Official: Government to dissolve after Budget completed

Scofflaw

Statement from Cowen this evening:

STATEMENT BY THE TAOISEACH AND FIANNA FAIL MEMBERS OF GOVERNMENT ON MONDAY, 22nd November 2010

There are occasions when the imperative of serving the national interest transcends other concerns, including party political and personal concerns.

This is one such occasion.

The vital national interests of this country require that financial stability be achieved:

by publishing a Four-Year Plan which sets out how the necessary €15 billion adjustment will be implemented by 2014;

by adopting a Budget which effects a €6 billion adjustment in 2011;

by taking the necessary legislative and other measures to give effect to the terms of the Budget; and

by concluding negotiations on a Programme for support from the European Union, the ECB and the IMF. These negotiations, in turn, are taking place in the context of the budgetary arrangements coming into effect.

It is a matter of the highest importance that Dáil Éireann should continue to consider and enact the relevant measures, and that the Government should continue to discharge its obligation to bring forward the necessary proposals.

There will be a time for political accountability to the electorate. The interests of the electorate, of all our people, will not be served by delaying, or worse still casting into doubt, the steps which are necessary to secure our economy and financial stability.

The Government will publish its Four-Year Plan next Wednesday; it will continue the negotiations with the EU, the ECB and with the IMF; it will present a Budget to the Dáil on 7th December and it will introduce the necessary Resolutions and legislation to give definitive effect to those measures.

We believe that there is a clear duty on all members of Dáil Éireann to facilitate the passage of these measures in the uniquely serious circumstances in which we find ourselves. The political and financial stability of the State requires no less.

It is the Taoiseach’s intention, at the conclusion of this budgetary process with the enactment of the necessary legislation in the New Year, to seek a dissolution of Dáil Éireann and to enable the people to determine who should undertake the responsibilities of Government in the challenging period ahead.

That's a definite, then. General Election early in the New Year.

cordially,
Scofflaw

maccored

with the enactment of the necessary legislation

dont be surprised when they drag their feet at that bit

imme

I thought threads had to be original, not quoting some old piece of news with no original thought.

Only joking with you Scofflaw:D, good idea to post the statement, now that we know where we are.
Sometimes its difficult to cut through the news and see the real story.
The past week or more has been one such period.

meglome

There are occasions when the imperative of serving the national interest transcends other concerns, including party political and personal concerns.

Well not what you expect to hear from almost any Irish politician. They're not really the best at taking responsibility for anything. Unfortunately up until today FF have said completely the opposite. While it really is great they are going it's way too little and too late for my liking.

gizmo555

Scofflaw wrote: »

Statement from Cowen this evening:



That's a definite, then. General Election early in the New Year.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I've read and re-read the Taoiseach's statement carefully and while the words "New Year" are in it, regrettably "early" isn't.

Noel Whelan on TV3 tonight was saying it would be March or possibly later, by the time all the necesssary legislation is passed.

Lapin

Scofflaw wrote: »

Statement from Cowen this evening:



That's a definite, then. General Election early in the New Year.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Not so hasty - Thats not what the statement says.

In essence what it says is that The Taoiseach won't be calling the election until the budget is voted through the Oireachtas.

It could be the middle of January before that happens.

Expect an election sometime around late February or early March.

Scofflaw

gizmo555 wrote: »

I've read and re-read the Taoiseach's statement carefully and while the words "New Year" are in it, regrettably "early" isn't.

Noel Whelan on TV3 tonight was saying it would be March or possibly later, by the time all the necesssary legislation is passed.

Covers anything in the first quarter of the year by my lights - I'm not what you'd call an early riser.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sir Oxman

Rumours of a FF backbench revolt - possible FG no confidence motion in Cowen to be backed by FF TD's?

This isn't over yet (I hope)

Overheal

Think of how much public outrage could have been solved by filling one fecking chair.

Was it for the best?

meglome

Was watching the Frontline and was almost frightened by Fintan O'Tooles suggestion that we have a referendum on the budget. In principle I'm all for more democratic votes but if the Lisbon treaty was anything to go by it would be a nightmare. All the fringe loonies and vested interests would stick their oar in and try to scare people with a pack of lies. Complex things like the Lisbon treaty or this budget are best left to experts. I like his suggestion of an interim government with highly qualified non political appointees to negotiate with the IMF.

Liked what Richard Bruton had to say. Very happy to hear Fine Gael's commitment to political reform. They are getting closer to my vote.

Amhran Nua

meglome wrote: »

Liked what Richard Bruton had to say. Very happy to hear Fine Gael's commitment to political reform. They are getting closer to my vote.

Indeed, they will always face internal resistance to serious reform from the TDs who attained their positions using the existing political system though. I doubt that can be overcome.

