanent TSB are in majority State
ownership. They are adding to homelessness and the
housing crisis by repossessing family homes. I am asking
the Minister, as the majority shareholder, to instruct the
banks to desist from this practice.
Deputy Michael Noonan: I would like to thank Deputy
Healy for raising this question. As he is aware, I have no
direct function in the relationship between the customer
and PTSB, or AIB and its subsidiary EBS. Notwithstanding
the fact that the State is a shareholder in these
institutions, I must ensure that these banks are run on a
commercial and independent basis to ensure the value of
the banks as an asset to the State.
Decisions taken by the banks are a matter for the board
and management of the relevant institution. The
relationship framework agreements define the armslength nature of the relationship between the State and
the banks in which the State has an investment. The
banks are therefore entitled to pursue all options open to

them in order to realise the value of their impaired assets,

within the significant constraints imposed by their
regulator, the Central Bank and the law as it applies.
The Government has put in place a broad strategy to
address the problem of mortgage arrears and family home
repossessions. The primary focus of this strategy is to
support those home owners in difficulty with their
mortgage repayments and, in so far as possible, to avoid
repossession of family homes. In recent months, the
Government agreed measures to enhance awareness of
and access to the insolvency framework. We expanded the
mortgage-to-rent scheme, making it more accessible. In
addition, my colleague, the Minister for Justice and
Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, also introduced the
Bankruptcy (Amendment) Bill 2015, which will, among
other things, reduce the normal duration of bankruptcy
from three years to one year.
The Central Bank of Irelands code of conduct on mortgage
arrears also provides protection as it sets out
requirements for lenders dealing with borrowers who are
facing, or in, mortgage arrears on their primary residence.
It ensures that borrowers struggling to keep up mortgage
repayments are treated in a fair and transparent manner
by their lenders and that long-term resolution is sought by
lenders with each of their borrowers.
The number of mortgages in arrears continues to fall.
There are almost 121,000 restructuring arrangements in
place and the vast majority of these are working. The
figures demonstrate that most families can, working with
their financial institutions, find an arrangement to make
their mortgage commitments affordable. Active
engagement by indebted borrowers with their lenders is
key to achieving sustainable resolutions. I would urge
borrowers in arrears who have not already done so to take
that step by contacting their lender directly, or MABS, for
an independent assessment of their situation and advice
on available resolution options.
Deputy Seamus Healy: There is a tsunami of
homelessness in this country. Last November, the Dublin
Homeless Executive provided figures according to which
some 1,425 children in 677 families were in emergency
accommodation. The Dublin Simon Community said that

was unacceptable and shameful. Focus Ireland said that

the Government had failed these families. The Master of
the High Court, Mr. Edmund Honohan, criticised the banks
and accused them of hounding home owners to suicide.
[Deputy Seamus Healy: ] He criticised the fast-tracked
repossession regime that the Government has allowed to
be introduced in the courts. These banks are majority
owned by the State and it is open to the Minister to
instruct these banks to desist from repossessing family
homes. In Tipperary alone, 100 families are facing
repossession. The Minister should insist that this stop.
Deputy Michael Noonan: Deputy Healy raised the very
important issue of homelessness and the Minister for the
Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy
Alan Kelly, brought forward proposals last year that have
blunted the edge of this particular social crisis. Certainly,
over the Christmas period there was less sense of a crisis
with homelessness than there had been earlier in the year.
The measures introduced by the Minister, Deputy Kelly,
have been working and, please God, they will continue to
work.
On the wider issue of repossession, which was the topic of
the Deputys notified question, there is some interesting
data published by the Central Bank. During the third
quarter of 2015, legal proceedings were issued to enforce
the debt security on private dwelling house mortgages in
1,687 cases. During quarter three, there were 798 cases
where court proceedings concluded but arrears remained
outstanding. In 329 cases, the court granted an order for
repossession or the sale of the property. A total of 422
properties were taken into possession by lenders in the
quarter, of which 207 were repossessed on foot of a court
order. The remaining 215 were voluntarily surrendered or
abandoned. The idea that tens of thousands of houses are
being repossessed is just not correct. A small amount goes
through the system. With the changes made by the
Minister for Justice and Equality and with the Money
Advice & Budgeting Service assisting directly people
before the courts, I hope the number will diminish even
further. It is the policy of the Government to put
arrangements in place so that people can live in the family
home.

Deputy Seamus Healy: The Minister is the majority

shareholder in these banks and he has obviously given
permission to the banks to repossess family homes. He
could equally instruct these banks not to go down this
road and repossess family homes. He could call an
emergency meeting of these bank boards and instruct
them not to repossess family homes. I ask him to do so
immediately and if bank directors do not agree, they
should be sacked, as the Minister has the power to do so
as a majority shareholder. This is urgent and, irrespective
of the Ministers comments, thousands of families in the
country are facing homelessness because of banks in
which the State has a majority shareholding. The Minister
could give instructions to stop these repossessions and I
ask him to do so immediately.
Deputy Michael Noonan: There is a relationship
framework, signed by my predecessors in office, with the
banks and the essential component is that the political
side will not interfere in commercial decisions. That is for a
very good reason as we do not want to politicise the
banks. It would be a very sad day for the country if the
first port of call for a person seeking a loan had to be the
local Deputy rather than a bank manager.
Deputy Seamus Healy: We are not asking anybody to do
that at all.
Deputy Michael Noonan: There will be no political
interference with the banks. On the question of
repossessions, 207 houses were repossessed on foot of a
court order, which does not equate to the tens of
thousands of houses sometimes mentioned in
commentary. There are 121,000 restructured mortgages
on private dwellings, with a success rate of 86.6%. That
means the arrangements stick in just under 87% of cases.
The problem is being solved progressively. I appreciate it is
very hard on people and I can appreciate that people who
lost their jobs do not have money. I also appreciate the
concerns and how upset people are. In a very extreme
situation, the issue is being handled reasonably well by
the banks

Woman facing return to prison over refusal to hand over

her home to bank

Claire Knowles was lawfully jailed for contempt of court

order, High Court judge rules
Mary Carolan
Irish Times Dec 15
Claire Knowles (56) of Castlejane, Glanmire, Co Cork, who
will remain on bail until Wednesday evening after which
time she will return to Limerick Prison unless she has
purged her contempt of the possession order. Photograph:
Collins Court
A High Court judge has ruled a woman was lawfully jailed
for contempt of a court order requiring her hand over
possession of her home to a bank.
Mr Justice Richard Humphreys told Claire Knowles she may
remain on bail until 7pm on Wednesday after which time
she will return to Limerick Prison unless she has purged
her contempt of the possession order in the interim.
Ms Knowles was jailed by a judge at Cork Circuit Court on
December 8th for contempt of a court order of January
2014 requiring she hand over possession of her home near
Glanmire, Co Cork, to Bank of Ireland.
She was freed on conditional bail on December 10th
pending the outcome of the inquiry, under Article 40 of
the Constitution, into the legality of her detention.
Giving his decision on Tuesday having heard arguments by
Ms Knowles and the State, Mr Justice Humphreys said he
was bound by other court decisions concerning Article 40
inquiries and, in all the circumstances, must rule the
detention is lawful.
He will give a written judgment outlining his reasons for
that decision at a later stage.
The contempt application was brought by solicitors
representing Bank of Ireland arising from a mortgage
taken out with ICS Building Society on Ms Knowles home
at The Pines, Castlejayne Woods, Glanmire, Co Cork.
An order for possession of that property was made by the
Circuit Court in January 2014 and the High Court dismissed
an appeal against that order in July 2014. Ms Knowles later
got an order from the Master of the High Court extending
the time effectively for a second appeal.
Attachment and committal proceedings were brought last
October against Ms Knowles for contempt over her failure
to hand over possession and were adjourned to December
8th when Cork Circuit Court directed her detention in

Limerick Prison.
Ms Knowles was freed on conditional bail on December
10th pending the outcome of the High Court inquiry,
initiated the previous day under Article 40 of the
Constitution, into the lawfulness of her detention.
In his decision today, Mr Justice Humphreys commended
Ms Knowles for the manner in which she presented her
case but said his hands were tied by various rulings which
meant he could not direct her release.
Among arguments advanced by her to support her claim
that her detention was invalid, she argued there was an
error in the title of the committal warrant in that it was in
the name of ICS when it was lawyers representing BOI who
sought her committal. She also argued she was wrongly
refused an adjournment of the contempt application so as
to allow her try and get legal representation.
Remy Farrell SC, for the governor of Limerick Prison,
argued the net issue in the Article 40 inquiry was if Ms
Knowles was denied an opportunity of getting legal
representation, and it was his case she was not.
The transcript of proceedings in the Circuit Court showed
Ms Knowles chose to proceed without legal representation
after clearly considering matters over the lunch break on
December 8th, he said. The Circuit Court judge had made
the jailing order after Ms Knowles refused to give an
undertaking to leave her home and she was manifestly in
contempt, counsel said.
On that date, the transcript of the hearing referred to
counsel for the bank saying Ms Knowles was still in the
house and she was in flagrant breach of the order.
The Circuit Court judge warned Ms Knowles she was at
strong risk of going to jail, should get legal advice and the
case would not be adjourned unless she undertook to
abide by the court order to leave the house.
It was very clear what she had to do and legal advice
would not have altered that. It seemed clear Ms Knowles
later decided to represent herself as she was entitled to do
but she must take the consequences of that.
The Circuit Court judge had said he did not believe she
was serious about getting out of the house, he would jail
her and refuse a stay, given the brazen contempt.
In her arguments, Ms Knowles said she is being turned

into a criminal out of civil litigation and these are not

ordinary times.
She said the banks had had months to get their paperwork
in order in her case but had failed to do so until much later
and then used the name of a non-entity in these
proceedings. Lawyers for the bank were unable to answer
her when she had raised points about the delay in
amending the title of the case, she added.
She also said she had been refused legal aid for the Circuit
Court proceedings as she did not know how to get it and
was given an hour to do so.
I was given no choice, she said.

NEED HELP? PHOENIX PROJECT

FREE OF CHARGE SERVICE www phoenixproject ie
Helpline: 1850 20 30 40
Phone: 057 8636830
Email: support@phoenixproject.ie
http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-andproperty/the-debt-doctors-there-s-a-black-cloud-over-a-lotof-people-1.2463335#.Vmw231bKiG0.mailto
Claire Knowles, Resisting Eviction, Released On Bail by
High Court as large number of supporters attend court
PLEASE,Could a Legal Team Offer to Represent Her Pro
Bono Publico?
It is grossly Unfair That She Should Be Forced to Represent
Herself.
Be there again NEXT MONDAY!
From Irish Times Breaking News
A woman jailed for contempt of a court order directing she
hand over possession of her Co Cork home to a bank has
been freed on bail by the High Court.
Claire Knowles (56) was jailed on Tuesday over her failure
to comply with orders obtained by Bank of Ireland over the
property at The Pines, Castlejayne Woods, Glamire.
She was brought to Limerick Prison where she was held
until she was brought before the High Court on Thursday
for an inquiry into the legality of her detention.
The inquiry, under Article 40 of the Constitution, was
sought on her behalf by anti-eviction campaigner Ben

Gilroy, who said he had assisted Ms Knowles in previous

court cases relating to the repossession.
Following a hearing, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys ordered
her release on her own bail of 100, with a condition she
stay away from her home, pending full determination of
her legal challenge.
She is to come back to court next Monday.
The judge ruled the governor of Limerick Prison was
obliged to go behind the reasons for her detention. To do
that, the governor would have to apply to make Bank of
Ireland a notice party in this case, the judge said.
In those circumstances, the judge adjourned the inquiry to
allow that occur. In the meantime, he granted bail to Ms
Knowles who was supported in court by a large number of
people.
Earlier, Remy Farrell SC, for the prison governor, said his
client had no relationship, legal or otherwise, with Bank of
Ireland.
He could not compel witnesses to attend court or provide
documentation in order to justify the reasons for
committing her to prison, counsel said.
Ms Knowles told the court she was too traumatised to
make the case because she had been in Limerick Prison
and wanted Mr Gilroy to do it for her.
The judge ruled it was established case law only the
person detained could make the arguments before the
court or could employ a qualified lawyer to do so.
Following an adjournment to allow the judge consider the
law on representation in such cases, Ms Knowles said she
was a little more composed and would present it herself.

Support Release of brave Claire Knowles From Jail Tomorrow

High Court 10.30 tomorrow Thursday Nov 10
Jailed for Refusing to Hand Over Her Home to Bank Of
Ireland
Inquiry on legality of womans detention for contempt
ordered
Claire Knowles jailed over contempt of direction to
hand over possession of home to bank
aIrish Timesbout 4 hours ago Updated: about 3 hours ago
Mary Carolan

A High Court judge has directed an inquiry into the legality

of the detention inLimerick Prison of a woman for
contempt of a Circuit Court order directing she hand over
possession of her home to a bank.
Ben Gilroy, of Direct Democracy Ireland, applied on
Wednesday to Mr JusticeMax Barrett for the inquiry
following the imprisonment the previous day ofClaire
Knowles (56), who lives with her son at Castlejayne,
Glanmire, Cork.
During the application, Mr Gilroy said there was huge
confusion over possession orders made by the Circuit
Court, an apparent reference to conflicting High Court
decisions of November and May last concerning the Circuit
Courts jurisdiction to hear certain repossession cases.
Suffered difficulties
He said Ms Knowles suffered difficulties including
depression after the possession order was made in January
2014, and the Master of the High Court later agreed to
extend time for her to appeal that possession order.
Ms Knowles has no recollection of getting a letter of
demand of November 2009 and there were issues about a
signature on that, he added.
In an affidavit, Mr Gilroy said he is a friend of Ms Knowles.
He said the warrant detaining her was invalid as it was in
the name of ICS Building Society and, as far as he was
aware, the governor and company of the Bank of Ireland
had applied to the Circuit Court to reconstitute the
proceedings by substituting the governor and company of
BOI earlier this year.
Ms Knowles is in dispute with ICS, he said. On November
10th, the Master of the High Court extended time for her
and her son to appeal the Circuit Court possession order of
January 20th, 2014. When a further extension was sought
on December 2nd, the Master granted an additional 72
hours, he said.
Notice of appeal
Ms Knowles did serve her notice of appeal on December
2nd, he said.
He said the plaintiff bank in the Circuit Court proceedings
appealed the Masters order, and the High Court on
Monday last dismissed the appeal and affirmed the
Masters order of November 10th.

Mr Gilroy said Ms Knowles previously appeared before

Judge Donagh McDonagh at the Circuit Court on October
27th. The judge said he had no jurisdiction in the Circuit
Court possession proceedings, refused to make an order
for attachment and committal, and adjourned the matter
to December 8th when Ms Knowles appeared before Judge
ODonnabhain.
A friend of Ms Knowles who was present had given a
written account stating the judge warned Ms Knowles she
was at risk of jail and should get legal representation. She
was unable to do so and was refused an adjournment to
get a lawyer, the account stated.
Described as brazen
It was also stated, when her case was called, Ms Knowles
began reading from a prepared statement but was
interrupted by the judge who made the committal order. It
was stated she continued to read the statement and the
judge said she was in breach of the order and described
her as brazen.
Mr Justice Barrett said he would direct an inquiry under
Article 40 of the Constitution into the legality of Ms
Knowles detention and order she be produced in court on
Thursday morning for that inquiry.
Dublin child homelessness figure doubles to 1,400
Kitty Holland:Shameful:Dublin Simon has described the
figures as unacceptable and shameful, while FOCUS
IRELAND said they showed Government action has so far
failed to halt the constant flow of families becoming
homeless.-Irish Times
Olivia Kelly: But the deal is a far cry from the proposal by
ALAN KELLY, Minister for the Environment, to link privatesector rent increases to the consumer price index for four
years. The measures wont make a dent in existing rents,
and its far from certain that they will make renting a
viable long-term option.-Irish Times(further down)
Kitty Holland:IRISH TIMES Saturday, November 14, 2015,
01:00
There are now more than 1,400 homeless children in
Dublin more than twice as many as a year ago, the latest
figures show.
Data published last night by the Dublin Region Homeless

Executive show that during the week of 18th to 25th

October there were 1,425 children in 677 families in
emergency accommodation.
This represents a 109 per cent increase in the number of
homeless children since October 2014, when there were
680 children in emergency accommodation in the capital.
Of the total, 975 children in 461 families are in hotels,
while 450 children in 216 are in supported homeless
accommodation.
Shameful
Dublin Simon has described the figures as unacceptable
and shameful, while Focus Ireland said they showed
Government action has so far failed to halt the constant
flow of families becoming homeless.
Sam McGuinness, Dublin Simon chief executive, said he
was alarmed at the numbers. With no measures to stop
the ever rising flow of people into homelessness over the
past year, we are now faced with the very shameful
situation where 1,425 children are forced to lay their head
in inadequate accommodation, scared and vulnerable,
without a safe home to look to this Christmas.
He said rent certainty measures announced by the
Government this week were inadequate, as rents
remained unaffordable for the poorest families dependent
on rent supplement.
Mike Allen, director of advocacy with Focus Ireland, said
the plan to freeze rents for two years was welcome but
added a rise in rent supplement levels was necessary to
keep poorer families in their homes.
Cumulative impact
The families which became homeless in October did so
primarily as a result of the cumulative effects of rising
rents over the last two years, linked to a freeze in rent
supplement, said Mr Allen.
Even if the Governments package does has the effect of
slowing down rents it will make no difference to the
families who will continue to lose their homes because of
the cumulative impact of rent rises over the last two years
while the Government took no action.
A spokeswoman for the DRHE, which manages
homelessness services in the capital, said month-onmonth the provision of emergency accommodation for

families was being increased.

In addition the executive was working to ensure 500
modular homes would be delivered next year to provide
temporary accommodation for homeless families. National
homelessness data for October are to be published by the
Department of the Environment over the weekend.
2015 irishtimes.com
Irelands rental crisis: Will new measures help?
Olivia Kelly
Irish Times Saturday, November 14, 2015, 01:00
After months of inter-Coalition wrangling, and years of
escalating rents, the Government has come up with a
solution to Irelands rental-accommodation crisis:
landlords can raise rents only every two years instead of
every year. As showpieces go its hardly dazzling. But is it
enough to make a difference?
There is a bit more to the package that the Government is
calling its new deal for tenants. There will be increased
notice periods both for ending a lease and for increasing
rent. The long-promised deposit-protection scheme,
whereby tenants deposits would be held by the Private
Residential Tenancies Board rather than by a landlord, will
be set up.
But the deal is a far cry from the proposal by Alan Kelly,
Minister for the Environment, to link private-sector rent
increases to the consumer price index for four years. The
measures wont make a dent in existing rents, and its far
from certain that they will make renting a viable long-term
option.
At other times this may not have mattered quite so much.
Ten years ago one in 10 households lived in privately
rented accommodation. Now its one in five, and another
10 per cent live in rented social housing. Numbers renting
are even higher in urban areas: a quarter of Dublin city
homes are privately rented. Historically, most Irish people
have viewed renting as a temporary measure, a stopgap
between leaving the nest and having the wherewithal to
buy your own place.
Even with so many more people renting, this perception
hasnt changed. A report late last year by the economic
consultancy DKM on the future of the private rented
sector, commissioned by the Housing Agency, showed a

low appetite for long-term renting. Almost three-quarters

of renters planned to leave the rental market this year or
next. Just 17 per cent saw themselves as lifelong tenants,
and for most of those it was not because they wanted to
but because they had to. The majority in this category
cited an inability to afford a house as the main reason they
had continued to rent.
Separately, a large group of the population rent from
landlords with State assistance, and they dont seem to
want to stay as private-sector tenants either.
We dont know for certain how many people want a
council house. The last national assessment of need,
completed in 2013, showed that just under 90,000
applicants were on local-authority waiting lists. Dublin City
Council had 16,000 on the list at the time; last July the
figure had increased to almost 21,600. More than 100,000
applicants are now likely to be waiting.
And these are just the people who have had their need for
a council house approved; many more are skittering
around the eligibility threshold and would like the stability
of a council house in effect a home for life, something
the private rental sector certainly does not guarantee.
What all these figures show is that almost nobody living in
private rental accommodation, supplemented or not,
wants to be there. And its easy to understand why.
The high cost of renting and the inability to control and
predict that cost in the medium or long term is a major
drawback. Rents have been rising steadily since 2013,
particularly in Dublin. The rises havent been minor: rents
in the capital went up by 9.2 per cent in the year to the
end of June, and rents across the State went up by 5.8 per
cent, according to the Private Residential Tenancies Board.
This means that the average Dublin renter, who had been
paying 1,275 a month for a house or 1,152 for an
apartment in the summer of 2014, is now paying 1,387
for a house and 1,260 for an apartment. Rents for houses
outside Dublin increased from 656 to 695 in the year,
and for apartments from 623 to 660.
Why has this happened? Its a simple equation of supply
and demand. To give the short version of the housing
boom and bust: we spent a few years building too many
houses (more than 93,000 in 2006), many of them in the

wrong places, then spent a few years building far too few
(8,301 homes in 2013) anywhere.
Things improved a little last year: 11,016 homes were
completed, but thats fewer than the number the year
records began, 1970, when 13,887 houses were built. The
11,016 built last year are just over half what the Housing
Agency says is the minimum needed to meet demand.
Theres an inevitable trickledown effect. Without enough
homes for sale, would-be buyers keep renting. More
people renting in a market with fewer homes pushes up
rents. More people renting who in a normal market would
have the money to buy pushes it up even further.
Real solution
At the end of the chain are people who cant afford to rent
anywhere, and for whom social housing isnt available.
The only real solution is to build more. Construction 2020,
published in May 2014, was the Governments first
response to this need. To a large degree it was a strategy
for strategies, recommending the setting up of taskforces
and working groups.
The recently announced Budget 2016 has more solid
housing-construction measures. Four thousand houses are
to be provided next year under the first phase of an
initiative to build 20,000 homes on sites controlled by the
National Asset Management Agency by 2020. About 90
per cent will be in the Greater Dublin Area, and threequarters will be starter homes.
This weeks housing package also included an initiative
aimed at kick-starting the construction of 7,000 more
affordable homes in Dublin and Cork. Developers will
receive rebates on construction levies where a scheme
has more than 50 homes and where houses are priced at
less than 300,000 in Dublin and 250,000 in Cork.
These initiatives should help to speed up supply, but
building houses takes a couple of years on average, so
this doesnt alleviate the immediate pressures on the
rental market.
Thats where the new deal should help. The two-year
rent freeze gives private tenants breathing space to
muster a deposit towards their own home if they so wish
or to find a better deal if measures to increase supply and
reduce prices work.

One announcement this week could bring a glimmer of

hope to tenants reliant on State support. Tax relief will be
introduced to encourage landlords to rent their properties
to tenants in receipt of social-housing supports such as
rent supplement. These landlords will be able to claim 100
per cent tax relief, up from the current 75 per cent. This
carrot is more likely to yield results than any of the
Governments rent-regulation sticks.
The Government also hopes to boost the market by
making apartment construction more appealing to
builders. Its guidelines on apartment standards
enforceable by ministerial direction are to be issued
early next year.
Apartments for hipsters
Here the Government is following the example of Dublin
City Council, which has put forward the notion of smaller
apartments for renters only described by one councillor
as apartments for hipsters. With 63 per cent of renters
aged under 34, and multinational firms that the
Government is so eager to attract saying that they cant
find accommodation for their workers, there may be a
case for allowing these smaller units.
Another form of rental provision, which is likely to prove
more popular, is the idea of public housing. This would
involve having private developers and investors build
housing on council land, combining social rental with
private rental.
Two schemes put forward in the Budget seem similar in
intent. One is the concept of an affordable-rental scheme,
for which 10 million from the sale of Bord Gis has been
set aside to fund a pilot project. This will be aimed at
people whose incomes are above the threshold for State
rental assistance but who cannot afford private rents.
The other, for social-housing tenants, involves a new form
of public-private partnership in Dublin. In the new scheme,
sites stay in the ownership of the State, and the developer
receives payments for 25 years, after which the houses or
apartments return to State ownership.
These are positive moves that could stave off a similar
rental crisis in future. But they are unlikely to help people
who right now cant afford, or cant find, a place to rent.
2015 irishtimes.com

Alan Kelly (Labour) Backs Down on Rent Control.

Government plans to solve Irelands rental crisis could
see landlords hike rents immediately, will not prevent
future rises, and risks marking the return of low-quality
bedsits to the market.
Threshold chief executive Bob Jordan said the charity has
alerted officials to concerns rent would be inflated
during the review period a view shared by housing
expert Dr Lorcan Sirr, who said landlords will frontload
rises because they will not be able to next year. Irish
Examiner Nov 7
Kelly had sought that rent increases be pegged to the cost
of living. But Minister Noonan(FG) backed by 25 Landlord
TDs, and American developers Kennedy Wilson forced him
to bend the knee and retreat.
Landlords can only increase the rent every two years now
rather than every year as before. Landlords must get three
local examples of rents to justify an increase.!!! This will
make almost no difference.In a situation where there is no
competition between landlords due to shortage of
accomodation,landlords can simply raise the rent by
double the yearly increase every two years! AND WORSE
STILL, THE LANDLORD CAN HIKE THE RENT BEFORE THE
NEW LAW COMES IN.The Dil Sat All Night to Bail Out the
Banks bondholders, but there is no urgency to protect
tenants!
And, of course, Alan is preparing to take water charges
from your pay or welfare cheque.
Focus Ireland Spokesperson said:However, we are highly
concerned it will fail to stem the constant rising flow of 70
to 80 families becoming homeless in Dublin alone very
month. The measures are far from a convincing
response to the scale of the problems we are facing, he
added.
Housing Crisis is Due to the Restrictions of the EU Fiscal
Treaty and by PROHIBITION by the FG/Labour Government
of Local Authority Borrowing for House Building Purposes
to comply with these restrictions.
This policy leaves Government completely at the mercy of
private developers. US investors Kennedy Wilson advised

Mr Noonans officials(before Budget) by letter that

investment in property here could be eliminated if rent
controls were introduced Irish Examiner Nov2 2015
Therefore local authorities, which are currently debarred
from accessing Housing Finance Agency loans, due to
concerns about its implications for the national debt, need
to be given permission to borrow again for social housing
provision Dr Michelle Norris, UCD
Government found it more Important to give away 750
million in tax relief including 100 million to the Super-rich
rather than allow local authorities to borrow 750 million for
housing purposes
THE HOUSING POLICIES of THIS GOVERNMENT and THE
PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT HAVE LEFT THOSE IN NEED OF
SOCIAL HOUSING IN A STATE OF VIRTUAL TOTAL NEGLECT
(I have brought together below articles by DR Rory
Hearne, Dr Michelle Norris and Fintan OToole on the
housing crisis)
The housing crisis is due to the implementation of a policy
under which the ability of the rich to make profits out of
housing provision and the opportunity for the rich to pay
low taxes on their incomes and assets to the to the state,
are prioritised over the need of all citizens to have security
of tenure in an adequate dwelling. The Free Market
IDEOLOGY to which Fintan OToole refers is being deployed
by governments and economists to justify this
prioritisation.
The implementation of these pro-rich policies is enshrined
in legislation and EU treaties. Why cannot Local authorities
borrow money to fund a social house building programme?
As Dr Michelle Norris UCD attests (below)local authorities,
are currently debarred from accessing Housing Finance
Agency loans, due to concerns about its implications for
the national debt.
Under capitalism, borrowing by the state to provide assets
that will endure for 100 years or more makes perfect
sense. But FF,FG and Labour supported an EU Fiscal Treaty
which places restrictions on state debt irrespective of
human need. This leaves these parties with three options
in order to provide housing:
a) IMPOSE SERIOUS TAX INCREASES on INCOME AND
ASSETS OF THE SUPER-RICH

b) Leave the Provision of Housing to the Free Market

c) IMPOSE NEW TAXES ON the Majority of the Population
It is not surprising that governments of the rich opt for a
combination of b) and c)
KEY QUOTES FROM ARTICLES BELOW
It is a national emergency and without a significant shift
in policy the crisis will only worsen. At the current rate of
families becoming homeless there will be more than 6,000
children in emergency accommodation by 2017. This is
deeply traumatic for children and their families. It is
arguably a breach of the UN Convention on the Rights of
the Child.The current crisis results from decades of
housing policy that followed the private free-market
approach which treated housing primarily as a commodity
and speculative investment asset-Dr Rory Hearne,
Tasc .
And still, after all weve been through, 75 per cent of the
Governments promised social housing is to be built
(supposedly) by the private sector.There is an almost
obsessive fear of stating the obvious that a large
proportion of people will never be decently housed by the
market. Those citizens need a State thats not afraid to
clear the ground of narrow ideology and build on the
foundations of real human needs. That might involve
relearning another forgotten word republic. Fintan
OToole Irish Times Columnist
Therefore local authorities, which are currently debarred
from accessing Housing Finance Agency loans, due to
concerns about its implications for the national debt, need
to be given permission to borrow again for social housing
provision. This is the only realistic method of raising
sufficient finance for and delivering a social housing
programme on the scale required to meet current needs. A
relatively small amount of public borrowing for this
purpose could have enormous social benefits and cut
spending on rent supplements.-Dr Michelle Norris UCD
Rory Hearne: The STATE MUST INTERVENE IN THE
HOUSING MARKET
Last Updated: Thursday, October 22, 2015, 05:15
The Irish housing system is in an unprecedented crisis.
This is visible in escalating rents, economic evictions,
mortgage arrears, repossessions, waiting lists,

substandard accommodation and the growing numbers of

those unable to buy a home.
It is a national emergency and without a significant shift in
policy the crisis will only worsen. At the current rate of
families becoming homeless there will be more than 6,000
children in emergency accommodation by 2017. This is
deeply traumatic for children and their families. It is
arguably a breach of the UN Convention on the Rights of
the Child.
The current crisis results from decades of housing policy
that followed the private free-market approach which
treated housing primarily as a commodity and speculative
investment asset.
This continues today with the crisis being analysed as one
of demand outstripping supply and discussion focused on
how to incentivise the property industry to build more
housing stock.
However, during the boom there was plenty of supply and
still prices rose to unaffordable and unsustainable levels
contributing to the crash. This is because price is
determined not simply by demand and supply but also by
profit seeking, costs of investment, and government
regulation.
Developers can and do sit for decades on land or leave
property derelict until they consider it profitable to
commence building. Right now there is 2,233 hectares of
undeveloped zoned land in the wider Dublin region which
could provide 102,500 new housing units.
The basic problem with a free market approach to housing
is that the private market only caters for a demand that
can provide a profit. If you cant provide a sufficient profit,
as is the case with many low income households, then you
dont count. The current crisis is not just a once-off market
failure it is the modus operandi of the private housing
market. Predominantly free market or neoliberal housing
systems like ours are characterised by persistent boom
and busts, affordability problems, and exclusion.
That is why the state must intervene to protect people
from the market. It could do this in two ways which would
fundamentally address the crisis. Firstly, there is an
immediate need for rent certainty (where rents cannot be
increased beyond a certain index such as inflation) and

improved tenant protections in the private rented sector.

