European Union to order changes if they don't like Budget

shanered

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/european-commission-could-demand-changes-to-ireland-s-budget-next-month-1.1527329

Seems like our Government doesn't have any power any more over our situation, its a bit scary that our economic future is at the mercy of Brussels, no amount of complaining outside the Dail will affect the lads n lasses in Brussels.

Looks like Austerity is here to stay if I'm to make an educated guess, anybody else have any interesting views or comments on this story?

thebman

From the article:

The commission will then produce an opinion on the budgets by mid-November, with the euro group signing off on the budgetary plans on November 22nd.

If it is only an opinion then they can't demand anything. Just make recommendations.

I don't recall giving them the power to demand changes to our budget.

_Kaiser_

thebman wrote: »

From the article:


If it is only an opinion then they can't demand anything. Just make recommendations.

I don't recall giving them the power to demand changes to our budget.

We all know "recommendations" from the EU effectively mean instructions - that will be no doubt carried out to the letter by our Good European leader, in the same way that Ireland was "urged" to accept the bail-out.

Not sure how this is a story though after last year when leaks showed the EU got a look at our budget before we did.

We already know the EU is fond of the "go back and do it again" approach if Ireland turns in an unwanted result. This is no different.

It does help make my case that Irish "democracy" is a sham - and an expensive one at that! - so yay I guess

Mongfinder General

Income in 2013 will be €36-38 billion.

Social Welfare Expenditure will be €20 billion.

Elephant in the room.

Sea Sharp

It's a good thing. It allows the government to make the harsh unpopular measures (social welfare cutbacks) whilst being able to point the blame at the EU.

_Kaiser_

Mongfinder General wrote: »

Income in 2013 will be €36-38 billion.

Social Welfare Expenditure will be €20 billion.

Elephant in the room.

OK, this isn't directed at you personally as it's a common enough attitude here, but I personally am sick to my back teeth on this forum of this harping on about the social welfare budget as if everyone who has been made redundant in the last few years is somehow to blame for the mismanagement of the country's finances over the past 15/20 years. Incidentally most of the people that some reckon "their" taxes are paying for, are in fact merely getting back what they themselves paid into the system while they worked (a little fact that always seems to be overlooked in this argument).

Btw.. just in case anyone thinks this is a "dole head" rant, I'm currently working and have been since I left college (save for most of 2010 when I too was made redundant), but I would rather "my" taxes go to supporting those (genuinely) in need than be pissed away to keep the gravy flowing at the top or to pay off quality bankers like the Anglo lads or their EU counterparts.

Yes there are the "lifers" that should be identified and cut off, and the ancillary benefits need to be reviewed (such as automatic entitlement to free travel and medical cards for pensioners as but one example) as is happening, and the number of people claiming disability could stand a review, but to suggest that slashing payments to those who are most affected by cuts will magically fix everything is just completely wrong.

The real elephant is how this farce continues or why we're paying debts that were never ours at all - but it's not really.. Paddy does love his "status" and "begrudgery" in equal measure... or maybe it's just Stockholm Syndrome at this stage? Hence why this time it's (again) the employed vs the unemployed, but fear not.. the private vs public vs union worker in-fighting will no doubt be along soon again too.

hmmm

Considering the state of Irish politicians I'd be happier if the EU took over our budget entirely.

Tigerandahalf

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

The real elephant is how this farce continues or why we're paying debts that were never ours at all - but it's not really.. Paddy does love his "status" and "begrudgery" in equal measure... or maybe it's just Stockholm Syndrome at this stage? Hence why this time it's (again) the employed vs the unemployed, but fear not.. the private vs public vs union worker in-fighting will no doubt be along soon again too.

I think that is very true. However, before there is any debt writeoff the budget has to be balanced. Not until then will we have any power to push the ECB for debt writeoff. However balancing the budget through austerity alone is hammering many people who had no part in this whole fiasco.

zootroid

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

OK, this isn't directed at you personally as it's a common enough attitude here, but I personally am sick to my back teeth on this forum of this harping on about the social welfare budget as if everyone who has been made redundant in the last few years is somehow to blame for the mismanagement of the country's finances over the past 15/20 years. Incidentally most of the people that some reckon "their" taxes are paying for, are in fact merely getting back what they themselves paid into the system while they worked (a little fact that always seems to be overlooked in this argument).

Btw.. just in case anyone thinks this is a "dole head" rant, I'm currently working and have been since I left college (save for most of 2010 when I too was made redundant), but I would rather "my" taxes go to supporting those (genuinely) in need than be pissed away to keep the gravy flowing at the top or to pay off quality bankers like the Anglo lads or their EU counterparts.

Yes there are the "lifers" that should be identified and cut off, and the ancillary benefits need to be reviewed (such as automatic entitlement to free travel and medical cards for pensioners as but one example) as is happening, and the number of people claiming disability could stand a review, but to suggest that slashing payments to those who are most affected by cuts will magically fix everything is just completely wrong.

