Anglo Tapes

SpaceTime

Scortho wrote: »

You got there before me!:(

Most likely because both the Government and the EU are a bunch of non financial experts who were winging it and pretending that they'd a clue instead of asking for help!

PeadarCo

maninasia wrote: »

There doesn't seem to have been any urgency or feedback about the progress of these investigations. In the meantime some of the major players have left the jurisdiction.

As I said its complex when do bad business practices become criminal offences?

Gardai can't give the public a daily/monthly etc run down of what they're doing as they could prejudice any trial and potentially give clues to what other documentation they might want giving people a chance to destroy this information.

People have left but you can't put people in jail without good reason. If they have been deemed to commit chargeable offences I assume the gardai will ask for them to returned like anyone else.

Cody Pomeray

maninasia wrote: »

Writing off 50% of their value was discussed. The elephant in the room is why didn't the government do this

They did. It happened 6 months later.

or **** the bank down like Merrill recommended?

That's the big question, yes.

Another interesting tidbit was revealed by Noonan. Seems the tapes coming out now is highly inconvenient and we could have 'done without this now'. I've a feeling he's known about the tapes for quite a while and he kept schtum due to the investigation and the obvious damage they do in terms of public relations and relations with the ECB and Germany.

Do the Gardaí brief the MoF on their investigations? That would appear to be inappropriate. I don't think we can say the Minister must have known about these tapes.

Neither can we say he ought have guessed their existence. Anglo went beyond Regulatory and Irish Stock Exchange rules on taping phone calls. Nobody could have known that the tapes existed unless they were directly informed.

Yes, Noonan is being a disingenuous in implying that the tapes harm the prospect of a deal on the banking debt. His concern is likely a wider Public Relations concern with the media or the domestic political audience, with references having been made by Noonan and at least one other cabinet member to the banking culture under Fianna Fáil.

SpaceTime wrote: »

Most likely because both the Government and the EU are a bunch of non financial experts who were winging it and pretending that they'd a clue instead of asking for help!

They did get advice. The tapes suggest they were being advised by Merrill Lynch to close Anglo.

Scofflaw

PeadarCo wrote: »

The gardai are investigating it otherwise we wouldn't have the tapes. As Scofflaw has mentioned its complex. The ran the business very badly to say the least but where stupidity becomes criminal isn't always clear and requires time and expertise to sort out with a bank the size of Anglo. But hey who needs due process rule of law etc. Sure it would be better if they were put up on trumped up charges and which get shot down in the courts at some stage than actually conduct a proper investigation that actually has consequences/punishment for the people involved.

And we should all hear all the tapes right now, even if the DPP perhaps feels that releasing them might prejudice trials. Of course, we'd then complain that the releasing was a government conspiracy to derail the trials...and round the merry-go-round again.

There is a Garda investigation, it is not yet finished, the DPP has intervened to prevent the tapes from prejudicing trials, which perhaps suggests that they feel the tapes so far don't do so, and also suggests perhaps criminal rather than civil cases.

Will we see people retracting the conspiracy theories in the event of trials? No, we'll see new conspiracy theories.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Boombastic

Scofflaw wrote: »

And we should all hear all the tapes right now, even if the DPP perhaps feels that releasing them might prejudice trials. Of course, we'd then complain that the releasing was a government conspiracy to derail the trials...and round the merry-go-round again.

There is a Garda investigation, it is not yet finished, the DPP has intervened to prevent the tapes from prejudicing trials, which perhaps suggests that they feel the tapes so far don't do so, and also suggests perhaps criminal rather than civil cases.

Will we see people retracting the conspiracy theories in the event of trials? No, we'll see new conspiracy theories.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Has the DPP given any time frame for the impending trials?

AlekSmart

Boombastic wrote: »

Has the DPP given any time frame for the impending trials?

Bearing in mind all the time that the office of the DPP is a POLITICAL appointment in the gift of the Government of the day,therefore,any and all decisions by the current DPP have to be regarded with a raised eyebrow or two....:eek:

SpaceTime

This defence of prejudice of a trial is taken way too far in Ireland. A judge should be able to instruct a jury to just ignore media coverage. We've turned it into a cop out.

Mr.Micro

SpaceTime wrote: »

This defence of prejudice of a trial is taken way too far in Ireland. A judge should be able to instruct a jury to just ignore media coverage. We've turned it into a cop out.

It certainly does not work for the ordinary guy or woman. Such a small country that nearly everybody knows each other.