Rent regulation exists in many European countries (who
incidentally have plenty of supply).
There is no constitutional impediment to such a measure,
as Article 43.2.1 of Bhunreacht na hEireann states that the
right of private ownership ought to be regulated by the
principles of social justice and the State may, delimit by
law these rights for the common good. The introduction
of rent certainty, as with other measures, is clearly a
political choice and the Constitution should not be hidden
behind as an excuse for inaction.
Secondly, a State Homes and Housing Agency should be
formed to deliver a historic social, rental and affordable
house building and refurbishment programme of wellplanned, sustainable, and mixed communities. This would
be a partnership between local authorities, government
departments, housing associations, NAMA and the Housing
Finance Agency. It would have access to land, finance and
institutional expertise. It should have 1.5bn of annual
capital funding from the state. The current allocation of
500 million to new social housing building in the Capital
Investment Plan is inadequate as it will only provide 1400
new units nationally next year with fewer than 300 of
those in Dublin City.
The Agency could build on the 30 hectares of land that
Dublin City Council is currently being forced to sell off
through a Public Private Partnership because it does not
have the finances to build on it itself. It could redirect into
social use the 4.5billion NAMA plans to invest with
various vulture funds on high end office and apartment
developments. A Housing and Homes Agency could draw
on finance from the European Investment Bank. It could
also compulsory purchase vacant and derelict buildings
and take over buy-to-lets in arrears and convert them to
low cost rental housing.
As it currently stands the 20,000 units the government has
outlined NAMA will provide in order to address supply will
not be social units but are to be delivered on a
commercial basis and are more likely to be sold to
international investment funds rather than as starter
homes. Indeed NAMAs promotion of and involvement
with global wealth funds in the Irish property market must

be questioned as to how it is benefitting the Irish housing

system. It is facilitating the trend where housing is
increasingly becoming a global investment asset for the
wealthy 1per cent.
Problems in our housing system are affecting economic
competitiveness, contributing to rising deprivation,
inequality and poverty, and lowering educational and
employment prospects of those affected. The 2008 crash
should be a stark warning that a rising property market is
not necessarily a good thing. The housing system will
only be fixed when policy treats housing in the first
instance as a home, a social necessity and a human right,
not a speculative investment asset or commodity.
Dr Rory Hearne, Senior Policy Analyst, TASC Think-tank for
Action on Social Change
2015 irishtimes.com
Fintan OToole: Opposition to social housing is matter of
ideology not economics
Fintan OToole Irish Times : Tuesday, October 20, 2015,
04:00
Fellmongery is the preparation of animal skins for tanning.
A pollard is an animal that has had its horns removed. In
1949, official statistics still listed Irelands principal
products as including fellmongery, laces, pigs heads,
pollard and snuff.
Yet in that same year, 1949, my mothers family moved
into the Dublin Corporation house where I would later
grow up. A poor, primitive, backward economy could build
social housing on a large scale for people who lacked
decent homes.
And the rich, developed, globalised Irish economy of 2015
cant.
In the late 1940s, when my family was housed, Ireland
was still recovering from the drastic economic effects of
the second World War. The average industrial wage was
5.59 a week for men and 2.97 for women.
In real terms, thats less than a third of average industrial
wages in 1998 before the Celtic Tiger bubble. Fewer than a
third of households in 1949 had more than four rooms to
live in. More than 60 per cent of households had no piped
water supply. Nearly half had no sanitary facilities only

255,000 houses had a flush toilet.

And yet the State could build social housing.
Health and education
Infant mortality was about a hundred times higher than it
is now. Kids still died in large numbers from pneumonia,
TB, whooping cough and diphtheria. Male life expectancy
at birth was less than 65 years.
People were badly educated in 1950, a grand total of
4,500 students sat the Leaving Certificate exam and the
number in all our universities combined was 7,900. The
entire output of Irish broadcasting was seven hours of
radio a day. There were just 43,000 phone lines in the
State, only a third of them domestic.
And yet the State could build social housing.
The Irish economy, dominated by agriculture and food
production, was a paltry thing: total exports in 1949
amounted to just 61 million.
Almost all of this went to the UK as raw product the
characteristic Irish export was a live cow in the hold of a
cattle boat. In order of scale, the leading Irish exports in
1949 were cattle, horses, fresh hen eggs, ale/beer/porter,
chocolate crumb, dead turkeys and tinned beef. This
makes tinned beef our leading manufacturing export.
And yet the State could build social housing.
The estate I grew up in, Crumlin in southwest Dublin, was
built by the local authority, Dublin Corporation, with
funding from the central government. The process actually
started in the 1930s, during the Great Depression: 250
acres of south Crumlin were acquired by compulsory
purchase in 1934 and the building of over 3,000 houses
began more or less straight away.
The project was far from perfect. The houses were too
small most, like the one I grew up in, had just two
bedrooms for big (often extended) Irish Catholic families.
(Our household, by no means untypical, had three adults
and five children.) Services and facilities were slow to
follow.
But the rent was affordable and the houses were a hell of
a lot better than what most people had before.
My mother had been living (with seven other people) in
what was essentially a one-room cottage in the Liberties;
my father grew up in a little hovel off the Dublin quays.

The market never had and never would give them a

decent place to live the State did so instead. For all the
problems, people in Crumlin had a secure roof over their
heads and the chance to build a good community. We had
homes.
Why could the State do this in the hungry 1930s and the
postwar 1940s but not now?
Not because we cant but because, as Enda Kenny put it
last week, interference in the market must be avoided.
The desperation to avoid the simple conclusion that
government should build houses for people who need
them is about ideology, not resources. Fine Gael, in
particular, seems incapable of understanding housing as
anything other than a market.
Free-market ideology
It is striking that the decline in the building of social
housing in Ireland follows directly from the rise of so called
free market ideology in the Thatcher/Reagan era. In the
mid-1970s, social housing made up a third of all new
houses. The shift in which that proportion dropped to just
5 per cent was as disastrous economically as it was
socially the property bubble could not have inflated
without it.
And still, after all weve been through, 75 per cent of the
Governments promised social housing is to be built
(supposedly) by the private sector.
There is an almost obsessive fear of stating the obvious
that a large proportion of people will never be decently
housed by the market. Those citizens need a State
thats not afraid to clear the ground of narrow ideology
and build on the foundations of real human needs. That
might involve relearning another forgotten word republic.
2015 irishtimes.com
From Dr MICHELLE NORRIS UCD Letter to Irish Times
Sir, Fintan OToole (Opposition to social housing is
matter of ideology not economics, Opinion & Analysis,
October 20th) in part answers his own question when he
asks why the State could afford to fund a major social
house-building programme during the hungry Fifties
when there was no free secondary education and many of
the social welfare benefits available today did not exist.
Relatively low spending on most other public services

facilitated levels of public investment in housing which

were the highest in western Europe at this time.
Growing spending on social welfare and health,
particularly during the 1970s, is one of the reasons why
spending on social housing was cut back. Therefore, unlike
its counterparts in the inter-party government of the
1950s, the current Government faces the challenge of
concurrently funding a social house building programme
and a comprehensive system of benefits and public
services.
However, the other part of the answer to the question
raised by Fintan OToole sheds light on how the current
Government can meet this challenge. High levels of social
housing delivery were possible in the 1950s because the
funding method spread out the costs of provision and kept
them affordable for government. At this time social
housing was funded by very long-term loans, which were
repaid using a mix of central government subsidies,
tenants rents and the proceeds of domestic rates.
This funding model collapsed when domestic rates were
abolished in 1978 and after that the exchequer paid for
social house building in lump-sum grants. The latter
arrangement was less affordable because the costs of
provision were paid up front rather than spread out over a
long period, which helps to explain why insufficient
numbers of social houses were built even during the Celtic
Tiger period.
This lesson has been partially taken on board by
policymakers and in recent years loan finance had been
provided for social housing provision by non-profit housing
associations by the Housing Finance Agency, which
borrows on capital markets and from EU institutions for
this purpose. The agency currently has some 500 million
available for lending to this sector at a fixed interest rate
of 3.25 per cent.
However, despite great work by some housing
associations, it is not realistic to think that this sector,
which delivered 25 per cent of social housing prior to the
bust, has the capacity to meet the full scale of current
housing needs, at least in the short term.
Therefore local authorities, which are currently debarred
from accessing Housing Finance Agency loans, due to

concerns about its implications for the national debt, need

to be given permission to borrow again for social housing
provision. This is the only realistic method of raising
sufficient finance for and delivering a social housing
programme on the scale required to meet current needs. A
relatively small amount of public borrowing for this
purpose could have enormous social benefits and cut
spending on rent supplements.
Local authorities were traditionally the main providers of
social housing in Ireland, and Fintans OTooles article
eloquently describes the huge contribution which council
housing made to improving the lives of his own family in
the 1950s.
I agree that they have to play a central role if we are to
solve the current housing shortage. However, I disagree
with his assertion that achieving this is a matter of
ideology; an affordable method of resourcing this work has
to be put in place as well. Yours, etc,
Dr MICHELLE NORRIS,
School of Social Policy,
Social Work and
Social Justice,
University College Dublin,
Belfield, Dublin 4.
NOT FOR RELEASE, PUBLICATION OR DISTRIBUTION (DIRECTLY
OR INDIRECTLY) IN WHOLE OR IN ... Ireland of IBRCs
exposures for transactions of this nature.
http://www.bankofireland.com/fs/doc/wysiwyg/proposed-securitiesrepurchase-transaction-and-notice-of-egc.pdf

Cigarettes in Ireland are heavily taxed, making illegal ...

Ireland ... provisions within the Irish Taxes Act
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/227418.pdf

Water Services Act 2007 - Irish Statute Book

Food Safety Authority of Ireland Act 1998. 1998, No. 29. ...
European Legislation Identifier
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2007/act/30/enacted/en/pdf

Abortion & Ireland: The Statistics - IFPA

Abortion & Ireland: The Statistics ... 1,216 illegal packets of

abortion inducing drugs are seized by Irish Customs in 2009. ...
Bill, 2002 which would
http://www.ifpa.ie/sites/default/files/documents/briefings/abortionand-ireland-factfile.pdf
Irish Home Rule and Resistance, 1912-1916

http://www.loyno.edu/~history/journal/documents/Rule.PDF

JudicialReviewundertheIrishConstitution:MoreAmericanthanCommonwealth
TheIrishlegalsystememergedfromtheBritishsystem.YettheIrishconstitutiondivergesfromthe
CommonwealthmodelandmorecloselyresemblestheAmericanconstitutioninbothsubstanceand
application.ThismeansthatwhiletheIrishparliamentarysystemisverymuchbasedonthe
Westminstermodel,thelegalsystem,whileremainingwithintheCommonLawfamily,hasimportant
distinctions.OneofthekeyareasofdivergencefromtheCommonwealthmodelisinjudicialreview.
Thishasimportantramificationsfortherecognitionandelaborationofhumanrightsunderthe
constitution.ThisarticleexploressomeofthehistoricalreasonsfortheshiftfromtheCommonwealth
modelandthenatureandconsequenceofsomeofthosedifferences.Italsocontrastscertainaspectsof
theIrishjudicialreviewprocesswiththosepertainingintheUnitedStates;inparticularithighlights
someantidemocratictendenciesintheIrishsystem.
TheemergenceofJudicialReviewundertheIrishConstitution
ThenewIrishconstitutionof1937,orBunreachtnahireann,madeafundamentalmoveawayfrom
theBritishconstitutionalmodelofparliamentaryprimacy.ItspredecessortheIrishFreeState
ConstitutionwasachildoftheBritishparliamentandwasframedinthecontextoftheBritish
experience.WhenframingthenewconstitutionamondeValeramayhavebeeninfluencedmorebya
wishtobreakthecoloniallinkthaningivingreigntothejudiciary,steepedashewasinaconservative
tradition.ItislikelythathisviewoftheseparationofpowersresembledthoseofAlexanderHamilton
inFederalist78,whereheenvisagedthejudiciaryasproperlytheweakestofthethreebranchesof
government.Thiswoulddenythepotentialforstrongjudicialreviewastheauthoritywhichcan
declaretheactsofanothervoid,mustnecessarilybesuperiortotheonewhoseactsmaybedeclared
void.
LookingatJudicialReviewinAmericanhistoryfromtheearly20thcenturyonemightbetemptedto
assumethatthecurrentformofjudicialreviewexistedfromthebeginning,butasWolfepointsoutitis
notthecase.WolfedividesthedevelopmentofjudicialreviewundertheAmericanconstitutioninto
twodistinctgenres,coveringthreeperiods.Hetermsthesegenresastraditionalandmodern,the
firsttosomedegreecanbelikenedtoTushnetsdescriptionofweakjudicialreviewandthemodern
tostrongjudicialreviewalthoughtheyarenotidentical.Thefirstperiod,duringwhichthetraditional
modelwasintheascendancy,coveredthetimefromtheadoptionoftheconstitutionuptilltheendof
theCivilWar.ThemodernperiodinWolfesviewemergedfrom1937,withtheintervening70years
orsobeingaperiodoftransition.
IntermsofdeValerasproject,itcanbeassumedthatashewasworkingbeforethetrueemergenceof
themodernorstrongertraditionofjudicialreview,hecouldnothaveanticipateditspotentialimpact
forhisconstitution.HowevertheIrishConstitutioncontainsexplicitmeasuresforjudicialreviewin
Articles26and34,thustheseedsweresownbydeValera,whichwouldallowfortheemergenceof
strongjudicialreviewalongAmericanlines,butconfinedtothesuperiorcourts.Thetransitionin
Irelandscasewasforeshortened;theperiodoftransitionwasjusttwodecades.TheIrishConstitution
operatedentirelywithinthecompassofthemoderngenreintheUnitedStates,mediatedbythe
youngerjudgeswhopushedoutthefrontiersofjudicialreview,drawingontheirownknowledgeand
experienceoftheAmericanmodel.Itmaynothavebeenascriticalintermsofinfluence,butitisworth
notingthatthepostwarGermanfederalconstitutionalsoassumedastrongjudicialreviewapproach.It
isclearthatinboththeAmericanandtheIrishcasestherewasatransitionfromaweakerformtoa
strongerform.TothepointwherethecourtshavegeneralauthoritytodeterminewhattheConstitution
meansthecourtsconstitutionalinterpretationsareauthoritativeandbindingontheotherbranches,
atleastintheshorttomediumrun.

WebermakessomeinterestingobservationsonjudicialrevieworwhathecallsJudgeMadeLaw.He
pointsoutthatajudgewillfeelobligedinsubsequentcasestoreiterateamaximusedinordertoavoid
achargeofbiasforchangingthenormonwhichhis/herdecisionwasmade.Thereisalsoatendency
forjudgestofolloweachotherinasimilarvein:
Themorestablethetradition,themorethejudgeswilldependonthosemaximswhichguidedtheir
predecessors,becauseitisjustthenthateverydecision,regardlessofhowitcameintoexistence,
appearsasbeingderivedfromtheexclusivelyandpersistentlycorrecttradition.
ThisinWeberswordsisapatternthatlaysclaimtopermanentvalidity.Wecanseethistrendintwo
aspectsofjudicialreviewundertheIrishConstitution.Thefirstisthegestationperiodfromthe
adoptionoftheconstitutiontotheemergenceofthetypeofstrongormodernjudicialreviewwhich
subsequentlyemerged.ThebreakwiththeBritishmodelandthemovetowhatmightbedescribedas
theAmericanmodelemergedwithanewgenerationofjudgeswhohadgreaterexposuretothe
workingsoftheUSConstitution.ThesecondpointofnoteisthattherethenemergesanIrishtradition.
Whilethefirstpointledtoanewwaveofjudicialactivism,thesecondmayintimeleadto
stultificationthroughadesiretosanctifythetraditionasitwere.Thislattertrendislikelydueto
Webersaccountofthenatureoftheworkoflegalprofessionalsvisvisthemakingoflaw.Heholds
firmlytotheviewthatprofessionaljuristsholdapreeminentroleintheshapingoflaw,butthattheir
innovationis,bythenatureoftheirprofession,bounded.Hestatesthat:prophetsaretheonlyones
whohavetakenareallyconsciouslycreativeattitudetowardsexistinglaw.Ontheothersidehe
placesaclearlimitationontheadvanceswroughtthroughtheactivitiesoflegalprofessionals,dueto
theirroleasinterpretersratherthancreators,eventhosejuristswho,fromanobjectivepointof
view,havebeenthemostcreativeones...regardedthemselvestobebutthemouthpieceofnorms
alreadyexisting.
Thisperspectivecastsalesspositiveanddynamiclightonthepossibilitiesoforiginalinnovation
arisingthroughjudicialreview.ThisisamorecontentiouspositionthanWebermighthaveimaginedas
judicialreviewinthemodernorstrongformhascomemoretotheforeonlyinthegenerationsafterhis
death.
BothGardbaumandTushnetofferinterestinginsightsonhowconstitutionsandorconstitutional
traditionsestablishstrongorweakformsofjudicialreview.Gardbaummakesthepointthatstrong
formsofjudicialreviewbecamethenormfrom1945inanattempttosafeguardtherightsofcitizens
fromtheexcessesoftheirowngovernments.
Delanywritingin1957,beforethefullfloweringofjudicialreviewundertheIrishConstitution,
providesakeeninsightintohowjudicialreviewwasthenconsideredbytheIrishjudiciaryandthe
trendshesawemerging.Thefirstpointhemakesisthatthejudgesthenonthebenchhadbeentrained,
inthemain,inanatmosphereofunlimitedparliamentarysovereigntyHealsonotesthatsurprisingly
fewconstitutionalcaseshadcomebeforethecourts,notwithstandinganexpresspowerofreview,
concludingthattheideaisanunfamiliarone,buthenonethelessdetectsthebeginningsofchange.
HisdiscussionontheNationalUnionofRailwaymenandOthersv.SullivancaseintheHighCourtand
especiallyinthejudgementofMurnaghanintheSupremeCourtappealindicateaseachangeinthe
Irishjudiciary:
InsomeConstitutionsitislefttotheLegislaturetointerpretthemeaningoftheseprinciples,butin
othertypesofConstitutions,ofwhichoursisone,anauthorityischosenwhichisclothedwiththe
powerandburdenedwiththedutyofseeingthattheLegislatureshallnottransgressthelimitssetupon
itspowers.
OvertimethismorevigorousapproachbythejudiciarywouldbecomepartoftheIrishjudicialreview
culture.MorganremarksonthissuggestingthattheIrishjudiciaryhaveattimesactedinawaywhich
itcouldbequeriedwhetherjudgeshavenotgonebeyondtheirproperplaceinthepolity.

TheadherencetoastrongjudicialreviewmodelfromthebenchisillustratedbythecommentsofBrian
WalshaformermemberoftheSupremeCourt,whoacknowledgedtherolethejudiciaryhasplayedin
extendingrightsprovisionsunderTheIrishConstitution:Constitutionalprotectionisaffordedalsoto
verymanyrightswhich,thoughunspecified,havebeenrecognisedbythecourtsashavingthefull
backingofconstitutionalprotection.
HoweverasstatedabovetheIrishsystemmigratedfromaclearlyweakmodelundertheSoarstt
ireannorIrishFreeStateconstitution,whichmodelinitiallycontinuedunderthe1937constitution,
butgiventhestrengthofArticle34inparticulartheemergenceofastrongermodelwasalwaysa
possibility.
ThishappenedwithoutthesortsofdebatesthatoccurredinCanada,NewZealandandBritain.Four
possibleexplanationscanbeputforwardforthis.Firstlytherewasnotthesamedepthoftraditional
respectforthesupremacyofparliamentinIreland,especiallyinnationalistpolitics,fromwhich
appointmentsandappointeeswouldemerge.Secondly,thenewIrishconstitutionwasmaturingjustas
thestrongAmericanjudicialmodelwasgaininginternationalacceptanceafter1945.Thirdlythe
youngerIrishjuristshadextensiveknowledgeandcontactwiththeAmericanmodel.FinallyArticle34
andtoalesserextentArticle26offerednotjustamechanism,butanimprimaturforstrongjudicial
review.
CircumstancesmilitatedagainstweakjudicialreviewintheIrishcontext.Firstlyaswasthecasewith
theCanadianBillofRights1960,theIrishFreeStateconstitutionsufferedfrombeingtoopliableinthe
faceofpoliticalimperatives.Itfellpreciselyintotheframeworkofaweakmodelasdescribedby
Tushnet.[T]hemarkofweakformreviewisthatordinarylegislativemajoritiescandisplacejudicial
interpretationsoftheconstitutionintherelativeshortrun.
SecondlydeValerawasnegativelydisposedtowardsaconstitutionthathadtheAngloIrishTreatyas
aschedule.AndthirdlydeValerawasdisposedtotheAmericanviewofgovernment,bothpositively
asamodelforanewlyindependentstateandnegativelyasanalternativetotheBritishmodel.
Outliningakeydifferencebetweenthe1922orIrishFreeStateconstitutionandthe1937constitution
Delanyhighlightsanewdirectioninthelatter.Whilethe1922constitutionwasconflictedbetweenthe
BritishmonarchicalsystemandIrishrepublicanism,therewasnosuchambiguityfrom1937and
Irelandsformalrelationshipwiththetraditionaltypeofdominionconstitutionwasterminated.
HadIrelandnottakenthatroadin1937itmighthavepursuedapathtowardswhatGardbaumcallsthe
NewCommonwealthModelofConstitutionalism.Thismodeldescribesaformofweakjudicial
reviewthathasemergedprimarilyinCanada(CanadianConstitutionAct1982);NewZealand(New
ZealandBillofRightsAct1990)andinBritain(HumanRightsAct1998).Underthistypeofweak
judicialreviewthecourtshavepowerstoquestiontheconstitutionalityofprovisions,butthiscanbe
circumventedbythelegislatures.ItisastrongerprovisionthanthatwhichpertainedundertheIrish
FreeStateconstitution,asitincludesanonbindingroleforthecourts.Whileallthreecountriessetout
toestablishastrongerprotectionforhumanrightsandatthesametimesteersomesortofmiddle
groundbetweentheoldmodelofparliamentarysupremacyandthestrongjudicialreviewpositionin
AmericaandIreland,themeasuresareneitheruniforminsubstancenoroperation.Noraretheyfree
fromdisapprovalasisdemonstratedbycritiqueslikethoseofAndersoninahardhittingcommenton
theLawLordsdecisioninDecember2004againstthedetentionofforeignsuspectsunderthe2001
Britishantiterrorismlegislation.AndersonholdsthattheBritishconstitutionaltraditionisundermined
bythatdecisionwhichflowedfromBritainsagreementtosignuptotheEuropeanConventionon
HumanRights.Wesignedoutofunfocusedbenevolenceandafewdecadeslater,werealisedthatwe
hadsigneduptoaforeignappealcourtwhichcouldoverturnourlaws.

Thishasled,inhisview,totheunderminingofparliamentarysovereignty.Heholdsthathumanrights
havebeenbestservedunderthetraditionalBritishconstitutionalsystem,whereparliamentultimately

decidesratherthanbeinginapositionwheredoctrinesofhumanrightsaregivenprecedenceoverthe
legalsystemandtheParliamentaryprocess.
Gardbaumsumsupthedifferencesandsimilaritiesinthethreecommonwealthsystems:
Canadabyinstitutingalimitedoverridingbillofrights;NewZealandbyapurelyinterpretiveone;
andBritainbyamixtureofthetwopreservesthecoreelementofparliamentarysovereignty...In
Canadabyexercisingtheoverride;inNewZealandbyenactinglegislationthatexpresslyorby
unambiguousimplicationlimitsrights;inBritain,firstbyexpresslimitationandthenbyrefusingto
amendorrepealthestatuteafterajudicialdeclarationofincompatibility.
TheCanadianConstitutionAct,1982throughSection33oftheCanadianCharterofRightsand
Freedomsallowsboththefederalandprovincialgovernmentstoenactlawsthatmightconflictwiththe
chartersprovisions,withsomeexceptions.Todothisalegislaturewouldhavetoincludeaclear
statementofitsintentions,anotwithstandingclause.Thiswas,perhapscynically,donebytheQuebec
governmentwhoopposedtheproposalforpoliticalreasons,whenitreenactingitsentirebodyoflaw
withanomnibusnotwithstandingclause.ThiswassubsequentlyupheldintheCanadianSupremeCourt
inthe1988caseFordv.Quebec.WhileCanadaprovidedthemodelforbothNewZealandandBritain,
Gardbaumcontendsthatthethreejurisdictionshaveinterpretedandimplementeditindifferentwaysas
outlinedabove.
Thisnewmodelattemptstocreateabalancebetweenthetraditionalsupremacyofparliament,as
operatedundertheIrishFreeStateconstitution,andthetypeofstrongjudicialreviewmodeladopted
byAmericaandfollowedbyothercountriesafterthesecondworldwar.Thecommonwealthmodel
camelongaftertheacceptanceofstrongjudicialreviewundertheIrishconstitution,whichwasinline
withcontemporarypracticeintheUnitedStates.Thelatterpresumesthathumanrightsareuniversal
andimmutableandthereforeshouldbeprotectedfrominterferenceevenbythelegislativebranchof
government.Thereishereanunspokennotionthatrightswillcontinuetoextendoffanunbreachable
baseline.Abaselinemaybetrueofcertainfundamentalrights,butitwouldbefoolishtopresumeit
appliestoallrights.Theveryprocessofjudicialappointmentrecognisesthisdualpossibility,the
courtscouldengageintrimmingrightsthatthelegislaturemightwishtoexpand.Thefateofthesocial
rightsproposedbyT.H.Marshallinthelatterpartofthe20thcenturyindicatehowrightscanshrink,
butitshouldnotbeassumedthatthiswouldorcouldonlyemanatefromthelegislature.

