Certainly shows that regulators have not only failed here, but Europe wide. Although I admit I know next to nothing about the debts in Spain and Italy and thier ability to reduce it significantly, perhaps thier debt to GDP ratio's are not as severe or significant as our and Greece's ?
I do stand for some correction.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
Most of the figure given in the NYT graph for Ireland's debt of $867bn is not yet sovereign debt, the Irish sovereign debt can't be more than half that figure. But looking more closely at the figures for the other countries, they come close enough to the national sovereign debt figure for that country.
The national debt of Italy is around $1.4TN and Greece $236bn. etc.
Going, Going, Gone:
http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/article.php?id=249
I'm loving the new thread title.
This could prove interesting - FF agreed to hold a Dáil vote on the deal during their parliamentary party meeting. Of course, like the budget, it'll probably be rubberstamped by all members in the current majority, but at least there will be no wriggle-room.
It's an interesting one.
The terms of the deal obviously involve a disappointingly high average interest rate, but it's still cheaper than we can get in the markets at present. At the same time though the bond rates have been inching downward, so I guess the best case scenario is that we can go back to the markets at some point and get the money cheaper. (I wouldn't bet on it though)
Although I don't think the deal was a particularly good one (although I certainly like the bit about doctors, lawyers and pharmacists) I'm not sure that voting against it now would really help us.
As I think someone pointed out earlier in the thread, Iceland is still negotiating with the UK about deposits in their banks, and have driven the negotiated interest rate down by several points. And we don't actually need to borrow until the tail end of next year. Why is FF so keen to get this sewn up so quickly? Are they really so egomaniacal that they want to get it done before they pushed out? Are are they actually naive enough to think it can win them an election?
Yes they ate. New angle today is Cowen being aggressive and forceful which they think will be believed.
I fear that there's enough goons out there that will.
There's a vote next Wednesday on the bailout. SF think that their threat of legal action made the govt bring a vote.
Voting against it speeds up the election. But it's passed through the Dail. The TD's votes in favour of it are on the public records of the Dail proceedings. If he or she comes to your door after Christmas, let him or her know in no uncertain terms what you think of them doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
Maybe they'd like to get it all done before an election so that the next four (or forty, or four hundred) years of austerity will be linked to a goverment of the current opposition, rather than being voted out and having the opposition get in and have success reducing the interest rate considerably.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
There was a point made on that eye-opening VBrowne show a few days ago where some economics lecturer (from Trinity/UCD) mentioned that it's not the case that we can't afford a to refuse a bailout (as we're fully funded until well into next year), it's more the case that the EU can't afford for us to refuse a bailout, because of what instability creates. The lecturer effectively said that we had them over a barrel - either they give us favourable terms or we refuse a bailout and all hell breaks loose.
With that in mind (if it's correct, I'm going off memory), the fairly punitive interest rates they agreed to are....suspicious?
I see the foreign cash reserves are very low for Ireland.
Cash/Gold reserves
Including a few barrowloads of gold, the total foreign reserves are about $2bn, just in behind Albania on the list.
the whole thing stinks. That the ECB got involved is what was our downfall really. the IMF were the 'good' guys in the deal really.
I still want to know why Britain, Denmark and Sweden wanted in. That one still stinks to high heaven. I think post-election it will all come out in the wash.
Just in behind Ethiopia in my list... Hmmmm... says there that we only had 831m. Either way how mad is it the amount of cash that China have built up. They could easily take our debt.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
I think the list of countries is from 2008, when the State foreign currency/gold reserves were at that lower level.
The Gov decided to offload 75%/ $3bn from the foreign currency/gold reserves in 2006?
I would be quite confident that the alarm bells were ringing loud and clear in 2006 in the CB. I wonder what the CB explanation was for this questionable/desperate action?
Anyway $3bn seems such a miniscule figure. These days, our concepts have been stretched toward infinity, as to what constitutes a decent pile of cash - that would make a difference.
