In pre-Abolition America, it was practice for slaves to marry amongst themselves, but not to partners on the same plantation. Spouses didn’t want to live a life where they would see their beloved abused and humiliated . So to avoid the heartbreak, slaves would avoid finding a partner on the same plantation even though it meant that husband and wife would be separated for six out of seven days a week. New welts and bruises might still be obvious on Sundays but would go unprobed.
The last time that analogy from antebellum America was used on here, there was some valid criticism, so this time out, to be clear it is the principle of the matter that is being used.
Having a daily record with video streaming and transcripts of Seanad Eireann is deeply humiliating and heartbreaking in a country which is pinned to the collar. Watching vastly-rewarded ignorant, ill-informed windbags besmirch Irish democracy when the country is on its knees is just heartbreaking.
So don’t watch it, might be the obvious response. But on occasion, the Seanad deals with NAMA issues and it is almost obligatory to peer your head around the door, in case the handful of decent senators in the Seanad actually contributes something new or constructive.
Not so this week when the Fianna Fail Donegal senator Brian Ó Domhnaill (pictured above) had this contribution to gift to democracy.
“Linked to that is the issue of the massive salaries being paid to bankers in this country, including salaries of more than €200,000 per annum being paid to 12 senior officials in the National Asset Management Agency, NAMA. NAMA is an interesting organisation. We tried to bring forward a Bill dealing with transparency in NAMA but it was voted down by Fine Gael and the Labour Party. I hope they will reconsider their position when they hear what I say next and that they will support the Bill when we re-introduce it. Officials are leaving NAMA as well as joining it. Two senior officials that were involved in the HSBC violation, in which that bank repeatedly violated anti-moneylaundering rules and accepted billions of dollars from drug cartels resulting in it having to pay the US Government €2 billion, are now employed by NAMA.
Second, I refer to two senior officials that were previously employed by NAMA. One of them was responsible for handing out a very lucrative contract to a high profile commercial property asset management group. He has now been given a private arrangement with that company and is employed by it. NAMA is acting disgracefully and it is time it was fully investigated. I hope the Fine Gael and Labour Party Senators will support the Bill that Senator Mark Daly brought forward previously and which Fianna Fáil will re-introduce. How can a Government stand over the very questionable practices of an organisation that is the biggest property owner in the world?”
And what was wrong with the above, you might ask?
Where do you start. Firstly it has been established that there are 12 staff at NAMA earning more than €200,000 but inclusive of employer pension contribution which ranges from 11-25% and “other allowances and benefits” but that is not the same as saying 12 are on basic salaries of €200,000. But you might carp at this and say in principle, there are large salaries paid at NAMA which many people would accept.
But then Senator O’Domhnaill goes on to say
“Two senior officials that were involved in the HSBC violation, in which that bank repeatedly violated anti-moneylaundering rules and accepted billions of dollars from drug cartels resulting in it having to pay the US Government €2 billion, are now employed by NAMA”
We know that Michael Geoghegan, former boss worldwide for HSBC has been engaged by Minister for Finance Michael Noonan to chair the NAMA advisory board, one of Minister Noonan’s toys that has an overall budget of €40,000 per annum and which also comprises Frank Daly and Denis Rooney. But this is not “in the employ of NAMA”. It is in the employ of Minister Noonan and €40,000 amongst three members is pretty miniscule.
And then, there is Brendan McDonagh – the lad on the right of the image below – who was boss of HSBC in North America and was also cited in the recent US Senate report which concluded HSBC had enabled moneylaundering to the benefit of Mexican drug cartels and the state of Iran. This Brendan McDonagh is employed on an “advisory committee” of the NTMA. Not NAMA. He has been confused in the past with the CEO of NAMA – the lad on the left in the image below, whose name is also Brendan McDonagh, but they are two different people.
And then the Senator says
“Second, I refer to two senior officials that were previously employed by NAMA. One of them was responsible for handing out a very lucrative contract to a high profile commercial property asset management group. He has now been given a private arrangement with that company and is employed by it”
We know that Kevin Nowlan recently left NAMA to return to the family business, WK Nowlan and we also know WK Nowlan is employed by NAMA on its panel of receivers and indeed has received some commissions and was previously employed on NAMA’s valuation panel when it was acquiring loans from the banks. But Kevin Nowlan wasn’t within a ass’s roar of “handing out a very lucrative contract” and in fact we know that there was some agonizing going on at NAMA to ensure that Kevin’s stake in WK Nowlan was placed in trust to avoid even the perception of conflicts.
Alas, Senator Ó Domhnaill didn’t manage to say anything about the second of the “two senior officials”
There was no comment forthcoming from NAMA last Thursday when asked about this episode, but we learn from Friday’s Independent and today’s Sunday Independent that NAMA has sent a stiff letter to the Senator. The Sunday Independent claims to have seen the letter – it hasn’t yet been seen on here but it’s likely to be similar in content to the corrections above. Senator Ó Domhnaill says that the letter is, says the Sunday Independent, “aggressive” and “an attempted gagging order”, but the Senator doesn’t admit his ignorant claims.