Regardlessofstrongorweakjudicialreviewrightsremainopennotjusttointerpretationbythecourts,
andevenifimmutabletheycanbechangedthroughaconstitutionalamendment.International
commitmentsandmembershipsofbodiesliketheUnitedNationsandtheCouncilofEuropeanpresent
constraintsonunilateralism,butnotallrightsareencapsulatedintheUniversalDeclarationofHuman
RightsandtheEuropeanConventiononHumanRightsandFundamentalFreedomsandnotallstates
respectrightsasuniversallyasthesedocumentsmighthope.
Intermsofrightstheconstitutionislikeasafetydepositboxinthenameofacluborsociety(astate).
Thecontentsareownedequallybyallmembersoftheclub(citizens).Fromwithintheclubaspecial
committee(judiciary)isappointedwhichhaspowerstosafeguardandkeepaninventoryofthe
contents,usingasetofrules,whichtheyadoptandcanchangewithoutreferencetothefullclub
membership.Theclubmembershiphastherighttodisposeofthecontentsoftheboxoraddtoit.The
specialcommitteeonreviewingthecontentscansuggestthatacertainitemisnotontheinventoryand
mayevenacknowledgeontheirinventoryanitempreviouslyvotedforremovalbythemembership
albeitunderadifferentlabel.ChiefJusticeFinlaysjudgementintheIrishSupremeCourtXCasein
1992seemedtodojustthatvisvisamajorityoftheIrishcitizenrywhobelievedtheyhaddrawna
lineunderabortionintheEighthAmendment.
37.I,therefore,concludethatthepropertesttobeappliedisthatifitisestablishedasamatterof
probabilitythatthereisarealandsubstantialrisktothelife,asdistinctfromthehealth,ofthemother,

whichcanonlybeavoidedbytheterminationofherpregnancy,suchterminationispermissible,
havingregardtothetrueinterpretationofArticle40,s.3,subs.3oftheConstitution.
Themainargumentinfavourofaweakermodelisthatthelegislatureisclosertothewillofthepeople
andthereforemoredemocratic.Harelclaimsthatratherthanbeingantidemocraticjudicialreviewin
factdefendstherightsofthemajorityagainstthepowerofthelegislatureandthusprovides
mechanismsforafaithfulimplementationofthewillofthepeople.Thisargumentisnotso
straightforward.Forinstancetheweakerformofjudicialreviewcouldjustaseasilybeconstruedas
fosteringaconcentrationofpowerinanelite,thegovernment,attheexpenseofparliamentandoneof
theotherbranchesofgovernment,thejudiciary.
Theweakformallowssomecedingofpowertothecourts.Itdoesnotgrantthecourtstheforcetoface
downthelegislatureontheconstitutionalityofalawascanhappeninIreland.Thenew
Commonwealthformshavepotencyintermsbothoftheirlegitimacytoquestionlegislationandas
moralgatekeepers.Notleastisthepotentialofajudicialopiniontoimpactonpublicopinionandshift
thebalanceofargumentinthepublicsphere,whichmightultimatelyderailameasure.Thejudiciaryon
theotherhandalsoactsasasortofpermanentoppositionwiththepowertoactagainstgovernment
wishes.Atonelevelthisoffersabulwarkagainstprecipitousorunreflectiveactionbygovernmentsin
thefaceofacrisisrealorimagined.Whilejudgesareultimatelyappointedbygovernments,they
generallyoccupyofficeforlongerperiods,sometimesbearingthemarkofseveralgovernments.That
hasobviousadvantagesanddisadvantages.Ontheplussidetheyhaveanindependencethatallows
themtospeakagainstthemoodofthemomentwhichcouldhavetheimpactofputtingreflectioninto
themodelandforcinganotherperspectiveontotheagenda.Onthenegativesidetheycouldrepresent
entrenchedviewsinthemannersuggestedbyWeber.
HowjudgesareappointedintheUnitedStatesandinIreland,wouldnotgiverisetomuchconfidence
inthecourtscapacitytoactdemocratically.SchmidhauserrejectsthenotionthattheAmerican
politicalsystemisagovernmentoflaws,notmen.Hemakesthepointthatitisindividualswho
make,enforce,andinterpretthelaw,thustheworkofthecourtscarrytheindeliblestampofthe
judgesandjusticeswhohaveservedonthem.Healsopointsoutthatlowersocioeconomicgroups
finditverydifficulttogettheeducation,professionalstatusandpoliticalconnectionstoputtheminthe
frameforselection.Hepositsthreeunstatedrequirementsthatgreatlyenhancepotentialselectionfor
thesuperiorcourtsespecially.Candidateswho:i.comefromarelativelyprivilegedandpolitically
activefamily;ii.haveexcellentlegaltrainingandconnections;andiii.areanestablishedand
successfulpoliticianorlawyer;areatadistinctadvantage.Cookinherdiscussionontheappointment
ofwomenjudgeswouldaddgendertothelist.
IntheIrishcasesimilartrendscanbeidentified,someofwhichwereaddressedwiththeintroductionof
theCourtsandCourtOfficersAct,1995,whichestablishedaJudicialAppointmentsAdvisoryBoard.
InsomewaystheJudicialAppointmentsAdvisoryBoardservesafunctionnotunlikethatoftheUS
Senateintheratificationprocess,exceptinthiscaseitputsforwardalistofcandidatesfromwhichthe
governmentmaychoose.Inits2002AnnualReporttheBoardacknowledgesthatwhilethereisno
obligationontheMinistertorequesttheBoardtomakerecommendationsaboutanyvacancyarising,
nonethelessthishasbeenthepracticeforallappointmentssincetheintroductionofthelegislation.
Likewisethegovernmentcouldchoosetoignorealloftherecommendedcandidates;howeverthishas
notoccurredtodate.Thissystemdoesnotremovepoliticalinvolvementinappointments,butit
presentsaverydifferentpicturetothatdescribedbyConway.ConwaystrawlthroughtheNational
Archiveshighlightsatotallackoftransparencyinthesystem,betweenthecirculationofaninitial
memobytheMinisterandthearrivalofthepinksliprecordingthenameofthepersonappointed.
Hisaccounthoweverisrepletewithexamplesofthesortsofrepresentationsthatweremadeby
politicians,bishopsandevencandidates.
ThenewsysteminnowayindicatesthatSchmidhausersthesisisanylessvalid,northatthesystemis
essentiallylesspolitical.Additionallyinthereportingperiod2002,thenumbersofwomenpresenting
forconsiderationforjudicialappointmentsdeclinedinrelationtotheseniorityofthepositions.Women

represented26.5%ofcandidatesatDistrictCourtlevel,buttherewerenoneatSupremeCourtlevel.In
2002withintheoverallscheme30.8%ofsuccessfulcandidateswerewomen.Thistranslatesasfour
womenoutofatotalof14appointments,onetotheHighCourt,twototheCircuitCourtandonetothe
DistrictCourt.ThereishoweveratrendtowardsafairerrepresentationofwomenintheIrishjudiciary,
evenifthereisstillsomedistancetogo,in1996only13.3%ofIrishjudgeswerewomen,by2004this
hadincreasedto21.5%.
JudicialReviewinPractice
FormerChiefJusticeBrianWalshwasclearonhowhesawtheroleofthejudiciaryinreviewingand
interpretingTheIrishConstitution:
Ourcourtshavesaidthatwhereverthereisaconstitutionalrighttheveryexistenceofthatright
providesitsownremedy,andgivesthecourtspowertotakemeasuresnecessarytogiveeffecttothe
vindicationorthedefenceofthatconstitutionalright.
IntheUSSupremeCourtJusticeHughesoutlinedsimilarsentiments,butinlessequivocalterms.We
areunderaConstitution,buttheConstitutioniswhatthejudgessayitis.Thislatterviewalthough
soundingcynical,Hoganpointsout,certainlyhasvalidityundertheIrishconstitution.Whilethe
constitutionvestsconsiderablepowerswiththecourtstointerprettheconstitution,itgivesthemfew
guidelinesonhowtheyshouldexercisethesepowers.Thereisnouniversalrulepreordainingthe
mannerinwhichtheConstitutionisinterpreted.Andhegoesontopointoutthatitsinterpretationhas
drawnitsinspirationfrommanysources,including:publicopinion,anhistoricalview,liberal
approach,naturallaw,extraconstitutionalprinciples,harmoniousinterpretation,viewedasanentire
document.Heoutlineseachindetailandcitescasesinsupportofeach.Intheendheisforcedtothe
conclusionthat
[n]oparticulartheoryormethodofconstitutionalinterpretationhasbeenappliedbythecourts.Indeed,
thislackofconsistencyhasbeensoprevalentthatindividualjudgeshavefromtimetotimeadopted
differentapproachestothisquestion,utilisingwhatevermethodmightseemtobemostconvenientor
toofferadventitioussupportforaconclusiontheyhadalreadyreached.
Thedangersofsuchadiverseandunpredictableapproachcannotbeignored.Itishardlyidealthata
constitutionshouldbesubjecttothewhimsofjudgesorthegoodfortuneofthosepleadingits
extensionorprotection.Schauerpursuesthesameissuewhenhespeaksofjudgesreachingperhaps
politicallyormorallywisedecisionsbutnotinthecontextofstrictprecedencenorontight
interpretationsoftheconstitutionitself.Hepointsouttheseriouspitfallsintryingtoachieveneutrality,
butitstillraisesissuesabouttheroleofthejudiciaryvisvislegitimatedemocraticgovernment.To
whatextentisjudicialreviewsteppingintothepoliticaldomain,orindeedisitafterallapartofthe
politicaldomaingivenitsstatusasoneofthethreebranchesofgovernment.Thereareessentiallythree
questions,noneofwhicharenew.Howcanwebestachievegoodgovernment;isdemocracythebest
approachandhowbestcanrightsbesafeguarded.Questionsaboutjudicialreviewwittinglyor
unwittinglyareconcernedwiththesethreequestions.
Hareloutlinesthethreeprincipalargumentsinfavourofjudicialreview:limitationshypothesis;review
hypothesis;andjudicialreviewhypothesis.Eachisgroundedinadifferentjustification.Thelimitations
hypothesisreliesontheideathatrightsareexternaltothepolity,that,notunlikenaturallaw,theyare
notsubjecttochangebythepolity.Thereviewhypothesisclaimsthatyouneedverystrongpowersof
reviewthatguaranteetolimitthepowersofthelegislature,keepingittoitsproperdomain,thisimpacts
ondemocracy,butitisapricethathastobepaid.Thethird,judicialreview,holdsthatsincethereview
processisessentiallyalegalone,thenthebestpeopleequippedtodoitarelawyersthroughthejudicial
system.
Hareloffersacritiqueofjudicialreviewasbeingundemocratic,becausehesaysthatevenifjudges
relyonsocietalnormsandvalueswhenusingtheirpowersofjudicialreview,itisstilljudgesdoingso,
notus.Thishassomevalidity,butitpresumesdemocracytoequatewithanAtheniantypedirect

democracyframework.Therealityofcontemporarycomplexsocietiesisthatwehavetolookoutside
thatsortofframeworktoreimagineademocraticapproachthatstillhasmeaningintermsofcitizens
havingtheultimatesay.
JudicialReviewundertheIrishConstitution
Judicialreviewhas,withafewnotableexceptions,inthemainextendedratherthanrestrictedrights
provisionsandgenerallyhashadapermissiveinfluenceonIrishsociety.Itisoftheutmostimportance
toconsiderthevulnerabilityoftheconstitutioninthishaphazardclimateinviewofthesingleopinion
restrictionsofArticles26and34:
Article26.2.2ThedecisionofthemajorityofthejudgesoftheSupremeCourtshall,forthepurposes
ofthisArticle,bethedecisionoftheCourtandshallbepronouncedbysuchoneofthosejudgesasthe
Courtshalldirect,andnootheropinion,whetherassentingordissenting,shallbepronouncednorshall
theexistenceofanysuchotheropinionbedisclosed.
Article34.4.5ThedecisionoftheSupremeCourtonaquestionastothevalidityofalawhaving
regardtotheprovisionsofthisConstitutionshallbepronouncedbysuchoneofthejudgesofthat
CourtasthatCourtshalldirect,andnootheropiniononsuchquestion,whetherassentingordissenting,
shallbepronounced,norshalltheexistenceofanysuchotheropinionbedisclosed.
Whilethepossibilityexistedfromitsenactment,theprocessofextendingtherangeofrightsdefended
bytheconstitutiondidnotinfactbegininaseriouswayuntiltheearly1960s.HighCourtJustice
DonalBarringtonwaspartofthatgenerationofbarristerswhobegantheprocessofrealisingthevalue
oftheconstitution.
Heidentifiestworeasonswhythisprocessdidnotbeginsooner.Thefirstwasthesetbackofthe1940
SupremeCourtjudgementontheconstitutionalityoftheOffencesAgainsttheStateAct.This
judgementineffectgaveasortofprecedencetotheBritishmodelofparliamentarysovereigntyby
sayingthatapersondeprivedofhisorherlibertyunderalawwhichwasnotrepugnanttothe
constitutionhadnorecoursetoprotectionunderArticle40.3.ThislefttheConstitutionasabroken
reedintheeyesofbarristersaccordingtoBarrington.
Thesecondreasonthattheprocessofjudicialreviewdidnotbeginsoonerwasthatthejudgesand
lawyershadallbeeneducatedinthepreconstitutionera.Itwasnotuntilthenewjudges,ledbyChief
JusticeCearbhallDalaigh,begantorecognisethelegalexistenceoftheconstitution,did
constitutionalpleadingsbecomeacommonandimportantfeatureofIrishcases.The1963casebrought
byGladysRyantopreventthefluoridationofthepublicwatersupplywasoneofthemostimportant
earlycases.Inshortshefeltthatwaterfluoridationwasharmfultoherownandherchildrenshealth
andassuchimpingedonherconstitutionalrighttobodilyintegrity.Thisrightshefeltexisted,ifnot
explicitlystated,arisingfromArticle40.3.1.
JusticeJohnKennyupheldthiscontentionintheHighCourt,althoughhedidnotdisallowfluoridation
ashejudgedittobeharmlessthisdecisionwasconfirmedbyaSupremeCourtjudgement.Ofthe
Kennyjudgement,Kellysays:Theprincipleforwhichshewascontending,namelythatthecitizens
rightsarenotexhaustedbythespecificrecitalsinspecialconstitutionalarticles,hefullyadmitted.In
hisjudgement,throughinterpretingthewordsinparticulartosignifythatotherunspecifiedrightsalso
exist,KennyopenedupanewrealmofjudicialreviewunderTheIrishConstitution.[T]heacceptance
ofinterpretationswhichacknowledgedtheexistenceofimpliedconstitutionalrightswerefirst
chartered.WhatKennydidinfactwastoallowforthepossibilityofsuchacontentionthatcertain
rightsmaynotinfactbelistedinthetext,butcould,nonetheless,berecognisedifandwhenthecase
forsuchrecognitionwasplacedbeforetheHighCourt.Beytaghsomewhatmischievouslyask:One
maywonder,then,abouttheenumerationofthosethatareinfactlisted.

Kellylistsaseriesofsimilarcaseswhichfollowedandestablishedthefollowing:therighttomarital
privacy,righttoearnalivelihood,righttolitigate,righttofairproceedings,righttotravelandholda
passport,certainrightsofmothersandsocalledillegitimatechildren.
JusticeHamilton,inthemorerecentandperhapsbetterknowncaseinvolvingtelephonetappingbythe
MinisterforJusticeandjournalistsGeraldineKennedyandBruceArnoldin1987,recognizedtheright
toprivacy.Effectivelyaddingtherighttoprivacytothoserightsalreadyenumeratedinthe
constitution.
BrianWalsh,servedonthebenchesoftheHighandSupremeCourtsforthirtyyearsandtogetherwith
thenChiefJusticeCearbhallDalaighandJusticeJohnKennywaspartofthaterawhichsawthe
greatestconstitutionaljudicialactivism.Walshwastheauthorofsomanyoftheimportantjudgements
oftheperiodthattheleadingconstitutionallawyer,ThomasConnollyremarkedthat:BrianWalshis
writingtheconstitutionallawofthiscountry.Kellyeloquentlydescribesthiserabeginninginthe
early1960sasfollows:Thisnewjudicialgenerationatthetopledtonothinglessthanarevolutionin
constitutionaljurisprudence,mostparticularlyintheareaoffundamentalrights.
Walshviewedtheconstitutionfirstlyasthefundamentallawofthestatethebasiclaw.Healsosawit
asalivingdynamicdocument,oneconcernedwiththeculturalandnormativerealityofthe
contemporarysocietyinwhichitisbeinginterpreted,notasapedanticorscholasticdocumenttobe
examinedonlyhistoricallyandtextually.
Itisalawthatembracesbothsocialandpoliticalobjectives,andisonethatgivesforceoflawto
certainmoralconcepts.Thereforeitisinevitablethatmanyofthecasesthatcomebeforethecourtswill
mirrormanysocial,economic,philosophicalandpoliticaldebatesthatengageourpeople.
JudicialReviewoperatesinaclimatewherealllegislationispresumedtobeconstitutional,aposition
thatcontrastswiththeweakerorcommonwealthmodels.WalshpointsoutthattheOireachtasis
directedbytheconstitutiontoenactonlylawsthatareconstitutionalandthatthejudiciaryoperateson
thepresumptionthatthisishowtheOireachtasinfactoperates.Thereforeifanystatuteiscapableof
beinggivenaconstructionthatisnotinconsistentwiththeprovisionsoftheConstitution,thecourts
willpresumethatthisistheconstructionintendedbylegislators.Thisisnotatotallynaivepremise,
healsopointsoutthattheveryexistenceofjudicialreviewpresentsadeterrenttothosewhomightbe
temptedtolegislateoutsidetherestraintsoftheConstitution:
...thepresumptionofconstitutionalitycarrieswithitnotonlythepresumptionthattheconstitutional
interpretationorconstructionistheoneintendedbytheOireachtasbutalsothattheOireachtas
intendedthatproceedings,procedures,discretionsandadjudicationswhicharepermitted,providedfor,
orprescribedbyanActoftheOireachtasaretobeconductedinaccordancewiththeprinciplesof
constitutionaljustice.Insuchacaseanydeparturefromthoseprincipleswouldberestrainedand
correctedbytheCourts.
ThisbecameparticularlynoticeableingovernmentlegislativepolicyduringMaryRobinsonstermas
PresidentofIreland.
ItisimportanttootorecognisethejudicialviewoftheactuallegaldocumentBunreachtnahireann
(ConstitutionofIreland).Walshstatesthatthecourtsseeitasacontemporaryfundamentallawthat
speaksinthepresenttense.ItisthereforeinterpretedintermsofwhatitmeansincontemporaryIrish
societyratherthanwhatitmeantin1937.
Thepossibilityofjudicialreviewhasexpandedthenumberandtypeofconstitutionalcasesbeing
taken.Initiallymostofthecasesinvolvedindividuals,whosepositionrelativetothelawmayhave
beensharedbyothers,butessentiallythesewerepeoplewhofoundthemselvesinadifficultlegal
positionandwhonowsoughtreliefbywayofaconstitutionalcasetoprovetheprecedenceofsome
rightoverapieceoflegislationwhichtheythoughttoberepugnanttotheConstitution.

Barringtonpointsoutthatmanyinterestgroupshavealsoinitiatedconstitutionalcasesthroughan
individualmember.Helistsfarmers,ratepayers,taxpayers,tradeunions,bankofficialsandpolice
officers.OnecouldalsoaddtothislistandincludeamongotherstheNorriscaserelatingto
homosexualrights,theCrottycaseregardingtheratificationoftheSingleEuropeanAct,the
McKennaCaseontheuseofpublicexpendituretosupportonesideinareferendumcampaignanda
numberofcasesrelatingtotheEightAmendmentandthesocalledrighttolifeprovisioninArticle
40.3.3.
Oneoverridingconsiderationofcourseinallthesecasesishavingthefinancialmeanstosupportthe
costofsuchlitigation.Theriskoflosingthecaseandbeingsaddledwiththeexcessivecostsinvolved
putsthisoptionbeyondthemeansofmostindividualsandgroups.Kellyvigorouslydeniesthisbar,
butdespitehisprotestationsregardingthegenerosityandgoodwillofthelegalprofessionhiscaseis
verymuchdisprovedbytheactualexperienceoflitigants.
ThisflexibilityofinterpretationoftheprovisionsofTheIrishConstitutionthroughjudicialreview,like
theAmericanconstitution,makesitpossibletorecogniseandprotectunspecifiedrightsasmuchas
thosecontainedinthetext.BycontrasttheEuropeanConventiononHumanRightsisamorerigidly
definedinternationalcharterwhichbyitsnatureprecludesthepossibilityofaswideaninterpretation.
Itcannotcertainly,giventhecurrentlevelofinternationaldiplomacy,gobeyondtheclearlydefined
principlesofthesignatorycountries.
TheSingleOpinion
TheIrishConstitutionhasanimportantlimitation,whichmakesitsinterpretationmorerestrictiveand
lessdynamicthantheAmericanconstitutiontowhichitsapproachtojudicialreviewisbroadlysimilar.
ThatisthesingleopinionrequirementoutlinedinArticles26and34,asdiscussedabove,whichis
categoricalinitsassertionthatnootheropinion,whetherassentingordissenting,shallbepronounced
norshalltheexistenceofanysuchotheropinionbedisclosed.
Thisrestrictiononthepublicationanddisseminationofasingleopinionfirmlyrejectsthemeritsofa
dissentingjudgement.FormerSupremeCourtJudge,BrianWalshpointsoutthelimitationsofthisin
hisforewordtoConstitutionalLawinIreland.Theobligatoryconcealmentoftheexistenceof
assentingordissentingopinionsalsoseriouslyhampersthedevelopmentofourconstitutional
jurisprudence.HecontraststhisfetterwiththesimilarrequirementoftheGermanconstitution,which
[a]fterseveralyearsofbeingboundbyanidenticalrulewasultimatelyreleasedfromittothegreat
benefitofGermanconstitutionaljurisprudence.

ItisinterestingtonotethatthesingleopinionrequirementsofArticles26and34wereonlyaddedby
anActoftheOireachtasin1941,inthatperiodgrantedtotheOireachtastomakeamendmentstothe
constitution.Thesingleopinionrequirementhasnot,therefore,beenratifiedbythepeopleofIreland
inthesamemannerthattheConstitutionitselfwasinthe1937referendum.
CaseypointsoutthattheCommitteeonCourtPracticeandProceduresfoundthesingleopinionrule
undesirableandinjurious.The1967CommitteeontheConstitutionvieweditquitedifferently
suggestingthat[a]nypublicationofotheropinionswouldonlytendtocreateuncertaintyintheminds
ofthepeopleonmattersofconstitutionalimportance.Caseyiscorrectindescribingthisasa
paternalisticviewofsocietyandlamentsthefactthatanumberofreferendahavebeenheldtoamend
theconstitutionandprovisionsfortheremovaloftheseclausescouldquiteeasilyhavebeenconsidered
withoneofthem.Itspassagein1941clearlypointstoaclosedworldviewbythelegislature,similarto
thedoctrinalpositionoftheRomanCatholicchurch,viz.theexistenceofasingleindisputabletruth.It
assumesagreatnaivetonthepartofthepublicandespeciallyintheirinabilitytomakediscernments
betweensubtle,butperhapskeypointsinbothnormsandlaw.Itisavoltefaceagainsttheveryideas
ofdiscursiveopinionandwillformation,andindeedagainsttheliberalmaximsinfavourofthe
autonomyoftheindividual.Theintroductionofthisprovisiondisplaysagreatsenseofinsecurityin

thedeValeracabinet,thattheirprojectcouldbederailedbyjurists,manyofwhomwouldstillhave
beenappointedbytheirpoliticalopponentsandallwouldhavebeentrainedinthecontextofaBritish
constitutionalmodel.
TheDilDebatesof1941givecredencetodeValeraspaternalisticorientation.Fromthepointof
viewofthepublicinterest,itisbettertohaveasinglejudgementpronouncedandnoindicationgiven
thatotherjudgesheldadifferentview.EventhoughtheSupremeCourtupheldtheconstitutionalityof
the1940OffencesAgainsttheStateAct,indeliveringthejudgement,Sullivanstatedthatitwasthe
majorityview.Althoughtherewasinfactnominorityview,deValerafeltthatthehintofonecould
underminepublicconfidenceinthisorothersensitivepoliticallymotivatedBillsandthusclosedthat
possibilitybyintroducingthesingleopinionamendmentsin1941.InthisdeValeracreatedtwopoints
ofweaknessinhisgreatproject.
Firstly,heunderminedhisinspireddecisiontohavethe1937constitutionadoptedinaplebiscite.The
retrospectiveactofclosingthedoor,nowthathefacedaseriouspoliticaldilemmainrelationto
repressivelegislation,sawhimreverttothelogicofthepreviousconstitutionofgivingprecedenceto
parliament.Inthishetookaperfectlylegalandconstitutionalshortcutthroughhisownsafeguardsthat
insistedonconstitutionalamendmentsbeingapprovedbothbytheOireachtasandthepeoplethrougha
plebiscite.ThisputintotheIrishConstitutionafundamentalprinciplewhichhadnotbeenputbefore
thepeopleandcouldnotclaimthepopularimprimaturoftherestofthedocument.
Secondly,consistentlywithhisownworldview,hereducedthepotentialoftheconstitutiontobecome
adynamicdocumentwithastronglatentpotentialtointroducereformwiththeevolutionofsociety.
Thissitscomfortablywithhisownconservativeideologyandwiththeurgeforretrenchmentinthe
historicalcontextofWorldWarIIandthechallengetothestateslegitimacyemanatingfromtheIrish
Republicanmovement.ItisalsotruethatalthoughjudicialreviewwaspartoftheUSreality,itwas
stillcompletelynovelintheIrishcontext.Givenapaternalisticandconservativeagenda,itwouldnot
havebeenviewedpositivelyinanycase,andgiventheprevailingdogmaofsingletruthvalues,itwas
almostheretical.Thegovernmentcontrivedtodeprivetheconstitutionofoneofitspotentiallymost
dynamicforces.Barringtonisparticularlystrongonwhatheseesasthefalloutfromthisdecision:The
dissentingjudgementhasanhonourableplaceintheevolutionofthelawandattimesturnsouttobe
moreinfluentialthanthejudgementofthemajority.
Theassertionthattheminorityviewcanbeavitalcatalystinthedevelopmentofourconceptofrightis
absolutelyvalid,andwhatevershortsightedpoliticalgainmayhavebeenachievedbyenforcingthe
singleopinionin1941ithasbeenoutlivedintheensuingyears.Itisnotasurprisingmeasureina
politicalframeworkwhereparticipationwaskeptataminimum.Notonlydoesthismeasurerestrictthe
judiciarysabilitytodevelopandexpandconceptsofrightandlaw,butitalsorestrictsthepublics
abilitytoactivelyengageindiscourseonthesesameissues.DeValerabelievedinclosedgovernment,
atraditionthathaspersisted,despiteclaimsbyvarioussubsequentgovernmentstothecontrary.In
1994onbeingelectedTaoiseachJohnBrutonproposedthathisgovernmentwouldgovernas
transparentlyasifitwereworkingbehindapaneofglass.Theactualisationofthatmaynothavebeen
quiteasopenandin1997therewasanecessitytoholdaCabinetConfidentialityreferendum.Windsof
changeblowthroughtheIrishsystem,butaresidualethosofclosedgovernmentstillpersistsevenif
thephilosophyofminimalparticipationandabeliefinthemaintenanceofthestatusquoreceiveda
severebuffetingthroughgovernmentandchurchscandalsinthe1990s.
Perhaps,asKeoghpointsout,weshouldbethankfulthatdeValeraresistedsomeofthemore
reactionaryreligiousandpoliticalforcesactiveinIrelandandmostofEuropeinthe1930s.His
suspicionofthejudiciaryandlegalsystemwastoogreateveninthesensitivepoliticalrealityofthe
period.Whilehehadbeeninpowerforovereightyearsatthatstageasubstantialrumpofthejudiciary
wasstillfromthepreFiannaFileraandmanyhadbeentheproductsofaneducationunderthe
philosophyoftheBritishlegalsystem,inwhichcircumstanceshisshorttermsuspicionsmayhavehad
ajustification.Thesingleopinionmuzzlewaspossiblycalculatedtocontainashorttermproblem,
whiletheconceptofanactivejudicialreviewwouldhavebeenasdistastefulasitwasinconceivable.

Thesingleopinionruleisatvariancewiththeconstitutionsthrustofvestingexclusiveinterpretative
powerwiththejudiciary.Itseemsuntenabletoholdthatthejudiciaryischargedwiththismost
importantofconstitutionaltasksononehandandyetdeprivedofthetrusttoresponsiblydischargethis
responsibilitytothefull.Itispossibleinthecontextofanewandasyetnotfullyestablishedstate,to
seehowdeValerasagendamightbethwartedbyahostilejudiciary.Theevidencewouldsuggest
thoughthatallarmsofthestate,puttheirdutyandloyaltytothestatebeforetheirpersonalpreferences.
Toimagineacontextwhereajudiciarymightcreateuncertaintyandinstabilitythroughaconcerted
campaignagainstthestate,fomentingdissensionandquestioninglegitimacy,couldrightlybelabelled
paranoia.Partiallygaggingthehighestcourtinthestateultimatelywascounterproductivetode
ValerasownagendaasitweakenedratherthanstrengthenedtheIrishConstitution.
TheSingleOpinionCrux
TheConstitutionalamendmentsofJune25,1941includedthesingleopinionstipulation,butalso
placedanotherveryimportantprovisoonthequestionofconstitutionality.Thisprovisocontainedin
Article34,3,3ineffectmeansthatoncealawhasbeendeemedtobeconstitutionalitcanneveragain
haveitsconstitutionalitytested.ThisArticlereads:
NoCourtwhatevershallhavejurisdictiontoquestionthevalidityofalaw,theBillforwhichshall
havebeenreferredtotheSupremeCourtbythePresidentunderArticle26ofthisConstitution,orto
questionthevalidityofaprovisionofalawwherethecorrespondingprovisionintheBillforsuchlaw
shallhavebeenreferredtotheSupremeCourtbythePresidentunderthesaidArticle26.
Thiscouldhaveseriousramificationsinthelongterm.ForinstancetheUSConstitutionisovertwo
hundredyearsold,inthatperiodsocietalmoreshavechangedconsiderably.Alawtestedunderthe
Article34provisionsseemstoatleastpartiallyundermineBrianWalshsunderstandingofthe
constitutionasacontemporarydocument.Article34placespartoftheconstitutionandthelawsit
enshrinespermanentlylockedintime.
Theideaofjudicialdissentasopposedtojudicialunanimityrevolvesaroundissuesofdemocracyand
power.Denyingavehicletoexpressdissentinvestsjudicialreviewswiththeauthorityofalaw,which
isunifiedandunderstandable,apointmadevisvissomecontinentalcourtsbyKelman.Hesaysthat
judgesincourtsinfluencedbyFrenchlawaredrivenbytheneedtofosterthemythofthelaws
impersonalityandinexorabilityaboveallpersonalreservationsortheneedtomaintainconsistency.
Judgesarethusvestedwithalmostsacredauthority,theysitinjudgementandreachtheonlypossible
conclusion,whichislegal,justandimmutable.Itisnotademocraticprocess,itisaboutseekingout
legaltruthandactinguponit.
Secondlyitlogicallyholdsthatthelegislativeprocessandpopularconsentdecreewhatislaw.Itis
easytoseewhydeValeramightpreferthisapproachasitplacesthepoliticaleliteattheepicenterof
theprocess.Ifthelawisnotrightorthejudgementisnotacceptableitcomesbacktotheexecutiveand
legislaturetofixit.Thisisdonethroughrecoursetonewlegislationand/orthroughtheintroductionof
aconstitutionalreferendum.Herethecourtsgetanopportunitytospeak,buthavingspokenthe
politicalelitehaveanopportunitytorevise.Sothedenialofdemocracywithinthejudicialsystem,
keepsthemessagetightandthetargetinfocus.Totaketherouteofmajorityandminorityjudgements
essentiallyenhancesinternaldemocracywithinthejudiciaryandgivesjudgespowervisvisthelaw
andpolitics.Thelawinnolongerunitary,butiswhatthejudgessayitis(majority)orsayitcouldbe,
seenfromanotherperspective(minority).Sonowdiscourseanddebateonthelawisintherealmofthe
judiciaryratherthanthelegislature.
Stackdescribesasaninstitutionalapproach,onewhereasingleopinion,deliveredbyajudgeisnotan
individualviewbutthatofthecourtasaninstitution.Thisdistancesindividualjudgesfromdecisions
andcreatestheimpressionthatwhatisemergingistheruleoflawnottheruleofmen.Inotherwords
thecourthasinterpretedthelaw,inthemannerinwhichpriestsinterpretthewordofgod.Neitherthe
individualjudgenorpriestcanbetakentobook,norseentohaveundueinfluenceastheprocessis
essentiallyaboutdistillingthetruthorthetruthinthelaw.Stacksays:Dissentexposesthe