Well we still haven't gotten any answers from anyone about what went on in 2005-2008.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
All of the head honchos have retired and the powers that be aren't willing to drag anything up whilst they are in power. FG and Labour have pledged to hold inquiries into what went on. Though that was a while ago. Whether the appetite will be there next year who knows.
Also the reasoning behind next week's vote on the bailout has become clear.
SF have said that they threatened high court action. Nonsense.
Seems its a ploy from FF to divide FG and Labour on this issue. We'll see how we go.
That appears to be the logic. However, if FG and Labour vote against, then where does that leave FF? FG and Labour could say they don't agree with specifics and the bad deal that the Government got rather than the theory of a bail out and, imo, FF/ Greens look like the undemocratic goons without a mandate they are!Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
There must be some risk of the likes of Mattie McGrath actually putting his vote where his mouth is, and therefore theres a chance the Government could actually fall because of rebel back benchers.
I could well be missing something obvious, but I just don't see this as some great strategic move from Cowen? Best case scenario for them appears to be if FG vote for or abstain, and Labour vote against. If that happens I'd expect Labour to get a few percentage points gain, most likely from FF.
Your theory is sound. However the realities are different. It's not important whether the opposition win this or not, what's important is that they agree to the same thing no matter what as you said. However the way Gilmore has been acting he knows that if they and FG don't agree it will be FG that will get the media kicking. So there's more to lose from FG's point of view I would say. Now I think there's a poll to be released next Wednesday so that could take over the news if it means FF are in single figures, which I doubt they will be considering the fawning over them that rte have been getting up to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
The best thing for both opposition parties would be to agree to opposing the govt to show a united front and stop this FF obsession with their differences. Even Sean Ardagh was at it this morning. It grates me that no member of the media comments on it properly.
It annoys the crap out of me the way they go on about the opposition having differences- of course they bloody do!, they're separate parties and broadly come from the centre right and centre left.
It's up to the electorate to decide which they want to have the heavier weighting in the next government. Then the parties work out a compromise based on their respective strengths.
And it's not like the Greens and FF agree on much.
Even now in Government! Gogarty was at it today - spoke for the motion that he was about to vote against ffs!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
Pat Kenny is always banging on about an agreement before an election, but it's really gone up a notch since the last poll which showed a Labour led leftist Government was at least a possibility. RTE and our media controllers are absolutely bricking it about such a prospect. If the next poll goes the same way, I expect the whole media focus will shift to a FG/FF coalition in their interest. I mean National Interest.
With any luck, that'd be the end of them as independent entities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
The so called "Icesave" settlement is now landed and to be voted on by the Iceland parliament. If there is some extra controversy, it will again go for a referendum.
Icesave are the unresolved issues around the collapse of Landsbanki and in particular the UK and NL branches. Both the UK and NL governments repaid/covered the deposits and demanded that the Iceland State pay them back (the EEA insured amount) to the tune of a maximum €20k for each deposit. The total bill for this is ca €4bn (equivalent to €60bn in Ireland)
The first agreement demanded 5.5% interest for the €4bn loan and the liquidated assets of UK/NL branches would be spread equally to the deposit claims and creditor claims - bondholders etc. The UK/NL used every trick to their advantage, including using their influence with the IMF to withhold the desperately needed IMF scheduled loan payments. Plain and simple gunboat diplomacy, sign or else! The IMF denied this, but all the same they refused to disburse further loans to Iceland until they reached agreement with UK/NL.
This agreement was passed in Iceland parliament after lengthy volcano debates (heat and temper) but the President, under mass pressure, used his constitutional right to forward it for referendum, where it was trashed 9-1. The NL (Netherlands) in particular were freaked out by the referendum and threw in a last minute offer to avoid it going to referendum. But the democratic process could not be throttled. The IMF relented after the referendum and released further loans. The publicity from the referendum had all of a sudden changed perceptions with some in the outside world towards the IMF and they were drawing flak, right left and centre against their (unofficial) position.
