Tag Archives: Vincent Browne

Leo Varadkar responds today to Vincent Browne’s article yesterday which said he was “chancing his arm” claiming Denmark’s borrowings had increased after one of its banks defaulted on bond repayments.

The fawning opening:

Vincent Browne is an excellent journalist with an eye for detail that is unsurpassed by his peers.

 

Peels onion:

This week, the Government had to make a very difficult decision: to allow the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (formerly Anglo) to repay a large bond.

 

Denmark? I meant Dubai

Dubai [rather than Denmark] is a better example, as its credit, construction and property bubble more closely resembles Ireland’s. In 2009, state-owned property investment company Dubai World and its subsidiary, Nakheel, unilaterally suspended payments to senior debtors. This is exactly the course advocated by some in Ireland today. This move was followed by a downgrading of state companies and utilities by the ratings agencies, and a further credit crunch resulting in the need for a bailout from neighbouring Abu Dhabi.

 

But I’m still right

The high cost of this bailout remains shrouded in secrecy. My point would have been better-illustrated by using this example, but it nevertheless remains valid.

Take that, Browne.

That’s why Browne is merely nit-picking. He takes issue with the example I gave, rather than the substantive case I made.”

“Nor does Browne challenge my view that there would be real risks and negative consequences if we defaulted on the bond.’

 

Conflict = bad

Most significantly, defaulting would bring us into sharp conflict with the ECB and other EU member states, at a time when we need them most.

 

Blame the other guys:

These promissory notes are an appalling, unjust and expensive sovereign commitment foisted on us by the last government.

 

Risk averse

Restructuring these €30 billion in promissory notes is a much bigger prize than imposing haircuts on the remaining rump of senior bondholders. It would not be wise to take such a big risk now, for so little potential benefit.

 

When I said “not a red cent”, I actually meant…

In opposition, Fine Gael said we would not inject any more money into Anglo “beyond what was committed”. Contrary to popular opinion, we have not done so. It’s being paid out of funds provided by the last government, and from the proceeds of the sale of Anglo’s North American assets.

 

Anyway, It’s old money not the new stuff:

This Government has not provided any new money for the payment of this bond. The only money going into Anglo is the promissory notes, which were committed before the election.

 

Finishes peeling onion:

We are now working night and day to renegotiate that arrangement.

 

Goes home.

Bond Payment May Earn Promissory Note Leniency (Leo Varadkar, Irish Times)

(Photocall ireland)

 

Troika (EU, ECB & IMF) representatives, and Barbara Nolan, head of the European Commission representation in Ireland, held a press conference on the latest bailout review this afternoon.

Participants:
Klaus Masuch, head of EU Countries Division at the European Central Bank
Istvan Szekely, director of economic and financial affairs at the European Commission
Craig Beaumont, mission chief for Ireland at the IMF.
Barbara Nolan, head of the European Commission representation in Ireland.

Early in the conference, Istvan Szekely said: “I’m impressed by the depth of the discussion in Ireland and the understanding of complex, economic financial-sector issues, which is revealed by looking into the Irish place, looking into the discussion. But also when I come from the airport with the taxi driver they are often very very informed I must say, very very informed.”

[LATER]

Vincent Browne: “Klaus Masuch, did your taxi driver tell you how the Irish people are bewildered that we are required to pay unguaranteed bondholders billions of euros for debts that the Irish people have no relation to or no bearing with, primarily to bail out or to ensure the solvency of European banks? And if the taxi driver had asked you that question,hat would have been your response? That’s my first question.”

Barbara Nolan: “Well, well, well, can we take a couple together? Can you ask the second question?”

VB: “Well, my second question is a completely different issue and it may have a follow-through if Mr Masuch doesn’t answer the question in a way that would illuminate the taxi driver’s understanding of all this, I would have a follow-through question.”

Nolan: “Right, can I ask you then to pass the mic, and we’ll come back to you for the second question?”

Browne: “Well, if you don’t mind, that’s a way of breaking up the exchange, and I would prefer if it went this way: We’ve a tradition in Irish journalism that we pursue issues and that when somebody doesn’t ask [answer] a question we follow through on it and I hope that tradition will be respected on this occasion. So could you answer the question?”

Masuch: “I have answered a very similar question of you – I think it was two reviews ago – and can…”

Browne: “[inaudible] the question”

Masuch: “… and I answered it. I can understand that this is a difficult decision to be made by the government and there’s no doubt about it but there are different aspects of the problem to be, to be balanced against each other and I can understand that the government came to, came to the view that, all in all, the costs for the, for Irish people, for the, for the stability of the banking system, for the confidence in the banking system of taking a certain action in this respect which you are mentioning could likely have been much bigger than the benefits for the taxpayer which of course would have been there. So the financial sector would have been affected; the confidence of the financial sector would have been negatively affected, and I can understand that there were, that there was a difficult decision but that the decision was taken in this direction.”