I don't know, as always with FF you have to take a close look at the intention rather than the actual words they are saying, so what can be read into this - are the budgetary adjustments to be so harsh and onerous that they don't want to hang around and reap the results from both the electorate and unions? Do they expect to negotiate yet another binding agreement and have the next government be shackled to it as they exit stage left immediately? Are they going to drop the CPD wholesale? Is their resignation a part of the bailout deal?

Taken at face value its a laudable statement that should have been made a year ago. Given their track record though, it doesn't make me feel any more comfortable, more likely this is the part where they stick it in and break it off.

nesf

meglome wrote: »

Was watching the Frontline and was almost frightened by Fintan O'Tooles suggestion that we have a referendum on the budget. In principle I'm all for more democratic votes but if the Lisbon treaty was anything to go by it would be a nightmare. All the fringe loonies and vested interests would stick their oar in and try to scare people with a pack of lies. Complex things like the Lisbon treaty or this budget are best left to experts.

Indeed, it was quite an idiotic suggestion really. Part of the reason we have Governments is because the people won't always take decisions in their best interests when it conflicts with their short term interests. Not that Governments do a massively better job 90% of the time but eh, it's some improvement.

Amhran Nua

meglome wrote: »

Well not what you expect to hear from almost any Irish politician.

I think thats actually the funniest part of the entire statement, in a grim sort of gallows way. So what you're saying in your noble exit speech lads, is that in the normal course of events, the national interest takes a back seat to personal and party interests? How kind of you to make an exception! They can't even get out without making a haymes of it.

ednwireland

blah blah blah i'm going to hang on for dear life blah blah blah blah, in the national interest, going forward blah blah blah


pretty much sums it for me

dan_d

I can't find any links to it yet, but I just heard on the radio that Gardai are investing an attack on the constituency office of transport Minister (Noel Dempsey?:o). Apparently windows were smashed and someone scrawled "traitor" across the walls.

I wonder how many more acts like this we'll see before the election. The thing people need to realise is that we're only hurting ourselves by this. No matter what you think about FF, they have to hang on right now, for a few more weeks. By the sounds of what Ollie Rehn is saying this morning, the bailout is contingent on the budget passing. If we go for a general election now, we just end up with another bunch of politicians trying to get a grasp on the situation, while parroting they're not going to do what FF wanted to do...and then realising that they actually have to do what FF are doing. But it'll be weeks of messing, negotiating and arguing with the IMF, and by the looks of things, we don't have weeks. That Budget has to be passed.We need this loan. End of. I couldn't care less what happens once the Budget goes through. And I think FF members claiming Brian Cowen should step down now are absolutely cowardly, because they are obviously only doing it to save their political reputation, since an election looms now. I expect no more of the Opposition (let's face it), but FF backbenchers, at least, should realise they have to stay in power a few more weeks.....for the good of us, the Irish people. Once again, they're demonstrating that they only think of themselves and their reputations.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Amhran Nua

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Its stunning how much they must be out of touch with reality, even today, to be able to come out with a howler like that.

paddy462

It appears the budget does have to be passed as soon as possible. Sean Kelly FG MEP saifd after the meeting with Rehn that it has to go through despite how palpable it may be. I don't believe the current government should have that responsibility but either way I'm afraid the budget has to be passed.

Sir Oxman

paddy462 wrote: »

It appears the budget does have to be passed as soon as possible. Sean Kelly FG MEP saifd after the meeting with Rehn that it has to go through despite how palpable it may be. I don't believe the current government should have that responsibility but either way I'm afraid the budget has to be passed.

I am not taking the word of Sean Kelly MEP or Mr Rehn.
I don't believe anyone is saying we mustn't have an austere budget.
There is a choice - election, manadated new govt and neutral financial experts along with the new govt can negotiate if/what kind of a deal is needed with the IMF/EU.

The EU can continue it's day-to-day finance of the rotten Irish banks (it is imperatively in THEIR interests to do so) until Ireland has time to look at all options - this is Ireland's future for the next few decades we are being rushed into.
If a month or so is the price to pay when hundreds of billions of more debt is about to be put on Irish citizens heads, then so be it.

Scofflaw

gambiaman wrote: »

I am not taking the word of Sean Kelly MEP or Mr Rehn.
I don't believe anyone is saying we mustn't have an austere budget.
There is a choice - election, manadated new govt and neutral financial experts along with the new govt can negotiate if/what kind of a deal is needed with the IMF/EU.

The EU can continue it's day-to-day finance of the rotten Irish banks (it is imperatively in THEIR interests to do so) until Ireland has time to look at all options - this is Ireland's future for the next few decades we are being rushed into.
If a month or so is the price to pay when hundreds of billions of more debt is about to be put on Irish citizens heads, then so be it.