individualitythattheinstitutionalapproachdependsuponsuppressing.Theattractionofan
institutionalapproachfordeValeraiseasytoappreciate.Hedidnotwanttopromoteajudicial
approachthatmightopenuplegaldiscourse,butratheronethatwouldkeepitbounded,keepitstrong
andmaintainthevisionofaunitarystatebasedonasinglefundamentallaw,albeitofmanyarticles.
InsomewaysthesingleopinionsteerstheIrishsystemsomewherebetweentheAmericanandGerman
systemsandthoseofthenewcommonwealthmodelsdiscussedabove,ironicallythroughadifferent
mechanism.WhilethecommonwealthmodelsandtheAmericansystembothallowdissentthecultural
fundamentalsaredifferent.Oneholdswiththesupremacyofparliamenttheotherwiththeconstitution.
InIrelandscaseitveerstowardstheconstitution,butwithhandcuffs,thatwouldlimitthescopeof
judicialactivism,whichovertimewouldrequireremedythroughtheactionofparliament.Whatde
Valeradidnottrulyenvisagewastheemergenceofstrongerjudicialreview;northewholehearted
acceptanceofhisconstitutionasthelegitimatefundamentallaw;northatconstitutionalreferendacould
changearticles,butnotnecessarilyjudicialopinions;northatthepoliticalelitecannotalwaysswaythe
peopletotheirpointofview,alessonhelearnedwhentryingtoreplacetheproportionalrepresentation
systemusedinelections.
StacksdiscussionontheimportanceofdissentintheAmericancontextofademocracypremisedon
deliberation,istheveryoppositetothedeValeraprojectofattemptingtocreateunitynotdiversity.For
Stackdissentlegitimizesacourtasitdemonstratesthatitreachesitsjudgmentsthroughadeliberative
process,inamannernotunlikethelegislature.WhetherStackshypothesisistrueofAmericatodayis
aquestionforanothertime.IfweweretoapplythesingleopinionrulerigidlyontheUSConstitutionit
wouldnothavebeenpossibleinthelightoftheDreddScottcaseforAmericanslavesoreventhe
childrenofformerslavestoobtainfullandequalcitizenshipcertainlynotwithoutaconstitutional
amendment.
InthecaseofTheIrishConstitutionthefurtherremovedintimewebecomefromtherulingdeeminga
particularlaworpartofittobeconstitutionalthelesslikelyitistoholdtrueinanunfolding
contemporaryinterpretativescenario.
ThisruletoohasalimitingeffectonthePresidentsprerogativetoreferBillstotheSupremeCourt.
Article26givesthePresidentthepowertoreferanyBilltotheSupremeCourtforadjudicationonits
constitutionalityapolicyadoptedmoreoftenbyMaryRobinsonthananyotherPresident,butalso
usedbyhersuccessorMaryMcAleeseandevenbydeValerahimselfduringhistimeasPresident.The
mechanismforseekingSupremeCourtadjudicationisstraightforward:UnderArt.26,thePresident,
afterconsultationwiththeCouncilofState,mayreferanybilltotheSupremeCourttoconsider
whetherthebillisunconstitutional.Theinstrumentishoweverrigidbothinitsimplementationand
consequencesandweakintermsofprocess.Itlosesmostofitspotentialbythestipulationthatabillso
testedcanneveragainhaveitsconstitutionalityreviewed.Caseydescribestheprocessasfollows:
Article26imposestighttimelimits.Thereferencemustbemadenotlaterthansevendaysfromthe
dateoftheBillspresentationforsignature:Article26.1.2.ThusthePresidenthasonlyoneweekin
whichtomeditateontheBill,assembletheCouncilofStateandreflectontheviewsexpressed,and
makehisdecision.
MorganpointsoutthatthecaseisarguedbeforetheCourtbycouncilappointedonbehalfoftheCourt
ononesideandtheAttorneyGeneralontheother,defendingtheconstitutionalityofthebill.
Barringtonrightlyexplainsthatthisispurelyahypotheticalcaseandwill[l]acktheforceand
credibilityoffacts.Suchanapproachisseriouslydeficientbycomparisontoreallitigation.
Theconceptisagoodone,butthemachineryopentothePresidentandultimatelytheconstitution
itselfispoor.Givenamoreflexiblebriefandtheremovaloftheunhelpfulrulethatconstitutionality
canonlybetestedonce,thiscouldbeoneofthemorepositiveelementsoftheconstitution.The
Presidentcouldbemoreactivelyinvolvedinaffirminganddevelopingtheconstitutionasitnow
standsreferringabilltotheSupremeCourtcouldbecounterproductive.Abillofdoubtful
constitutionalityismuchmorelikelytoescapetheartificialtestofacourtwithoutwitnesses,evidence

orlitigationthanitistostanduptothetestofactuallitigation.Thereiseveryreasonthereforewhya
PresidentshouldbeveryreluctanttoreferabilltotheSupremeCourt.Partofthisproblemcouldbe
alleviatedthroughtheuseoftheAmericanprocedurewherealineoflegislationcanbequestioned,
ratherthantheentireBill.QuestionsraisedabouttheconveningoftheCouncilofStatetoadvisethe
PresidentontheHealthAmendment(No2)BillinDecember2004intimatedsuchapotential
interpretation,giventhatmanyobserverswereconcernedabouttheretrospectiveaspectofthe
legislation.ButitwasreportedthataspokespersonforthePresidentsaidshehadnotidentifiedany
particularpartofthelegislation.Evenifshehadanissuewithaparticularpartofthelegislationthat
leveloffocuswasnotopentoherinconsideringwhethertosendthelegislationtotheSupremeCourt
forreview.
Conclusion
InthisarticleIhavelookedatjudicialreviewundertheIrishconstitution.InthisperusalIhavepointed
outsomeimportantissuesforthosestudyingIrishlawandgovernment.Itisimportanttopointoutthat
theIrishconstitutiondoesnotfitintotheCommonwealthmodel.ThisforcesthosewhostudytheIrish
politicalsystemtoavoidplacingIrelandintoaconvenientcategorywithCommonwealthsystems.Yes
intermsofthelegislativebranchofgovernment,IrelandverycloselyresemblestheCommonwealth
model.Howeverthenatureofthejudicialbranch,whileoperatingwithintheCommonLawtradition,
alsooperateswithintheambitofaconstitutionthatdoesnotrecogniseparliamentarysupremacyina
mannerconsistentwiththeCommonwealthmodel.InthisregardthenIrelandisclosertotheAmerican
model.IneffectIrishgovernmentisahybrid,withantecedentsintheCommonwealthparliamentary
modelwithastrongflavouroftheAmericanconstitutionalmodel.
IhighlighttwoimportantareasinwhichtheIrishconstitutiondeviatesfromtheAmericanconstitution.
FirstlytheIrishconstitutiondoesnotallowforthepublicationofaminorityopinioninSupremeCourt
judgements.ThisIargueowesmuchtotheconservativeideologyofitsmainauthoramondeValera
andindeedtothegeneraltraditionalistconservativeclimateinIrelandatthetimeofitsadoption.The
impactisthatjudicialdissentishidden,givingafalseimpressionofjudicialcertaintyandreducingthe
potentialforbothpublicandjudicialexpressionanddebatearoundcurrentandemerginglegaland
constitutionalissues.InthisregardwecansaythattheIrelandhasafarlessdemocraticallyoriented
constitutionthantheUS.
ThesecondsignificantdeviationfromtheAmericanmodelisthatundertheIrishconstitutionan
absoluteclosureisbroughttotheconstitutionalityofanactorbillonceithasbeenadjudicateduponby
theSupremeCourt.Thismeasuremayultimatelyleadtoastultificationofsignificantaspectsofthe
constitution,denyingitthepotentialtobethesortoflivingdocumentenvisagedbyformerChief
JusticeWalsh.
CurrentlywhereeitherthePresidentoralitiganthastestedtheconstitutionalityofabilloractthe
SupremeCourtdeliversafinalandabsolutedecision.Thisisasignificantweakness,whichIbelieve
oughttobeaddressedthroughareviewmechanismthatwouldhavespecifictimeframesand
procedures,butnonethelessleaveopenthepossibilityofrevisitingtheissue.Thetimeframeswouldbe
necessarytoavoidaconstantquestioningofconstitutionality,especiallyaroundcontroversialquestions
liketherighttolifeorothervexedissues.Theprocedureswouldbenecessarytoensurethatthedoor
forlatertestingisneitherirretrievablysealednortooeasilyopened.Perhapsfiveyearsafterthe
SupremeCourtrulingtheSenate(Seanad)wouldbeautomaticallypresentedwithamotiontoconsider
liftingtheprohibitionagainstasecondSupremeCourtopinion,whichifpassedwouldalloweitherthe
Presidentoranyotherlitiganttobringtheissuebeforethecourtsagain.Anadditionalmeasuremight
betosetalimitationofsaytenyearsafterwhichanypreviousconstitutionaldecisionoftheSupreme
Courtcouldberevisited,throughnormallegalprocedures,withoutreferencetotheSenate.Thatwould
putgreaterflexibilityintoasystemthatcurrentlypreventsreasonablereview.
IpointoutthedivergencebetweentheAmericanconstitutionalmodelandthatoftheCommonwealth.I
placeIrelandclosertoAmerica,howeverIfeelthereisastrongcasetonudgeIrelandatleastinone
respectclosertotheCommonwealthmodel.HereIrefertoHabermassideaofaquasijudicialreview

functionforthelegislature.Heenvisagesaparliamentarycommittee,whichmightincludeexternal
lawyers,thatwouldengageinareviewoflegislationintermsofitsconstitutionality.Thiswouldnotin
anywaystepovertheseparationofpowersortheroleoftheSupremeCourt,butratherforce
legislatorstoreflectonthelegislativeprocess.Inthiswayitwouldallowthelegislaturetoriseabove
thecutandthrustofparliamentaryengagementandgiveamorerational,reflexiveandconsideredview
ofbothindividuallawsandthewholeprocessoflawmaking.Inthepartypoliticalrealminwhich
westerndemocraciesexistitwouldrequireaculturalshift,butthisshiftmayalreadybeemerging.
AsecondcontentionraisedbyHabermasconcernstheplaceofthelegalsysteminthewidersocietal
context.Forhimitisnottenableforthejudiciaryandthebroaderlegalcommunitytooperateonan
isolatedlegalisticplanewhenitcomestointerpretingandunderstandinglawsandconstitutions.Legal
discoursenomatterhowtightlyframedcannotbeviewedinisolationfromthewidermoraldiscourses
ofsociety.Lawhasalreadybeenshapedbyrulesandprinciples,theprinciplesthemselvesaredrawn
frombothalegalandmoralbase.Hepointstotheevolutionfromthemoralprinciplesofnaturallaw
intopositivelawtosupporthiscase.Thisfoundationpointstothefactthatthelogicofargumentation
inherentinthemodesofjustificationoflawareinfactopentomoraldiscourses.Hesaysitisworthy
ofnotethatthelegaldiscourses,howeverboundtoexistinglaw,cannotoperatewithinaclosed
universeofunambiguouslyfixedlegalrules.Thisapproachseeksagreateropeningupofthelegal
systemandindeedthejudicialbranchandinthecaseofIrelandaneedtorevisitthesortsofissuesI
raisevisvisboththesingleopinionruleandthefinalityofSupremeCourtdecisionson
constitutionality.
Whatisatissueinalloftheseconcernsistheentirebusinessofgoodgovernment.Twocentral
concernsonthisagendaaredemocracyandhumanrights.Thefundamentalquestionaboutdemocracy
doesnotstopatthelegislativeandexecutivebranchesofgovernment.Ifweareseriousabout
democracythenittoomustplayaroleinthejudicialbranch.Thesecondissue,humanrights,isnot
unconnectedwithdemocracy,bothintermsofhowwerecognizeandjustifyrightswithinthebroader
societyandthejudicialbranchofgovernment.
Citeas:SeamusOTuama,JudicialReviewundertheIrishConstitution:MoreAmericanthan
Commonwealth,vol.12.2ELECTRONICJOURNALOFCOMPARATIVELAW,(October2008),

http://www.ejcl.org/122/art122-2.pdf

Jobstown Boy found Guilty.....

Technically its not a gross miscarriage of justice, not by
the legal people or the State... What I mean and read
carefully because what happened here was simple....
People just don't know how the supreme law
works...People Believe wrongly they have rights and
freedoms to protest....In truth....NO WE DON'T. There is
nothing within the contents of the Constitution that give
people legal right. If there is to be one resounding lesson
to be learned... People of Ireland get properly educated
and informed on the Constitution. See and understand
who its always served.... see that its not even fit for
purpose. Know your true legal rights.... protesting, striking
are NOT legal rights. Wisdom comes from admitting what
you don't know... this is the path toward wisdom and real
knowledge. Understanding the system and how its run and
operated will be the beginning of real change.... protesting
because you're angry, which is justified won't achieve or
do anything for this young man..and others who now
stand trial.

It was the desire of Burton and the Labour Party to have the youth
jailed and nobody will be more disappointed than Burton the
members of the centre-right party that the judge didn't put the
youth behind bars

Today, democracy died in the Republic of Ireland. A

teenage boy was found guilty of imprisoning Joan Burton,
despite her being in a Garda car and in the presence of
over 100 Gardai. His crime? Videoing proceedings on his
phone while joining in chants made by hundreds of
protestors.

Mary Robinson has made a handy living from the

taxpayers of this country but not content with pocketing
large amounts of our money she is now building an ego
project for herself in her native Ballina. We would not mind
too much - if that's what she wants to do, except it is
costing an astronomical 8 MILLION OF OUR MONEY.
Great expose by Diarmaid Ferriter in the Irish Times
(previously only The Phoenix highlighted this madness)
Here's a few extracts:
"Robinsons archive is being assessed for acceptance as a
heritage donation; under sections of the Finance Act 1995
and the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, a tax credit equal to
80 per cent of the market value of the heritage item
donated can be credited against tax liabilities incurred by
the donor. As the Robinson archive has been valued by
Mealys auctioneers at 2.5million, this amounts to a
possible tax credit of 2 million. Robinson has described
this project as a give back to the people of Ireland."

"Robinson is a former groundbreaking politician and head

of state, in receipt of a very large annual pension from the
public purse, being paid 121,158 last year. Her public
service should extend to the donation of her archive in the
proper sense, continuing a noble tradition."
Not so sure about "groundbreaking" but Robinson was of
course a member of the Labour Party. Is that where the
arrogance comes from? This is nothing short of a massive
scam and once again it's the people who are being
mugged. Kenny is backing this vanity project of course. Of
course!

Mary Robinsons legacy in

no need of a vanity project

The former president should follow the practice of her

predecessors and donate her papers to the National
Library, the National Archives or a university
about 14 hours ago

Diarmaid Ferriter

Wrong location for archive? The Mary Robinson Centre in Ballina, Co Mayo.
Photograph: Keith Heneghan/Phocus

On this day 40 years ago, a major Irish political drama

reached a conclusion when the fifth president of
Ireland, Cearbhall Dlaigh, resigned from office.
Patrick Donegan, the minister for defence at the time,
had insulted Dlaigh over his decision to refer the
Emergency Powers Bill to the Supreme Court for a
judgment as to its constitutionality. Dlaigh should
not have had to resign; that he did was not just due to
the failure of Donegan to resign but also to the refusal
of taoiseach Liam Cosgrave to demand Donegans
resignation.
In a letter to Dlaigh, Donegan sought to blame
others for how the controversy over his description of

the president as a thundering disgrace had played

out, complaining, for example, that facile references
by journalists, which can become emotive, are difficult
to contend with. This was an ironic assertion given
Donegans emotive and facile comments about
Dlaigh. The president was scathing in response,
asking pointedly: Have you any conception of your
responsibility as a minister of state and in particular as
minister for defence?
Dlaigh resigned to protect the dignity of the office
of president, but there was a broader context to the
controversy: he had long been sidelined by the
coalition government and, according to notes he
compiled, he felt there was not even a minimum of
acceptance of him as president by some of its
members. He bristled, too, over the contemptuous way
he believed Cosgrave had treated him.
O Dlaighs notes also shed light on what I have
described elsewhere as a learned but also a highly
unusual and occasionally messianic mind. There is
little doubt, however, that he was treated disgracefully
during this controversy.

Diarmaid Ferriter: Irish-Americans will not all vote as

immigrants
Diarmaid Ferriter: Theres a big difference between
visiting and belonging
Diarmaid Ferriter: Be wary of shameless, populist
water charge abolitionists

Such an assessment can be made because Dlaighs

private papers are held in the University College
Dublin (UCD) archives, and combined with the State
papers in the National Archives, they allow for a
detailed analysis and interpretation of the events that
led to his resignation. The papers of one of his
predecessors as president, amon de Valera, are also in
the UCD archives, as are the papers of Dlaighs

successor, Patrick Hillery, which were deposited by

Hillery in 1991 and 1997. All collections in the UCD
archives are donated without payment of any kind. The
current president, Michael D Higgins, donated the
archive of his career up to that point to the National
Library of Ireland in 2011, also without payment, with
the promise of more to come.
However, the papers of Mary Robinson, president in
1990-1997, are heading west to the new Mary
Robinson Centre in Ballina, which has an estimated
cost of 8.35 million. Mayo County Council, which will
hold the papers in trust on behalf of the State, has
committed 1.5 million to the centre, while the
Department of the Taoiseach will provide 2 million,
and this money will reportedly be matched through
philanthropic funding.
Robinsons archive is being assessed for acceptance as
a heritage donation; under sections of the Finance Act
1995 and the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, a tax credit
equal to 80 per cent of the market value of the heritage
item donated can be credited against tax liabilities
incurred by the donor. As the Robinson archive has
been valued by Mealys auctioneers at 2.5million, this
amounts to a possible tax credit of 2 million.
Robinson has described this project as a give back to
the people of Ireland.
The website of the Mary Robinson Centre lists the
contents of the archive, including:
2,000 books on law and Human Rights (many of
these presented to Mary Robinson and signed by the
author); 3,800 periodicals, many of them with
contributions by Robinson; A Master File of the
Presidents engagements from Dec 1990 to Sept 1997;
The symbolic light in the window of ras an
Uachtarin from Marys Presidency; Robinsons
personal diaries from 1967 to 1990 and from 1998 to

2001; 325 Archive Cartons containing documents

ranging from the Anglo Irish Agreement to Women
and Equality . . .
Whether these items are worth 2.5 million is
arguable, but equally troubling is that an auction house
ever had to be involved in the calculation of the
material value in the private market of an archive of a
former head of state. And why is a master file of the
presidents engagements not the property of the State?
If Robinson wants to encourage research into her
career, or assessments of her legacy, she should follow
the practice of her predecessors and donate her papers
to the National Library, the National Archives or one of
the national universities, without any need for tax
credits or valuations by auctioneers and with no
excessively expensive, publicly funded vanity centre.
Robinson is a former groundbreaking politician and
head of state, in receipt of a very large annual pension
from the public purse, being paid 121,158 last year.
Her public service should extend to the donation of her
archive in the proper sense, continuing a noble
tradition.

GRECO Report on
Corruption in Ireland
ElaineByrne / November 21, 2014 Elaine Byrne

21/11/14
The Council of Europe (GRECO) today published
its fourth evaluation round report on corruption
in Ireland. Corruption prevention in respect
of members of parliament, judges and
prosecutors contains eleven
recommendations.

The recommendations are a timely intervention

into the debate on political reform much of
which campaigners for reform have been
advocating for some time. No surprises here
the strong focus on judges pay is interesting
though. Much of it is echoes the European
Commission report on corruption in Ireland
published earlier this year.
RECOMMENDATIONS
POLITICIANS
1. The existing ethics framework be replaced
with a uniform and consolidated values-based
normative framework encompassing the ethical
conduct of members of parliament including
their staff as appropriate covering various
situations of conflicts of interest (gifts and other
advantages, third party contacts including
lobbyists, accessory activities and postemployment situations etc.) with the aim of
providing clear rules concerning their expected
conduct;
2. Authorities clarify the scope of the Houses of
the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and
Procedures) Act 2013 so as to ensure thatthe
protections and encouragement for
whistleblowers contained in the Protected
Disclosures Act 2014 are fully understood and
implemented;
3. Existing regime on asset declarations be
enhanced by i) extending the obligations upon
all members of parliament to disclose their

interests to include quantitative data on their

significant financial and economic involvements

as well as in respect of significant liabilities; and
ii) that consideration be given to widening the
scope of members declarations to also include
close or connected persons, in line with the
existing rules for office holders;
4. Establishment of a consolidated independent
monitoring mechanism be considered in respect
of members of parliament, that itbe provided
with necessary means to investigate complaints
as well as to sanction findings of misconduct
and that all its decisions, including on the
dismissal of cases are given an appropriate
level of publicity;
5. Parliamentary authorities provide dedicated
regular training for members of parliament on
issues such as ethics, conduct insituations of
conflicts of interests and corruption prevention;
JUDGES
6. With due expedition, an independent
statutory council be established for the
judiciary, provided with adequate resources and
funding for its organisation and operations;
7. The current system for selection, recruitment,
promotion and transfers of judges be reviewed
with a view to target theappointments to the
most qualified and suitable candidates in a
transparent way, without improper influence

from the
executive/political powers;
8. Appropriate structure be established within
the framework of which questions concerning
constitutional safeguards of the judiciary in
connection with employment conditions are to
be examined in close dialogue with judicial
representatives with a view to maintaining the
high levels of judicial integrity and professional
quality in the future;
9. Code of conduct for judges be formally
established, including guidance and confidential
counselling in respect of conflicts of interest and
other integrity related matters (gifts, recusal,
third party contacts and handling of confidential
information etc.) and ii) connect such an
instrument to an accountability mechanism;
10. Dedicated induction and in-service training
for judges be institutionalised and adequately
resourced, while respecting theindependence of
the judiciary;
DPP
11. Policy for handling complaints against the
Prosecution Service be enhanced with a view to
i) establishing more independentprocessing of
matters concerning the integrity and ethical
conduct of prosecutors and ii) further
developing the statistics concerning such
complaints.

GRECO Group of States against Corruption 16th General Activity

Report (2015) progress needed in preventing corruption in respect
of MPs, judges and prosecutors
http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/documents/2016/Greco(2
016)1_GAR_No.16_2015_EN.pdf

Revisiting the
Minsk II
Agreement
The Art and Statecraft of Russianbrokered Cease-fires
August 11, 2016

https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fspublic/publication/160802_Hvenmark_RevisitingMin
skII_Web.pdf

Royle Family star Ricky Tomlinson

sends letter of support to Jobstown
protestors
Saturday, October 22, 2016

Royle Family actor Ricky Tomlinson has sent a letter in

support of the Jobstown protestors in Dublin.

The letter, read out by irg's Scott Masterson at today's

rally in Dublin, comes after a teenager was found guilty of
falsely imprisoning the former Tnaiste Joan Burton and
her adviser during a protest in Jobstown in Dublin.
The message of solidarity with the Jobstown protesters
from Tomlinson recalls when he was sent to jail with his
friend Dessie Warren in the 70s for a builders' dispute
against the British government.
If you can't see the Facebook post above, click here,

or read the full letter below:

Brothers and Sisters,
40 years ago myself and Dessie Warren were sentenced
to 2 years and 3 years in jail.
We were guilty for organising building workers; we were
guilty for organising for better pay and for better health
and safety; but most of all we were guilty of saying
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
Working conditions on building sites were second only to
coal mines for fatalities and serious injuries. Facilities
were non existent, no toilets or wash basins. Pay was
terrible 20 per week for a skilled worker and 17 for
labourers, this for a 40 hour week.
Me and Dessie organised workers to strike, we organised
workers for better pay and conditions and we won! But
the bosses and the Tories came after us and used the law
to punish us and to punish other building workers - but we
stood strong.
It is an absolute insult to find that a politician trapped in
the comfort of (a) car is deemed to be in prison. As Jim
Royle would say - "Imprisonment my arse!"
Dublin is a great city - Liverpool is a great city - but
solidarity and unity of the working class is the most
important.
I want to send greetings to the people of Jobstown for
standing up against water charges - it is better to break
the law than to break the poor.
[PAUSE]
You'll Never Walk Alone,
Ricky Tomlinson.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/roylefamily-star-ricky-tomlinson-sends-letter-of-support-tojobstown-protestors-760558.html

My Dad, Des Warren By Andy

Warren

I would like to take the opportunity of thanking the Official

Shrewsbury 24 Campaign Committee for the work they
have put into preparing the application to the Criminal
Cases Review Commission on behalf of the pickets. They
have campaigned tirelessly over the past five years raising
awareness about the pickets, fundraising and researching
the background to the case.

Ricky Tomlinson with Andy Warren, Liverpool Town Hall,

February 2012. Chris Gregory 2011
From before I was born my father was an active trade
unionist. My earliest memory of him was being crammed

with my sisters and brothers in the back of a car while he

sang Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra songs to us. He was
a brilliant crooner. He had a good voice and knew all the
words. This is one of the happiest memories that I have of
our dad.
There were five children in our family. When our dad was
sent to jail in 1973 I was aged 10, Nick was 12, Diane was
8, Katy was 6 and Chris was 4.
My dad had a caring disposition. He disliked fat cats and
profiteers. He cared about working conditions on building
sites, whether it was about being exposed to asbestos or
other toxic materials, or accidents that could have been
prevented.

London demonstration 1973. Socialist Worker 2011.

My dad argued that he was not a criminal, he was a

political prisoner. He spent eight and a half months in

solitary confinement. Both him and Ricky Tomlinson went
on hunger strikes in protest at the way that the prison
authorities treated them. My dad endured three hunger
strikes, the longest lasting 22 days. At Christmas time
1974 both him and Ricky took a decision not to wear
prison uniform to make a point to the Government that
they were innocent. They wore only towels for clothing.
They maintained their protest for three months.
In the two years eight months that my dad spent in jail he
was moved thirteen times to different prisons around the
country. The policy of the authorities, if they had a
problem prisoner, was to transfer him to another prison.
This was meant to demoralise the prisoner, as each prison
had different personnel and a different regime. In the first
five weeks of his sentence he was moved four times.
Often we would all arrive at a prison to visit my dad that
had been weeks in the planning only to be told he had
been moved the previous night. We were never given any
notice of the transfer. Upset, we had no choice but to
make our way home again.
Whilst inside the prison doctor gave him drugs. This was
part of a notorious policy of using medication to pacify
prisoners. It was known as the liquid cosh. Whilst in HMP
Leicester the prison doctor gave him three drugs,
amytriptylene perphenazine and nitrazepam. We have
always believed that these drugs brought on a medical
condition similar to Parkinsons disease.
When my dad was finally released and came home he
was never the same. The time he spent behind bars took

a terrible toll on him. When he arrived home he was

completely debilitated. When my dad went in to prison in
1973 he was a well-built, strong man, full of energy and
with his spirit intact. When he came out he had lost a lot of
weight, but his spirit was still strong. He was not bitter. His
intention was to return to work and carry on with his life
with us all.

Families at the head of the Merseyside contingent at

Euston Station ready to march to Parliament 20 March
1974. Left to Right John Carpenter, Marlene Tomlinson,
Rita Carpenter and Nicholas Warren. Socialist Worker.
My dad never worked again. Every employer in the
country blacklisted him. After a time his health began to

fail due to the treatment that he had endured in prison,

particularly the drugs. Dad sued the Prison authorities for
giving him these drugs and they settled out of court to
avoid the issues coming out in public.
Over the following years dads health worsened until he
became wheelchair bound. He died in 2004, just 66 years
of age. His early death was in sharp contrast to both his
mother and his father who were 91 and 87 respectively
and his two sisters are both in their late 60s.
I look forward to the CCRC considering the application
favourably and referring the case to the Court of Appeal to
have the miscarriage of justice overturned. For my family
and myself we will at last see justice done, even though it
has taken almost 40 years.
http://www.shrewsbury24campaign.org.uk/des-ricky/my-dad-deswarren/

Latest: Teenager plans to appeal

Jobstown verdict
Friday, October 21, 2016

A 17-year-old boy is planning to appeal the guilty verdicts

handed down today for falsely imprisoning Joan Burton

and her adviser in November 2014.

He was aged 15 when he blocked them from leaving a
graduation ceremony in Jobstown in Dublin - by standing
in front of two Garda vehicles.

The judge described the boy as an active participant but

decided not to give him a criminal record if he stays out of
trouble for the next nine months.
Afterwards, his solicitor Michael Finucane said they
intended to appeal.
My client has asked me to say that he is extremely
relived that the proceedings have ended, and that the
stress on him and his family has, to some degree, been
lifted, for the time being, he said.
But he is disappointed by the outcome.
Counsel and myself are considering the options, but I can
confirm that an appeal of some description will be taken in
due course.
Update 1.57pm: Todays guilty verdict against a 17-yearold protester for the false imprisonment of Joan Burton has
been called an outrageous assault on civil liberties and

the right to protest by the #JobstownNotGuilty group

today.
The judge later applied a conditional discharge whereby
the boy will escape a criminal conviction if he stays out of
trouble for the next nine months.
This young man has had this hanging over him for almost
two years while he completed his Leaving Certificate and
started college, the group stated.

No evidence of false imprisonment was presented.