The real elephant is how this farce continues or why we're paying debts that were never ours at all - but it's not really.. Paddy does love his "status" and "begrudgery" in equal measure... or maybe it's just Stockholm Syndrome at this stage? Hence why this time it's (again) the employed vs the unemployed, but fear not.. the private vs public vs union worker in-fighting will no doubt be along soon again too.

There are 435,000 on the live register. If all those people were taking home the full employment benefit of 188 euro per week (which they are not), this would add up 4.25 billion per year. So what is the other 16 billion spent on? I have no issue with people seeking unemployment benefit, but our social welfare system must need serious reform if the main item people associate it with only accounts for a quarter of the expenditure, and also the fact that it takes up over half the tax revenue.

Secondly, we are still running a primary deficit, ie excluding interest payments, our expenditure is still higher than the tax we take in. So while paying off bank debts are infuriating, we would still be running a deficit even if we didn't bail out the banks.

In my opinion a country shouldn't be borrowing money to pay its day to day expenses. Borrowing should only be permitted for capital expenditure. But I think I'm in the minority with that viewpoint

Geuze

Mongfinder General wrote: »

Income in 2013 will be €36 billion

Please note that this is incorrect.

See Govt Finance data here:

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/gfsa/governmentfinancestatisticsapril2013/#.UjZFHdK-qrw

Govt reveniue is 55 bn approx.

Geuze

zootroid wrote: »

There are 435,000 on the live register. If all those people were taking home the full employment benefit of 188 euro per week (which they are not), this would add up 4.25 billion per year. So what is the other 16 billion spent on? I have no issue with people seeking unemployment benefit, but our social welfare system must need serious reform if the main item people associate it with only accounts for a quarter of the expenditure, and also the fact that it takes up over half the tax revenue

Please note that unemployment payments are not, and never have been, the main part of SW exp.

The biggest SW exp is Child Benefit and State Pensions.

Also please note that Govt revenue is approx. 55-56bn, while DSP exp is approx. 20 bn.

Jumboman

Ireland should just tell the EU to F**K off or we'll crash the euro.

View

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

We all know "recommendations" from the EU effectively mean instructions - (

The EU noted that we were overly dependent on property related taxes for our Government income and recommended we rectify that - how much heed did we pay to those "instructions"?

View

Jumboman wrote: »

Ireland should just tell the EU to F**K off or we'll crash the euro.

We have about as much chance of crashing the Rouble as the Euro.

Jumboman

View wrote: »

We have about as much chance of crashing the Rouble as the Euro.

How so ? at the very least we could talk it down that world harm the markets.

Also the central bank could create billions to pay off our debts.

shanered

Was just watching Barrasso giving a speech about the EU's problem is a political one and that we should stay the course etc etc...
Really putting the gun to our head in this situation, he talks about financial goals, but what I feel the point is.how these financial targets are really effecting society, with huge youth unemployment across Europe it is.clear that even our Euro paymasters havent got the ability to sort this mess out.
I think what was said by our MEP is that 24/27 member states have a worse debt to GDP ratio than last year.
These.guys.are.not just running us into the ground, their running a good deal of the member states into the ground with their economic policies.
Along with the fact.that Ireland will have one less MEP in a reconfiguration of the European parliment just.seems like we have less.and less say by the day on how our country is to be run.

kona

shanered wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/european-commission-could-demand-changes-to-ireland-s-budget-next-month-1.1527329

Seems like our Government doesn't have any power any more over our situation, its a bit scary that our economic future is at the mercy of Brussels, no amount of complaining outside the Dail will affect the lads n lasses in Brussels.

Looks like Austerity is here to stay if I'm to make an educated guess, anybody else have any interesting views or comments on this story?

About time, country is pissing away far too much money still. And I'm sick of funding others to go on the piss when I've to work.

View

Jumboman wrote: »

How so ? at the very least we could talk it down that world harm the markets.

Markets ignore us unless they want to savage us. We are very small fry in financial terms.

Jumboman wrote: »

Also the central bank could create billions to pay off our debts.

Not without breeching EU law it can't and you do have the monies to pay the ECJ's fines we'd need to pay as a result?

You do also realise that the other member states can just HINT that won't accept our extra "fake" Euro from us and our banking system will start to implode?

spank_inferno

Didnt part of the lase EU treaty include a proviso whereas some part of the EU can run the rule over a members national budget??

If so... Is this not the stability treaty performing as expexted.

Which we did vote for.

_Kaiser_

kona wrote: »

About time, country is pissing away far too much money still. And I'm sick of funding others to go on the piss when I've to work.