This is the second time this year when Seanad proceedings have been covered on here. The first was in June 2012 when serial alleger Senator Mark Daly brought his Bill to promote transparency to the Seanad and although there is a lot to be said for more transparency at NAMA, the Fianna Fail Kerry senator keeps making allegations but even when he enjoys the privilege of the Seanad, he refuses to provide details and the details he provided in June 2012 related to a Bank of Ireland – not NAMA – transaction and the Cork landbank transaction took place months after he turned up breathless on the Pat Kenny show alleging all sorts of shenanigans. The June Seanad debate was the only debate watched live on here, and with practically all senators absent from the chamber and one third of them not even bothering to show up for the vote, with senators from all parties and none mostly contributing nothing of value, you really lose faith in what was supposed to be an independent organ of government that would bring a different class of wisdom to legislation and policy.
It was just over a year ago when An Taoiseach Enda Kenny committed to holding a referendum in 2012 to abolish the Seanad. That slipped as Enda’s ear was bent backwards by vested interests, namely many of the 60 senators and some TDs who might see the Seanad as a soft-landing when they lose their seats at the next election. In recent months, An Taoiseach has reiterated the intention to hold a referendum but it will now be held in 2013.
Then, we will get the opportunity to do what Denmark – one of the contributors to our bailout – did in the 1950s. And then we will get the opportunity to abolish this blot on our democracy, this very expensive forum – take a look here at the pay and perks of senators – and this disgrace where ignorance and windbaggery – above is but a tiny example that just happens to relate to NAMA -prevails over the voices of the handful of senators who might have the capacity to improve life in this State. The abolition referendum can’t come soon enough, and then, we won’t have to put up with this superfluous puffery.
NAMA Wine Lake 
Reblogged this on Machholz's Blog and commented:
We haven’t a hope to many vested interests and too many hangers on would be kicked off the Gravy train in these Austerity times.But we live in hope !
Meh…one idiot isn’t an excuse to abolish the Seanad. Or two, or even ten. By that logic we should abolish the entire Oireachtas.
I see no reasons why these same arguments do not apply in every single detail to the Dail? Why not abolish that as well, elect an executive all-powerful Taoiseach each year and have done with it?
Why don’t ~20 or so regions in Ireland just elect a local “Big man” Tainiste, to run the region and who is responsible only to the Taoiseach who is chosen by general (presidential) type election. It would at least formalise the tribal, backward nature of Irish politics, and save us the farce of a parlimentary system which just doesn’t work. It would introduce new problems, but I have difficulty seeing how regional “Big Men” (And they would all be men) could get the country into more trouble than the existing shower of regional men made Big.
Do not abolish the Seanad.
Reform it.
That it should be mandatory that people from all strata of society be elected. That the system of electing to the Seanad should be reformed.
And mandatory that three or four are (actual) unemployed people; another three or four are those in the ‘actual’ unfinished housing estates; that another three or four are ‘actual’ ‘poorer’ protagonists for better health-care. And so on.
Or even at least one half of all Seanad seats should be allocated to these kinds of the ‘real’ disaffected and disenfranchised. (sorry abt. all the alliteration..).
hey, even elect two or three Bloggers
Not just Denmark but also Sweden, Canada and New Zealand are on the list of better-run-countries-than-Ireland where they have abolished their upper house. Also in New Zealand (roughly same population as us) they somehow manage with only 120 MPs in their parliament.
Well said, an awful waste of money. And AFAICT by abolishing the Seanad that would bring Ireland back inline to be within and around the average for the number of elected representatives versus the population. Right now its 1 politician to every 20,000, if you rid the Seanad it will be 1:30,000.
The sums I used for this (please correct me if I’m wrong)
160 in the dail plus 60 in the Seanad.
with the Seanad:
4.5 mill / 220 = 20454
without
4.5mill / 160 = 28125
And Ireland is a small country, it does not need two houses (look at Denmark) …
ahem.. it can’t afford it anyway, ahem
Probably not the place for a Seanad debate, but here’s the thing. The money argument will take you cutting deep into the Oireachtas and the legislative infrastructure. Money is no less precious now than it was in 1937 – so why was the Seanad formed in the first place, along with the rest of the infrastructure of government? There is a real need for a proper functioning alternative to the popular Dáil.
If money is the only object, then essentially all we would need is some system for electing three or four weighted whips in the Dáil. That’s all. The reason we don’t is that we need more voices, we need wider representation. You can criticise the functioning of the houses of the Oireachtas, or the level of representation, but ‘money’ is a churlish, narrow minded and intellectually lazy argument.