Instead, he was found guilty on the basis of images of him
attending a protest, leading a chant and holding a
megaphone.
This verdict represents the criminalisation of protest and
sets an extremely dangerous precedent. It is, as his
barrister argued in court, a recipe for totalitarianism.
Any people who engage in sit-down protests or slow
marching in future now face the threat of being convicted
of false imprisonment.
All those who oppose the criminalisation of protest should
now make a stand. The right to protest must be defended

by exercising it.
We are calling on people to join the Rally for Justice
tomorrow at 1pm at the Central Bank, which will march to
the Childrens Court.
Update 12.57pm: A teenager found guilty of falsely
imprisoning the former Tnaiste Joan Burton and her
adviser during a protest in Jobstown in Dublin has been
granted a conditional discharge by the trial judge today.
Both sides in the trial of agreed to proceed with his
sentence hearing today, during which the court heard that
Ms Burton had no desire to see any young person go to jail
over this.
The judge decided to apply a conditional discharge
whereby the boy will escape a criminal conviction if he
stays out of trouble for the next nine months.
Earlier: A 17-year-old boy had been found guilty of falsely
imprisoning the former Tnaiste Joan Burton and her
adviser during a protest in Jobstown in Dublin.
The judge described him as an active participant in the
blocking of an unmarked Garda car they were in, following
a graduation ceremony in 2014.
Judge John King said it was clear the passage of Joan
Burton and her adviser Karen OConnell was obstructed as
they moved from the graduation ceremony to a nearby
church.
He said they were clearly detained when an unmarked
Garda car was surrounded outside the church and again
when they were moved to a jeep.
YouTube clips and Garda evidence put the boy at both
scenes and he could be seen directing the crowd with a
megaphone at various points.

Judge King described him as an active participant. He

said all elements of common design were made and
rejected his claim he had no case to answer.
He said he was satisfied the offences had been proven
beyond a reasonable doubt and convicted him on both
counts.
His sentence hearing is due to take place at later date.
The maximum penalty for false imprisonment at district
court level is 12 months in prison.
Chants from a large crowd gathered outside court grew
louder and louder as news filtered through that the boy
had been found guilty.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/latest-teenagerplans-to-appeal-jobstown-verdict-760382.html

Leo just can't help

shooting from the lip as
Garda dispute gathers
momentum
John Downing Twitter
BIO
PUBLISHED
19/10/2016

1
Minister for Social Protection Leo Varadkar. Photo: Douglas
O'Connor

Leo Varadkar probably knows the old

political question and answer dialogue: Q:
How do you quench a fire? A: Not sure - but
I do know how to start another one.
It just might explain why, on his way to shut down the
notorious JobBridge scheme, that he had a good poke at
the garda now set to "withdraw their labour."
The Social Protection Minister's one big job yesterday was
to close off the JobBridge scheme which had drawn down
heaps of trouble on the collective heads of the previous
government who had introduced it. The bould Leo would
eventually argue that overall the work placement scheme
was a success.
But it had drawn serious fire for its 52 top-up to the
weekly dole for would-be trainees, and allegations of abuse
by some bosses seeking little more than cheap labour.
The man who would be Taoiseach was marching into
Government Buildings for a Cabinet meeting early

yesterday. He was asked about the impending month of

industrial action by rank and file garda and the sergeants
and inspectors.
For Mr Varadkar, the impending dispute could change
relations between An Garda Sochna and the Irish nation
forever.
"Obviously we all hope that a strike can be avoided - I do
think that if a strike goes ahead that people won't ever look
at the garda in the same way," he told reporters.
The riposte did not take too long. AGSI president,
Antoinette Cunningham, representing the sergeants and
inspectors, deployed both barrels.
"If Minister Varadkar wants to protect public relationships
between the guards and the associations, then he should
be putting his energies into finding solutions - and not
pitching the public and guards against each other," the
AGSI leader told Sen O'Rourke on RT.
That could be another way of saying: if the Government
leave the garda to go on strike, the public may never look
at Fine Gael in the same way again. Bear in mind that his
words were, as they so frequently are, far more strident
than those of the Taoiseach, or the Justice Minister,
Frances Fitzgerald, who must try to defuse this garda
dispute.
By early afternoon, the Social Protection Minister arrived
to formally announce the demise of JobBridge, and was
asked about the garda reaction to his hardline comments.
He stressed the Irish people's special regard for the garda
- but he was clearly not for backing down.
"It is very much my personal view that if it is the case that
the garda go on strike and leave communities unprotected
for one Friday, or multiple Fridays, over the next couple of
weeks, then the public won't be able to see them the same
way as they did in the past," he said.
"I'd hope they would reflect on that before making a
decision that can't be stepped back from."
Meanwhile, back in Dil ireann, Labour leader Brendan
Howlin, was basking in the joys of inhabiting the

opposition benches. Next month, there would very likely

be no garda on the streets while the bulk of secondary
schools shut down.
The former Public Expenditure Minister struggled to say "I
told you so" with any kind of grace. It was reminiscent of
"everything was fine when I left it".
The Labour leader warned that bitter disputes involving
garda and teachers risked spreading all across the public
sector. He had played a part in negotiating the
Landsdowne Road Agreement which provided for phasing
out emergency recession pay cuts. He urged the
Government to negotiate a new replacement agreement
and speed up pay restoration to public servants.
The Government's "cunning plan" of a Public Pay
Commission will not help here. Teachers and garda are
demanding quicker remedies.
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-downing/leo-justcant-help-shooting-from-the-lip-as-garda-dispute-gathersmomentum-35142383.html

Garda Commissioner's
14,000 spend on credit
card revealed
Beleaguered O'Sullivan splashed out
1,339 in one transaction
Mark O'Regan Twitter
EMAIL
PUBLISHED
23/10/2016

May the Corruption of the Evil force be with you: Garda

Commissioner Noirin O'Sullivan Photo: Damien Eagers

Garda Commissioner Noirin O'Sullivan has

spent more than 14,000 on foreign trips,
hotels, meals and other expenses since
taking control of the force in March 2014,
the Sunday Independent can reveal.
Figures show that spending claimed on her Executive Visa
Corporate credit card now stands at 14,312 and includes
the period when she was Acting Commissioner before she
was formally ratified as Garda Commissioner in November
2014.

2
2
O'Sullivan's husband Chief Superintendent Jim McGowan Photo:
Damien Eagers

The Commissioner provoked controversy last week

following her decision to attend a policing conference in
San Diego, as the country braces itself for a campaign of
industrial action by rank- and-file and middle-ranking
officers.
She was accompanied on the trip by a number of senior
officers, including her husband, Chief Superintendent Jim
McGowan.

New figures obtained by the Sunday Independent show

that Commissioner O'Sullivan's credit card spending in the
first six months of this year totalled 2,771.03.
Last year she claimed 7,565.72 for a range of expenditure
while on official business.
In 2011, her predecessor Martin Callinan, during his time
as Commissioner, incurred expenses of 2,519.38 on his
Garda credit card. In 2012, the figure stood at 2,128.31,
with 1,724.58 claimed in 2013.
There are currently four credit cards assigned to senior
members of the force: the Garda Commissioner, the two
Deputy Commissioners and the Chief Administrative
Officer.
Expenses mainly relate to domestic and foreign travel,
training, the purchase of publications and money spent on
official engagements.
However, details of certain items paid for with Mrs
O'Sullivan's credit card have been redacted by An Garda
Siochana's Freedom of Information unit.
In March 2014, she took on the role of Acting Garda
Commissioner, following the resignation of former Garda
Commissioner Mr Callinan, who retired as the
whistleblower controversy continued.
In the same month, she travelled to the John Jay College
of Criminal Justice in New York, as part of the McCabe
Fellowship programme. The programme was established
to commemorate Detective Garda Jerry McCabe, who was
shot dead during an attempted armed robbery in Co
Limerick in June 1996.
In total, she incurred 1,517 in expenses during the trip.
Some 178 was spent in Smith & Wollensky, which
specialises in prime steaks and seafood in a 'clubby,
power-dining setting'.
AIB credit card statements also reveal that a day later Mrs
O'Sullivan spent 1,339 in a single transaction but details
were redacted by the Garda's Freedom of Information
unit.
Later in the year, on September 2, the Commissioner

attended the International Association of Chiefs of Police

in Orlando with her husband, who was at that time a
Detective Superintendent in the force. Spending of $920 is
listed for Mrs O'Sullivan.
A Garda spokeswoman confirmed that Mrs O'Sullivan's
card was also used to pay a 'spousal rate' of $125 so that
her husband could also attend. She added that Mr
McGowan attended the conference in his capacity as a
Superintendent in An Garda Siochana.
"Detective Superintendent McGowan's expenses were
refunded by the Commissioner," the spokeswoman added.
Garda Commissioner Noirin O'Sullivan has spent more
than 14,000 on foreign trips, hotels, meals and other
expenses since taking control of the force in March 2014,
the Sunday Independent can reveal.
Figures show that spending claimed on her Executive Visa
Corporate credit card now stands at 14,312 and includes
the period when she was Acting Commissioner before she
was formally ratified as Garda Commissioner in November
2014.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardacommissioners-14000-spend-on-credit-card-revealed35153571.html
Crisis-hit Garda Commissioner Noirin O'Sullivan has
insisted she is "not privy to, nor would I approve, nor
would I condone" any targeted campaign by officers to
silence whistleblowers in the force,
Ireland's most senior garda made the comment at the
start of a high-profile Dil meeting this morning in which
Ms O'Sullivan was told if she did not know about the
scandal her authority has been completely "undermined"
as the incidents were "going on behind your back".
The Garda Commissioner has also rejected claims of
nepotism under her leadership of the force.
She denied suggestions about the roles of her husband
and her bridesmaid.

"It isnt the case I promoted my bridesmaid. I didnt have a

bridesmaid," she told the Oireachtas Committee on Justice
today.
Speaking at the start of a meeting with the Oireachtas
justice committee, whose members include outspoken
whistleblower advocates Mick Wallace and Clare Daly, Ms
O'Sullivan was repeatedly asked about her knowledge of
the crisis at the heart of the garda.
The questions came after superintendent and former
garda press officer David Taylor alleged he was part of a
campaign against whistleblower sergeant Maurice McCabe
which he claims was orchestrated by the highest levels of
the force.

Separate allegations have also been made that a handful

of whistleblowers have been subjected to abuse within the
force and targeted due to speaking out over what they say
are serous issues within the garda.
However, faced with controversy - which is now the
subject of a six-week independent review by retired former
High Court judge Iarflhaith O Neill - during early
questioning, Ms O'Sullivan repeatedly said she is "not
privy to, nor would I approve, nor would I condone" any

attacks on whistleblowers.
Asked directly by Fianna Fil justice spokesperson Jim
O'Callaghan if she was "aware of any effort by An Garda
Sochana to subject whistleblowers" to ill-treatment, Ms
O'Sullivan said she had no first-hand knowledge of such
alleged attacks.
The controversy surrounding the former Garda
Commissioner Martin Callinan is expected to be raised in
the Dil this afternoon.
The former Garda Commissioner is facing growing calls to
confirm or deny allegations he tried to discredit the Garda
whistleblower Maurice McCabe in a meeting with Fianna
Fil TD John McGuinness.

Last night, the current Garda Commissioner Nirn

O'Sullivan denied any knowledge of a private meeting
between her predecessor and the former chair of the
Public Accounts Committee.
Clare Daly of Independents4Change said that TD John
McGuinness also has questions to answer.
"If he was afraid he'd be stopped from going to the PAC

[Public Accounts Committee], well why didn't he reveal it

after the PAC?" she said.
She added: "Or why didn't he reveal it a couple of weeks
ago when the media, particularly sections of RT, were
going out to say that Commissioner Callinan needed to be
apologised to?
"None of his reasons add up to me, anyway."

The garda commissioner refused on seven separate

occasions to clarify how she responded to separate
whistleblower concerns from garda Kevin Harrison, whose
issues are not currently the subject of the independent
review by Judge O'Neill.
When asked about the matter and to clarify how many
whistleblowers have contacted her, she said she was "not
in a position" to address the issue and repeated she is "not
privy to, nor would I approve, nor would I condone" any
campaign against them.

Ms Daly said if this is true the garda commissioner did not

know about the scandal then her authority has been
"undermined" because the incidents of targets those who
speak out have been "going on behind your back".
Fellow Independents4Change TD Mick Wallace
subsequently asked if the garda commissioner is aware of
any whistleblowers or TDs being put under surveillance or
phone-tapped because of the controversy, to which Ms
O'Sullivan said there are strict rules in terms of
surveillance matters.
Despite Mr Wallace heavily criticising Ms O'Sullivan as
"things are much as they were" since she took over from
Martin Callinan two years ago, the garda commissioner
said there were "factual inaccuracies" in the claims and
that "if I painted a pretty picture it's not all pretty in the
garden yet".
Sinn Fin justice spokesperson Jonathan O'Brien also
grilled Ireland's most senior garda on the whistleblower
controversy, asking bluntly if she has "considered stepping
aside temporarily" while the issue is investigated.
However, Ms O'Sullivan said her only focus is on where the
force is going and that she has no intention of stepping

aside, adding all whistleblower claims will be "fully and

appropriately investigated".
The Commissioner also told the Oireachtas justice
committee she believes how protected disclosures are
dealt with needs to change.
Ms O'Sullivan said: "The professional expert can help us to
review our internal structures, our internal policies and our
approach to things.
"If there are areas that we can strengthen, we are very
open to strengthening those.
"But perhaps it is time for a consideration to be given to
some type of an independent entity where all of these
issues go to, and that people can have some reassurance
that there is somebody independently looking into all of
these matters."
The meeting continues.
One of the whistleblowers at the centre of a Garda scandal
has been called a "decent, honourable man".
Retired Detective Sergeant Alan Bailey said the senior
Garda who claims he was involved in alleged efforts to
discredit a previous whistleblower, feels it is his duty to
expose distasteful practices in the force.
The Garda Commissioner Noirn O'Sullivan has denied any
knowledge of the incident and wants it investigated at the
earliest opportunity.
However, she is now facing calls to step down.
Retired Garda Alan Bailey said the latest whistleblower is
credible.
"He's a decent, honourable man. I imagine he has come
forward because he feels it is his duty as a serving
member (of the Force). The allegations are very distasteful

and I can see why a man would come forward."

A judicial-led inquiry looks set to be established by the
Government into the allegations, following reports this
week in the Irish Examiner that senior garda engaged in a
campaign to destroy and crush a whistleblower within
the force.
Taoiseach Enda Kenny has told the Dil a judge is likely to
be appointed to investigate the allegations.
Amid calls for her resignation in the Dil yesterday, Garda
Commissioner Nirn OSullivan (pictured) insisted she was
not privy to nor approved of any action designed to
target any Garda employee who may have made a
protected disclosure.
She said she would condemn any such action.

1
Garda Commissioner Nirn O'Sullivan

Flanked by a phalanx of her top brass, Garda

Commissioner Nirn O'Sullivan stepped
once more into the breach as she was called
before her political masters this week. She
gave a credible performance.
Whilst it was not a particularly powerful counterforce
against the most recent whistle-blowers charges laid
against her, neither was there the slightest whiff of regret
from the commissioner on display.
With the disconnect between management and rank-andfile garda now as big as the Grand Canyon, the
commissioner's patience may be wearing thin, but her
perseverance is not.
However, one abiding consensus exists between all parties
in relation to An Garda Sochna - change must come.

It is hardly surprising. There are few organisations which

we would expect to continue with the same operation or
funding model that they had 100 years ago. And so too An
Garda Sochna must change its structures and operations
to deal with a modern society as it approaches its
centenary in 2022.
The fly in the ointment of this master plan is that rankand-file garda and sergeants are about to take the historic
(and possibly, depending on who you listen to, illegal) step
of striking next month because they have a number of
fundamental complaints.
Firstly, and like most of us, they feel that proper reverence
to their profession is only reflected through financial
reward - they want more pay.
They also have a legitimate concern that the loss of
significant manpower and experience during the recession
has increased their workload exponentially in an
increasingly difficult and complex work environment.
Many frontline defenders feel that unnecessary and
unwieldy bureaucratic buffers have been introduced which
make simple tasks overly complicated. Such changes,
when introduced by management who have been
ensconced in Garda HQ for most of their careers, cause
resentment and resistance.
Furthermore, the commissioner's repeated public
declarations that members of the force have all the
resources necessary to do their jobs, annoys those dealing
with the realities of day-to-day life as garda. Many believe
the statement is fundamentally flawed and merely
fabricated to suit the political climate.
These "change management'' issues in the force are further
compounded by the political machinations that the Garda
Commissioner is finding herself increasingly immersed in.
Whilst on the face of things they are not intrinsically
linked, both elements are now tangled in a potentially
deadly clinch, which unless halted soon, will lead to the
reputational demise of all.
Some in the media, in politics and indeed within the

service are deliberately and erroneously questioning Ms

O'Sullivan's capacity to manage An Garda Sochna while
claims of malpractice on (and before) her watch are
investigated.
The argument is used to suggest that decline in the morale
of rank-and-file garda is down to a loose moral compass
at Garda HQ. Worse, that somehow these developments
are a reputational scourge contaminating all serving
garda.
That is nonsense.
It belittles the real and legitimate concerns of those garda
who are facing into a difficult job in difficult circumstances
each and every day.
It has nothing to do with what is happening on the ground
at garda level.
Some of this is pure theatre, a political game, with garda
being used as a political football.
Every good general knows that you cannot fight a war on
two fronts. For Ms O'Sullivan, as the entanglement of
these complex narratives continues, it is becoming
increasingly unclear just whose side she and her
management team are actually playing on.
Since taking charge, her persona has been somewhat
confined to that of a senior manager who is solely
responsible for managing garda. Seldom have we seen her
act as a figurehead for garda by fighting their corner.
Instead, her high-profile appearances get lost in dealing
with some internal dispute with one of her own people.
Of course, her role should encompass both, but a
perceptual distortion has crept in. She is one of them, not
one of us. Whilst the opposite may very well be the case,
sadly, perception often becomes the reality.
There is a growing opinion that the Garda are no longer at
one. That is quite possibly the worse legacy that Ms
O'Sullivan could leave behind her when she eventually
departs.
One of the biggest criticisms from within An Garda
Sochna is that it is effectively a political organisation,

where promotion is only ever really achieved through

alignment with powerful superiors who are in the
ascendancy.
If successful, ambitious higher-level management in the
force are then expected to mix it and manoeuvre deftly in
political circles. In the past, management were equally in
tune with what the ground troops needed, and they
worked assiduously to guarantee that their voices were
heard in the corridors of power.
Ms O'Sullivan and her management team must do all of
this, and more.
They now need to introduce improved systems that are
credible and, crucially, have buy-in from rank and file.
Change management may be something that top brass and
political leaders accept and respect, but it does not
necessarily mean that it will be embraced readily without
any pushback.
In order to deliver the fundamental changes necessary, it
may not be possible to continue with leaders who have one
foot in Merrion Street and the other in the Depot. Which is
why the notion of an external appointee is beginning to
look attractive, even to some from within, who believe that
dysfunction and disillusionment has reached saturation
point.
At the very least, serious consideration should now be
given to introducing an external professional changemanagement team to assist with healing divisions and
implementing transformation.
Unless fundamental practical decisions are taken now
about how to heal and move forward, the future may be
much grimmer than the past.
There is a massive job of work to be done in educating all
sides on the value of strength in unity.
Perhaps older, wiser hands could be prevailed upon to
assist with this realisation.
Reputation is hard won, easily lost and, once gone, almost
impossible to retrieve.

Garda Commissioner Nirn OSullivan claimed Sgt Maurice

McCabe was motivated by malice when he highlighted
malpractice in the force, documents from the OHiggins
Commission of Inquiry show.

At the very early stages, the inquiry was told by senior

counsel for Ms OSullivan that evidence would be
produced to show that Sgt McCabe had told two other
officers that he was making his complaints because of
malice he harboured towards a senior officer.
The inquiry was informed that the two officers had taken
notes at the meeting in question and prepared a report
which was forwarded to a senior officer.
However, a few days after the submission, Sgt McCabe
informed Mr OHiggins he had a tape recording of the
meeting in question.
The commission took possession of the recording and
arranged for a transcript to be created.
Mr OHiggins indicated that the transcript coincided
precisely with Sgt McCabes version of events and was in
conflict with the allegation that he had told the two
officers he was motivated by malice.

Maurice McCabe
Following that, no evidence to show malice was called
from the two officers who were at the meeting.
However, the failed attempt to impugn Sgt McCabes
character did not appear in the OHiggins report. The
retired judge stated that Sgt McCabe was an entirely
truthful witness and his bona fides were fully accepted.
The documents show that, at the commission, Mr
OHiggins asked the commissioners lawyer whether you
are attacking his [McCabes] motivation and attacking his
character.
The reply from Colm Smyth, SC, was: Right the way
through.
He told the judge that he was acting on instructions.
Sgt McCabes counsel, Michael McDowell, objected in the
strongest terms to the course being taken by Ms
OSullivan.
Attacking one of our own members of our force who is in
uniform and on oath when in circumstances where in
public she promoted him to a professional standards unit,
and in public she has indicated that she accepts that he
was acting in good faith et cetera, et cetera, and in private
she sends in a legal team to excoriate him.

Nirn OSullivan
At the inquiry, the commissioner was represented by the
same counsel as two of the officers against whom Sgt
McCabe had made allegations.
A Garda spokesperson said the commissioner was barred
by statute from commenting on the commission.
In May 2014, then acting commissioner Ms OSullivan told
a joint Oireachtas committee that Sgt McCabe had the full
support of garda management.
In September 2014, after Sgt McCabe raised further
concerns about the penalty points system, the
commissioner appointed him to the Professional Standards
Unit to assist in reforming the system.
The OHiggins report published on Wednesday described
Mr McCabe as a dedicated and committed officer. It said
the sergeant was a person who acted out of genuine and
legitimate concern and that the commission
unreservedly accepts his bona fides.
The inquiry vindicated former justice minister Alan
Shatter, who had resigned after criticism of him in the
Guerin Report, which preceded OHiggins.

Legislation for

Lansdowne Road
Agreement enacted
The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Brendan Howlin
TD, last week (Monday 30th November) formally signed the
Commencement Order bringing into law the Financial Emergency
Measures in the Public Interest (FEMPI) Act 2015.
The Act gives effect to the provisions of the Lansdowne Road
Agreement and amends previous FEMPI legislation, which has
underpinned the various public service pay and pensions
reductions since 2009.
It follows the passing of the legislation by the Seanad last week.
The Minister praised the role of public servants in maintaining
delivery of public services through the years of crisis in an
atmosphere of industrial peace. Thankfully, we are in a position
to commence the unwinding of that financial emergency
legislation. This Act illustrates that this Government is committed
to the process of income restoration for serving and former
public servants. This package is aimed at delivering particularly
for the lower paid. I am pleased that we have been in a position
to recruit once again into the public service with a particular
focus on front line positions like Garda, teachers and nurses.
For more news see IMPACTs latest members ebulletin HERE,
published 7th December 2015.

IMPACT general secretary Shay Cody has said that the

Lansdowne Road deal was fair and reasonable at the time,

and he is encouraging other unions to be pragmatic.
"It wasn't an ideal agreement from the point of view of all
workers and all unions, but a pragmatic approach was that
it was a step along the road," he said.
"And we fully believe that in the colander year 2017, we
will be in another round of negotiations with the
Government, and the endgame of those negotiations is to
seek to reach agreement on the full unwinding of the
financial emergency legislation for everybody."
FGE branch secures revised model for the establishment
of 430 civil servants
by Niall Shanahan
The negotiations were conducted by the FGE branch's
seconded officials Thomas Cowman and Eugene Dunne.
The negotiations were conducted by the FGE branch's
seconded officials Thomas Cowman and Eugene Dunne.
The FGE branch of IMPACT has secured agreement on new
measures to establish 430 members of the branch as
officer grade civil servants by confined competition.
Subject to members having the standard criteria on
service and suitability, they can now apply for
establishment having completed one year of service,
without interview or formal competition. The measures
follow intensive negotiations over the past year between
IMPACT's FGE branch and the Department of Public
Expenditure and Reform (DPER).
The negotiations were conducted by the FGE branch's
seconded officials Thomas Cowman and Eugene Dunne.
Thomas said the new competition model is a more
functional appointment method. "It replaces an archaic
and anachronistic model that has existed since 1956 and
has moved the department into a position where it has
devolved authority, to handle applications for

establishment, to line departments at a local level in

conjunction with Public Appointments Commission" he
said.
Pensions
The establishment of the existing 430 staff will have a
significant effect on their pensions.
Eugene explained, Depending on whether a person is
employed pre or post-1995, there will be significant
benefits in pensions. Non-established members, employed
after 1995 and prior to the new single pension, will see an
increase in gross pay of 5.21 per cent, which will feed into
their final pension.
Eugene added that those recruited after 2012, and subject
to the single pension scheme, will also have the security
of permanence in status equal to all officer grades. The
branch is currently in discussions with DPER to have this
competition annualised, given the criteria of the single
pension scheme.
Competition
IMPACT national secretary Andy Pike said that the new
measures were a welcome departure from the previous
system, where sporadic competitions for establishment
were agreed on a grace and favour basis. He added The
branch has described the new approach as a more
functional model and I think thats a good way to describe
it. Under this new model, the authority to handle
applications for establishment is devolved locally, and
provides a fairer approach for experienced staff.
Both Eugene and Thomas said that this is a significant
breakthrough in the area of establishment and includes a
very large group of IMPACT members (430). The branch
has advised that individual members check their
circumstances with both their employer and the
Department of Social Protection before taking up the offer.

Download DPERs circular - Selection Process for

Established Appointments to Certain Grades in the Civil
Service (Confined)

Financial Emergency Measures in the

Public Interest Bill 2015: Committee and
Remaining Stages
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates
%20Authoring/WebAttachments.nsf/
($vLookupByConstructedKey)/seanad~20151126/$File/Daily
%20Book%20Unrevised.pdf?openelement

Dil passes FEMPI Bill to give effect to Lansdowne Road

Agreement
Bill passed by 110 votes to 14
by Niall Shanahan
Renua Ireland abstained from the vote, while a number of
independent TDs, including Shane Ross, Finian McGrath
and members of various left wing groups in the Dil, voted
against.
Renua Ireland abstained from the vote, while a number of
independent TDs, including Shane Ross, Finian McGrath
and members of various left wing groups in the Dil, voted
against.
Dil ireann has overwhelmingly passed a Bill to give
effect to the terms of the Lansdowne Road Agreement.
The Bill will go to the Seanad next week.
TDs overwhelmingly backed the Bill. During the debate on
Wednesday (18th November), Sinn Fin moved
amendments seeking to block the agreed terms of the
Haddington Road and Lansdowne Road agreements
regarding the restoration of the third round of cuts for
those earning over 65,000.
The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Brendan
Howlin TD, said that these amendments would be in
breach of what was negotiated, agreed and voted on by
union members. The Sinn Fin motion was subsequently
rejected.

The Bill was passed, by a vote of 110 votes to 16, and

supported by the four main political parties. Renua Ireland
abstained from the vote, while a number of independent
TDs, including Shane Ross, Finian McGrath and members
of various left wing groups in the Dil, voted against.
http://www.impact.ie/seanad-passes-fempi-bill-2015-giving-effect-tolansdowne-road-agreement/
Public Service Stability Agreement 20132018 THE LANSDOWNE
ROAD AGREEMENT
http://www.impact.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/LRA1.pdf

(Lansdowne Road Agreement) and the Financial

Emergency ... under the Lansdowne Road Agreement/
FEMPI Act 2015 ... Emergency Measures in the Public
Interest Act
https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/ActiveCirculars/cl0070_2015.pdf

Minister Howlin signs

Commencement Order to
give effect to the provisions
of the Lansdowne Road
Agreement
Issued 30 November 2015
Brendan Howlin T.D., Minister for Public Expenditure
and Reform, today (30 November 2015) formally
signed the Commencement Order bringing into law
the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public
Interest (FEMPI) Act 2015. The Act gives effect to the
provisions of the Lansdowne Road Agreement and
amends previous FEMPI legislation, which has
underpinned the various public service pay and
pensions reductions since 2009.
The Minister praised the role of public servants in
maintaining delivery of public services through the
years of crisis in an atmosphere of industrial peace.
The Minister said:
Since taking office this Government has made
tremendous progress in stabilising public finances,
reducing unemployment by over a third and bringing
our national debt down towards the European

average. Public servants and public service

pensioners played a significant part in bringing about
this recovery and taking this country off its knees.
Five separate pieces of financial emergency legislation
contributed 2.2 billion annually to stabilising public
finances.
Now, thankfully, we are in a position to commence the
unwinding of that financial emergency legislation. This
Act illustrates that this Government is committed to
the process of income restoration for serving and
former public servants. This package is aimed at
delivering particularly for the lower paid. I am pleased
to that we have been in a position to recruit once
again into the public service with a particular focus on
front line positions like Garda, teachers and nurses.
The Minister also said:
The ongoing public service reform programme, which
is underpinned by the Lansdowne Road Agreement,
will ensure that efficient and effective public services
remain an integral part of our future.
The Minister noted that the phased and careful
restoration of remuneration to public servants,
focusing on the lower-paid, illustrates the prudent
approach of this Government in managing the ongoing
improvements in public finances.
Note to the Editor
The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public
Interest Acts 2009 2013 comprise five pieces of
primary legislation under which cuts in gross rates of
pay and pension, and a pension related deduction,
were applied to the income of serving and former
public servants to assist in the process of reductions in
public expenditure. The legislation enables annual
savings of up to 20% in the public service pay and
pensions bill.
Details of the specific measures which acted to reduce
public service pay and pensions, and of the measures

proposed to apply to serving and former public

servants under this Act, are available on the
Departments website.
The terms of the Act, which primarily seeks to give
legal effect to the Lansdowne Road Agreement as
agreed with the Public Services Committee of the Irish
Congress of Trade Unions, provide a number of
measures that will come into effect either at end 2015
(in the case of the 2015 PRD measure) or on 1 January
2016. The bulk of the measures are focused on lowerpaid public servants in the first instance. In summary
the measures that will come into effect are:
2.5% pay increase on annualised salaries up to
24,000
1% pay increase on annualised salaries between
24,001 and 31,000
Changes to the PRD* rates for 2015 and 2016
Changes to PSPR** rates in 2016
Changes to salary structure for the Judiciary.
In addition, the Act will amend the Courts
(Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 to regularise the
position with regard to the arrangements for
remuneration of members of the Judiciary, whose pay
was also reduced in 2012. The Act will provide that
persons newly appointed to the bench are not
restricted from achieving pay parity with existing
judges. This is the equivalent of the arrangements
made for other newly appointed public servants, for
whom arrangements were made to achieve pay parity
in accordance with the Haddington Road Agreement.
The total additional cost arising in 2016 from the
Lansdowne Road and Haddington Road Agreements is
297 million. This should be compared to public
service pay and pension bill savings of 2.2 billion
annually, achieved as a direct result of pay and
pension reductions, and other deductions under the
FEMPI legislation.
The Minister is required under the Acts to present an
annual review (by 30 June each year) of the legislation

to the Houses of the Oireachtas.