Oh please. That's a ridiculous argument. As I noted above, the "dole heads" were there long before the recession and are not reflective of the vast majority of current welfare claimants who have enough trouble paying all their bills for another week, never mind "going on the piss".
That's not to say that said "dole heads" need to be identified and dealt with but I suppose this is an example of that hipster "straw man" thing that seems to be the favourite term on Boards these days as opposed to making a coherent counter-argument.

spank_inferno wrote: »

Didnt part of the lase EU treaty include a proviso whereas some part of the EU can run the rule over a members national budget??

If so... Is this not the stability treaty performing as expected.

Which we did vote for.

If by "vote for" you mean being forced to go back and give them the answer they wanted, then yes I suppose so.

Not really a good sign though when the original "will of the people" is ignored because the powers that be didn't get the answer they wanted. It reduces our so-called democratic process to mere rubber-stamping of decisions that were already made and agreed upon by our "betters"

shanered

shanered wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/european-commission-could-demand-changes-to-ireland-s-budget-next-month-1.1527329

Seems like our Government doesn't have any power any more over our situation, its a bit scary that our economic future is at the mercy of Brussels, no amount of complaining outside the Dail will affect the lads n lasses in Brussels.

Looks like Austerity is here to stay if I'm to make an educated guess, anybody else have any interesting views or comments on this story?

That might be a good thing even though I would be wary of it happening long term, the reason it might be a good thing is that the powers that be in Brussels are less subject to the cultural hegemony that Irish politics is, so therefor you would not get government (of any party) giving in to special pleading to protect there own patch.

Sleepy

Given the level of news we're hearing that the government are thinking of not cutting the full amount recommended by the troika is there anything to be said for a protest to demand they make the full cut and accept that the recommendations they're receiving are from more qualified sources than their own as former teachers, publicans etc.?

Jumboman

View wrote: »

Not without breeching EU law it can't and you do have the monies to pay the ECJ's fines we'd need to pay as a result?

You do also realise that the other member states can just HINT that won't accept our extra "fake" Euro from us and our banking system will start to implode?

If it was done right before the EU copped what was happening the money could be transferred into real assets say 50 to 100 billion. But the government havnt got the balls to do that,

Idbatterim

Given the level of news we're hearing that the government are thinking of not cutting the full amount recommended by the troika is there anything to be said for a protest to demand they make the full cut and accept that the recommendations they're receiving are from more qualified sources than their own as former teachers, publicans etc.?

nail on the head, why bother with all the advisers if they are just ignored? Labour called the previous government reckless and shortsighted, probably feeling a bit hypocritical now Labour hah? sure the election isnt too far away... I know it cant be quantified, but what will the actual cost and perception be, if we now start backing down quickly, because it will sure as hell be more than the compounded 300-600 million plus interest every annum, thats for sure!

How about we make a start by undoing some of FF dirty work (read Berties vote buying here) by bringing thousands back into the tax net and capping welfare? I wont go into the Haddington road agreement or pensioners...

If I were FG I may throw Labour a little slack, but the adjustment certainly wouldnt be going from 3.1 to 2.5 billion. All FG need to do is get us back to the markets at a reasonable rate, make it look like they have made the tough decision for optics and I can see the potential propaganda now... Its a real pity the FG 5 or whatever they are called, dont start a new party. They could then potentially have FG "light"and FG "right" in power, they would be far more fiscally conservative and responsible that anything else out there by a country mile IMO... I dont want to see Labour, SF or FF in power, as things stand, could well be a FF / FG coalition the next time round!!!

View

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

If by "vote for" you mean being forced to go back and give them the answer they wanted, then yes I suppose so.

We weren't forced to do any such thing.

Ireland was in fact an active supporter of these new measures as we voted in favour of them in the Council of Ministers as did 11 out of 12 of our MEPs (if I remember the EP votes correctly). These are measures Ireland wants in place.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Not really a good sign though when the original "will of the people" is ignored because the powers that be didn't get the answer they wanted. It reduces our so-called democratic process to mere rubber-stamping of decisions that were already made and agreed upon by our "betters"

No will of the people was ignored. The democratic will of the people was that we would approve the relevant EU Treaties (on the Euro, the SGP and the Stability Treaty) and that mandate stands. These new measures which Ireland supports are measures adopted to give effect to those decisions of the electorate.

View

Jumboman wrote: »

If it was done right before the EU copped what was happening the money could be transferred into real assets say 50 to 100 billion. But the government havnt got the balls to do that,

The government has no intention of gambling with the economy on the basis of some pie-in-the-sky idea. There is no legal basis for them to do so either.

I can't see you offering to pay the massive EU fines the ECJ would impose on us for breeching EU law.

Jumboman

View wrote: »

The government has no intention of gambling with the economy on the basis of some pie-in-the-sky idea. There is no legal basis for them to do so either.

I can't see you offering to pay the massive EU fines the ECJ would impose on us for breeching EU law.