We are all presuming that the DPP have put the stop on the tapes to avoid prejudice and an ongoing (never will be complete) investigation, but it could be just to protect the powers that be and avoid further embarrassment. Those powers being the DPP, DOF, Central Bank, and also to stop further annoyance to the Germans and the EU listening to those clowns and their banter. Angela is not impressed and like a lot of women she never forgets.

SpaceTime

Angela might be able to do something to speed up investigations by putting direct pressure on. Maybe she's who we need to be lobbying. She seems like a matter of fact, straight forward salt of the earth type compared to our lot!

thebman

Scofflaw wrote: »

There is a Garda investigation, it is not yet finished, the DPP has intervened to prevent the tapes from prejudicing trials, which perhaps suggests that they feel the tapes so far don't do so, and also suggests perhaps criminal rather than civil cases.

Will we see people retracting the conspiracy theories in the event of trials? No, we'll see new conspiracy theories.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The investigations are taking so long there are only two explanations that I can think of.

1) They don't have the expertise, in which case they should be hiring in the expertise.

2) They are under instruction not to proceed for some reason, possibly by the current government to harm FF when coming up to the next election and from FF before them to not harm their election campaigns despite them being doomed to failure.

It is no wonder there are conspiracies as it doesn't seem to take any other country this long to begin looking into their failures.

Scofflaw

thebman wrote: »

The investigations are taking so long there are only two explanations that I can think of.

1) They don't have the expertise, in which case they should be hiring in the expertise.

2) They are under instruction not to proceed for some reason, possibly by the current government to harm FF when coming up to the next election and from FF before them to not harm their election campaigns despite them being doomed to failure.

It is no wonder there are conspiracies as it doesn't seem to take any other country this long to begin looking into their failures.

Fraud investigations take a long time everywhere. The only time they're anything like visibly quick is when someone confesses. In this case it's not even a case of knowing that there is a provable, or any, fraud, so it's slow.

That's the case for nearly all civil cases, if you think about it - they tend to be long-running, because they're most often about details buried in papers, and the interpretation of those details, whereas criminal investigations are usually about something very much simpler. Fraud cases, though, are much more similar to civil cases.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Lbeard

Scofflaw wrote: »

Fraud investigations take a long time everywhere. The only time they're anything like visibly quick is when someone confesses. In this case it's not even a case of knowing that there is a provable, or any, fraud, so it's slow.

That's the case for nearly all civil cases, if you think about it - they tend to be long-running, because they're most often about details buried in papers, and the interpretation of those details, whereas criminal investigations are usually about something very much simpler. Fraud cases, though, are much more similar to civil cases.

cordially,
Scofflaw

There is another element to fraud cases which doesn't happen much in other crimes.

Usually, the fraud has been perpetrated with the assistance of incompetent managers. People not beneficially involved in the fraud may have an interest is suppressing evidence to protect themselves.

Managers still in their jobs, may wish the problem just to vanish. Trickery goes on.

Fiskar

Scofflaw wrote: »

Fraud investigations take a long time everywhere. The only time they're anything like visibly quick is when someone confesses. In this case it's not even a case of knowing that there is a provable, or any, fraud, so it's slow.

That's the case for nearly all civil cases, if you think about it - they tend to be long-running, because they're most often about details buried in papers, and the interpretation of those details, whereas criminal investigations are usually about something very much simpler. Fraud cases, though, are much more similar to civil cases.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Granted they take a long time but,

many potential suspects have absconded the country for Bankruptcy protection elsewhere or to start new lifestyles having syphoned off money to support it.

Secondly, many people believe there is never going to be anyone charged and put in jail from Anglo management or board for this fiasco.

Thirdly, the government probably hope all associated will die of old age before they ever hit trial.

Very sad state of affairs and a reason I will not hang around this country in retirement for round 2 by some other Drumm upstart.

AlekSmart

AlekSmart wrote: »

Bearing in mind all the time that the office of the DPP is a POLITICAL appointment in the gift of the Government of the day,therefore,any and all decisions by the current DPP have to be regarded with a raised eyebrow or two....:eek:

and every promotion from superintendent and above in the gardai is done by the Cabinet

SpaceTime

They really need to have a policing board to handle all that like they do in NI

Scofflaw

Drumm has given an interview on the tapes to Irish Central: http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Fromer-Anglo-Irish-Bank-chief-David-Drumm-apologizes-on-tapes-says-inquiry-needed-on-bank-guarantee-213713761.html?page=1

I see he also thinks there ought to be an inquiry into the guarantee, and insists the issue is separate from the Anglo discussions:

David Drumm first learned about the Anglo tapes when he logged on to the Irish Independent website early Monday morning in New York.