*PRD: Pension Related Deduction: a deduction from
pay levied on the salaries of serving public servants
**PSPR: Public Service Pension Reduction: a deduction
from public service pensions in payment.
ENDS

http://brendanhowlin.ie/news/2015/11/30/minister-howlin-signscommencement-order-to-give-e/

Publication of Annual
Progress Report on Public
Service Reform
Issued 3 May 2016
The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform,
Brendan Howlin, T.D., has published the second Annual
Progress Report on the Public Service Reform Plan
2014-16.
Building on progress on implementing the
Governments first Public Service Reform Plan (201113), the second Public Service Reform
Plan, published in January 2014, covers the period to
end 2016. It contains more than 230 actions, with the
overarching objective of achieving better outcomes for
citizens, businesses and public servants themselves.
The plan emphasises improved service delivery,
alongside an ongoing focus on efficiency.
The Annual Progress Report published provides an
overview of the progress made in the last year on the
cross-cutting areas set out in the Reform Plan. It also
provides a range of examples of progress and good
practice on reform from across the Public Service.
Minister Howlin said:
I am very pleased with this progress which builds on
our achievements on Public Service Reform since
2011 and which further embeds reform as a key role
for all of those involved in designing and delivering
public services.

He continued:
We have seen strong progress at a central, crosscutting level and also in the complementary reform
programmes underway at organisational and sectoral
levels across the Public Service, which have been led
by the relevant Ministers and their Departments.
The Minister added:
Ireland has a long and proud tradition of service to
the public and the State and looking to the future, I
believe that ongoing reform should be central to
meeting increasing customer expectations and
demographic challenges.
The Minister also thanked all public servants for the
role that they have played in delivering this significant
programme of reform.
ENDS

Note to the Editor

The Report sets out details of some 170 specific
examples of progress made across the Public Service.
Some highlights include:
The Public Service ICT Strategy was launched and the
Office of the Government Chief Information Officer is
leading its implementation, working with Departments
and agencies across the Public Service;
Over 1.9 million Public Services Cards have been
issued to date, including over 630,000 Free Travel
variants;
Benefacts.ie was launched with the aim of delivering
greater public transparency on the work and funding
of the non-profit sector in Ireland;
In the three years to the end of 2015, the Office of
Government Procurement (OGP) and its partner sector
sourcing organisations in Health, Education, Local
Government and Defence enabled procurement
savings estimated in excess of 160 million;
The Open Data Governance Board was established in
October 2015 and will lead and drive the

implementation of Open Data in Ireland;

The Lansdowne Road Agreement was concluded in
May 2015 and ratified by the ICTU Public Services
Committee in September 2015, extending the
Haddington Road Agreement to 2018; and
A Corporate Governance Standard for the Civil Service
was published in November.
The Executive Summary and the main body of the
Report include many further examples.
The Report also presents some key achievements in
Public Service Reform since 2011, highlighting
examples of reform initiatives under the following four
themes:
A Focus on Service Users
A Focus on Efficiency
A Focus on Openness, Transparency and Accountability
A Focus on Leadership, Renewal and Organisational
Reform
Infographics are also available
at http://reformplan.per.gov.ie/

Annual Progress Report

on the Public Service
Reform Plan 2014-2016

The importance of reform

Public Service Reform was a central element of the response to
the crisis of recent years and remains an essential part of building
for the future. Since the first Public Service Reform Plan was
published in 2011, a comprehensive programme of reform has
been implemented. This has enabled the Public Service to
continue to provide essential services, while demand for those
services increased and while resources were very constrained.
In 2015, there were around 298,000 public servants delivering
many diverse services across hundreds of organisations. The
Public Service in Numbers infographic on the preceding pages
illustrates the breadth and volume of those services, using just

some examples from each of the main sectors. The infographics

opposite show the scale of investment in public services and the
allocation of staff resources by sector.
The importance of an effective and efficient Public Service cannot
be overstated. The performance of the Public Service has major
implications for the management of the States finances and for
employment creation. The quality of public services also affects
how Ireland is perceived by businesses considering investing here.
Most importantly, the Public Service provides essential services for
our people when they need them most.
The IPA Public Sector Trends report 2015 shows Irelands public
services performing above the European average in a number of
comparative studies. For example, Ireland ranks fourth in the
European Union for both the quality of its public administration and
perceptions that Government decisions are implemented
effectively. Ireland also does well for upholding traditional public
service values, ranking sixth in the European Union. Indicators that
assess the impact of public administration on the ability of
companies to do business show that Irish public services are
considered the least bureaucratic in Europe.
Public Service Reform since 2011
The first Public Service Reform Plan was published in November
2011. Fiscal adjustment was a key driver at that time and so the
focus was, to a large extent, on cost containment and efficiency
improvements. Public Service staff numbers were significantly
reduced, while meeting increased demand for services due to the
downturn. The reform of public services became critical to the
delivery of those services and strong progress was made, as set
out in two published progress reports.
The second Public Service Reform Plan was published in 2014
and reflects the need to maintain a focus on reducing costs and
increasing efficiency, having regard to the continuing increased
demands for many public services. However, the Plan has an
ambitious, overarching objective of delivering better outcomes for
all stakeholders and a strong emphasis on service improvement.
The infographic opposite illustrates the main demographic drivers
of demand for public services. These include general population
and life expectancy increases in the last ten years or so. It also

illustrates how these drivers are reflected in increased demands

for key services in a number of areas such as Health, Education
and Social Protection. Overall, it is clear that there are current and
future demographic trends that will continue to place growing
demands on public service delivery.
The framework diagram in the Introduction illustrates how reforms
in four key areas across all sectors of the Public Service are
contributing to improved outcomes for citizens, businesses and
public servants themselves.
Start Smart Image stack template

End Smart Image stack template

A Focus on Service Users

A Focus on Efficiency
A Focus on Openness, Transparency and Accountability
A Focus on Leadership, Renewal and Organisational Reform
The Public Service Reform Plan 2014-16 includes a broad range
of reforms, with over 230 specific actions set out. Key priorities
include, for example, more digital delivery of services, better
engagement with customers, the use of alternative models of
service delivery, implementation of shared services and more
efficient and effective public procurement and property
management, and increased openness, transparency and
accountability.
The first progress report on the 2014-16 Reform Plan was
published in March 2015. As with that report, this second progress
report is structured on the four key areas of reform listed above.
Main areas of progress on cross-cutting reform
In 2015, strong progress has continued in implementing the
reforms set out in the Public Service Reform Plan 2014-16.
Progress is set out in greater detail in the body of this report, with
more than 170 specific examples included. Some highlights are as
follows:

A Focus on Service Users

The Public Service ICT Strategy, Delivering better outcomes and
efficiency through innovation and excellence in ICT, was launched
and the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer is
leading its implementation, working with Departments and
agencies across the Public Service;
Over 1.9 million Public Services Cards have been issued to date,
including over 630,000 Free Travel variants;
The results of the Civil Service Customer Satisfaction Survey 2015
were published in May, with many positive findings;
A public consultation on Commissioning Human, Social and
Community Services has been undertaken, following an Open
Policy Debate and a review of international evidence; and
Benefacts.ie was launched with the aim of delivering greater public
transparency on the work and funding of the non-profit sector in
Ireland.
A Focus on Efficiency

Public servants have made a significant contribution to addressing

the challenges that faced the economy and the public finances in
recent years. The Exchequer pay bill was reduced by over 20%
between 2009 and 2014 and staff numbers were also reduced by
around 10% in that period;
The Lansdowne Road Agreement was concluded in May 2015 and
ratified by the ICTU Public Services Committee in September
2015, extending the Haddington Road Agreement until September
2018;
The National Shared Services Office has been established within
the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to lead shared
service strategy across the Civil Service and major shared
services programmes are being rolled out;
In the three years to the end of 2015, the Office of Government
Procurement and its partner sector sourcing organisations in
Health, Education, Local Government and Defence enabled
procurement savings estimated as in excess of 160 million;
The first progress report on the Governments Property Asset
Management Delivery Plan, Accommodating Change Measuring
Success, was published in July 2015 and sets out progress
towards a more integrated approach to this key asset;
A new Value for Money Review Programme for 2015-2017,
covering over 40 areas of expenditure across all sectors, is now
underway; and
The Department of Finance and the Department of Public
Expenditure and Reform jointly hosted a National Economic
Dialogue in July 2015 as part of the new budgetary framework.
A Focus on Openness, Transparency and Accountability
The Open Data Governance Board was established in October
2015 and will lead and drive implementation of Open Data in
Ireland;
The General Scheme of a Bill on Data Sharing and Governance
was approved by Government and legal drafting of the Bill is
expected to commence shortly;
The Freedom of Information Model Publication Scheme was
published in October following public consultation;
The Public Sector Standards Bill, 2015 was published in
December;
An Accountability Board for the Civil Service has been established;
and
A Corporate Governance Standard for the Civil Service was
published in November.
A Focus on Leadership, Renewal and Organisational Reform

The Public Appointments Service ran over 150 open recruitment

campaigns in 2015 for a range of diverse positions across the
Public Service;
In September, the first Civil Service wide employee engagement
survey was carried out, with the results published in January 2016;
Work is progressing to develop a new shared model for learning
and development across the Civil Service;
The first ever Civil Service Excellence and Innovation Awards were
held in December; and
Integrated Reform Delivery Plans for 2015 were completed by all
Departments and major Offices early in 2015.
Organisational / sectoral reforms
This report focuses primarily on cross-cutting reforms that
generally apply right across the Public Service. The Reform
Framework set out in the Introduction on page 9 illustrates the
emphasis on driving reforms in the five key sectors of Health,
Education, Local Government, Justice and the Civil Service.
In addition there are, of course, a range of further organisational or
sector specific reforms, the implementation of which is led by the
relevant Ministers and their Departments. Integrated Reform
Delivery Plans (IRDPs) are produced annually by all Departments
and major Offices to incorporate these specific reforms alongside
the cross-cutting reforms from the Public Service Reform Plan, the
Civil Service Renewal Plan and the Lansdowne Road Agreement.
Progress on the implementation of the 2015 IRDPs has
contributed to this report, with a significant number of examples
included from the many reform initiatives taking place across the
Public Service.
Civil Service Renewal Plan
Published in October 2014, the Civil Service Renewal Plan is a
significant part of the overall Public Service Reform Framework.
The three year plan outlines 25 practical actions that will create a
more unified, professional, responsive, open and accountable Civil
Service that can provide a world-class service to the State and the
people of Ireland.
In July 2015, the first progress report on the Civil Service Renewal
Plan was published, detailing the significant progress in the first
200 days of the Plan. It outlined how most actions had been
initiated and confirmed that the Plan was on track to deliver

transformational change in the sector.

Significant achievements in 2015 include the establishment of the
Accountability Board; undertaking the Civil Service Staff
Engagement Survey; the development of a Corporate Governance
Standard for the Civil Service; designing and implementing a new
performance review process for Secretaries General and
enhancing the process for Assistant Secretaries; a programme of
Townhall events to engage with staff around the country; the
development of a new rating system for PMDS; strengthening the
Disciplinary Code; and holding a series of Open Policy Debates
involving stakeholders to support more open approaches to policymaking.
In addition, the inaugural Civil Service Excellence and Innovation
Awards showcase was held in December highlighting
achievements and innovations in policy and service delivery and
recognising staff excellence. Details of the award winners are
included in the Appendix and examples of winners and of
shortlisted projects are referred to throughout this progress report.
http://www.reformplan.per.gov.ie/2014/downloads/files/Progress
%20report%202016.pdf

Supporting Public Service Reform:

eGovernment 2012 2015.
http://egovstrategy.gov.ie/wpcontent/uploads/2012/04/eGovernment-2012-2015.pdf

Digital Agenda: Turning government data

into gold
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-11-1524_en.htm?locale=en

Unlocking the Power of Public Sector

Information
Dec 8, 2011
Neelie Kroes, European Commission, commenting on the power
of public sector information. The short video coincides with the
release of a legal package of measures taken by the EU
Commission to unlock the power of open data.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlcFKPyiRuw

Minister for Public

Expenditure and Reform
announces the repeal of
almost 300 obsolete Acts
enacted from 1922 to 1950
Issued 19 January 2016
The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Mr
Brendan Howlin T.D., today (19 January 2016)

approved the publication of the Statute Law Revision

Bill 2016. This Bill is the culmination of the first
comprehensive review of Acts enacted by the
Oireachtas and will repeal almost 300 Public General
Acts enacted between 1922 and 1950 which are now
spent or obsolete.
The Minister said:
Statute law revision is the process by which spent or
obsolete legislation is removed from the statute book.
The legislation of this period shows a nation in its
infancy developing its own legislative framework. It is
appropriate that we are removing some of the earliest
legislation of the Oireachtas that has long since
served its purpose, and in doing so we pave the way
for future legislative growth.
The obsolete Acts listed for repeal include:
The Public Safety (Emergency Powers) Act 1923,
enacted during the Irish Civil War, granted far reaching
powers and additional offences and penalties aimed at
ensuring public safety. It included the imposition of a
death penalty or penal servitude for anyone found
guilty of an armed revolt against the Government of
Saorstt Eireann or certain associated offences.
The Emergency Powers Act 1939, which granted wide
ranging powers at the outbreak of World War II
including the power to suspend the operation of any
law.
Griffith Settlement Act 1923, which granted pensions
to members of Arthur Griffith's immediate family
following his death.
A number of Acts which amended the 1922
Constitution.
The Telephone Capital Acts 1924 to 1938 which
authorised the expenditure of funds to develop the
telephonic system of Saorstt ireann.
Note to the Editor:
This Bill follows on from the Statute Law Revision Acts
of 2005, 2007, 2009, 2012 and 2015 which completed
the review of all pre-independence primary legislation

and secondary legislation up to and including 1820.

In total 1,124 Acts were examined during the
preparation of this Bill and of the 707 identified as
remaining in force in whole or in part, 294 were
identified as suitable for repeal and have been listed
for repeal in this Bill.
Further examples of Acts for repeal:
Constitution (Removal of Oath) Act 1933 which
repealed Article 22 of the Free State Constitution
which required members of the Oireachtas to take an
oath declaring their faithfulness to His Majesty King
George V and his heirs and successors.
Spanish Civil War (Non-Intervention) Act 1937 which
carries into execution the international obligations of
Saorstt ireann in relation to the civil war waged in
Spain, and to prohibit citizens of Saorstt ireann from
participating in that war.
Public Servants (Continuity of Service) Act 1938 which
provided for the continuity, notwithstanding the
coming into operation of the Constitution, of the
service of public servants and the conditions of their
employment.

Minister Howlin welcomes

Commencement of PPP
Courts Project

Issued 18 December 2015

Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Mr
Brendan Howlin TD, has welcomed the
announcement by his colleague, Minister for
Justice and Equality, Frances Fitzgerald TD, that
the Courts PPP project has been signed-off on by
all partners and that work can now commence on
sites across the country.
This is the fourth project in the 1.4 billion PPP
Stimulus Programme to reach financial close. It
involves building four new courthouses and
refurbishing a further three in seven different

locations across the country. BAM PPP PGGM will

build, operate and maintain the buildings with
construction due to commence in the New Year.
Minister Howlin said:I am very pleased that we have achieved sign
off on the latest PPP project. I particularly
welcome the employment creation that this
project will bring, with approximately 700
construction jobs expected to be created during
the period of construction.
The successful completion of this procurement
process illustrates the high level of investor
confidence in Ireland. The NDFA was able to
successfully leverage Irelands strong economic
recovery to attract high quality investors at
competitive long term rates.
I am particularly pleased that work can now begin
on the long awaited new court house for Wexford,
which will provide proper working conditions to all
who use the courts system.

Note to the Editor:

Courthouse Locations
The new and refurbished courthouses will be
constructed at the following seven locations:
New Courthouses:
Drogheda - Wellington Quay, Drogheda, Co. Louth
(site at Linenhall Street/Patrickswell Lane)
Letterkenny - High Road, Letterkenny, Co.
Donegal (site of former council leisure centre)
Limerick - Mulgrave Street, Limerick City, Co.
Limerick ('Costellos Yard')
Wexford - Municipal Buildings, Wygram Place, Co.
Wexford (former Tate School)
Refurbishments:
Waterford - Catherine Street, Waterford City, Co.
Waterford
Cork - Anglesea Street, Cork City, Co. Cork

Mullingar - Mount Street, Mullingar, Co.

Westmeath

Minister Howlin welcomes

High Court decision to refuse
an application for an
injunction over the awarding
of a contract for the
Grangegorman DIT campus
Issued 2 December 2015
Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Brendan
Howlin T.D., today (1 December 2015) welcomed the
High Court decision to refuse an application for an
injunction against the awarding of a multi-million euro
contract for the new Dublin Institute of Technology
(DIT) campus at Grangegorman.
In May of this year Minister Howlin made a number of
changes to the Remedies Regulations to give the High
Court jurisdiction to lift an automatic suspension
should it see fit to do so.
The Remedies Regulations allow tenderers or
candidates who feel that a public procurement process
was not carried out in an open, fair and transparent
manner the option of seeking recourse from the
courts.
Welcoming todays judgment, Minister Howlin said:
This decision will allow for the Department of
Education and Skills to recommence this project. DIT
is currently one of the largest providers of higher
education in the State. When completed the
Grangegorman education facility will accommodate
approximately 11,000 students and staff,
consolidating half of DIT into a single site. This will
derive significant efficiencies for a key third-level
institution, which constitutes some 10% of all third-

level education places in Ireland.

ENDS
COURTS BUNDLE PPP PROJECT MARKET LAUNCH DAY
Kilkenny Courthouse, 13th May 2014 . ... End user
representation Courts Service Authority Project Team
https://www.enterprise-ireland.com/en/events/ourevents/meet-thebuyer-courts-bundle-ppp/market-launch-day-presentation.pdf

THE LAW COURTS PPP: PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS AND

THE EVOLUTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROCUREMENT IN THE
ACT ... the courts would be the first PPP project
http://apps.treasury.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/785713/A
CT-Law-Courts-PPP.pdf

Building on Recovery 2016-2021 ... the Plan includes a third

phase of PPP investments of about 500 million and Stateowned sector investment of
http://www.arthurcox.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Building-onRecovery-Irelands-Infrastructure-Plan-October-2015.pdf

Unitary Patent Report D2 - The Federal Trust

package as it currently stands proposes the creation of a new
system of courts to be ... threatens to derail the entire
project. ... potentially illegal,
http://fedtrust.co.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2014/12/Radcliffe_Unitary_Patent_Report.pdf

Public-Private Partnerships Delivering During

Recession
An IBEC PPP Council Report
http://www.ibec.ie/IBEC/DFB.nsf/vPages/Public_sector~Resources~p
ublic-private-partnerships---delivering-during-recession-30-012009/$file/Public-private+partnerships++delivering+during+recession.pdf

Independent Review of Irelands PPP

Experience is Essential
Wednesday, 21 October 2015

Eoin Reeves: A largely unnoticed feature of the governments new 27

billion capital investment plan Building on Recovery -is the decision
place a ten per cent cap on the total annual exchequer capital spending
on Public Private Partnerships (PPPs). This marks a significant shift in

government policy on PPPs as it recognises the mounting annual

spending commitments on existing PPPs.
Since 1999, successive governments have officially embraced PPPs as
a means of delivering much needed public capital investment. Under
PPP private contractors take responsibility for most elements of the
project life cycle. Hence PPP involves the public sector entering into
long term contracts with private consortia that agree to design, build and
operate assets such as roads and schools. A critically important
characteristic of several PPP projects is that the private sector is
contracted to finance the relevant investments. This makes PPP
extremely attractive as it raises the potential to keep infrastructure
investment off-balance sheet. In other words, the size of the national
debt, as presented in the official statistics, can be contained while the
government procures much-needed physical infrastructure.
But there is no such thing as a free lunch and PPPs must be paid for.
The new capital investment plan recognises that the burden of
repayments on existing PPP is growing. It is forecast to reach 225
million this year and will increase to 380 million in 2012. As PPPs are
long term contracts, annual commitments on existing PPPs will stretch
beyond 2050. The scale of new PPP investment announced in the new
Capital Investment Plan is therefore a relatively modest 500m. This
has been rationalised on the grounds of ensuring PPP investments are
affordable and sustainable. But one suspects that there may be a
degree of disenchantment with PPPs in terms of how they have
performed to date.
Ireland has over fifteen years of experience with PPPs and in relative
terms is a global leader (after the UK) in this respect. But the delivery of
PPP projects has not always been smooth and in a number of instances
PPP projects were announced but never materialised. The failure of the
PPP approach to deliver several social housing projects has had
enormous economic and social consequences for struggling
communities. Other examples of PPPs that were never brought to
fruition include nursing homes, elements of a national oncology network
and the DART Underground that was first postponed in the context of
the global financial crisis.
Despite claims that PPP would guarantee speedy delivery of projects,
the reality has been a litany of delays and postponements. This is
partly explained by the complex nature of procurement under PPP
which results in lengthy tendering periods. For example, the tendering
periods for PPPs such as the National Convention Centre and the
Shanganagh Wastewater Treatment plant in Dublin were over three

years. The contract for the Poolbeg incinerator was advertised in July
2002 and took almost five years to award. These delays in procuring
contracts drive up social and economic costs and may deter private
bidders for contracts.
Higher costs reduce the scope for achieving value for money, which is a
core objective of PPP policy in Ireland and other countries with
extensive PPP experience such as Australia, Canada and the UK. The
experience in the UK the world leader in PPP procurement- is
suggestive. In 2012, HM Treasury published the findings of an in-depth
review of PPP use. It noted widespread concern that PPP was not
delivering value for money and taxpayers have not been getting a fair
deal.
The UK Treasury highlighted a number of factors impeding the
achievement of value for money. These included slow and expensive
procurement processes, the transfer of inappropriate risks to the private
sector, resulting in a higher risk premium being charged to the public
sector, and possible windfall gains accrued by equity investors on PPP
projects.
It is striking that after fifteen years of PPP usage in Ireland there has not
been a government-led, in-depth review of the PPP experience to date.
Despite the fact that total exchequer spending on existing PPP
contracts exceeds 6 billion, we do not have detailed information on
whether or not PPP has achieved important objectives such as value for
money. Public agencies tell us that assessments have been completed,
but the workings and details that should support such claims are not in
the public domain.
A thorough, independent review of the performance of PPP in Ireland to
date is long overdue. In the absence of such a review future decisions
about how infrastructure is procured and managed will not be clearly
evidence-based. This is not in the interest of citizens (present and
future) who will ultimately pay for infrastructure and related services.
Dr. Eoin Reeves is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Economics
and Director of the Privatisation and PPP Research Group at Kemmy
Business School, Univerity of Limerick
http://www.progressive-economy.ie/2015/10/independent-review-ofirelands-ppp.html

Some People Pay Much More Tax Than

Others (ITI Report)
Tuesday, 20 September 2016

The Irish Tax Institute (ITI) has just published Perspectives on Ireland's
personal tax system, which will be discussed on RT Primetime tonight.
Their main argument is that taxes are skewed, with those on high and
"middle" incomes paying too much, and those on low incomes paying
very little.
There are a number of problems with the ITI's analysis, including the
prominence given to unorthodox measurements and a lack of context
for their comparison with other countries.
The ITI describes itself as follows: 'The Irish Tax Institute is the leading
representative and educational body for Irelands AITI Chartered Tax
Advisers (CTA) and is the only professional body exclusively dedicated
to tax. Our members provide tax expertise to thousands of businesses,
multinationals and individuals in Ireland and internationally. In addition
many hold senior roles within professional service firms, global
companies, Government, Revenue and state bodies.'
Unorthodox Measures
The ITI's summary of Ireland's personal tax system (page 5) is odd.
They focus on how much more tax one person pays than another. This
is not a standard measurement of the impact of personal tax, and the
comparisons are between income levels that have been at best
arbitrarily chosen. For example, a worker on 25,000 pays 5.6 times the
tax of someone on 18,000, while earning 1.4 times the income.
Why pick these income levels? There's no way to compare this with
another country, as cost of living and the level of salaries vary too much.
Someone on 18,000 is basically someone working full-time on the
minimum wage. A single person on this income will pay 600 in total;
300 in income tax, 300 in USC and no social insurance (PRSI). A
person on this income is well below a Living Wage (www.livingwage.ie),
and so is likely to be deprived of some basic goods and services that
other people take for granted. How much tax should this person pay? Is
600 a reasonable contribution given the cost of rent or energy in
Ireland?
Someone on 25,000 pays 3,368 in total; 1,700 in income tax, 668
in USC and 1,000 in social insurance. Indeed, that is 5.6 times more
tax. But what does that particular metric tell us? A single person on
25,000 does earn a Living Wage. His or her after-tax income will allow
a modest minimum standard of living.
At the other end of the spectrum, someone on 100,000 earns 5.6 times

the minimum wage earner on 18,000 but pays 'almost 66 times the
amount of tax'.
So what? The person on 100,000 has an income enough to enjoy a
Living Wage standard of living four times over. Someone on 100,000
pays 39,492 in taxes; 29,940 in income tax, 5,043 in USC and
4,000 in social insurance. Nonetheless, after meeting his or her
essentials, someone on this income has a lot of room for comfortable
living and luxuries: a larger home, home ownership, car ownership,
foreign holidays, investments, meals out, etc. Is this a fair level of tax?
But wait. The ITI has not taken into account tax breaks, which in Ireland
are plentiful and generous for things like private pensions. When these
are taken into account, the person on 100,000 pays less tax. If this
person puts 10,000 away for a pension, he or she will then pay 4,000
less income tax.
There is another factor to be taken into account. Those on every income
pay indirect taxes too, like VAT and motor tax. But these take a bigger
amount from smaller incomes, which swings the tax pendulum back
again and makes the difference in the amount of tax paid smaller
between low and high earners. (A NERI paper deals with this point in
detail).
Comparison with Other Countries
The ITI describe someone on 55,000 under the heading of "squeezed
middle". People on those sort of incomes are well up the income ladder,
nowhere near the middle of income earnings from employment, let
alone income from all sources (including pensions and welfare).
The ITI argue that someone on 55,000 pays more tax than someone in
Sweden, Spain, Switzerland, the USA or the UK. But the ITI do not take
tax breaks into account, which simply do not exist to the same extent in
Sweden or Spain for example.
As well as ignoring tax breaks, another problem is that you can't
compare countries' tax systems without comparing what goods and
services they receive in exchange for their taxes. In fact, the big
difference is the much higher rate of social insurance paid in other
European countries, which provides for lower healthcare costs, pension
security, stronger unemployment security, longer maternity (and
paternity) cover, etc.
A further issue is that what really needs to be compared is household
taxation, not just personal income tax. For example, how are married
couples treated versus singles? What about property tax, water charges

and other levies? In most European countries these are significantly

higher. So too in the USA, where property tax alone can be ten times
higher than what is paid in Ireland.
It is true, as the ITI point out, that someone on 100,000 or 150,000
does pay more personal tax in Ireland than in the USA or UK. But the
UK and USA report very high levels of post-tax income inequality. (Deep
inequality is seen as a partial cause for the popularity of presidential
candidate Trump in the USA as well as UKIP and the Brexit vote in the
UK, although there are other important reasons for these events too.) Is
emulating UK-USA income inequality something that people in Ireland
want to do?
In fact, Ireland has very high market income inequality, but manages to
reduce it greatly through taxes and cash welfare transfers. But our
ability to do this is stretched, and Ireland could very quickly become
much more unequal after-tax, if the tax system is weakened.
The proposed abolition of USC, for example, is an example of exactly
that kind of weakening. And as the above examples show, it is the high
earners who have most to gain from USC's abolition.
Four Questions
The ITI report poses four questions for the future of Ireland's personal
tax system (p.11). What follows are my own answers to those questions.
Can we continue to create and judge personal tax policy on a
Budget by Budget basis?
I agree with them, we should not do this. But we do need to talk about
the whole tax system, not just personal taxation. And that includes tax
breaks too, as well as property tax and all the rest.
Is there a point at which a country's personal tax system becomes
overly progressive?
That's a silly question. A better question to ask is whether or not the tax
system is fair. Talking about excess "progressively" is just using
technical jargon that covers up the basic question of fairness. In my
opinion, everyone should pay some level of taxesas indeed they do,
through VAT if nothing else.
What the ITI report implies is that people on lower income should pay
more taxes. If the state invests in affordable housing, subsidies for
childcare, etc. then it would be absolutely reasonable to ask everyone in
society to contribute more to pay for these things, and low income
earners in Ireland do pay very little tax compared to what they would
pay in other EU countries, precisely because we rely on cash in the

private market to provide so many goods and services that have at least
greater subsidies if not public provision abroad.
Do high tax rates above the average wage (squeezed middle and
upwards) impact our competitiveness and create issues around
incentive to work, labour costs and ability to attract talent and
skills?
There's a lot packed in here. They are talking about wages from
55,000 and above, so high earnings as far as I am concerned.
Ireland has high GDP growth. These tax levels are not effecting that.
Nordic countries have the highest tax levels, and very high productivity.
So no problem there either.
The marginal rate of personal taxes does not tell the whole story of
labour costs, as employers also pay additional contributions to social
insurance. These are spectacularly low in Ireland, where you could
double employer's PRSI rate and it would still be lower than the EU
average.
Does higher taxation affect talent? If a star employee is put off moving
to Ireland from the UK due to an extra few thousand in taxes, employers
might point to the lower property tax they'll pay here or just make up the
difference. The employer would probably still gain from paying a higher
salary in Ireland than UK, because employers' social insurance is lower
here.
Ultimately, anyone wishing to work inside the EU may face higher
personal tax rates than those in the UK or further afield. Brexit may well
lower pressure on Ireland to compete with the UK for lowering taxes on
high earnings.
Have we personal tax system in Ireland that meets our social
needs but is also suitable for a small open economy?
Denmark is a classic example of a small open economy. They have the
higher personal taxation in the world. So the two things are not
incompatible.
Most north-western European countries still offer considerably more in
terms of public services, social protection, subsidies, etc. So it boils
down to very different socio-economic models, and so in the end we
need to move our focus off personal tax rates and talk about a much
bigger picture about the role of government and public spending in the
economy and society...