EU fines ? I wouldnt give them a cent. The government has already gambled with the economy by giving billions to the banks. Its not pie in the sky the central bank has the ability to create euro currency we should use that to our advantage. Also as long as we are still in the euro the EU will not want our backs to collapse especially since we are the "good boy in the class". We need to start playing hardball.

View

Jumboman wrote: »

EU fines ? I wouldnt give them a cent.

You wouldn't but the government will. The electorate decided we would be bound by decisions of the ECJ. You are now suggesting that the government flout a democratic decision of the electorate as well as the ECJ. How do you think the Supreme Court will rule in that case? The democratic system rests on the rule of law in case you need reminding.

Jumboman wrote: »

ts not pie in the sky the central bank has the ability to create euro currency we should use that to our advantage.

Not according to EU law it doesn't unless the ECB authorises it. The CBI after all is first and foremost now a part of the ESCB and bound by its rules and regulations.

Jumboman wrote: »

Also as long as we are still in the euro the EU will not want our backs to collapse especially since we are the "good boy in the class". We need to start playing hardball.

Any attempt at "hardball" and we are on our own to face the financial markets. The other member states will walk away at the merest hint of hardball as it will rightly be perceived as attempted blackmail.

There is no clause in EU law that means a member state cannot go bankrupt or be allowed to go bankrupt. Given a choice between blackmail and seeing the effects of another member state go bankrupt, the other member states will sit back and watch what happens. We didn't exactly rush to throw ourselves under the train for Cyprus when it looked for a short while like they actually might go bankrupt due to political indecisiveness, did we?

Jumboman

View wrote: »

You wouldn't but the government will. The electorate decided we would be bound by decisions of the ECJ. You are now suggesting that the government flout a democratic decision of the electorate as well as the ECJ. How do you think the Supreme Court will rule in that case? The democratic system rests on the rule of law in case you need reminding.

The politicians were elected to work in the best interests of the people. Which do you think the general public would prefer give money to the EU or to schools and hospitals ? The "democratic decision" of the electorate was only after we were asked to vote again in two referendums hows that democratic ? you can get any result you want if you keep asking the same question over an over again. Thats democracy EU style.

Not according to EU law it doesn't unless the ECB authorises it. The CBI after all is first and foremost now a part of the ESCB and bound by its rules and regulations.

I dont care what the EU says about anything the question should be what is good for Ireland. Germany and Frnace have no problem breaking EU law when it suits them.

Any attempt at "hardball" and we are on our own to face the financial markets. The other member states will walk away at the merest hint of hardball as it will rightly be perceived as attempted blackmail.

That is such a defeatist attitude in order words we should bend over and take it up the arse from the EU.

There is no clause in EU law that means a member state cannot go bankrupt or be allowed to go bankrupt.

If we went bankrupt it would destabilize the euro currency especially since we are been hailed as one of the only successfully "bailout" countries.

Given a choice between blackmail and seeing the effects of another member state go bankrupt, the other member states will sit back and watch what happens. We didn't exactly rush to throw ourselves under the train for Cyprus when it looked for a short while like they actually might go bankrupt due to political indecisiveness, did we?

They blackmailed us so why shouldnt we "blackmail" them or play them at their own game ?

_Kaiser_

Jumboman makes a lot of sense IMO

Like it or not, the EU has shown that it's more than happy to break it's own rules to suit the interests of the larger states and no matter how you try to spin it.. asking a country to "go back and do it again" because a referendum didn't produce a wanted result is not democratic is any shape or form.

You can't claim that we all signed up for it when the only reason we did was because we were forced to under threat of sanctions, hell and brimstone and what not (YES for Jobs anyone? Still waiting on that one...)

What about coercing the Irish state into accepting a "bailout" that has proven disastrous for our national economy, youth and sold our children into economic servitude ... while those at the top who are responsible for the mess escape unscathed - anyone who doubts this should have another listen to the Anglo Tapes.

Like I said previously, I can only assume that the EU supporters on this forum are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. The only other conclusion I can draw is that they're either blind to the consequences of this Austerity-for-Some policy we've been forced to follow, or perhaps just (in typically Irish fashion) unconcerned because it hasn't (yet!) personally affected them to any great degree. I don't have to suffer racism to know that it's wrong, nor do I need to be assaulted to know that's wrong too!

_Kaiser_

View wrote: »

You wouldn't but the government will. The electorate decided we would be bound by decisions of the ECJ. You are now suggesting that the government flout a democratic decision of the electorate as well as the ECJ. How do you think the Supreme Court will rule in that case? The democratic system rests on the rule of law in case you need reminding.

Who said we have a democracy? Oh sure on the surface perhaps but thanks to the Whip system and sanctions against those who go against it, we've seen that TDs are really only there to "make up the numbers" these days.

