Well done on what must be a formidable task.

But let me take issue with one small but important item of phraseology of in your post above re the EZ/ECB ;
“we are a bit player in a vast EuroZone which supports our banks still with massive lending,”
Like many, if not all, reporters you seem to be buying into the ECB /EZ ‘supporting our banks’ narrative. The language here is important, as the ‘support’ message has been the main theme of the EU institutions since this crisis began. But we all know too well, who the ECB /EZ were really supporting (EU bank bondholders), and that to a large extent is the reason why ‘Irish’ banks need ‘support’.
There are a number of issues with this, but in general terms the accepted narrative is that capital is free to move where it will, but resulting capital deficits are a matter for each country to ‘resolve’, by deleveraging (firesales of assets and restricted to zero lending) and destroying their economies, with their hands completely tied behind their backs in terms of capital controls.
More specifically the accepted narrative ignores many points:

Firstly, the ECB ‘supports’ many banks in EZ countries , through 3 year LTRO funds. In that sense Irish banks are little different from many other banks.

The second issue is why identify banks with the State. Indeed that has been at the root of all our problems, to such an extent that the banks are largely owned by the State, and more to the point their losses have been foisted onto the State. Even more again to the point, the State appears to have accepted unto itself an almost sacred duty to recapitalise the banks to some arbitrary EZ / investor feel good level, depriving a starving economy of much needed funds.

Thirdly, the ECB is merely replacing funds that have fled Ireland to other European banks. The ECB could decide not to do so and this would require Ireland to impose capital controls. In fact this is the most fundamental point of all. Without the ECB acting fully as a LOLR (without the pejorative addict lectures), and without a national or EZ bank resolution scheme, capital controls should be an accepted and necessary tool of all EZ governments.

It clearly indicates that salaries for (almost) all top level posts in the Irish public service are away ahead of those in other countries.It then goes to the trouble of undermining this finding by adjusting pay levels to take account of income tax and purchasing power differentials to, very conveniently, deflate the Irish pay levels and thereby ignore issues relating to (un)competitiveness. Of course, the true cost of the Irish pensions was ignored.

Here is what the Chairman of the Body said:
“Our investigations revealed that, across a range of EU countries of varying size, pay for the most senior levels, namely, prime ministers, government ministers and administrative heads of ministries was, generally speaking, substantially below the rates prevailing in Ireland. This gap was less pronounced when income was adjusted to include the value of benefits and to reflect differences in income tax and relative purchasing power between countries. No precise explanation for the difference in pay between Ireland and its selected peer countries was forthcoming, other than that comparison with the private sector rates for equivalent jobs has been a much more significant factor in Ireland than in the other countries.”

I would have thought that the Golden Rule (“he who has all the gold makes all the rules”) plus selfishness and greed might be part of the explanation.

Thanks NWL for a most interesting blog and a Happy (if not necessarily Prosperous) New Year to all.