A lot depends on whether the loan is something we have to take all of, or a facility we can draw against - last I heard, it was the latter. That being the case, it will be up to whatever government comes in after the general election to decide whether to burden us with debt or not by choosing whether to draw down any of the facility.

Using such a facility to roll over Irish state or bank debt at a lower rate than we can get from the bond markets doesn't increase our debt - it lowers the interest we pay on it - whereas drawing against the facility either to fund the banks or to prop up state spending will. The extent to which those choices will be in the hands of the incoming government as opposed to being part of the conditions of the facility is not yet known.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sir Oxman

Scofflaw wrote: »

A lot depends on whether the loan is something we have to take all of, or a facility we can draw against - last I heard, it was the latter. That being the case, it will be up to whatever government comes in after the general election to decide whether to burden us with debt or not by choosing whether to draw down any of the facility.

Using such a facility to roll over Irish state or bank debt at a lower rate than we can get from the bond markets doesn't increase our debt - it lowers the interest we pay on it - whereas drawing against the facility either to fund the banks or to prop up state spending will. The extent to which those choices will be in the hands of the incoming government as opposed to being part of the conditions of the facility is not yet known.

cordially,
Scofflaw

What's your opinion on Ireland taking it's time (a month or so maybe less) to fully investigate our options?

It's looking to me as if we are being railroaded into more huge debt (and the banks will suck up a lot of the billions) for the sake of kicking the Euro bomb down the road.

flutered

one question for all you good folks, when was the last time one could take a statement from clowen cowen without a large portion of salt, there seems to be unecessary haste in pushing the budget through, if it is delayed another month will the eu or the eurozone fall, or has german bondholders and their ilk been clamouring for immediate payment, the old adage the more the hurry the less the speed springs to mind.

Sir Oxman

flutered wrote: »

one question for all you good folks, when was the last time one could take a statement from clowen cowen without a large portion of salt, there seems to be unecessary haste in pushing the budget through, if it is delayed another month will the eu or the eurozone fall, or has german bondholders and their ilk been clamouring for immediate payment, the old adage the more the hurry the less the speed springs to mind.

Indeed.
The last time we were told monumental decisions needed to be made immediately without debate or analysis was September 30, 2008.

And look where we are now.

We are being shafted again. I firmly believe that now.

leeroybrown

flutered wrote: »

one question for all you good folks, when was the last time one could take a statement from clowen cowen without a large portion of salt, there seems to be unecessary haste in pushing the budget through, if it is delayed another month will the eu or the eurozone fall, or has german bondholders and their ilk been clamouring for immediate payment, the old adage the more the hurry the less the speed springs to mind.

I'd suggest that the EU and IMF have effectively threatened dire financial consequences if the budget is delayed. They've gone about as far as they can go publicly without being accused of interfering in our democratic process, but behind closed doors they've probably been putting serious pressure on.

That said, I believe the correct approach is for the government to fall now allowing a swift election in parallel with multi-partite discussions with the EU/IMF. As it stands all that's happening is that Cowen is framing a budget to suit FF's ends then buggering off to leave a democratically elected government to deal with the mess.

Mr.Micro

I for one think it is unacceptable for FF/Greens to be preparing any budget unless it is with the participation of the opposition parties especially if they actually believe it is in the national interest to have the budget passed. Signing away our future without bringing in the opposition input is possibly another disaster. No doubt any budget will have some sweeteners for the core FF vote?

Justin Collery

Scofflaw wrote: »

A lot depends on whether the loan is something we have to take all of, or a facility we can draw against - last I heard, it was the latter.

I am very, very uneasy about what is going on, behind closed doors right now. You can check out the figures over on the Namawinelake or trueeconomics blogs, but here is the basic breakdown.

Between here and 2013 the government needs 60bn, about 20bn/year. This is the deficit plus the added cost of promissory notes, interest, maturing bonds etc.

The banks are into the ECB for north of 100bn, and this needs to be unwound, this is after all what precipitated the crisis. A facility, of at least 100bn will be put in place [spin] but only drawn down if needed[/spin]. Ask yourself two questions

- the ECB wants rid of the Irish bank exposure, where will it go? (Irish government)
- private investors will not give Irish banks money today, what will have changed in 3 weeks time that will suddenly start them giving money to Irish banks again? (nothing)

The 'bailout' over 3 years will be about 160bn, 100% of GDP. New debt after will not be guaranteed by Germany so we will not be able to issue new debt.

The interest on existing debt will be such that it will be unfeasible to service existing debt without taking on new debt.

We will default.

So, in summary, we have 3 years of misery, which is currently being decided behind closed doors, and following that we will default, causing more misery. The parting kiss from a government that gave us boomier booms, soft landings, lax regulation, bank guarantees, NAMA and now a closed deal behind closed doors.