"I knew they were bad, bad, bad," he told IrishCentral on Friday.

He said he was aware such bank conversations were recorded and he especially wants to hear the similar conversations that were going on at that intense time between the other banks and the Central Bank of Ireland and the Financial Regulator.

It was a panicked time in the fall of 2008 as he relates it, when the entire foundation of the Irish economy seemed on the verge of crumbling. Threats and bluster and frustration were everywhere.

He sees a silver lining from his own perspective, that the focus will shift from the tapes to the events surrounding the disastrous government guarantee -- which he is adamant must be explained if people are to learn the whole truth about that period.

He sees the selective leaking of the tapes and the aftermath as a clear attempt to link Anglo to the creation of that guarantee. But he insists that the Anglo liquidity issue discussed on the tapes, and the guarantee decision made when Anglo was not present, are two very separate issues.

I think that's probably true - I don't see Anglo as the well connected bank here. He has previously said that AIB and BOI portrayed Anglo as the bank that needed the guarantee, and both those banks are far better connected than Anglo seems to have been.

He (Drumm) is back in the limelight after a relatively quiet period and accepts his role as the villain but believes there is a compelling alternative narrative where everyone involved in the disastrous sequence of events at the time will receive the same scrutiny as he and his bank already have. That, he says, is what keeps him going.

If I had to put money down on where the bent wheel in the whole guarantee mechanism is, I would put my money on AIB. It cost nearly as much as Anglo, slid quickly into the arms of the government, and also slid quickly out of the public spotlight. If AIB turned out to have pulled political strings to have Anglo included purely in order to avoid the public spotlight falling on AIB, I wouldn't be at all surprised - Anglo as the fall-guy for the 'establishment banks' and the establishment seems quite possible to me, particularly if AIB had a reasonable appreciation of how far up the creek they were, which they seem to have had. And look who got to survive as the 'pillar banks'.

The case for the inclusion as fall guy rather than political favourite gets stronger if Drumm is correct when he says Anglo was still solvent in 2008:

The increasing losses in Anglo Irish Bank's loan portfolio did not take effect until the effects of the property market collapse and the contraction in the general economy started to be felt in the first half of 2009. This is a matter of record and a matter that has been sworn before the courts.

cordially,
Scofflaw

maninasia

Boombastic wrote: »

Has the DPP given any time frame for the impending trials?

No, and this is the difficult a lot of us have.

When we hear nothing, should we just sit there and hope for the best?

Does that tend to work in Ireland?

Should we give the benefit of the doubt and extend trust?

The answers are clear.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Scofflaw wrote: »

Drumm has given an interview on the tapes to Irish Central: http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Fromer-Anglo-Irish-Bank-chief-David-Drumm-apologizes-on-tapes-says-inquiry-needed-on-bank-guarantee-213713761.html?page=1

I see he also thinks there ought to be an inquiry into the guarantee, and insists the issue is separate from the Anglo discussions:

I think this is a positive development. It highlights the extent to which we still need to dig into what exactly happened. If he'd just let the Anglo tapes pass without comment, it might have done just that, as Government was/is clearly seeing it as a storm to be ridden out.

Scofflaw wrote: »

The case for the inclusion as fall guy rather than political favourite gets stronger if Drumm is correct when he says Anglo was still solvent in 2008:

I'd feel that issue requires a degree of sceptical analysis. I'm not saying the immediate facts are necessarily wrong - presumably, Anglo would have had to be wound-up the moment someone formally stated that it was insolvent to the tune of €30 billion plus.

But all that's probably best left to enquiry. One line of question presumably will have to cover whatever pragmatic actions might have been felt necessary post-guarantee to shore up the financial system for another month (or "kick the can down the road", to use the motto of the time).

take everything

Drumm's allusion to calls between Anglo and the Central bank/Government figures (and the need to publish them) in his interview in today's SBP is intriguing.
Very juicy stuff there. Will we ever hear it though.

Rightwing

Drumm's assertions are most likely valid. AIB has cost us what, €20bln, I've never quite understood how Sheehy & co, have managed to pull it off.

whitebriar

Gosh.
Drum and co paid themselves monumental 100's of 1000's in salaries only to make a monumental mess of his bank and this countries finances and has the gall to suggest its not their and their cronies fault?

lol,his chickens are going to come home to roost and he deserves every bit of it.

