John McGuinness has on numerous occasions in his role proven himself completely impartial and quite critical of Fianna Fáil’s failings in past administrations. He is also one man in a committee that would all have free range to ask any question they liked, including Shane Ross. How on earth would he even be able to orchestrate a cover up? He’d need to out vote the rest of the PAC on his own on every contentious issue. Your claim is nothing short of party political non-sense.

People in glass houses

Fianna Fail have previously heavily pressurised others external to its party many times over many decades – can you imagine what they might try to one that they have within their own ranks when push comes to shove and a few might fear convictions eventually with evidence dug up on a personal level and/or the party is further exposed as corrupt?

No. The man might be clean and strong himself – but someone further impartial, possibly international, would have to be brought in!
A trained investigator of things regarding finance!

Of the two options available I would prefer PAC to do the work,as they have a mountain of work done on it already,I think the committee and it’s cross party members would be significantly better than the others,just look at the mess the FC made with Ivor Calley,and even watching the chair of that committee on Vincent Browne last night was tough he couldn’t even argue with him never mind him going toe to toe with persons involved in the guarantee…to say the chair of PAC will cover up what happened is a bit stupid,you should look up the work that PAC have done under the Chair and cross party members…..

Totally agree Eoin , its just rediculous , somtimes is seems people cant wait to stick in any anti FF statement just to get a barrage of green thumbs, anybody observing McGuiness over the last few years will see that he is straight talker and as good a politician as you will get , thats why he was marginalised by FF when they were in power . He is hungry for the job and was always openly critical of the FF leadership, just a pity the electorate were hoodwinked yet again by self serving lawyers before the last referendum that prevented these commitees from making statement of fact

John McGuinness stayed with FF through the battering and robbing of this country, backed Cowen and Lenihan in every vote. He was still a FF’er through and through. He still is and while it may not be intentional he still will have the party mentality of Fianna Fáil first, Ireland 2nd.

U can guarantee that Micheal Martin,Sean Fitzpatrick and Fingelton will want their man heading it.

If that wasn’t enough to convince people of McGuinness’s unsuitability, his brother was, like so so many FF’ers mentioned in the Mahon report. There is just too much baggage with that man. He should step down from the PAC chair for the duration of this inquiry, and replaced with someone who has no questions over their impartiality.

John McGuiness is the only FF & one of a handful of TD’s, I believe, has a record of genuinely acting in the interest of the Irish people. Sometimes at the cost of advancing his own career.
However, I do not believe that politicans investigating themselves is likely to be objective or effective. Irrespective of any enhanced powers they may gain.
Unfortunately, as the political system is currently constructed, a tribunal is the only method likely to effectively investigate the events of the most damaging political decision taken in the states history.

Given that a constitutional convention is commencing in a couple of months, perhaps a German-style constitutional court may be worth looking at. It could provide an appropriate venue for such an investigation as well as acting as a watch dog for political impropriety.

Why do we need an investigation? We know what happened. Let’s just proceed to the hangings.

Should also be pointed out that an Oireachtas inquiry would be televised for us all to see and examine every question and answer unlike the Tribunals where we had to rely on second hand accounts and transcripts.

If the problem we have with a Dail inquiry is that it would be led by *Irish* TDs, then saying that the system works well in (say) the UK or US is pretty irrelevant, because Irish TDs don’t lead those inquiries…

Mark the point being that the same “politicians are inherently wrong/corrupt/all the same/somehow evil” exists in the UK and US same as it does in Ireland yet the inquiries run by them work very well. Nothing to suggest that they wouldn’t succeed in Ireland too.

Nothing except precedent and context, true.
But those are somewhat important. You’re asking us to trust those who voted for the bailout to investigate the bailout. That’s not just asking the fox to guard the henhouse, it’s asking the fox with blood on its mouth to find who attacked the chickens…

If it’s an inquiry by an Oireachtas committee, the politicians don’t get an extra bean (over their current wage) as it would fall within the remit of their committee work. A lot of people in the country have no understanding about Oireachtas committees and what they do when in fact, they are in truth where the majority of legislation is fleshed out and refined before being introduced on the floor of the house as a bill. (ie: the majority of the work takes place in Oireachats committees)

The rest of Europe and the financial world thought it was an act of economic lunacy. Lenihan’s economic reputation was destroyed that night.

That’s a complete rewrite of history there Fagan.

In hindsight, of course everyone thinks the Guarantee was an act of economic lunacy, but very few people called it so then.

At the time, the reaction was largely positive, with most of the negativity focusing on the unilateral ‘middle of the night’ aspect of the move.

Donal the present head of the IMF Miss Lagarde was less than impressed by what had been done on that night.Also i don’t believe this was decided in the small hours of the night in question.It involved alot of meetings and planning for such a suggestion to be credible.Its high time the lies and disinformation stopped and the truth came out.

Nama Wine Lake gives a good account of the events: http://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/conspiracy-probably-not/

With one commenter deliciously refering to “Not so much a conspiracy then as a confluence of mediocrity.”

Part of the problem of course is the cult of the “professional politician”. Poltics should not be a profession, or a job handed down through families like a Butcher’s shop it should be a duty performed by citizens who have already proven themselves in ordinary life. We are all in the West complicit in the creation of the so called “political class”, schooled in politicing and in not much else and thus unskilled when real crises emerge.

Norman – Christine Legarde was unimpressed because at the time she was the French Minister for Finance and she was worried about the movement of funds from France to Ireland (ditto Alistair Darling).

I’m simply pointing out to Fagan that it is incorrect to say that at the time ‘the rest of Europe and the financial world thought it was an act of economic lunacy’.

I would totally agree that the Guarantee would have to have had significant ground work done on it and that it wasn’t something that was thought up on the night.

Nevertheless, the decision to implement it was taken unilaterally and in the middle of the night.

Donal. The financial world walked away from Ireland, when the Guarantee came in to being, as it moved the state’s debt from problematic to unsustainable. When it was announced it was only a matter of time before the IMF came in.

As for the Guarantee being a spur decision, it was not. It was planned for weeks before hand. The night time spectacle, was just that. A way to avoid debate, the EU/ECB would never have allowed it.

The Govt. of the day had their own reasons to create the Guarantee, and the welfare of this state was not one of them.

Fagan – the bank Guarantee was issued in September 2008. The IMF came in November 2010 when our borrowing costs finally became unsustainable (which happened only in the months preceding this). That’s a gap of more than two years.

Your thesis that the financial world immediately rejected the Guarantee is simply wrong. When the size of our banking crisis became clear, it was then that they began to walk away from us.

Also, I never said the Guarantee was a spur of the moment decision. What I said was that, at the time, the only real negative reaction regarding the Guarantee was in relation to its unilateral middle of the night implementation. The general reaction to the Guarantee as a policy move was initially quite positive, with the suggestion that this would be an inevitable move for many other European economies.

These are basic historical facts. I don’t see why you need to say otherwise.

@Donal: Not true. I was shocked when the bank guarantee was announced, as were most of the people I know. We could see what was coming. The only debate was whether they were extraordinarily naive or corrupt. I also remember Lenihan getting several phone calls from other European countries including the UK. Those idiots locked us all into a suicidal course.