The real power (whatever the EU has left us) is centralised around the cabinet table. Given the fondness on Boards for referring to RTE as Pravda (not inaccurate either), maybe we should go the whole way and refer to the Cabinet as the Politburo.

Not according to EU law it doesn't unless the ECB authorises it. The CBI after all is first and foremost now a part of the ESCB and bound by its rules and regulations.

Let's never lose sight of the fact that all these institutions that are so cherished on this forum are there to serve the will of the people.. not the other way around! Anything can be changed given enough support.

Any attempt at "hardball" and we are on our own to face the financial markets. The other member states will walk away at the merest hint of hardball as it will rightly be perceived as attempted blackmail.

Oh ok, so the EU can threaten to cut us off if we don't accept their "bailout" and threaten us with doom and despair if we don't vote the way they want (I'm sure they'd be happy to remove that option entirely if they could), but god forbid Ireland did what is in OUR own interests eh?

There is no clause in EU law that means a member state cannot go bankrupt or be allowed to go bankrupt. Given a choice between blackmail and seeing the effects of another member state go bankrupt, the other member states will sit back and watch what happens. We didn't exactly rush to throw ourselves under the train for Cyprus when it looked for a short while like they actually might go bankrupt due to political indecisiveness, did we?

Really? Cause as I recall it the same tactics were employed there too to keep the gravy train rolling in Brussels. I don't remember the actual citizens being too happy though! But that doesn't matter I suppose as long as the EU survives.

View

Jumboman wrote: »

The politicians were elected to work in the best interests of the people. Which do you think the general public would prefer give money to the EU or to schools and hospitals ? The "democratic decision" of the electorate was only after we were asked to vote again in two referendums hows that democratic ?

The decision to be bound by rulings of the ECJ was made in a single referendum.

Jumboman wrote: »

I dont care what the EU says about anything the question should be what is good for Ireland.

Fair enough if you consider the rule of law to be unimportant. I fancy the Supreme Court would regard it as highly important and you'd have a tough time persuading them that it was "good for Ireland" that we abandon it and flout a democratic decision of the electorate.

Jumboman wrote: »

That is such a defeatist attitude in order words we should bend over and take it up the arse from the EU.

No, it isn't deafeatist. It just doesn't coincide with your bellicose view of the world.

Jumboman wrote: »

If we went bankrupt it would destabilize the euro currency especially since we are been hailed as one of the only successfully "bailout" countries.

So what? Caving into blackmail would immediately destabilise the Euro since no one - not even us - could trust the political decision making in the EU after that. Not to mention the legal uncertainty that would arise as the decision was immediately challenged in every Supreme Court in the Eurozone.

Jumboman wrote: »

They blackmailed us so why shouldnt we "blackmail" them or play them at their own game ?

That's "blackmail" as in providing us with a loan facility at rates of 1/3 that of the financial markets were charging us at the time (and which they were increasingly unwilling to loan us at all). And, as it was a loan facility, there has never been any obligation on us to draw down those loans unless we chose to do so.

bbam

In fairness the government are running a fine line and are playing a blinder.
They are protecting the high rollers while pilling on more charges and taxes onto the joe soap.
An example of this attitude is the recent blunder in admitting that insolvent doctors and accountants should hold onto their large properties as befits their standing in the community.

They know full well that if they push too hard they will push voters over to SF, but they seem to have the Irish mentality under control. While the main parties remain in power there will be no radical two finger approach to Eu money and EU control of our budgets.

I can't ever see our deficit being balanced, the unions will protect the earnings of the large numbers in the HSE, teaching etc. increasing taxes to the stage to balance the books will drive the voters to SF so that won't happen. Job creation is way down their priority, the jobless numbers will be massaged with CE, TUS and the new Gateway scheme to do council menial work, all funded by DSP. Long term unemployed numbers will fall as people are cycled out into these schemes.

It should be no supprise that the budget is carefully orchestrated between our main parties and EU as they have the most to benifet by maintaining the Status Quo.

View

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Jumboman makes a lot of sense IMO

Like it or not, the EU has shown that it's more than happy to break it's own rules to suit the interests of the larger states and no matter how you try to spin it..

You can take that "argument" to the courts where the judges will be free to agree with it if it is a valid argument. Of course, you won't though, will you?

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

asking a country to "go back and do it again" because a referendum didn't produce a wanted result is not democratic is any shape or form.

The EU has never asked us to hold any referenda ever - either first ones or second ones.

And the Supreme Court here is quite clear, second referenda are 100% democratic as the demos get a free vote in each and every case.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

You can't claim that we all signed up for it when the only reason we did was because we were forced to under threat of sanctions, hell and brimstone and what not (YES for Jobs anyone? Still waiting on that one...)