Browne: “That, that… Well, that doesn’t address the issue. We are required to pay, in respect of a defunct bank – that has no bearing on the welfare of the Irish people at all – we are required to pay in respect of this defunct bank, billions on unguaranteed bonds in order to ensure the health of European banks. Now how would you explain that situation to the taxi driver that you talked about earlier?”

Masuch: “I think I have addressed [looking to Barbara Nolan] the question.”

Browne: “No you haven’t addressed the question because you referred to the viability of the Irish financial institutions. This financial institution I’m talking about is defunct. It’s over. It’s finished. Now, why are the Irish people required, under threat from the ECB, why are the Irish people required to pay billions to unguaranteed bondholders under threat from the ECB?”

Masuch: [silence]

Browne: “You didn’t answer the question the last time so maybe you’ll answer it this time.”

Masuch: [mutters to Barbara Nolan]

Nolan: “Well, I think he doesn’t have anything to add to what he’s already said. Can I.. [pointing at another questioner]”

Browne: “Well, just a minute now. This isn’t, this isn’t good enough… You people are intervening in this society causing huge damage by requiring us to make payments not for the benefit of anybody in Ireland but for the benefit of European financial institutions. Now, could you explain why the Irish people are inflicted with this burden?”

Manusch: “Well, I think I have addressed the question.”

Browne: “You’ve nothing to say. There’s no answer, is that right? Is that it? No answer?”

Manusch: “I have given an answer”

Browne: “You have given an answer that didn’t address the question.”

Nolan: “That’s your view.”

Browne: “That is my view and I think it would be the view of the taxi driver and a few of our viewers tonight.”

Nolan: “Right. Can we please move on?”

Earlier: Vincent Browne In Da House (Video)

(Laure Hutton/Photocall Ireland)

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAf7J4a_T1g&feature=player_embedded

Could you explain why the Irish people are inflicted with this burden?”

Klaus Masuch (top) from the European Central Bank enjoys a demonstration of haranguing from Vincent Browne at the troika (ECB/IMF/EU) press conference this afternoon in government buildings.

(Laura Hutton/Photocall Ireland)
Thanks Oireachtas Retort

A 1964 essay, Seeking A National Purpose by Garret FitzGerald set out the former taoiseach’s political vision for the rest of his life.

What it and FitzGerald’s subsequent career lacked, says Vincent Browne in today’s Irish Times, was a commitment to end inequality.

“Garret had only a thin commitment to the ideal of equality, which perhaps is surprising because his personal dispositions would have suggested otherwise. But he was from privileged background – not in monetary terms but certainly in cultural ones.

Garret was not scandalised by the scale of inequality here and rarely exposed to it.

He believed it was politically impossible to radically redistribute wealth and income; he believed there could be only an incremental redistribution from aggregate increases in wealth and income.

He remained therefore content to live with evidence of radical inequality and was often dismissive of that evidence. And his contentment with radical inequality added considerably to the contentment of our political culture with radical inequality, such was his influence.

Garret’s Acceptance Of Inequality Had An Effect (Vincent Browne, Irish Times)

(Photocall Ireland)

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXOKtr3lDOY&feature=player_embedded

We have no idea. If anyone has any suggestions…

Having invited Brian Cowen onto his show for the umpteenth time in three years, and had the invitation turned down yet again, Vincent Browne turned up at the press conference in Government Buildings last night and comprehensively pwned the taoiseach.

The highlights:

VB: You don’t think that you’ve contributed to the screwing up of this country?

BC: I don’t accept your contention – the premise of your question – that I am the bogey-man you’re looking for, no.

VB: Who else in public office bears anything like the responsibility for the devestation caused to this country than you?

BC: I don’t accept that…etc.

VB: The reality is – and everybody but you seems to know this – you’re a liability, not just to your party, not just to your government, but to the country, because nobody believes you…people know you’re the guy most responsible for the chaos that’s been caused. Don’t you owe it as an act of patriotism to the Irish people to get out now?

BC: Sorry Vincent I don’t accept the premise of what you’re saying…

You will recall Vincent handed Bertie Ahern his own ass in 2007:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6tQN6H_tVY

Meanwhile, back in the editing room.

YouTube still from lecraic/Video from irishforfecksake