TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 13 °C Tuesday 21 May, 2013

Column: 10 reasons why Ireland should be praying for a second bailout

Cheap money, essential reforms, and a route away from gombeenism? A second bailout would have immense benefits for Ireland, argues NAMAwinelake.

NAMAwinelake

IN THE DIRTY little scrap that took place last week after Citibank economist Willem Buiter said Ireland should be planning for the possibility of a second bailout, it seemed to be lost on us all –  regardless of whether or not Ireland needs a second bailout – we will need to continue borrowing.

Even by 2015 when we plan to have a 3% budget deficit which will amount to €5bn-plus, we will need to borrow. Plus we have debt maturing and we will need to start paying back our first bailout. So we will need to borrow. That’s an unassailable fact.

The argument is about whether or not we will be able to borrow from the open market, mostly the sovereign bond market, at so-called “sustainable” rates.  But should we really be concerned whether we get the funds from the open market or a second bailout though? The perceived wisdom is that a bailout will have strings attached, and we don’t want foreigners sticking their noses into the running of our country, we don’t want them turning up each quarter assessing our progress and we don’t want to have to ask permission any time we think of a policy. We want to, in the words of An Taoiseach Enda Kenny, “wave goodbye to AJ (sic) Chopra and the IMF.”

But let’s step back for a moment and consider the immense benefits – both achieved and in prospect – of the bailout:

  1. It’s cheap. Whilst Ireland is paying an average interest rate of just 3.7% on its bailout, the mugs in Italyand Spainhave been paying 6-7% in recent months on the issuance of new long term debt.  France’s 10-year bond closed at 3.1% last week, and it may come under renewed pressure following the confirmation of the S&P downgrade. Ireland’s 10-year bond is at 7.8%, and hasn’t been much below 5% in the past five years. So 3.7% is an absolute steal.
  2. Independent fiscal advice council. This was announced last July 2011, just about meeting a commitment date in the bailout Memorandum of Understanding. The Fiscal Responsibility Bill is currently wending its way through the Oireachtas but what we should have by the end of March 2012 is an expert economics panel who will give their views openly on Government projections and the effect of any policy announcement. The existence of this council should combat the tradition of gombeenism which promises and legislates in a way which runs counter to the interests of the country as a whole, in favour of short-term electoral victories and benefits to vested interests.
  3. The legal and medical professions. Some pretty limp-wristed legislation was introduced last year to combat the high cost and competitive distortions of our two leading professions. Limp-wristed but a start. It will be at least a couple of years before we see the effects of the new measures, but if we still end up with the second highest legal costs in Europe (after Moscow), it will not go unnoticed by the IMF.
  4. Personal insolvency. Ireland had the most draconian personal insolvency (bankruptcy) legislation that I have seen, which was effectively non-existent judging by the very small number declared bankrupt each year (single digits were not unusual annual figures). Last year, under pressure from the IMF, the Government made some light amendments to the legislation, but this year, we expect to have spanking new legislation that will haul Ireland into the 20th century, and allow people with unsustainable debts a humane and economically efficient means of getting on with their lives. Do you think this would be happening without the IMF breathing down our necks?
  5. House prices! By mid-2012 we should finally have an open database of house prices in this country. Called for at least since 1973 with the publication of the Kenny Report, successive governments have superficially all welcomed the Kenny Report recommendations but somehow seem unable to enact them when they get into power. It was laughable during the previous government’s term to hear data protection being held up to shield the administration from enacting something promised in its programme for government. Hand on heart, I don’t believe we would now be getting a House Price Database unless it was required by the Memorandum of Understanding.
  6. Political pigtroughery. Despite having an independent media in this country, it is still only occasionally that we get an insight into the ludicrous cost of Government, which will naturally enough act to protect its own perks and privileges. At least with the IMF controlling the purse-strings, we may have whipsaw pressure from the public and the IMF, so that we can have get the cost of Government down to a reasonable level.
  7. NAMA. There had been signs that the Government last year was going to politically interfere in NAMA on a grand scale, farming out its asset management functions to 3-4 asset management companies for example. Although Government interference has increased and NAMA has a dedicated contact number for politicians and rumour has it that ministers do ring the NAMA CEO Brendan McDonagh to ask for decisions to be expedited and in some cases reversed. But for all of that, the IMF understands NAMA’s objectives and will help the independence of the Agency by identifying damaging political interference. NAMA was one of the first bodies to meet the bailout teams last week; if Brendan McDonagh complains of political interference, it is likely the comment will appear in the IMF’s assessment.
  8. Stress tested banks. Remember before the bailout, our own financial regulator, Matthew Elderfield had overseen not one but two stress tests of the banks. The first turned out to be hopelessly inaccurate in underestimating the losses in our banks, and the second suffered from poor credibility after the first fiasco. The IMF and EU oversaw the stress tests in March 2011, which received no small amount of welcome from markets.
  9. Croke Park (agreement with unions to protect pay levels in return for reforms), social welfare and income tax rates. To close the budget deficit, it is likely that Ireland will need some form of wealth tax. It is also likely that top salaries in the public sector will need be significantly cut. But even that will not balance the books and the view on here is that Croke Park which protects salaries amongst all levels of the public sector, social welfare rates and income tax levels will need be adjusted. All are political hot potatoes which governments will try to avoid. The IMF will make it happen.
  10. Our economic sovereignty. On current projections, it will take eight years, from 2008-2015 for Ireland to adjust to the collapse of our financial and property sectors. Eight years. And it will be a challenge to have a near-balanced budget by 2015. But without the up-close-and-personal involvement of the IMF, do we think we could balance the books ourselves under the traditional standard of Irish political competence? Whilst remaining a member of the euro?