JC

Scofflaw

gambiaman wrote: »

What's your opinion on Ireland taking it's time (a month or so maybe less) to fully investigate our options?

It's looking to me as if we are being railroaded into more huge debt (and the banks will suck up a lot of the billions) for the sake of kicking the Euro bomb down the road.

Essentially, that's the slightly obscure point of what I'm saying - I'm not happy if we are simply having to take on debt straight away, but that if we're being offered a facility to draw against then whether to actually draw against it is a decision that can be made on an ongoing basis by the new/subsequent government(s) - in other words, that we will have time to explore the options.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Mr.Micro

Scofflaw wrote: »

Essentially, that's the slightly obscure point of what I'm saying - I'm not happy if we are simply having to take on debt straight away, but that if we're being offered a facility to draw against then whether to actually draw against it is a decision that can be made on an ongoing basis by the new/subsequent government(s) - in other words, that we will have time to explore the options.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I don't believe for one minute that we will not have to draw against any loans. It is just the Government pretending its just for safety's sake, pure pretence and spin trying to dilute reality. It stands to reason that the banks are broke, the economy is in recession, social welfare demands are increasing so of course the money will be drawn down......where else will it come from?

flutered

Scofflaw wrote: »

Essentially, that's the slightly obscure point of what I'm saying - I'm not happy if we are simply having to take on debt straight away, but that if we're being offered a facility to draw against then whether to actually draw against it is a decision that can be made on an ongoing basis by the new/subsequent government(s) - in other words, that we will have time to explore the options.

cordially,
Scofflaw

if it is a facility that can be drawn against, why the haste, in all banking insurance transactions is there not a cooling off period, the same needs to be applied here, for the reasons given in anearlier post, also the funds need to be earmarked, for the budget etc, this is the only way that we will find out how much the banks require, otherwise the banks will just hoover it all.

Sir Oxman

The basic T&Cs that apply to us don't apply to the bondholders or then banks it seems - 'the value of your investment may decrease as well as increase'

No doubt, the strapped mortgage holder is having this clause pointed out to them on an hourly basis.

Sir Oxman

Scofflaw wrote: »

Essentially, that's the slightly obscure point of what I'm saying - I'm not happy if we are simply having to take on debt straight away, but that if we're being offered a facility to draw against then whether to actually draw against it is a decision that can be made on an ongoing basis by the new/subsequent government(s) - in other words, that we will have time to explore the options.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I believe all options before we take this huge decision have not been fully explored - all options.

Alongwith other posters, I cannot see how Ireland will not default within a couple of years.
We can't pay this money back as well as the other tens of billions.

Amhran Nua

jcollery wrote: »

We will default.

Not to fly in the face of the doom and gloom, but so what? Most of that debt isn't the responsibility of the Irish taxpayer, and no FF-brokered cross-our-hearts-and-hope-to-die-really-really guarantee is going to stand up in a fair court. Ireland is a country and a nation, not a company, and default means something very different between those two. I wouldn't call it a default, even, more of a "restructuring of debt". That's assuming things go that far.

Justin Collery

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Not to fly in the face of the doom and gloom, but so what?

You are somewhat right, so what, I do sort of agree with you. However, at best we should be planning for a world where we balance our books. At worst we should be planning for a world where our overseas assets are seized.

I guess the economy is based on MNC's being here. We need to ensure that whatever we do, we do not endanger that. Corpo tax is an obvious one in the current stage, but in the next default stage, we need to make sure they have a warm fuzzy feeling about being here. I don't see this crisis ending in roses, but we need it to end, fast. I don't see the point of 3 years of pain, followed by default, followed by god knows how many more years of pain, just get on with it.

By dragging out the pain, it's like a low intensity civil war. The middle class, those with money and those with get up and go, well, they get up and go. You are left with a society where the most productive have fled, and you are left with a shell of a country.

Perhaps that is the legacy of the 80's, those with drive and a sense of right and wrong just left, and those that stayed behind led us to this. Perhaps not, we will see over the coming months.

Amhran Nua

jcollery wrote: »

At worst we should be planning for a world where our overseas assets are seized.

What, like the embassies? That would be an act of war. On the European Union.

jcollery wrote: »

By dragging out the pain, it's like a low intensity civil war. The middle class, those with money and those with get up and go, well, they get up and go. You are left with a society where the most productive have fled, and you are left with a shell of a country.

Perhaps that is the legacy of the 80's, those with drive and a sense of right and wrong just left, and those that stayed behind led us to this. Perhaps not, we will see over the coming months.

Again with the doom and gloom. It takes a lot to drive people out of their home country, and given that long term unemployment hovered around the 1% mark in the period 2001 to 2007, there are a vast number of motivated, educated people in Ireland right now. The overwhelming majority in fact. The biggest mistake of this whole mess was that the government never recognised that and sought to build on it.