You don't even know which referenda we are talking about.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

What about coercing the Irish state into accepting a "bailout" that has proven disastrous for our national economy, youth and sold our children into economic servitude ... while those at the top who are responsible for the mess escape unscathed - anyone who doubts this should have another listen to the Anglo Tapes.

The only reason we need a "bailout" was because our economy was a disaster zone. As it is, we aren't under any obligation to borrow any of the monies avail to us under the "bailout" - we are choosing to do so because we don't want to face the alternative.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Like I said previously, I can only assume that the EU supporters on this forum are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. The only other conclusion I can draw is that they're either blind to the consequences of this Austerity-for-Some policy we've been forced to follow, or perhaps just (in typically Irish fashion) unconcerned because it hasn't (yet!) personally affected them to any great degree. I don't have to suffer racism to know that it's wrong, nor do I need to be assaulted to know that's wrong too!

Well keep ignoring the obvious conclusion - namely, that the majority of the electorate won't support your view point. You can feel really virtuous at being "right" but it won't persuade a majority to your point of view.

djpbarry

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

What about coercing the Irish state into accepting a "bailout" that has proven disastrous for our national economy, youth and sold our children into economic servitude ... while those at the top who are responsible for the mess escape unscathed...

Overlooking the Anglo directors who are due to appear in court, are we?

Jumboman

View wrote: »

The decision to be bound by rulings of the ECJ was made in a single referendum.

People just voted Yes on the basis of what we "could get" out of the EU. I doubt 99% of the electorate have any clue about the ins and outs of the ECJ. People are however concerned about if they have enough money in their pockets to pay the bills.

Fair enough if you consider the rule of law to be unimportant. I fancy the Supreme Court would regard it as highly important and you'd have a tough time persuading them that it was "good for Ireland" that we abandon it and flout a democratic decision of the electorate.

So how is germany and france able to break EU law whenever it suits them ?

No, it isn't deafeatist. It just doesn't coincide with your bellicose view of the world.

It is deafeatist. Do you really think someone like enda kenny is providing Ireland with its best possible representation when negotiating with the EU ?

So what? Caving into blackmail would immediately destabilise the Euro

So was been forced to guarantee unsecured bondholders not blackmail ?

decision was immediately challenged in every Supreme Court in the Eurozone.

Foreign courts should not concern us. We need to get of the eurozone but before we do we should get back the billions they took from us.

That's "blackmail" as in providing us with a loan facility at rates of 1/3 that of the financial markets were charging us at the time (and which they were increasingly unwilling to loan us at all). And, as it was a loan facility, there has never been any obligation on us to draw down those loans unless we chose to do so.

They create money of out of thin air then charge us interest on it. And we are meant to be grateful for that ?

I doubt their was no obligation for us to take the loans. Do you really believe the EU didnt order/threaten the irish government.

Jumboman

View wrote: »

The EU has never asked us to hold any referenda ever - either first ones or second ones.

Not officially. But that doesnt mean they didnt threaten the Irish government behind the scenes.

And the Supreme Court here is quite clear, second referenda are 100% democratic as the demos get a free vote in each and every case.

Its by no means democratic when they just keep running the referenda untill they get the "right" result.

ardmacha

the unions will protect the earnings of the large numbers in the HSE, teaching etc

When, exactly, are the unions going to start doing this?

Its by no means democratic when they just keep running the referenda untill they get the "right" result.

I take it that you think there should be no divorce, then?

Jumboman

ardmacha wrote: »

I take it that you think there should be no divorce, then?

Bit off the topic but how has divorce benefited society ?

spank_inferno

Jumboman wrote: »

Bit off the topic but how has divorce benefited society ?

I agree Jumboan.
People should always stay in unhappy relationships.

Back on topic.

View

Jumboman wrote: »

People just voted Yes on the basis of what we "could get" out of the EU.

That's an extraordinary statement to make. You know why others voted the way they did, do you?

Jumboman wrote: »

So how is germany and france able to break EU law whenever it suits them ?

If you have complaints about EU law being breeched make formal complaints about such breeches.

Germany & France are subject to the same EU rules as everyone else, no more and no less.

Jumboman wrote: »

It is deafeatist. Do you really think someone like enda kenny is providing Ireland with its best possible representation when negotiating with the EU ?

Okay, so you don't like "Inda", but so what? He is the democratically elected Taoiseach and until you are elected to the Oireachtas and can vote for someone else, tough.

Jumboman wrote: »

So was been forced to guarantee unsecured bondholders not blackmail ?

And how were we "forced" exactly? Were there gunmen in the Oireachtas when the votes were taken?

Jumboman wrote: »

Foreign courts should not concern us. We need to get of the eurozone but before we do we should get back the billions they took from us.

So, the "cunning plan" is to force other EU member states to accede to our demands but we shouldn't be concerned that their Supreme Courts will prohibit them from doing so?

Jumboman wrote: »

They create money of out of thin air then charge us interest on it. And we are meant to be grateful for that ?