Irelands income tax is Too High

A great deal of political debate in Ireland rests on the assumption that

Irelands rates of taxation are prohibitive. This is generally taken to mean that
Irish taxes on income, specifically, are particularly onerous. This perception is
rarely, however, assessed with reference to available statistics.

Our study uses the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and

Development (OECD) data concerning estimates of the effective direct
taxes paid by households of varying income and marital status in 2014
to assess Irelands rates of taxation on income relative to those
observed in other comparable nations.

This inBrief is available here.

Estimating the Direct and Indirect

Tax Contributions of Households
in Ireland
http://www.nerinstitute.net/download/pdf/neri_wp_household_tax_co
ntributions_collins_and_turnbull_nov_2013.pdf

Household Tax Contributions NERI

Seminar Slides
http://www.nerinstitute.net/download/pdf/household_tax_contributio
ns_neri_seminar_slides_201113.pdf
KEY POINTS
Irish effective tax rates on gross income for single earners were generally
substantially lower for most income levels relative to international

comparators.

This was most pronounced at the lowest income levels.

At the highest income levels for which data is available (200 per cent of
average income), effective tax rates were slightly higher than the OECD
average but remained below EU15 averages.
Effective tax on income for dual income couples were similarly comparatively
low at lower joint income levels, although rates were approximately equal to
the OECD average for a single joint income of 200 percent and 167 percent of
the average wage. EU15 average effective tax rates still exceeded Irish rates
at these maximum income levels.
New Thinking on Taxation and Inequality from OECD
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/5jlv74ggk0g7.pdf?
expires=1477231286&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=845D2E4
BC97C639FEE632B6920D05371

Corporate Social Responsibility -the

first casualty in Apple truth fight
Saturday, 17 September 2016

Viewed through a Corporate Social Responsibility lens the behaviour of

the Irish State and Apple does not stand up to scrutiny.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is firmly on the agenda of
companies across the globe. An increasing focus on the dynamics of
social responsibility, sustainability and innovation informs business
goals and strategies at all organisational levels. CSR has become a
mainstream business activity providing an organisational mandate to
tackle social and environmental challenges. The idea that business
practices should yield social benefits is not a new idea. Prior to the
Industrial Revolution the separation of social and business activities
was not so pronounced. Boundaries between individual and corporate
social responsibility before and during the early phases of
industrialization were blurred because businesses were often founded,
owned and managed by the same person. When one person owned
and oversaw the relationship between the business and wider society a
noblesse oblige- the obligation of the privileged to be generous- social

consciousness secured public benefits.

The march of capitalism, which had begun with the expansion of
European power and technological and organizational innovation in the
seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, oversaw the
emergence of an economic system in the twentieth century driven by a
new technocratic management system. Under this system ownership
and control functions were separated. Management was delegated to
new and emerging professional groupings.
A modern conceptual understanding of corporate social responsibility
was produced by Howard Bowen in 1953. His book Social
Responsibilities of the Businessman (1953) cited the findings of a
survey carried out in 1946 by Fortune magazine which investigated the
social consciousness of the managers. The study found general
agreement amongst managers surveyed that their responsibilities
extended beyond spheres of profit and loss statements. A new
discourse focused on the compatibility of companies legal obligations
and their social responsibilities emerged in the 60s and 70s. Opposing
perspectives were articulated by well-known economists. Milton
Friedman (1970) contended that corporate officials who considered that
they had a social responsibility alongside their responsibility to make as
much money for their shareholders as possible were likely to
undermine the capitalist system, democracy and the free society. Paul
Samuelson, a distinguished economist, argued that large corporations
should pro-actively engage in socially responsible activities (1971).
During the 1970s the concept of CSR was defined and its profile as a
business strategy was raised. Contemporary thinking on CSR is
focused on stakeholder theory. This theory challenges the shareholder
view which separates economic and social issues. It rejects the belief
that it is possible to separate the economic from the social, business
from morality and the company from its shareholders. Businesses have
purposive, beneficial and mutually advantageous relationships with
their employees, customers, communities, suppliers and wider society.
Shareholders and stakeholders share significant common intereststhey are both about value creation.
Stakeholder theory finds expression in the notion of shared value.
Businesses concerns for stakeholders economic, social and
environmental interests will generate long-term value for both business
and society.
Globalisation the stretching, linking and expansion of connected
human activities across regions and continents- creates a new
imperative for corporate social and environmental responsibility while at

the same time curtailing the influence of governmental regulation.

Companies can engage in questionable business practices in states
where approaches to the enforcement of social and environmental
responsibility are poorly developed.
The fight for the truth about Apples commitment to CSR is taking place
against the backdrop of the historical failure of the Irish State to
implement progressive tax policies and its failure to implement its
shared value strategy on Corporate Social Responsibility Good for
Business, Good for The Community- launched by Richard Bruton in
2014.
Fraudulent offshore bank accounts deprived the State of vital tax
revenues in the 1980,s and the loss of national income translated into
cut backs and retrenchment across education, health and welfare
services.
The Apple debacle demonstrates the lack of political will to create a win
win relationship between business and society. Maybe Apple are acting
in accordance with societal norms, rules and values by not honouring
their shared value obligations to Irish society. Perhaps Irish citizens are
merely bystanders in a corporate tax wheeze which has their tacit
support. However it is reasonable, under the circumstances, to
question Apples assertion that it embraces socially responsible values
and to question the Governments commitment to the creation of a
culture of CSR.

Housing and homelessness crisis

worsens
October 23, 16

By Rita Cahill
This weeks figures on homelessness and rent increases provide further
evidence of the on-going housing crisis. Unfortunately the
Governments recent Action Policy for Housing and Homelessness
provided no significant change in direction from the policies that caused
the current crisis. Therefore, issues of homelessness and housing
unaffordability are going to worsen in the coming months and years with
harsh results for those most affected.
Firstly, the number of children and family who are homeless in Dublin
continues to rise dramatically.There are now 2,020 children homeless in
Dublin, a 70% increase in the last 12 months. Of the 993 families who
are homeless, 731 families and their 1,490 children and living in hotels.
Some of these have been living there for over 18 months. This
homelessness will have lasting damaging effects on these children for
their lives.

This level of homelessness is directly related to the other figures

released during the week the rising private rents. The Daft.ie report
shows that rents rose by an average of 3.9% between April and June
this year which matches the biggest three-month rent increase in the
Celtic Tiger boom in 2007. Both nationally and in Dublin, the second
quarter of 2016 saw annual inflation in rents return above 10%, for the
first time since late 2014. The average rent nationwide has risen by
39.7% since 2011 and for the first time exceeded its 2008 peak (by
0.8%). In Dublin, rents are now an average of 5.2% above boom time
prices. Average rents in Dublin City Centre are now 1,505 per month.

This begs the obvious question. If inflation is so low, and there is no

evidence of wages increasing anything near these figures, what is the
rationale for rising rents? There is no justification. Landlords are taking

the advantage of the housing crisis and the lack of rent controls to
increase their profit (or in the case where landlords are in mortgage
arrears to cover that cost).
It is important to note that landlords are not a homogenous group and
that increasingly we are seeing vulture funds and large international
property speculative funds buying up Irish residential property. These
have been encouraged by the governments tax break for Real Estate
Investment Trusts (REITs) introduced in 2013 by Michael Noonan,
where rental profits arising in a REIT are exempt from corporation tax.
Speaking at the recent Oireachtas committee on housing and
homelessness Minister Noonan extolled the virtues of the REITs:
I introduced the real estate investment trusts, REITs, tax regime in the
Finance Act 2013. This intervention has been successful in encouraging
large scale investment into the commercial and residential property
markets.
Yet these REITs are playing a role in fuelling the crisis by pushing up
rents and house prices further. Furthermore, the issue has been raised
of large vulture funds using Irelands low and zero tax regime to pay
little or no tax on its speculative residential activities here. It appears
that Irish taxpayers, and particularly the most vulnerable citizens, are
paying for the cost of the financial and property crash over and over
again.
There are a number of different but interlinked solutions to the on-going
housing crisis, which is a national emergency.
At its most fundamental level, the current crisis results from decades of
housing policy that followed the private free-market approach which
treated housing primarily as a commodity and speculative investment
asset. It also resulted from the focus within macro level government
economic policy on fixing the banks through a strategy which included
re-inflating the property market through attracting foreign speculative
investors into residential property (as I explained above).
Another policy decision that contributed very significantly to the current
crisis was the obliteration of the social housing capital budget during the
austerity years by the Fianna Fail, and then Fine Gael lead
governments. Contributing also has been the privatisation of social
housing by its increased delivery through the private rental sector.
Unfortunately, the governments Action Plan for Housing and
Homelessness provides no meaningful change on these policies.
Despite the statements of commitment to a return to social housing

provision and acknowledgement of the failure of the private market

approach - the actual policy within the Action Plan remains centred
upon re-igniting the private market, commodity finance and developerled property model.
For example, there is no rent control in the Action Plan, despite the
obvious and clear role it could play in halting spiralling unaffordable
rents. The recent rent increases show that the existing two- year rent
freeze will not stop rents rising further. Nor is there a proposal to change
landlords ability to evict tenants if they want to sell the property which is
a leading cause of homelessness.
Rents should be set (as they are in many other European countries that
have no issue with supply by local authorities and linked to inflation,
standards or a maximum increase (eg 10 to 15 per cent) over four
years. Greater security of tenure should be provided through longer
leases (say 10 to 20 years) and removing clauses allowing landlords to
evict tenants to sell their property.
The other main area where the plan fails is the issue of state
(Exchequer) funding for new building of social housing by local
authorities. The plan claims to be providing 47,000 units of new social
housing by the end-of 2021 (an increase on the 35,600 new social
housing units planned in the 2014 strategy).
However, just as with the 2014 strategy these social housing units are
dependent on various forms of private financing, off-balance sheet
mechanisms, Public Private Partnerships, acquisition from the private
market and delivery from Part V mechanisms (10% of new
developments are to be available for social housing). The figures for
what number of units are to come from these mechanisms is unclear in
the Action Plan but my analysis of the 2014 social housing strategy
showed that less than a third of the new social housing building was
going to come from exchequer funded local authority housing. The rest
was to come from the various forms of private finance and privatised
housing provision mechanisms outlined above.
The Action Plan appears to be no different. You can see in the graph
below that the direct 'build' of social housing (represented by dark blue
shade at the bottom; and it appears only a proportion of this will come
from direct exchequer capital funding. This will be clearer from the
figures in October's budget) will only be a small proportion of new social
housing up to 2021 with a strong reliance on private rental sector
provision of social housing through HAP and RAS.

Yet the mechanisms which the plan relies on to provide social housingthe private finance, investor and developer led initiatives - have failed
over and over again to provide affordable and quality housing. Yet here
we are, continuing this failed neoliberal approach that further
commodifies, commercialises and financialises the provision of, and
access to, the basic need that is housing.
Funding and promoting the private building industry is the priority in this
approach through further privatising and commercialising the delivery of
social housing. As a result, the only mechanism that can guarantee the
provision of affordable and accessible housing - direct state funding
through local authorities - is given much too little a role in the Action
Plan.
he fact that the number of homeless children in the capital exceeds
2,000 for the first time since current records began is further evidence
Ireland is a deeply unequal country. Economic inequality is worsening
despite the recovery and, for those experiencing inequality, particularly
children, Ireland is a very harsh place.
Economic inequality has become a defining global issue since the 2008
crash. The rise in wealth of the super rich while the majority suffer
austerity, debt and stagnant wages has led to intense political and
economic attention. Here in Ireland we have experienced similar trends.
The share of gross income going to the top 1 per cent of earners
increased from 34 per cent in 2011 to 39 per cent this year. And over
half of the increase in total income (21 billion) over the last five years
has gone to the top 10 per cent of earners. The bottom 50 per cent of

earners received just 6 per cent of that increased income. This

highlights an inequality in employment and wage growth in the recovery,
with a more polarised work force, an rise in low paid jobs, low hours
employment and precarious work. The minimum wage, for example,
remains 20 per cent lower than the living wage of 11.50 per hour.
Irelands progressive income tax and social protection spending does
reduce this gross income inequality (the highest in the EU) and results
in a net income inequality at the EU average. However, Irelands net
income inequality has also risen in recent years, and an accurate
assessment of economic inequality requires inclusion of other measures
(such as wealth, poverty, public services,
taxation, cost of living) which TASC provides in our recent report
Cherishing All Equally 2016.
In relation to the distribution of wealth, Ireland has also become much
more unequal. Over the last three decades, the top 10 per cent have
increased their proportion of net wealth from 42 per cent to 54 per cent,
while the share of net wealth held by the bottom 50 per cent has halved
(from 12 per cent to 5 per cent).
Austerity period
The recession and austerity period resulted in a dramatic increase in
poverty and, despite the recovery, these levels remain very high. At 36
per cent, child deprivation is double the 2007 rate, while 58 per cent of
lone parents suffer deprivation, up from 35 per cent in 2007. This means
more than onethird of Irish children live in households experiencing two
or more types of material deprivation such as being unable to afford to
heat their homes, buy new clothes, have sufficient food or socialise with
friends and family.
Economic inequality has a profoundly damaging impact on childrens
educational development and wellbeing. At age nine months, the level
of household income a child is born into has no correlation with their
inherent cognitive potential. However, by just three years of age,
children in higherincome families perform better with a 1 per cent
increase in household income predicted to lead to a 5.1 per cent
increase in educational test scores. By nine, there is a strong negative
correlation between childrens selfimage and their social class
background, as children from more disadvantaged
backgrounds are more anxious, less happy and report poorer
behaviour.
By 13, children have internalised their inequality by reducing their
expectations. Only 36 per cent of children aged 13 from the bottom

income decile expect to achieve a third level education in contrast to 65

per cent from the top income decile. Children growing up in
disadvantaged areas face multiple inequalities while inequalities in
relation to health and housing are also significant.
Women in Ireland are also disproportionately affected by inequality, with
a concentration of women in lowpaid, parttime work and unpaid care
work. Gender inequalities result in women being underrepresented in
more senior positions. Another important factor is the inadequate
provision of quality and affordable public services and infrastructure in
housing, childcare, transport, healthcare and education. Irelands
government expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product
is now the jointlowest (with Lithuania) in the EU.
Irelands high level of economic inequality results from structural issues
shaped by the type of economic policies pursued in recent decades. We
have followed a variety of capitalism that is deregulated, neo-liberal and
free market in orientation. In contrast, the Nordic countries have
pursued a more regulated social economy model resulting in greater
equality and lower poverty.
Policy shift required
To reduce inequality in Ireland, particularly child poverty, requires a
significant shift in policy and political decisions that prioritise equality.
Proofing budgetary measures for their impact on economic inequality is
essential. Would reducing inheritance tax, abolishing a progressive tax
such as the
universal social charge, failing to raise the minimum wage or the lack of
a wealth tax pass such a proofing?
Policymakers should remember the message from the public in the
general election: investment in quality public services (health, housing)
should be prioritised before tax cuts. This centenary year should give
the economic equality dimension of the 1916 Proclamation, which
declared equal rights and equal opportunities to all citizens, the
required political and policy attention it merits.

Interdepartmental Group to examine issues relating to

people with mental illness who come in contact with
the criminal justice system
First Interim Report
http://justice.ie/en/JELR/interdepartmental-group-to-examine-issuesrelating-to-people-with-mental-illness-who-come-in-contact-with-the-

criminal-justice-system_first-interimreport.pdf/Files/interdepartmental-group-to-examine-issues-relatingto-people-with-mental-illness-who-come-in-contact-with-thecriminal-justice-system_first-interim-report.pdf

'Communicating Change'
Communications Strategy 2016 2018

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Communicating-ChangeCommunications-Strategy-2016-2018.pdf/Files/CommunicatingChange-Communications-Strategy-2016-2018.pdf
Report on Protected Disclosures received in the Department of
Justice and Equality (Vote 24) 2015
http://justice.ie/en/JELR/Report_on_Protected_Disclosures_received_i
n_the_Department_of_Justice_and_Equality_(Vote_24)_2015.pdf/Files
/Report_on_Protected_Disclosures_received_in_the_Department_of_J
ustice_and_Equality_(Vote_24)_2015.pdf

Report of The Honourable Mr Justice

Frank Clarke concerning an Inquiry
pursuant to Section 109 of the Garda
Siochana Act 2005
http://justice.ie/en/JELR/Extract-from-the-Report-of-The-HonourableMr-Justice-Frank-Clarke-concerning-an-Inquiry-pursuant-to-Section109-of-the-Garda-Siochana-Act-2005.pdf/Files/Extract-from-theReport-of-The-Honourable-Mr-Justice-Frank-Clarke-concerning-anInquiry-pursuant-to-Section-109-of-the-Garda-Siochana-Act-2005.pdf
Commission of Investigation (Certain Matters relative to the Cavan /
Monaghan Division of the Garda Sochna). Final Report.
http://justice.ie/en/JELR/Commission_of_Investigation_Certain_Matter
s_relative_to_the_Cavan_Monaghan_Division_of_the_Garda_S
%C3%ADochna_Final_Report.pdf/Files/Commission_of_Investigation
_Certain_Matters_relative_to_the_Cavan_Monaghan_Division_of_the_
Garda_S%C3%ADochna_Final_Report.pdf

Commission of Investigation (Certain matters relative to the

Cavan/Monaghan Division of the Garda Sochna) Interim Report
and Request for extension of time
http://justice.ie/en/JELR/Commission%20of%20Investigation%20Interim%20Report.pdf/Files/Commission%20of%20Investigation%20Interim%20Report.pdf

First Annual Report of Garda Fixed Charge

Processing System (FCPS) Cancellation Policy
Oversight Authority
http://justice.ie/en/JELR/First_Annual_Report_of_Garda_Fixed_Charge_
Processing_System_(FCPS)_Cancellation_Policy_Oversight_Authority.
pdf/Files/First_Annual_Report_of_Garda_Fixed_Charge_Processing_Sy
stem_(FCPS)_Cancellation_Policy_Oversight_Authority.pdf

Corporate Governance Framework for the

Department of Justice and Equality
http://justice.ie/en/JELR/CorporateGovernanceFrameworkfortheDepa
rtmentofJusticeandEquality.pdf/Files/CorporateGovernanceFramewor
kfortheDepartmentofJusticeandEquality.pdf

Minister and Department of Justice

and Equality Achievements 2015
Equality and Family Law
ntroduced legislation for the holding of the
Marriage Equality referendum. On May 23rd 2015
Ireland became the first country in the world to
vote in a referendum to introduce an equal right to
civil marriage for same-sex couples. In November,
a signed commencement order for Marriage Act
2015 made Marriage Equality a legal reality in
Ireland.
Enacted the Children and Family Relationships Act
2015 which provides for the most comprehensive
reform of family law since the foundation of the
State.
Enacted the Equality (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act
2015 to protect LGBTI teachers and other
employees in state-funded religiously-run
institutions from discrimination.
Working on the new Family Leave Bill to provide for

the introduction of two weeks paternity leave

Work progressing on new National Disability
Inclusion Strategy and new National Traveller and
Roma Inclusion Strategy.

Investing in Policing, Tackling Crime

Continued Garda recruitment; 550 currently in
process, 600 more to be recruited in 2016.
Continued substantial increase in investment in
Garda vehicles - over 34 million invested since
2012 over 720 new vehicles coming on stream
since start of January 2015.
A further 46m provided for new vehicles in
Government Capital Programme 2016-2021.
An additional 205 million allocated for Garda ICT
in Government Capital Programme 2016-2021.
Construction commenced on new divisional Garda
HQs at Galway, Wexford and Kevin Street.
Finalised and announced Garda Building and
Refurbishment Programme 2016-2021 benefitting
32 locations nationwide.
Provided 1.75 million for upgrade to Garda aircraft
surveillance equipment.
Supported launch of Operation Thor, including by
way additional allocation for Garda overtime.
Enacted the Criminal Justice (Burglary of a
Dwelling) Act to provide for tougher sentences for
repeat burglars.
Work progressing on new Bail bill to provide for
stricter bail, strengthened powers for Garda and
electronic tagging of offenders out on bail.
Commenced operation of Irelands new DNA
database.
Secured a doubling of funding for Crimestoppers
and Community Alert.
Enacted the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences)
Amendment Act 2015.

Secured 4 million to commence introduction of

Schengen II information sharing system in Ireland,
to improve security and border control.
Extended Garda Youth Diversion Projects to 10 new
locations.
Launch the Joint Agency Response to Crime
interagency initiative to reduce reoffending.
Work progressing on new Community Justice
Intervention programme, in response to calls for
Community Court.
Announced planned reform to Firearms licensing
following comprehensive series of consultations
with key stakeholders.
Commenced consultation on possible regulation of
Cash for Gold outlets.
Established new cross-border Joint Agency Crime
Taskforce.
Instigated a review of effectiveness of Garda CCTV
systems.
Working with the Department of Environment,
Community and Local Government on legislative
changes to greater align the liquor licensing and
planning systems.
Justice Reform
Legislation enacted to establish the new
independent Policing Authority on January 1st.
2.7 million allocated in Budget 2016 for the
establishment of the Independent Policing
Authority.
Appointment of two Deputy Commissioners by
open competition following similar open
competition for appointment of Garda
Commissioner in 2014.
Enacted legislation to reform and strengthen the
role and remit and operation of the Garda Sochna
Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) .

Completed the Independent Review Mechanism.

Established Section 109 enquiry by a Supreme
Court judge into actions of GSOC.
Victims
Worked closely with statutory agencies and victims
advocacy groups to progress implementation of EU
Victims Directive.
Published head of Criminal Justice (Victims of
Crime) Bill following extensive consultation with
statutory agencies and victims advocacy groups.
Supported establishment of dedicated Victim
Support Offices in every Garda division.
Oversaw process leading to the granting of a
Posthumous Pardon to Harry Gleeson
Domestic Violence
Ireland signed the Istanbul Convention
Published Action Plan on implementation of
Istanbul Convention in Ireland.
Published heads of comprehensive new Domestic
Violence bill.
Migration and Protection
Enacted the new International Protection Act to
reduce the length of time in the system through
the establishment of a single applications
procedure. New ground breaking legislation long
since promised but delivered by the Minister.
16 citizenship ceremonies held and 13,500 persons
granted Irish citizenship.
Published the report of the Working on the
Protection System & Direct Provision.
Actively participated in the Justice and Home
Affairs Council of Ministers to respond to the
Migration Crisis facing Europe.
Established the Irish Refugee Protection

Programme (IRPP) to meet Irelands international

humanitarian obligations by accepting refugees
under official relocation and resettlement
programmes.
Introduced new measures to address queue
management at the Immigration Public Office in
Burgh Quay.
Actively engaged in Government taskforces to
tackle abuse of the immigration system in the
English Language School and Fisheries sectors.
Announced extension of the British-Irish Visa
Scheme to India
Diplomatic visa waiver agreement between Ireland
and China commenced.
Work progressing on new Integration Strategy.
Courts and Legal Services
Officially opened new Court of Appeal.
Enacted the Legal Services Regulation Act to
reform regulation and oversight of legal profession
and legal costs.
Established second Special Criminal Court.
Enacted legislation to increase the number of High
Court judges to address delays.
Secured increased funding for Courts Service in
2016 to increase staffing and improve efficiencies.
Published heads of the Criminal Procedures Bill to
improve efficiencies in trials and court proceedings,
including establishing Pre-Trial Hearings.
Announced PP projects for the
construction/redevelopment of seven courthouses
at Mullingar, Limerick, Cork, Letterkenny,
Drogheda, Wexford and Waterford.
Announced additional PPP funding for Development
of state-of-the-art Family Law and Childrens Courts
complex at Hammond Lane
Secured a further 10 million in exchequer funding

for Courts building refurbishment.

Magdalene Survivors
Continued implementing the recommendation of
the Quirke report in full.
To date nearly 23m has been paid out in lump
sums to over 600 applicants under that scheme.
Enacted the Redress for Women Resident in Certain
Institutions Act 2015 to make provision for a broad
range of health services free of charge.
Penalty Points
Published the Garda Professional Standards Unit
(GPSU) on the operation of the fixed charge
processing system (penalty points).
Appointed Judge Matthew Deery to the new
position of Independent Oversight Authority for the
fixed charge processing system.
Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Enacted the Personal Insolvency (Amendment) Act
to provide for independent review by Courts in
cases of the so-called Bank Veto.
Enacted legislation to provide for one-year term of
Bankruptcy and stricter penalties for noncooperation.
Prisons
Enacted the Prisons Bill to legally provide for the
closure of St. Patricks Institution
Published the landmark report of the Inspector of
Prisons on the culture and management of our
prisons.
Secured additional capital funding for the
elimination of slopping out in the prisons estate;
the completion of Limerick Prison and
refurbishment work at Portlaoise.

Budget 2016 funding for other Agencies:

1.3 million in additional funding to recruit
additional staff for Forensic Science Ireland.
1.3 million in increased funding to strengthen role
of Charities Regulatory Authority.
1.3 million for additional staffing for Probation
Service to help reduce reoffending.
1.6 million in increased resources for Legal Aid
Board.
1.2 million budget increase for Office of Data
Protection Commissioner.
Other legislation enacted or being
progressed:
Assisted Decision Making (Capacity) Act.
Choice of Court (Hague Convention) Act.
Civil Debt (Processes) Act to end the
imprisonment of debtors.
Spent Convictions Bill.
Criminal Justice (Sexual Offences) Bill.
Civil Liability (Amendment) Bill. The bill will
introduce a new model of Periodic Payment Order.
Organisational reform of the Department of
Justice and Equality
Implementation of new service level agreements
and new structures to ensure better oversight and
coordination of all agencies under the
Departments auspices
Significant progress in developing the future vision
of the Departments organisational culture which
better reflects the needs and aspirations of the
people the Department serves and which supports
the effective governance and oversight of the
Department and the sector.
Development of new HR and training policies;

Introduction of new audit and risk management

procedures;
New post of Deputy Secretary General established
and the filling of Assistant Secretary Posts;
Major upgrade of the Department ICT system,
including new cloud based initiatives enabling
enhanced cross-organisational cooperation in the
sector
The introduction and implementation of a new
protocol for the processing, tracking and
monitoring of all correspondence to the Minister
and Department.
Department of Justice and EqualityJanuary
2016
http://justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Minister_and_Department_of_Justice_a
nd_Equality_Achievements_2015

Enda Kenny says he is very

much worth his 185,000
salary

Taoiseach says salaries in his department have been

reduced by 40 per cent
Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 14:46 Updated: Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 16:33

Taoiseach Enda Kenny at the St Andrews Resource Centre in Dublin for the
launch of the Low Pay commission. Photograph: Cyril Byrne/The Irish Times.

Taoiseach Enda Kenny has insisted he is worth his

3,500 a week salary.
Asked at the launch of the Low Pay Commission in
Dublin whether his 185,000 a year salary were value
for money, Mr Kenny replied very much so.
Mr Kenny was also asked about the wage bill for the
Department of the Taoiseach.
Salaries are down by 40 per cent and in the case of the
Taoiseachs (department) we have cut everything to the
bone, he said.
Mr Kennys salary compares with 142,000 for British
prime minister David Cameron, $400,000 (356,143)
for US president Barack Obama and 179,000 for
French president Francois Hollande and the 200,000
plus earned by German chancellor Angela Merkel.
The commission is a nine-person panel which will
advise Government on changes to the minimum wage,
which is currently 8.65 per hour.
The Government insisted that cuts or increases to the

minimum wage will be agreed on the basis of evidence

and after consulting directly with workers and business
owners.
The annual minimum wage reviews will examine
unemployment and employment rates generally, advise
on the expected impact of a cut or increase on
employment, the cost of living and national
competitiveness and it will also look at changes in
income distribution and exchange rates.
Addressing the work of the commission, the Taoiseach
insisted the Government would not delay
implementing its recommendations. Work should pay
more than welfare, and no household with a person in
full-time work should be poor. This is not always the
case at the moment, he said.
PA
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/enda-kenny-says-he-is-verymuch-worth-his-185-000-salary-1.2118638

Ministers forced to give

up 12,000 pay hike

Kevin Doyle Twitter

EMAIL
PUBLISHED
13/10/2016

1
Finance Minister Michael Noonan and Minister for Public
Expenditure and Reform Paschal Donohoe

Ministers' salaries are to be frozen at

157,000 following a huge public backlash,
the Irish Independent can reveal.
Public Expenditure Minister Paschal Donohoe is to
formally ask Cabinet colleagues in the coming weeks to
forego pay restoration.
It follows days of public and political disquiet after it
emerged that ministers are due a pay rise of 3,911 on
April 1.
Throughout yesterday, ministers, including Mr Donohoe,
declined to rule out accepting the money, repeatedly
pointing out that their pay is linked to that of senior civil
servants.

