Earlier this week, it was confirmed that satellite TV broadcaster BSkyB is to create up to 800 new jobs in a Dublin call-centre operation which will provide support to the company’s 10.5m subscribers throughout Ireland and Britain. Wonderful news for Ireland which has over 300,000 unemployed or a 14.2% unemployment rate, and nearly 440,000 on the Live Register. BSkyB’s call centre operation will be based at Plaza 1,Burlington Plaza on Burlington Road in Ballsbridge, Dublin 4 where it is understood the company is taking 35,000 sq ft of accommodation in a building which has over 150,000 sq ft overall. So far, so good – nothing to see here.
But it seems that the creation of the call centre and the jobs was almost scuppered by NAMA. Why? Because the building atBurlingtonPlazais understood to be controlled by NAMA as a result of loans acquired from AIB. The building has 164,533 sq ft and is presently being marketed for rent by Jones Lang LaSalle. BSkyB only wanted to rent part of the building, but NAMA wanted to hold out and try to rent the building as a whole to one tenant. So NAMA apparently vetoed the letting of the 35,000 sq ft to BSkyB.
NowBurlingtonPlazais only one of five building in centralDublinwith over 100,000 sq ft of accommodation available for letting, so it might be that NAMA thought it might maximise its return on the building if it was let at a premium to a company that might have been looking for a large centralDublinoffice. But in rejecting the BSkyB deal, the Agency was (a) turning down immediate business and (b) was placing the creation of 800 jobs in jeopardy.
And had it not been for the apparent intervention by Minister for Jobs, Innovation and Employment, Richard Bruton, there the matter might have lay. But it seems the Minister was coaxed into telephoning the NAMA CEO, Brendan McDonagh. We don’t yet know what was said during the conversation, but the immediate aftermath saw NAMA change its position on the approach from BSkyB and agreement was given for the part-letting of the building.
This is not the first time that NAMA has come in for criticism and accusations of stymieing business and employment. BBC Northern Ireland’s Spotlight programme broadcast in November 2011, made a similar charge.
Neither NAMA nor the Department of Jobs Innovation and Employment has commented on the matter. With 14.2% unemployment, no-one is going to criticise the Minister but it is curious that he hasn’t made his apparent intervention public as required by the NAMA anti-lobbying rules…
NAMA Wine Lake 
Where is the anger!
70,000 people emigrating this year and every year for the foreseeable future, 450,000 on the dole and these people living in their ivory towers immune from it all and allowing 800 more leave.
It is irrelevant whether the building is let to one tenant or three tenants. What matters is the jobs for our people. Where is their moral compass and where is our anger!
When will they be replaced by someone with commercial nous? When will our politicians take charge of this cesspit at the heart of our domestic economy?
Sorry but I am going to have to nitpick a wee bit here, many people mention this 70,000 figure but it’s a bit tabloid for my taste and totally dismisses immigration. The net figure is 34,500 and if you take non-nationals out of the equation then it is only 23,000. Admittedly this is about the worst figure since 1987 ish so it is definitely a thing to be looking at but 23,000 is a long cry from 70,000 emigrating every year.
Personally I don’t have a problem with people leaving Ireland (living in Canada and waiting for the house prices to drop myself) and I was never too sure why people got upset about it. Brain drain seems to be one of the more common reasons for not wanting it to happen but I can guarantee ya there’s plenty of thick feckers emigrate as well so I don’t buy that. Can anyone explain to me why emigration is a bad thing and what harm it has done Ireland in the past?? Apart from it being a damning indicator of the state of the economy and outlook in Ireland….
@The Fuzz, you might be interested in this two-part post on emigration, and why it is historically unique to Ireland
https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2011/08/01/is-there-any-hope-for-the-country/
https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2011/08/07/the-departed-part-2/
Well, if they were a Nama consultant getting paid €765 an hour for holding out for a full tenant, you can see why someone would be reluctant to rent the building at all!
I think that, owing to the size of their remuneration, the boys at Nama are still living at some time in 2006. They probably think that there is a queue of Music stores and architectural firms lined up outside the door waiting to rent the place.
I’d describe Nama not as living in an Ivory Tower, but up in the clouds altogether.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/nama-treating-developers-like-dirt-says-furious-agar-3010367.html
Oooooooooooh….. Richard Bruton kicking ass…
Looks like you’re part of the government spin machine now!
Whoever gave you the heads -up on the SKY deal really wants that story out there.
The Sunday Independent running the same thing on the web and in print today:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/how-nama-risked-800-sky-jobs-3010378.html
@WGU, part of the government spin machine? (1) His department didn’t respond to a request for comment and (2) the blogpost above poses a serious question about Minister Bruton’s behaviour in the context of NAMA’s anti-lobbying rules.
The Indo article is nothing but a hagiography to Richard “Jobs” Bruton:
His department may not have responded to a request for comment – but they probably smiled internally.
As for being seen to be illegally directly/indirectly “lobbying” NAMA or being seen to be The Minister For jobs fighting for Ireland… well, he’s only a Gombeen Irish politician who failed miserably in his putsch against a paperweight party leader – you have to allow him his little victories.
The Indo article has tried to cover the lobbying issue by saying it was via the IDA – so he obviously got your questions… he just chose to “answer” them via favoured journalists.
This is classic free market spin. If NAMA was private sector landlord nobody would expect it to have a role in job creation but once it’s government owned its job becomes confused in free marketers minds.