No money came "from thin air".

The monies we borrowed from the EU funds were borrowed on the international bond markets by the other governments and the EU funds. They are paying interest on those loans which were incurred so they could loan us money at rates we couldn't hope to get on the financial markets at the time.

Other governments don't sit around with tens of billions sitting in a bottom drawer on the off-chance we might need to borrow from them.

Jumboman wrote: »

I doubt their was no obligation for us to take the loans. Do you really believe the EU didnt order/threaten the irish government.

And what do you think they'd have done if we had decided to reduce our government's massive over-expenditure and not borrow?

Do you really think Angela Merkel is insisting Enda Kenny borrow money to keep Castlebar Hosiptal open and he is there insisting that he'd prefer to close it instead? Or the schools? Or to pay Social Welfare?

View

Jumboman wrote: »

Not officially. But that doesnt mean they didnt threaten the Irish government behind the scenes.

Wouldn't it have made more sense for them to threaten us to NOT hold a referendum in the first place?

Jumboman wrote: »

Its by no means democratic when they just keep running the referenda untill they get the "right" result.

Take that up with the Supreme Court. They are the ones who get to decide what "democratic" is just as they are the ones who handed down the Crotty judgment without which you probably wouldn't be complaining about the EU referenda at all as we'd be unlikely to be having them as often as we do.

Geuze

bbam wrote: »

I can't ever see our deficit being balanced, the unions will protect the earnings of the large numbers in the HSE, teaching etc. increasing taxes to the stage to balance the books will drive the voters to SF so that won't happen.

They haven't been doing a great job so, (the unions), as PS pay has been cut three times.

bbam

ardmacha wrote: »

When, exactly, are the unions going to start doing this?

I don't want this to descend into a PS bashing exercise.. these comments relate to how the unions will use the sheer numbers in the PS to force agreements which are not helpful to balancing the books of income/expenditure

But look at the notion of "efficiencies" as a cost saving exercise..

Employees of the state work maybe 2 hours extra per week or some other similar notion, and yes the individual will have a lower income/hour, but the drain on the state is unchanged.. This enables the salaries to remain and so there is no saving in financial terms to the state...

Teachers would be an example... what benefit or saving is there in teachers remaining on after pupils going home, I see this as the implementation of the efficiencies in a number of schools..

Personally people being made stay on in their workplace for more time is of no benifet to the state nor its finances, balancing of the deficit will require either more money to be taken in or less to be given out, or a combination of the two.. Pretending that somehow paying out the same amount will somehow help balance the books - its just absurd.

This is a deal struck by the unions in protection of their members with the biggest strength in numbers.. Its what unions do, they serve no other purpose other than to get the best deal for their members. But it does nothing to help cut expenditure which is one of the few direct means of balancing the budget.

Enough about PS pay, there have been enough threads on the topic..

BKtje

Mods: Apologies if this post isn't acceptable here but I'm curious as to what people think would happen if we followed the course outlined below.

So I couldn't sleep last night and my mind started thinking about Jumboman's and Kaiser2000's wish that Ireland would just give the ol two fingers to the EU and I came up with a hypothetical timeline. I realise this isn't based on any sort of fact and possibly too extreme but this is what I came up with more or less. Point 4 and 5 being the most unlikely scenario but 1-3 seem fairly likely consequences.

1) The people of Ireland decide to fully back the proposal of giving the ol two fingers to the EU and tell them to get stuffed. Refusing to repay loans and interest causes the EU to cut off any funding. Ireland survives a while on the 50 billion that was (somehow) printed but that money soon runs out. The EU enters crisis talks. Ireland becomes locked out of the money markets forcing the government to balance the books immediately. Services and welfare are cut and many public sector employees join the dole queues (whose weekly payments are halved). Unemployment jumps to 20% and the standard of living falls.

2) The EU fines Ireland and is ignored leaving them no choice but to kick Ireland out of the Euro. Punt Nua floated and immediately crashes, peoples savings become a quarter of their initial value. Ireland experiences a slight rise in exports to the EU due to being a low cost economy, however many Europeans refuse to buy Irish products. Exports to the rest of the world experience a massive jump due to the low cost. In Ireland the standard of living falls further and unemployment stays steady at around 22%.

3) Ireland kicked out of the EU and thus loses access to the European market. Large companies who moved to Ireland for access to the EU are forced to move meaning unemployment rises again to over 30%. All Irish work permits in the EU are revoked and people deported back to Ireland causing unemployment to rise to 33%. EU allows trade with Ireland but all imports are heavily taxed, nullifying any cost advantage Ireland may have (even if Europeans are willing to buy Irish produce). Services are cut further, crime rampant, people afraid and starting to get hungry. Petrol too expensive to mass import, cars become a true sign of wealth but most of the wealthy have already fled the country long ago.