Human greed facilitated it of course,with the queue for houses off the plans,car loans,living on seemingly at the time endless supply of borrowed money etc etc all lapped up.
But it was ever thus.

renegademaster

take everything wrote: »

Drumm's allusion to calls between Anglo and the Central bank/Government figures (and the need to publish them) in his interview in today's SBP is intriguing.
Very juicy stuff there. Will we ever hear it though.

what are you doing Wednesday? unempolyed protestors showing up at the Dail for 1pm and those who're busy coming at 6. bring drums or whatever to make lots of noise

https://www.facebook.com/events/169550859889655/?ref=2

Mr.Micro

Rightwing wrote: »

Drumm's assertions are most likely valid. AIB has cost us what, €20bln, I've never quite understood how Sheehy & co, have managed to pull it off.

I do not doubt that there was a lot of shenanigans when it came to AIB and BOI and how they got their handouts bailouts and the amounts. Anglo was part of the picture with its own tapestry of deceit and bluff, but the other two have as much to answer as well IMO. Drumm is clearly trying to spread the blame. He could always come back and explain if he feels that Anglo is being portrayed as the fall guy.

Rightwing

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I do not doubt that there was a lot of shenanigans when it came to AIB and BOI and how they got their handouts bailouts and the amounts. Anglo was part of the picture with its own tapestry of deceit and bluff, but the other two have as much to answer as well IMO. Drumm is clearly trying to spread the blame. He could always come back and explain if he feels that Anglo is being portrayed as the fall guy.

Absolutely, the chap could write a book yet, a blockbuster,,,,all the way to hollywood.

Mr.Micro

Rightwing wrote: »

Absolutely, the chap could write a book yet, a blockbuster,,,,all the way to hollywood.

Would he portray himself as villain or hero, or just plain misunderstood?

Rightwing

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Would he portray himself as villain or hero, or just plain misunderstood?

All 3 rolled into 1!

Lbeard

Scofflaw wrote: »

If AIB turned out to have pulled political strings to have Anglo included purely in order to avoid the public spotlight falling on AIB, I wouldn't be at all surprised

No. You have to think about this. The guarantee needed to cover every bank or no bank.

And I don't believe the theory of the bank guarantee really was an intention to pony up the cash. It was more meant as a gesture that would hopefully stabilise the system. As in the result of having to pony up the cash we'd be bankrupt .......Which is essentially where we are now.

If many things were different, simply as gesture may have been enough. But all the banks essentially were loaded with junk assets. The scale of the problem was much larger than any gesture could cope with.

It's wrong to think of all these things in retrospect without thinking of the perspective of the actors at the time. People like Drumm may have genuinely believed Anglo could be saved in some form. Brian Lenihan too. In retrospect it looks impossible - but at the time they may have been hoping for some Deus ex machina to come from somewhere.

RichardAnd

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0630/459761-howlin-open-to-oireachtas-referendum-re-run/


I knew that there was more to this whole thing. Yet again, the Irish state avails itself of an obsequious and venal media to manipulate the plebs. I understand now why some people don't even bother to vote...

john.han

Lbeard wrote: »

No. You have to think about this. The guarantee needed to cover every bank or no bank.

And I don't believe the theory of the bank guarantee really was an intention to pony up the cash. It was more meant as a gesture that would hopefully stabilise the system. As in the result of having to pony up the cash we'd be bankrupt .......Which is essentially where we are now.

If many things were different, simply as gesture may have been enough. But all the banks essentially were loaded with junk assets. The scale of the problem was much larger than any gesture could cope with.

It's wrong to think of all these things in retrospect without thinking of the perspective of the actors at the time. People like Drumm may have genuinely believed Anglo could be saved in some form. Brian Lenihan too. In retrospect it looks impossible - but at the time they may have been hoping for some Deus ex machina to come from somewhere.

Really? I've always been frustrated that Anglo wasn't simply let go, with the other banks protected purely for the reason that most ordinary citizens had deposits in the other banks. I don't know anyone that had money in Anglo, they weren't a day to day bank for ordinary people, they only had a small number of branches. I don't see what the problem with applying the normal rules of insolvency to them would have been.

Mr.Micro

john.han wrote: »

Really? I've always been frustrated that Anglo wasn't simply let go, with the other banks protected purely for the reason that most ordinary citizens had deposits in the other banks. I don't know anyone that had money in Anglo, they weren't a day to day bank for ordinary people, they only had a small number of branches. I don't see what the problem with applying the normal rules of insolvency to them would have been.

Anglo apparently convinced the Central Bank, DoF and the rest that it was systemic. The powers to be were completely shocked by the state of things and pure incompetence and were panicked into obliging hence the bailout of Anglo. It should have been cut adrift but there we go.