Nothing To PwC Here



Neil writes:

Did PWC have anything to do with Irish Water or DO’B/Siteserv deal? Do they know something the rest of us don’t? It seems to think water will be deducted at source if their on-line tax calculator is anything to go by… it was not present a few weeks ago.

PWC Tax Calculator


Let’s see.

in 2011, PricewaterhouseCoopers and McCann Fitzgerald were tasked with carrying out a report on the setting up of Irish Water.

In April 2012, former Environment Minister Phil Hogan spoke about the decision to award the Irish Water tender to Bord Gáis, rather than Bord na Móna, saying “the outside assessors, PricewaterhouseCoopers, had made the decision based on a long list of criteria”.

In January 2014, it was revealed that former Environment Minister Phil Hogan’s department paid €179,584 paid to PricewaterhouseCoopers for “consultancy services” on the establishment of Irish Water.

And in a statement issued earlier this month, Siteserv stated:

“The transaction to acquire Siteserc PLC (in liquidation) by [Denis O’Brien’s] Millington in 2012 was conducted entirely in full compliance with best corporate practice and best corporate governance standards as already publicly stated by the Directors of Siteserv PLC (in liquidation). The sale process on behalf of Siteserv PLC (in liquidation) was assisted by KPMG Corporate Finance and Davy Corporate Finance overseen by a sub-committee of the Board of the company and was subject to and EGM of the company’s shareholders. IBRC had a representative on the sub-committee and was advised by PwC Corporate Finance.


You may recall former CEO of Bord Gáis John Mullins stepped down from his role in December 2012, and later replaced by Michael McNicholas.

Mr Mullins was appointed as non-executive chairman of Heneghan PR earlier this month.

Heneghan PR – which does  PR for Siteserv – is headed by Nigel Heneghan, advisor to Leslie Buckley, spokesman for INM and, most recently, a member of the compliance committee of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, a position he was appointed to by the Government, without any public recruitment process.

Good times..

Previously: Contains Impurities

Denis O’Brien, Fine Gael And The Water Meter Deal

Sponsored Link

19 thoughts on “Nothing To PwC Here

  1. Soundings

    Hmmm, Paul Murphy said in the Dail this week

    “The Taoiseach says the promised Bill [to introduce penalties for non-payment] will be introduced in the next few weeks. On 3 February he told us it would be published “in the next couple of weeks”. The next time we raise the issue will we be told that it will be introduced in the next couple of months and then the next few months? ”

    Remember Senator Higgins saying the government would clarify penalties “over the coming week” when she was speaking in that car crash of a radio interview on 2nd Feb.

    As for any discussions between this government and PwC, you’ll probably find that such discussions were unminuted. Nice that we’re still using PwC, what with us suing them for billions over their alleged negligence with auditing the Quinn insurance companies.

    Stinks to high heaven, and whatever you might think about the water protesters, you wouldn’t be uncovering these malodourous transactions and communication unless there were serious street protests at government maladministration.

    1. SweetPeteato

      Important point about the water protests. The Anti Water movement should push the corruption angle more rather than the “we can’t afford it” mantra which is easy to argue against (3e a week or whatever) from the governments point of view.

      1. Soundings

        I don’t think there’s too much protest now focussed on the initial cost, though it is a fact that a small number of households will buckle under a €60 or €160 a year charge. It’s very small though, but still there’s a principle there about ability to pay.

        What is of general concern though is the fact – and it is just that, a fact – that the charges will increase. Personally, I can’t see them being less than €300 a household. Some protesters would claim it could go to €1,000. Regardless, the charge will increase. A €500 charge would be serious challenge for more than a small number of households.

        And it’s about the principle. We all know if we accept the principle of charges at even €1 a year, then when the government increases the charge, the ability to protest will be much diminished.

        Agree though, there could be better focus on the maladministration.

  2. David

    Or they wanted to better capture people’s loss of income between budget 2014 and budget 2015…..

    Seriously folks, tin foil hat stuff here.

    1. Original Cynic

      Unfortunately, the corruption in this country has gone WAY beyond tin foil hat territory!

    2. David

      Even if it has (which it hasn’t) are we really to believe that a policy was decided by cabinet, unknown to the rest of the Dáil, sent to an accounting firm, passed around their various departments as a done deal, and even implemented on their website for the rest of the public to see…..

      1. Joe the Lion

        Yes, notwithstanding that you’re an obvious comical Ali type shill, that’s exactly how cabinet decisions are made by the so-called economic council

  3. CousinJack

    Government wanted ESB to take on water, ESB management refused (very unusual for ESB to refuse such a request, what did they know/foresee?)

  4. Kolmo

    Good work BS for highlighting this.
    Everyday some new steaming mound of pure scummy nonsense appears about this deal – and the snarky sideline commentators still shillingly refuse to understand why people protest….

    One bond holder payment (private European bank gambling losses) would take care of this bo77ox.

  5. Truth in the News

    A “family tree” type diagram needs developing to identify to the public
    who is connected with whom in the Irish Water farce…its heading one
    way….a house of cards.

  6. timble

    Neil may have missed this but water charges didn’t exist in 2014 but do now in 2015 so if you are developing an income calculator you would include them seeing at it would affect your after tax income?

    Whatever about any other kind of corporate connections is that an illegitimate thing to do? Where at any point in the screenshot above does it imply deduction at source?

    There are plenty of sources of information as to what PWC actually provided service wise, but god forbid providing any of it would get in the way of a conspiracy…/Water/FileDownLoad,29193,en.pdf

    Here’s the actual document that outlines why BGE was selected over BnM…/Water/FileDownLoad,37410,en.pdf

  7. Freia

    Well done, Broadsheet, you are certainly beginning to reveal the names of persons of great interest, now.

  8. Owen C

    This is stupid. They have included the property tax too. That is not taxed at source and doesn’t even affect everyone, but it makes perfect sense to include it in there given it will affect anyone who owns a house and that is roughly 65% of all houses in the country. Tinfoil hat stuff, as noted above.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link