4)Large gangs form and take control as the government pretty much collapses. Social welfare non existent and people begin to starve. Farmers employ people to defend their land in exchange for food becoming a sort of feudal lord. Criminal gangs are everywhere and most people either part of a gang (criminal or farmer) or they are living in constant fear of violence and starvation. Food is air lifted into the country by aid organisations helping to
stave off mass starvation but many die.

5) Ireland becomes the first western first world country to return to third world country status.

Ya know, this might make a decent fiction novel if I create some sort of love story in the middle of all this. I honestly can't see a good world for Ireland outside of the EU and giving the ol two fingers to Europe wouldn't get us anywhere in the long term.

fly_agaric

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Like I said previously, I can only assume that the EU supporters on this forum are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. The only other conclusion I can draw is that they're either blind to the consequences of this Austerity-for-Some policy we've been forced to follow, ...

EU has been the origin of alot of legislation in that enhances the rights of ordinary people imo [afair our shower often want to opt out of part of it that improve employment rights etc]. Our own politicians are the ones who've always been very quick with austerity-for-some policy options as you call them to temporarily dig the Irish economy out of a hole - "we can't all live on a small island", or "we must live within our means" etc; much slower with reforms to try and stop the ship hitting the rocks again.
Without any bailouts, the professional and political "elite" here would naturally have to squeeze the rest of us a lot more tightly to keep the "show on the road" (and themselves in a fitting manner)!

jmayo

shanered wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/european-commission-could-demand-changes-to-ireland-s-budget-next-month-1.1527329

Seems like our Government doesn't have any power any more over our situation, its a bit scary that our economic future is at the mercy of Brussels, no amount of complaining outside the Dail will affect the lads n lasses in Brussels.

Looks like Austerity is here to stay if I'm to make an educated guess, anybody else have any interesting views or comments on this story?

On the contrary I think it is a good thing that our economic future is not decided by people like joan burton, brendan howlin and james reilly.

I am no fan of EU (as can be atested by anyone looking at my old posts), but we cannot be trusted to govern ourselves.
The vested interests (public sector unions, pensioners, social welfare proponents, IBEC, mortgage defaulters, beleivers in magic money trees i.e people before profit, etc) win out and we need to get our financial house in order.

And please let no one start bringing in bank bailouts etc into this.
The simple fact is we ramped up public spending based on transactional taxes and taxes on a non sustainable pyramid of construction fueled by cheap credit.
We are not making enough in reveneue to service our day to day costs never mind service our borrowing.

Now we need to cut our cloth to suit our measure and as long as our politicans think short term and reelection they will not make the very hard decisions necessary.

Likewise with other members of the PIIGS.
The Greeks simply can't be trusted to sort out the mess they created.
Insetad of ordinary Greeks being angry with Germans maybe they should look to their own political and professional classes.

BTW everyone talks about austerity, but to me if I ran a home and had to balance a budget in the same manner I wouldn't call it austerity but "living within my means".

MRnotlob606

merkel has germany prospering, unemployment is at its lowest in 20 years in germany

woodoo

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

merkel has germany prospering, unemployment is at its lowest in 20 years in germany

She may be happy with the way thing are the EU now. She seems in no rush to solve the mess.

dissed doc

shanered wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/european-commission-could-demand-changes-to-ireland-s-budget-next-month-1.1527329

Seems like our Government doesn't have any power any more over our situation, its a bit scary that our economic future is at the mercy of Brussels, no amount of complaining outside the Dail will affect the lads n lasses in Brussels.

Looks like Austerity is here to stay if I'm to make an educated guess, anybody else have any interesting views or comments on this story?

In times of yore, before the euro, the currency would have been massively devalued by now, we would all be tightening our belts, and convinced it was somebody else's fault.

This way, our parliamentary government cannot hide it's actions. A pity their response is to attempt to polarise the political system into a left vs right two-party system to avoid having to reform the political system.

Still breaking the law on doctor's working hours...still issuing property development contracts to builders for health centres and clinics that never get used....

View

jmayo wrote: »

On the contrary I think it is a good thing that our economic future is not decided by people like joan burton, brendan howlin and james reilly.

I am no fan of EU (as can be atested by anyone looking at my old posts), but we cannot be trusted to govern ourselves.

Loath as I am to upset you, I am afraid that the EU is not there to "save us from ourselves" (or our choice of politicians).

It IS up to us to govern ourselves and the rest of the EU will trust us to do so (even if all evidence points to the contrary).

jmayo wrote: »

The vested interests (public sector unions, pensioners, social welfare proponents, IBEC, mortgage defaulters, beleivers in magic money trees i.e people before profit, etc) win out and we need to get our financial house in order.

Well that is what vested interests are there for - to advance their members' interests. If we - by being too lazy to counter their efforts - do nothing, then we get what we deserve.