"Anything involving politicians' pay never looks good,

which is why we don't decide how much we're paid and we
never should," Social Protection Minister Leo Varadkar
said. However, sources confirmed that Mr Donohoe would
raise the issue with the Cabinet "imminently".
It is understood that his proposal will only affect
ministers, meaning that TDs will still be entitled to their
2,700 pay rise next year.
The Irish Independent has also learned that ministers in
the previous government had made a similar agreement
but it was not reaffirmed after the General Election. This is
despite the fact that nine ministers, including Taoiseach
Enda Kenny, remain at the Cabinet table.
Politicians are among the public servants earning over
65,000 who are due to benefit from a clawback of
temporary pay cuts that were imposed during the
recession. Under the Lansdowne Road Agreement,
ministers are to see their pay restored to pre-2013 levels in
three tranches between April 2017 and April 2019.
Read more: 'TDs giving themselves a pay-rise is very
insensitive' - Ministers forced to answer the tough
questions on Budget 2017
Mr Donohoe yesterday refused to rule out ministers
getting the pay increase, saying he would "revisit" the issue
next year.
However, this process is now set to be expedited and a
decision to freeze ministerial pay is likely within weeks.
"It was already agreed by ministers in the last government
that they wouldn't take the money but there are newly
appointed ministers, so the decision will have to be taken
again," said a source.
Former Public Expenditure Minister Brendan Howlin
confirmed that the deal had been struck before the
election.
"I secured the agreement of all sitting ministers and
ministers of State at that time that they would forego
benefits they would stand to gain under the Lansdowne
Road agreement.

"It remains my view that current ministers should follow

the same path," he said.
Mr Donohoe faced a series of questions on political
salaries during radio interviews yesterday, with one caller
describing the hikes at a time when social welfare
payments are going up by just 5 as "very insensitive".
He was asked if his plan to revisit the issue meant that
ministers would end up foregoing the increases.
But he replied: "I'm not getting into that yet because all
the changes that are happening are not part of the
Budget."
Independent TD Michael Fitzmaurice told the Irish
Independent he sent an email to the Houses of the
Oireachtas last August, saying he does not want the
increase to his TD's salary of 87,258. But he was told he
would have to wait until March to formally make the
request.
Social Democrats co-leader Catherine Murphy described
the furore as a "leadership issue", saying she was glad the
issue was on the Government agenda "because I think it's
an issue on the public's agenda".
http://www.independent.ie/business/budget/ministers-forced-to-giveup-12000-pay-hike-35126921.html

Falling public pay

dominoes may knock
down the Coalition

John Downing Twitter

BIO
PUBLISHED
20/10/2016

1
Public Expenditure Minister Paschal Donohoe. Photo: Gareth
Chaney Collins

It is now clear that Budget 2017 was the easy

part. The key challenge for Enda Kenny's
minority coalition will be to manage through
a series of inter-connected public service pay
demands - without destroying the national

finances just as they were on a path to

recovery. It will be a challenge central to the
survival of this minority coalition for any
appreciable length of time.
November risks being a torrid month without effective
policing and with hundreds of secondary schools closed.
The impact on middle Ireland will be large and immediate.
It is a situation which no government can allow to persist
because we hire governments to keep basic services going.
Garda and teachers believe they have a special case. They
are not the only ones who think so. But even those who are
less seized by feelings of injustice are watching carefully.
If garda and teachers get a remedy, everyone else will
want the same. Reports of good Exchequer returns and
positive growth projections will further fuel pay demands.
Problems are compounded by both rank-and-file garda, in
the Garda Representative Association, and teachers in the
Association of Secondary Teachers in Ireland, both being
outside the Landsdowne Road Agreement. Since autumn
2015 this process has been about the business of a phased
restoration of pay.
The recession years were pretty brutal ones across the
public service. The gross public service pay bill fell from
over 17bn in 2008 to just above 14bn in 2013. This was
achieved by financial emergency legislation and the
introduction of a pension levy. The numbers employed in
the public service were also reduced by 32,000.
But let's recall the recession years were in many instances
even more brutal in the private sector. Any demur about
pay cuts coupled with demands for more productivity was
met with a glib reminder of where the dole office was.
So, when other public sector unions remind Government
they are keenly watching what concessions garda and
teachers extract, the Government does not need reminding
that private sector workers will also look askance at this
unfolding gut struggle. The reality is the Government is
between a rock and a hard place on this.

But the ministers may take some consolation from the

moderate stance being taken thus far by the Fianna Fil
leadership. It has been remarkable that on Tuesday and
yesterday, Michel Martin actually avoided the issue
during Leaders' Questions in the Dil.
Fianna Fil has very valid reasons for walking lightly here.
The whole public service pay regime was their work to
begin with in June 2010 as they lugged in the Croke Park
Agreement.
The confidence and supply agreement underpinning this
Government also recognises the successor, the
Landsdowne Road Agreement, as the mechanism for
managing public service pay.
If they maintain their reasonable stance, Fianna Fil are
entitled to some kudos. It is in stark contrast their very
opportunistic populism over water charges.
What is more intriguing is Sinn Fin has also thus far
taken a measured stance in this one. Like Fianna Fil they
have avoided the topic in the main Dil set-piece. It is
unlikely this quiet stance will be maintained and the
Government is vulnerable on issues around handling these
disputes.
But the more pressing issue is finding creative remedies
which avoid a chain reaction.
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-downing/fallingpublic-pay-dominoes-may-knock-down-the-coalition-35145624.html

Jobstown Trial Judge

Awards Joan Burton
14 Million In Damages
September 19, 2016

THERE was an abrupt and bizarre end to a court case

today in Dublin as Joan Burton was awarded 14 million
in emotional damages by a judge, WWN can reveal.
In just one puzzling aspect of a trial that hardly seems to
meet even the most basic concepts of legal merit, former
Tnaiste and relevant politician Joan Burton, just a
witness in the trial of a 17-year-old boy, was awarded the
damages shortly after taking to the stand.
Some of them had expensive phones, Burton recalled
through sobs, as she recounted the time she was forced to
interact with members of the public.
The judge immediately abandoned proceedings, delivering
damages to Burton, which seem to have no basis in Irish
law.
Poor people, with expensive phones? This is outrageous,
the judge remarked as he took the time to hand out life

sentences, at the behest of Burton, to anyone in the public

gallery that seemed like they might object to Irish Water.
In some of the most troubling reports to come from the
courts today it is alleged the young man at the centre of
the incident, which saw Burton trapped in her car for
several hours, had an accent.
More as we get it.

Ricky Tomlinson: The judge

was a gobshite. He didnt have a
clue

Ricky Tomlinson on his 77th Birthday, Haldane Society fringe meeting at Labour
Party Conference, on The State and Political Policing.
Jess Hurd/reportdigital.co.uk

The trial was a cock-up from start to finish. It was politically

motivated, reflects Ricky Tomlinson, the veteran actor, star of
Royle Family but, for the purposes of this interview, one of the
surviving members of the Shrewsbury 24. Photos of Ricky
Tomlinson by Jess Hurd.
Tomlinson remains outraged about a criminal trial that took place
almost 45 years ago. In 1973 he together with six others were
charged under arcane legislation (Conspiracy Act 1875) for
offences relating to intimidation and damage to property for
picketing during the first nationwide industrial action by the building
trade. Tomlinson and his friend Des (Dezzie) Warren received two
and three years respectively. The builders always insisted that they

were framed by the Heath government to send out a message to

other union activists contemplating industrial action.
Hillsborough, Orgreave, Shrewsbury
The parallels with Hillsborough and indeed Orgreave have become
shocking clear see here. There is evidence that some of the
original statements were destroyed as part of a deliberate policy.
We got reports from two police chiefs where the picketing took
place saying that theres no charges to answer they were
overruled by the powers that be, Tomlinson continues.
Despite heavy policing on the day Tomlinson recalls 60 to 80
police officers there were no arrests, no cautions and no names
or addresses were taken. Almost four months later, 271 criminal
charges were laid.
The trial itself is mired in suggestions of outrageous state
interference. The judge was a gobshite. He didnt have a clue. He
wasnt a criminal judge he was an ecclesiastical barrister who
had been sort-of elevated to take over the trial, the actor says.
Tomlinson recalls his brothers being pulled out of the public gallery
and interrogated. When I got sentenced the foreman of the jury
and a fellow juror jumped up and started boxing. The two of them
had been persuaded to change their minds because they thought
we were only getting fined fifty quid. Apparently, the foreman later
explained that a court official had incorrectly informed him of the
likely outcome when the jury was deadlocked.
Lord Widgery, Lord Chief Justice, dismissed the appeal, saying:
The deterrent effect of the original sentence has contributed to a
period of relative peace.
While in prison Warren and Tomlinson were deliberately
uncooperative. We wouldnt work and we wouldnt just soldier on.
All the time I was in prison I would not shut my own cell door. Id
never ring the bell. I wanted nothing off them. Thats why we spent
so much time in solitary confinement and the segregation unit.
Tomlinson even refused to leave prison on his release date until
friends persuaded him that there might be repercussions for

Warren who was still serving his sentence.

Shrewsbury 24 (www.shrewsbury24campaign.org.uk)

Whipping boys
It is a stubbornness that characterises Tomlinsons campaign. He
was not only a thorn in the governments side, but he has also
clashed with apparent allies. He feels badly let down by the trade
union movement, who refused to fund his trial and removed him
from the TUC conference after his release from prison. He calls
GMB general secretary Paul Kenny a shithouse for accepting a
knighthood. He was badly let down by Amnesty International, who
originally supported him and Warren as prisoners of conscience
but subsequently unadopted them. The group eventually
conceded that they had been leaned on by the government. They
released a statement in May 2016:
It is clear that the UK government sought to influence Amnesty
Internationals decision to take up the case. Forty years on, it is
impossible to state conclusively that the pressure unduly
influenced Amnesty Internationals internal decision making
process; however, we acknowledge that the organization at the
time did not act in a manner that would meet research and
casework standards to which we adhere today.
Since his release Tomlinson has been active in trying to uncover
the truth about the Shrewsbury prosecutions. He is working with
Des Warrens son Andy.
So why does he think were they were made an example of? It
wasnt done particularly to hurt the building workers. We were the
whipping boys for the miners. We were before Hillsborough, before

Orgreave. We were the starting point. They got away with it with
us.
Tomlinson is convinced that one of his co-defendants was a police
informer. It came out during the trial that our telephones were
tapped. Nothing was done about it.
The actor is following the progress of the Pitchford Inquiry into
undercover policing. The case is till under review by the
miscarriage of justice watchdog the Criminal Cases Review
Commission.
Ive got no faith in the judicial system whatsoever. Its more
important to me that the public finds out what has been done to us.
Its an uphill struggle but we wont give in.

Haldane Society fringe meeting at Labour Party Conference, on The State and
Political Policing. Casa Bar, Liverpool.
Jess Hurd/reportdigital.co.uk

Kicking up a fuss
Tomlinson is adamant that the government is responsible for Des
Warrens death. He went into prison a fine, big, strapping man, he
says. He was a steel fixer by trade and he came out of prison and
never worked again. And the last time I was with him, he was
strapped to a wheelchair and couldnt hold his head up. Tomlinson
says the medication Warren received in prison led to the
Parkinsons disease that killed him. If [the government] thinks
thats wrong, well come and arrest me: prove that you never.
With that in mind, Ricky Tomlinson is conscious that the campaign
needs to move quickly. Five of the lads are dead including Dessie

 two died in their 90s and so we havent got a lot of time.

Theyve got no fucking intention of releasing the papers that will
throw a light on this.
When Tomlinson spoke to the Haldane Society at the Labour Party
conference fringe event it was his 77th birthday. His energy was
extraordinary, charging around the country gathering evidence,
talking to people, tracking down documents and organising
support.
Anyone at all whos got any information anyone who took part in
the strike, whether they were for us or against us, if they want to
get in touch through my solicitors [Public Interest Law Unit], he
says. Theyre waiting for me to snuff it because Im still here
kicking up a fuss.
A version of this article will feature in the next issue of
Socialist Lawyer here
http://thejusticegap.com/2016/10/ricky-tomlinson-judge-gobshitedidnt-clue/

Willie Penroses driver

quits after a week as it
is revealed he is a
convicted tax-dodger

Posted on July 14, 2016

A Government ministers personal driver has

been forced to resign after the Irish Mail on
Sunday revealed that he is a convicted tax
dodger.
Labour Junior Minister for Housing and Planning
Willie Penrose, who has a seat at Cabinet, hired

former rally driver Pdraig Price as his driver just

last week.
But an MoS investigation found that Mr Price is a
serial tax-defaulter whose failed plant hire
business has left him owing tens of thousands of
euro to the taxman, as well as owing other
creditors.
When the MoS contacted Mr Penrose for
comment, the minister said he was unaware of
Mr Prices tax issues. Shortly after being
contacted, Mr Penrose called the MoS to say he
had approached Mr Price to discuss the issue,
and that the chauffeur had offered his
resignation.
Mr Price, from Ballynacargy, Co. Westmeath,
near Mr Penroses home in the same townland,
lived a fast-paced lifestyle in the early 2000s,
competing in rally car races around Ireland and
the UK in Ford Escorts and Toyota Celicas.
His driving experience made him eminently
qualified to drive the minister to and from his
office and his various engagements.
However, his plant hire business, which relied on
work from the construction sector, hit the skids
towards the end of the decade, leaving him
owing thousands to the Revenue and Mr
Penrose red-faced for employing a tax-defaulter.
An examination of Land Registry records shows
a number of judgments against Mr Price
registered on his three-acre property in Ballintue,
Co. Westmeath.

The records show that on October 3, 2005, a

judgment of almost 60,000 was registered
against Mr Price, with the note stating: An office
copy of an affidavit by Gerard Harrahill, Collector
General and an officer of the Revenue
Commissioners of a judgment obtained by
Liam J Irwin against Pdraig Price on March 4,
2005, in the High Court.
It continues: The amount owing on the said
judgement is stated to be 57,725.61.
On June 22, 2006, another judgment was
registered in the Land Registry amounting to a
further 6,108.95, with the note explaining it is a
judgment obtained by Gerard Harrahill of the
Office of the Revenue Commissioners against
Pdraig Price on February 24, 2005, in the
District Court.
Later in 2006, Mr Price appears on Revenues
tax defaulters list, where he is recorded as a
plant hire operator. It is noted that he was fined
750.
There are two further judgments, both registered
in 2007, against his property in Land Registry
documents, one in favour of insurance firm Aon
amounting to 15,713.41.
The other results from a circuit court case
brought by Navan plant hire businessman Patrick
Kearns, for 31,243.07. It is understood that Mr
Price was subcontracted by Mr Kearns to provide
machinery for building sites in the midlands.
The MoS called Mr Penrose on Friday afternoon

to ask if he knew he was employing a convicted

tax defaulter. He immediately replied: No, I
wasnt. I wasnt aware of it.
Look, Im not aware of his personal situation,
you know. He was a lad from around home,
thats all. I just picked somebody who wasnt
working, you know. Thats all I know about him.
Asked why he employed Mr Price, Mr Penrose,
who also employs his brother Johnnie Penrose
as his parliamentary assistant, said: Well, I
mean hes somebody that was there hes not
related to me in any way and he knows his way
around, hes a driver.
He used to do a bit of rally driving, you know, Mr
Penrose added.
I understood he might have had a company or
whatever and he was working but thats years
ago.
Asked whether he would have hired him had he
known about Mr Prices tax problems, the
minister said: Well, Im the type of person who
thinks that all of those things are matters for
people to deal with themselves. Im not
somebody who holds everybody in judgment
thats being honest with you.
Im not aware of his personal circumstances. I
knew he had a contracting business years ago
but I wouldnt know the extent of his failure or
anything like that.
I knew he had difficulties like everybody else, but
thats years ago, I think.

It doesnt affect his ability to drive. It doesnt

affect his ability to do his job with me.
Ill certainly raise it with him, the minister
promised, also committing to telling Mr Price that
the MoS was offering an opportunity for him to
respond himself. Asked if he thought that hiring
Mr Price, whose construction sector business
failed, was a conflict of interest, given his
portfolio as housing and planning minister, Mr
Penrose replied: I dont award any contracts. I
dont have anything to do with contracts or
anything like that, but Ill certainly consult him
about it.
A short while later, Mr Penrose called the MoS to
say he had spoken to his driver. Asked if Mr Price
had any comment on this story, the LongfordWestmeath TD said: No, he has nothing.
Sure, I mean what has he to say? It appears his
business was in a lot of difficulties actually, you
know, the poor old divil.
I asked him there, I said it seems like theres an
issue there in relation to judgments. Well I
suppose none of us are going to be safe in the
next 20 years but anyway, the tax judgements,
and he said, yeah, a number of years ago.
I didnt ask him about them but he said theres
an issue in relation to them and he proffered his
resignation to me in order to avoid any potential
embarrassment to me.
I accepted it straight away. Its regrettable
because he was an excellent driver.

Asked if Mr Price had satisfied the various

judgments made against him, Mr Penrose said:
He mustnt have, you know. He didnt win the
Lotto anyway or Id have heard that.
Hes offered his resignation, Ive accepted it, and
thats all I can do other than try to look for
another driver.
Its with regret Ive accepted it but obviously he
has to comply. As far as I was concerned, as
long as I had somebody who wasnt related to
me and who was competent in the job, they were
the parameters that I was interested in.
Asked if he would have kept Mr Price as his
driver had he not offered to resign, Mr Penrose
said: No. Once the situation was that he had
taxation judgements against him in that context.
You have to have tax clearance or whatever, we
all must have tax clearance.
http://mikegavin83.com/willie-penroses-driver-quits-week-revealedconvicted-tax-dodger/

Clare Daly disallowed to question Tanaiste and

Minster for Justice re Roscommon Gardai
entering Elderly Mike Gavins Home

On April 1st Peter D. Jones State Solicitor

Mullingar Threatens Elder Mike Gavin to halt
Peaceful Protests outside his client Robert
Marren Solicitors Mullingar
Mike Gavin informed Peter D Jones in writting
that he was preparing a file to send to Garda
Fraud Squad Mike demanded 7 pieces
documentary evidence and answers to 20
questions No Response to date from Jones
MikeGavins Peaceful Protest in Mullingar Friday
May 20th 2pm Great Success Supporters from
all over the country
Has-Being and Never will Be again Being exMullingar Councilor FAILED to trick Mike Gavin
Peaceful Protesters into Breaching the Peace.
Shame on You!
Special Branch visit Mike 3 Times 8 Penalty
Points Peter D Jones State Solicitor
THREATENS 84 Year Old Mike Gavin with
Garda Special Branch.
Peter Jones is the Fianna Fail appointed State
Only a few years ago, Peter Jones had 8
PENALTY POINTS corruptly and illegally
removed, a matter which appeared in the
Phoenix Magazine at the time.
Peter Jones is now threatening an 83 year old
farmer. Is it not enough for 83 year old Mike
Gavin to have been defrauded of a large sum of

money by Mr. Joness friend and fellow Mullingar

solicitor Robert Marron? Is there nothing so low
as to what the legal profession in Mullingar
will stoop to? Just as you thought that they
could not sink any lower by defrauding an elderly
farmer, they are now threatening him.

Gardai Interrogate Elderly Mike

Gavin in his home
On Friday the 20th of May a local Garda and
Roscommon detective called to Mike Gavins
Home, Dundonnell Taughmaconnell. They were
told Mikie was gone to Mullingar (Protest). They
said they wanted to see Mikie re the Fraud
Thing. They called back the next day despite
the fact that Mikes sister Eileen called them and
told them that they were sending their Fraud file
to Dublin when it was complete.
They came regardless and told Mikes sister it
had nothing to do with her and they wanted to
see Mike Gavin. Mikes sister locked the door
and told them repeatedly out the window to go
away and leave them alone and eventually they
did.
3 Gardai returned Wednesday when and got
Mike home alone. Mike Gavin describes here
what happened

http://mikegavin83.com/wpcontent/uploads/2016/05/Solicitor-FinancialElderAbuse-of-Michael-Gavin-and-EileenLinney.pdf

We will bring our Next Peaceful Protests to their

Homes.
Saturday, June 11 at 1 PM Ballyglass Mullingar
https://www.facebook.com/events/868004409977
743/
In retaliation for Special Branch Gardai
intimidation and attempted interrogation of 84
Year Old Mike Gavin,
https://www.facebook.com/michaelgavin83/video
s/313572975640475/
followed by Clare Daly TD being disallowed to
question Tanaiste and Minster for Justice re
Roscommon Gardai entering Elderly Mike
Gavins Home.
http://wp.me/p6LhQk-hg
Why Rolling Peaceful Protest Mullingar Friday
June 24th 2pm Outside Robert B Marren and
Peter D Jones Solicitors Mullingar
http://wp.me/p6LhQk-h

Shannon airport is the elephant in the

room - Paul Gavan
Oct 20, 2016
Today, the Seanad passed a motion a cross-party motion
calling for an end to the war in Syria, however, US troops and
munitions continue to pass through Shannon airport on their

way to bombing civilians in Iraq, Yemen and Syria itself - This is

hypocrisy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=leq0THq_tGI&feature=share

Wider implications for

Ireland of Brexit need to be
brought into the open
Kenny and Martin comment on border poll are welcomed
as a stimulus for debate
Sat, Jul 23, 2016, 13:45

Paul Gillespie

16

That Northern Irelands future in the United Kingdom

is subject to Brexits constitutional logic has this week
come squarely on to Irelands mainstream political
agenda. Michel Martin and then Enda Kenny said
they would support an Irish reunification referendum

under certain conditions.

This is an important shift of attitude, since the Border
poll issue has been monopolised by Sinn Fin and
discussion of reunification resisted by other parties as
unrealistic or undesirable. It should now get the wider
debate and research it deserves.
The UKs dual sovereignty question links EU
membership to its own integrity as a united state. After
the decision to leave the EU that decisional logic
assumes crisis proportions since it embraces Northern
Ireland and Scotland, whose votes to remain were
overridden by an English majority.
Speaking at the MacGill Summer School, Martin said a
Border poll should happen if support for the EU
Remain option shifts Northern opinion towards
reunification; but he acknowledged the only evidence
so far is that the majority there wants to maintain
open borders and a single market with this jurisdiction
and beyond that with the rest of Europe.
Preserving those very substantial rights against more
closed visions of Brexit is a major challenge. It was
taken up the next day by Kenny in his remarks at the
school. He said in his prepared speech that the closer
the UK is to the EU the better for all of us, and above
all, for Ireland. If that is not what emerges from the
British debate, he later told journalists, Ireland must
prepare for a shift of view in the North towards Irish
unity by ensuring Northern Ireland could be absorbed
into the EU like East Germany was in 1990-91 rather
than through a tortuous and long process of separate
application.

Unique role
This European context of possible
reunification plays into the special or

unique role the Northern Ireland peace

process has in that setting, according to
Irish diplomats. Kenny stressed this aspect
with Angela Merkel and Franois Hollande.
Judging his remarks only by the competitive logic of
domestic politics whether with Sinn Fin or Fianna
Fil underestimates the dual sovereignty question
Ireland also faces over European integration and
national reunification. Its logic could play out much
more rapidly than is presently imagined or desired,
according to the dynamics Lenin observed in 1917:
There are decades when nothing happens, and there
are weeks when decades happen. We are arguably
living through such an accelerated time period in
international affairs. In that perspective, it is high time
these wider implications of Brexit for Ireland were
brought out into the open.

Realistic evaluation
Sinn Fien
ins cack-handed call for an immediate Border poll
after the Brexit referendum certainly deserved the
criticisms it got from other nationalists and unionists,
based on a realistic evaluation of recent polling in the
North which decisively rejects Irish unity. Martin and
Kennys case is more long-term, anticipating a possible
decisive shift in unionist attitudes confronted with a
certain Brexit scenario linked to UK break-up.
Sinn Fins own evolution from a sceptical
sovereigntist opposition to the EU towards a leftcritical stance, accepting it with a different form and
policies, is more significant than its reversion to
slogans about unity. It has yet to come to terms with
the possibility that a united Ireland is more likely to

arise from wider British and European tensions than

from purely Irish ones. And its hopes to supplant
Fianna Fil in the last election were frustrated by
Michel Martins determination not to allow that to
happen. Thus the supplanting of the Civil War political
cleavage by a new left-right one has not occurred. Irish
politics remains polarised around the two main
centrist parties.
The UK crisis may not be resolved by break-up. It may
alternatively hold together in a new federalised
fashion, linked more closely to the EU than many
Brexiteers want. Ireland must live with whatever
outcome emerges. Irish policymaking should not
accept that passively but should seek to shape it
according to Irish interests. These are contested
politically between those who want closer or looser
European integration, a more social or a more
neoliberal EU.
Inescapably, too, such choices involve Irish attitudes to
the UK and a united Ireland. They need to be
researched and debated much more than they have
been, perhaps along the lines of the New Ireland
Forum in 1984. In that perspective, this weeks
remarks by Martin and Kenny should be welcomed.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/widerimplications-for-ireland-of-brexit-need-to-bebrought-into-the-open-1.2732710

Brexit and Northern

Ireland: early indications
are that post-Good Friday

Agreement relationships
will survive quite well
Posted on August 9, 2016 by The Constitution Unit

.entry-meta
.entry-header

Following the result of the EU referendum there was much

concern about what Brexit would mean for the peace
process in Northern Ireland. Brian Walker writes that,
although the full ramifications of Brexit are as yet unclear,
at this early stage it seems that post-Good Friday
Agreement relationships will in fact survive the severe
stress tests of Brexit quite well.
In the Irish Republic, the Brexit result reawakened some of
the worst nightmares and revived a familiar debate. The
nightmare acted on an already volatile situation in which
the Fine Gael Taoiseach Enda Kenny is under internal
challenge as leader of a minority coalition supported by a
confidence and supply arrangement with the main (and
now reviving) opposition party Fianna Fil, with Sinn Fin
as a third force trying to exploit differences between them.
Not a stable situation. At Stormont the new two party
coalition of the DUP and Sinn Fin split Leave to Remain
respectively, while the newly created opposition outside

the Executive mainly supported Remain.

Federating the Brexit verdict
As in Scotland demands were made that Northern Ireland
should remain within the EU as a consequence of the local
majority for Remain. It is hard to see how this could apply
retrospectively. In any case the demands will not make
headway as neither government will support them. Indeed
they seem more of a tactic to press the British government
to include the devolved administrations not only in
consultations but in the actual negotiations over Article 50.
Legal action is threatened to try to ensure Stormonts as
well as the Westminster parliaments approval for the UKs
eventual negotiating position.
Brexit and the Good Friday Agreement
Because the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) is an
international treaty the hare is raised that Irish permission
would be necessary to amend it. My informal legal
guidance suggests probably not. Moreover the Irish
government are unlikely to make it a point of legal
challenge. The GFA has little to say about the EU,
therefore there would appear to be little to negotiate about
in it. However, like all other relevant UK law the Northern
Ireland Acts which implement the GFA are EU compliant
and are therefore liable to repeal. The repeal of EU legal
compliance in the GFAs enabling legislation might be
used to bolster an argument to try to keep Northern
Ireland within the EU. An attempt to block it would fail to
win cross-community support and no devolved
administration has a formal veto. But maintaining EU
compliance might form a basis for some sort of associated

status with the EU for Northern Ireland (and Scotland), if

that were to emerge as a possible solution.
The GFA proclaims a British-Irish partnership but does not
give Ireland a veto on a matter which involves the whole
UK. Claims that the Brexit verdict violates the Irish
citizenship rights for people in Northern Ireland introduced
in the GFA remain to be tested. Although the Agreement
has created a British-Irish partnership beyond its formal
terms, the Irish government would not claim that it has
extended to become a dual sovereignty question as
recent comment has suggested. The robust and
increasingly warm British-Irish relationship is the natural
context for managing a UK withdrawal that affects the
Republic at least as much as it does Northern Ireland.
Political negotiation rather than legal challenge is likely to
be the more fruitful approach.
Brexit and Irish unity
Although the DUP supported Leave, Remain won 56 per
cent to 44 per cent, a majority which included a fair
sprinkling of unionists. This sparked speculation about
setting a precedent for forming a new majority in favour of
Irish unity.
Seeking to protect their flanks from Sinn Fin, which had
demanded a border poll provided for in Good Friday
Agreement, the leaders of the two main parties in the
Republic began to think aloud separately about Irish unity
at a summer school where such jeux desprit are
encouraged. But support for the EU and support for Irish
unity are clearly different things. Realising the potential for

creating instability in a febrile atmosphere, the leaders

hastily issued clarifications that they did not mean any time
soon. Even so, some say the genie is now out of the
bottle, but most admit there is no evidence that a border
poll would be won under likely circumstances.
On the role of the GFA and a border poll one of the
clearest analyses was made by the Anglo-Irish academic
Martin Mansergh who was adviser to successive Fianna
Fail taoisigh and therefore not expected to have much
tenderness towards Brexit or a pro-Union position:
Its a complete misinterpretation to suggest a border poll
is suddenly more viable, says Mansergh. Although I dont
think Sinn Fin are misinterpreting it, I think they are using
it to push an agenda for a united Ireland. I think its very
disruptive and destabilising to get people going back into
the trenches in a fundamentalist sort of way, unionism
versus a united Ireland.
Brexit and the two governments
After Theresa May held meetings with the First and
deputy First Ministers in Stormont and with the Taoiseach
in London, the prospects for keeping the border open or
nearly open look a little brighter. Both premiers pledged
not to return to the border of old. Electronic data
screening of transport movements already agreed
between the two governments might provide alternatives
to border checks. Immigration control could rely on a
system of administering work permits and welfare
entitlements within Northern Ireland which is in any case
thought to be an unlikely back door into Great Britain,
when would be immigrants can make for London directly.

As they say, when theres a will theres a way. The full

ramifications of Brexit are as yet unclear but early
indications are that post-GFA relationships ritually
described as fragile look like surviving the severe stress
tests of Brexit quite well and will make the best of it.
About the author
Brian Walker is an Honorary Senior Research Fellow and
Press Officer at the Constitution Unit. He is a former
political editor for BBC Northern Ireland.

https://constitutionunit.com/2016/08/09/brexit-and-northernireland-early-indications-are-that-post-goodfriday-agreement-relationships-will-survivequite-well/