It was formed because DeValera needed an institution to mimic the House of Lords, but he also needed it weak enough to be unable to interfere with his running of the state in the Dail. He also needed rid of the even more useless senate which the seanad was replacing.
@Anthony Behan, agreed, however, I personally feel that there is something very wrong with the Seanad.
Either it should be ‘effectively’ reformed (and this is of course open to debate as to what effective reform is) or abolished.
I often find arguments regarding the number of pols who represent a population as a fairly narrowly focused and bizarre argument, as if their is a magic number out there. Arguments could just as easily be made that certain populations are under represented if needs be.
It maybe narrow but its just another point which stresses the bloated ineffective nature of Irish politics (salaries etc). The dismiss it and to claim that the average across the west is lacking in representation is certainly an interesting point of view… Id like to see you try to sell that in any other country.
Hi CC, thanks for the reply.
Decreasing numbers of pols really shouldn’t be tied to thoughts of money, rather value for money (I know, a horrible term). I am not saying that money should not be a problem with a legislature or that they shouldn’t be scrutinised, but there is no magic number when it comes to representation; you could do away with the Seanad and STILL have the Dail which is pure awful in many ways.
Further, the Seanad as constituted now is fairly ineffective and in all honesty, as a Northerner, when I look at the governance set up in the South I feel you have centralised localism if that makes any kind of sense. Whilst I have no problem (in general) with pols playing constituency politics in the Dail (after all, they are there to represent their constituents) I wonder if your opinion is flavored by such considerations like:
i) ineffectiveness of the pols in power at the moment and those who preceded them?
ii) the fact that the nation is facing a depression the likes of which it has never experienced?
People don’t raise too many objections when they are in employment and an economy is doing well, yet a political system is blamed when it is normally economic policy. I am not saying, btw, that the Oireachtas is not in need of reform, but hating pols is not a good enough reason.
As for convincing others they are underrepresented, look if they are out work and experiencing trouble I’m sure they too start to blame a political system and not discrepancies between votes cast and the number of pols it produces. It is in fact a rather easy argument to make, I assure you. All it needs is a fair wind behind it and economic prosperity, then more and more people want to be represented or feel represented in order to get a slice of the success (I mean the electorate, not just pols :))
I concede that the money argument can come across as childish but I do not concede to your bold statement of fact that “there is a real need for a proper functioning alternative to the popular Dáil”. You say nothing to prove that point. A statement of fact it certainly is not. Who’s being lazy now … Considering the state has existed this long without a second house that has any real relevance and considering that many other similarly sized countries do perfectly well without it why on earth should it continue to exist ?
The popular Dáil is important because people need representation, but because it is a popularly elected parliament, you get the parish pump nonsense trumping the national interest. Hence there is a real need for an alternative forum within which to discuss the interest of the state, without the distraction of opinion polls, and playing to one’s electoral constituency. That is doesn’t exist in other countries, or that it has not been relevant here does not mean that it is an unnecessary construct.
Do we know, for example, the extent to which national parliaments in those countries without a second house militate against the influence of popular opinion in framing national policy? This is not of course to say that popular opinion is a bad thing. Politicians should be accountable to their electorate. But from a political development perspective, it is important to get around what de Tocqueville called ‘the tyranny of the majority’.
An exclusively popularly elected administration would make for appalling government, devoid of vision or strategy, and focused solely on re-election. It’s bad enough as it is – we need to make that better, not worse.
@Anthony, I only rarely dip into the business of the Seanad, generally on NAMA matters – otherwise it is just too painful to watch.
But if the Seanad has a practical value, can you name three developments in the Seanad since March/April 2011 that have contributed to the betterment of the State?
Not really, no – I’m agreeing with the point that it’s irrelevant, but I disagree that we should simply abolish it. I particularly disagree that we should abolish it just to save money. We have a great opportunity for radical change in this country, and we are ignoring it. That’s a shame.
@fragrant pete.
good reference to ‘Noo Zeeland’, we are similar in so many ways – ever compare how many civil servants they have running the country to ourselves?
Woo hoo! We’re back to a Croke Park debate :D
HQ need to seriously reconsider who they let through the gates.. the ‘aviva’ agreement has a better foreign ring to it.
Hang on, I take it all back. Abolish it, abolish it now. I just heard what Mullen said.
@ NWL
If you wish to spend your valuable time on abolishing something, I would suggest you hone in on NAMA. Yes, the Seanad is a bowl of buffons. However, NAMA is an acute manifestation of everything that is wrong with Ireland and its pathetic oldboy, croney fraudgelence of an “economy”. It is nothing more than a very expensively run shell game. There are many, many real people in Ireland suffering today because of the likes of this ilk. And, please save me the defense of the money launders on a technically. They should be in prison. By the way, the vast majority of this dirty money came soaked in the blood of tens of thousands of murdered Mexicans and drug ruined lives.