New second stage negotiations started and gone on for over 16 months.
The new agreement has dragged interest down to an average 2.75% over the loan period, interest only payments until 2016 - at no time can an annual repayment be more than 5% of GDP. The UK/ NL assets of the failed bank are now in control of Iceland and the assets will be distributed according to Iceland law, where the deposit claims are secured first before creditors. There will be nothing for creditors/bondholders. The liquid assets are likely to cover around the amount that Iceland owe to the UK/NL, not quite everything but at least 95% of the total bill.
I do add that the Iceland parliament had the foresight, in all this drama, to pass an emergency bill on the night before the Banks were declared bust in sept 2008, that gave the depositers first claim to the Bank assets, ahead of the senior bondholders.
Iceland has now only to deal with a mere economic depression rather than a turbo depression.
That the ability for the President to send contentious issues for referenda is something we sorely lack.
All the bill signer can do here if s/he opposes a bill and only if it is unconstitutional is to a: sign it into law and hope someone brings a case to the supreme court about its apparent unconstitutionality. Or b: refuse to sign it and send it to the supreme court herself/himself and let them debate the constitutionality of it. If they find that it is constitutional that bill becomes locked in a sense and can't be touched again. Hence the bill signer tends to sign it almost always.
Headline today "IMF delays funding until Dáil vote on rescue deal" :bomb:
What we have seen in the day after the budget, was the true face of this Fianna Fail government, complete denial, obnoxiously rude, arrogant and sneering condescension to the people. What we saw in effect, was the face of a government who are immune, chronically corrupted by power and corrupted by the absoluteness of this power.
As long as they act within their constitutional mandate, they can decide what constitutes the national interest.
There is no one fix. In Ireland there are a multitude of lessons to be learned and acted upon from this tissue of fiascos. But one big lesson, is that a people united on their constitution can not be thwarted by parliament, they can not be defeated (in the courts anyway) and a teeny weeny republic can stand up to a foreign nation 300 times bigger. Nations are bound to respect another's sovereignity. The UK/NL had to respect the sovereignity of tiny Iceland's democracy, even if their own constitutions did not allow for such vagaries. The Iceland government had made a deal with UK/NL, but the deal was rejected by the people using the constitution. The will of the Iceland people had to be respected by the UK/NL. Even the IMF had to respect the sovereign right of a people to reject a treaty and back off from trying to exert pressure to accept. The UK/NL had to accept, that although the Iceland government had signed an international agreement/treaty, they had not the full mandate to sign, if the people exercised their right to take away that mandate. The UK/NL had to then renegotiate on the basis that they were negotiating with the Iceland people.
Now you can imagine how a small clause of accountability to the people in major sovereign issues, would have changed the situation in the negotiation between the Irish gov and EU. The Irish Gov would have had much more pressure to act in the interests of the people. We would have had much more disclosure on issues. The Government stated that the bondholders were protected by law, that in the event of a bank failure they had equal right with depositers to assets. But the banks had a solvency crisis, there was no fix for this solvency crisis. I have not heard an explanation why a law could not be passed protecting the depositers, making them first claimant and making it retrospective.
I don't believe the protection of the people from inept government should necessarily fall on the President.
Here, as head of state of a sovereign republic, the Iceland president is being interrogated by an obnoxious Paxman on Newsnight and he manages to patiently give him a lecture on democracy. YouTube Paxman
So, predictably the vote was won, 81-75, but as can seen, not everyone voted.
Naming and shaming the six who abstained:
Government:
Willie O'Dea
Opposition:
Alan Shatter
Dinny McGinley
Olwyn Enright (retiring)
Liz McManus (retiring)
Noel Grealish (take your pick which side to put him on)
Apparently McManus is in hospital. I reckon that pairing was invoked as well.