Is it supposed to create jobs or optimise returns?
I thought the IDA/EI owned job creation.
Are you suggesting NWL that NAMA’s role should now be job creation?
@paddy19, It should factor in job creation. It’s better to rent a factory for €2 per sq. ft. and create some jobs and employment than leave it empty. NAMA reminds me of those still looking for the 2006 price of €1 million for the house, when the going rate is now €350,000.
@ who_shot_the_tiger
Once you start asking NAMA to factor other factors in like jobs or poor areas or regional development it will loose it’s focus on getting the best return for the taxpayer.
One standard for the private sector…make a profit.
Different standard for the public sector…. solve all society’s ills.
Nobody expects McDonalds to manage their customers health or Guinness to worry about alcoholism so why should NAMA get saddled with creating jobs.
Let the IDA/EI create jobs. They get well paid for it.
It’s Ireland’s curse that we keep confusing roles and responsibilities
.. the bank regulator was supposed to supervise the banks but also wear the green jersey……
….the National Consumer Agency was to supposed to protect consumers and educate merchants in consumer law….
….schools are supposed to educate children but are expected to fix every social problem from booze to sex…
Let NAMA create money. It’s got enough on it’s plate without loading it with social responsibility.
@paddy19,
I’ve watched NAMA…. up close and personal. The people that work there are incapable of making a profit. It’s not part of their psyche or genetic DNA. They are civil servants with a CAB mentality. They are just interested in expedient sales of low hanging mainly income producing assets. They see their role in a narrow perspective, one that is mainly personal, retributional and vindictive. It is a negative perspective that ignores the wider interests of the economy that relate to jobs and growth.
In my opinion, the NAMA Act does not exclude the wider interests of the State as stated in Clause 10, viz:
10.(1) NAMA’s purposes shall be to contribute to the achievement of the purposes specified in section 2 by
(a) the acquisition from participating institutions of such eligible bank assets as is appropriate,
(b) dealing expeditiously with the assets acquired by it, and
(c) protecting or otherwise enhancing the value of those assets, in the interests of the State.
The story is, IMHO, mostly illustrative of our worsening economic debilitation. This is top-of-the-range office accommodation in D4, and the best NAMA can get for it is a partial rental to a company which may create a few hundred highly insecure (see below) service jobs. I don’t want to call them McJobs, because people really need work, but it’s a dire state of affairs, in the face of which, politicians are all pretty helpless.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0908/1224303700239.html
Looks like a little slap from Oliver.
“The excellent Emmet Oliver has just been appointed as director of communications”
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/education/2012/0131/1224310995513.html
@Patrick,the analogy and whining by Agar is somewhat diminished,by the failure to disclose his investment in The Ritz.
“Developers David Agar and Jarlaith Sweeney, and Adrian Crawford, a partner at KPMG, were also named as investors in the scheme, along with a number of less well-known business people”
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/kenny-putting-on-ritz-for-tax-relief-2245544.html
Folks, there is a separate blogpost on the David Agar story
https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/nama-understood-to-have-appointed-receivers-to-top-30-developer/
Is 35,000 sq ft a bit tight for 800 employees? I guess if there is no canteen, little or no conference rooms and small bogs, you might get by. Though if it’s a 24hr call centre, the space is probably adequate. Hopefully the number of jobs isn’t being talked up.
I’d agree with Paul Quigley’s comment. However, we’re in no position to turn away any jobs. Welcome to the smart economy :(
@Ahura, fair points though if it is run on two shifts eg 7am – 4pm and 4pm-midnight, it is probably adequate.
I’m not sure if Ahura is commenting on other comments or on the blogpost but would be surprised that the blogpost above might be interpreted in a way which criticises Minister Bruton’s intervention, either with NAMA or the IDA. The NAMA Act allows lobbying by public representatives and the IDA, as long as the lobbying is made public. And NAMA is entitled to consider the objective “to contribute to the social and economic development of the State.” – s2(b)(viii) of the NAMA Act.
What the anti-lobbying rules were supposed to prevent was gombeen politicians from corruptly trying to give an advantage to cronies. And whilst no-one is going to criticise Richard Bruton for trying to protect and expand employment, the question is why he didn’t – or why the IDA didn’t if you believe the Sunday Independent story – make public the fact that they had lobbied NAMA. And NAMA too has responsibilities under the anti-lobbying rules.
@ NWL,
just commenting on the bit I found interesting. I consider the anti-lobbying section is more for show than anything else. We didn’t overthrow the gombeens so I expect it will continue. It will only be used if some unconnected gobdaw pisses off NAMA at a time where NAMA wishes to appear whiter than white.
There’s probably some element or interpretation of the Act that allows Bruton to contact NAMA (i.e. acting on behalf of the MoF). I’m not sure if there is a general ‘for the greater good’ overrider, but in this situation it is understandable that the ‘lobbying’ was not made public.
Do you think the ‘meat’ of the lobbying should be made public under the NAMA Act? (‘meat’ being the details being asked for or will it be deemed commercially sensitive). Would Bruton be in compliance if the publicly announced “I’m calling NAMA today about something that’s commercially sensitive”? The act doesn’t seem to specify what needs to be made public. So I guess I don’t put too much store in this aspect of the NAMA act. I’m open to change this view if you can come up with a compelling argument.
It is curious that BSkyB didn’t opt for a cheaper out-of-town location. Maybe Murdocks will suggest relocating HQ to Dublin unless they’re found innocent :)