So the next time politicians poo-poo the notion of a second bailout, perhaps we can remind them of the politically difficult but beneficial reforms the IMF has effected in this country, not to mention the rock-bottom interest rates charged on the bailout. The reforms however are far from complete, so a second bailout and further oversight from our friends at the IMF, might just be in the interests of the country as a whole.

Amen.

NAMAwinelake is an anonymously written blog covering developments in Nama, property, banking and the economy. This post originally appeared here.

More: ‘Nobody is talking about a second bailout’, insists Burton>

Read next:

Comments (52 Comments)

  • So we need the IMF to shield us from our own broken political system. Maybe we need new politics.

    Reply
  • I can see where this article is coming from.
    The idea that if it wasn’t for the IMF we would be well and truely buggered.
    Then again, if it wasn’t for the idiocy in our government for the last 20 years we would have not needed the IMF in the first place.

    The IMF isn’t our friend, people need to realise that. It never claimed to be.
    If I was ‘Europe’ as an entity, I’d be well and truly pissed off at the way Ireland was run and continues to run.

    If I was Irish (Which I am) I’d be well and truly pissed off at the way Ireland was and continues to run.

    The IMF is a big scary beast that the government turned a blind eye at for years, and now it’s gobbling us up, one citizen at a time till it eventually reaches the ‘higher ups’.

    Reply
  • all of those points bar the first are happening because of the first bailout, therefore they are not reasons for a second one. the only reason we’d go for a second would be the lower interest rate from the first point. the rest of the article is very hit and miss imo.

    Reply
  • Instead of becoming the U.S 51st state, lets just accept our fate and become the 17th German Federal State.
    I have absolutely zero confindence for any Irish political party to truly guide use out if this mess.
    So as unpopular as it might seem I don’t object to E.U interference in our affairs as some people might, as reading the daily papers and watching/listening to Irish politicians on tv/radio seems to me like I’m stuck in some nightmarish Fr. Ted tv show universe!!

    Reply
  • Why should anyone place any faith in the Fiscal Advice Council? Just because its members are academics doesn’t guarantee it the wisdom of Solomon. How many academics all sung off the soft landing, no fear of property prices collapsing hymn sheet as the economy was going over the cliff? Why is yet another ‘expert’ group needed when the country already has the ESRI, NESC, NESF and who knows how many other quangos about the place. The government, the banks, the NTMA, and so are awash with advisors and committees of professionals. If economic success and growth were proportional to the amount of academic ‘expert opinion’ in circulation, Ireland would be running the world by all accounts.

    Reply
  • ahfukit 17/01/12 #

    It doesn’t really matter what Ireland does in regards to borrowing and repaying these massive debts. If the bigger countries default on there loans(which is going to happen)then Ireland is f##k’d anyway! All this austerity that was talked about was supposed to end in 2012! Apparently Ireland was in a position to get out of the mess they were left in by the previous government and their banker buddies. The government should grow a pair and stop putting burden on their citizens.

    Reply
  • If they are snot looking for a bailout they should certainly consider the implications of one .in for a penny in for a pound ! The probable difference would be enormous reduction in debt repayment interest which is what we are saddled with anyway.

    Reply
  • “Every nation has the government it deserves.” Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821) written in 1811

    Reply
  • Bailout me hole. We, our children, and indeed theirs will have to pay back the borrowings required to run the country following the mis-management if the past 10+years

    Reply
  • Loads of people are commenting about the circumstances and policies which brought us to the first bailout. Everyone agrees on those. The point is, as we now stand, Ireland benefits from cheaper borrowing costs and many areas of reform have been made politically less difficult because of the terms of the bailout.

    Reply
  • It was some lad from one of the banks a week or two ago said government shouldn’t be interfering in the banks in regards to mortgage rates, so I find it to be a bit of cheek when they come out and tell the government to go get them another bailout.

    Reply
  • I’ve a better idea, why don’t we actually take some temporary pain and stop bloody borrowing money when we’re already in huge debt.

    Reply
    • We cannot just stop borrowing and “just take some pain”. The country would literally run out of cash and public services would grind to a complete halt,you would ring 999 and the line would ring out…..

      Reply
    • We cannot stop borrowing and “taking temporary pain” as we will run out of cash and the public services will grind to a halt. Imagine calling 999 in a emergency and the phone line rings out and there is no Garda,fire service or ambulance service to respond as well as no hospitals to bring anyone to….

      Reply
    • Yes we can stop borrowing if we choose to. Only keep Garda, Health, education, revenue, defence and welfare Get rid of every other dept and area of public spending, cut welfare by 25% increase bottom and top rate of tax by 5%. Then we wouldn’t need to borrow.

      Reply
    • Graham, it would require a change in standard of living but it’s possible. The advantage would be that we would free up some cash that would otherwise be going to bank debt. That would help ease things a little.
      All were doing here is delaying the inevitable and yes, even armchair “economists” like ourselves can see that plainly at this stage.

      Reply
    • Austerity is actually a good thing. It can save a countries economy. The problem is we’ve lost the meaning of austerity. We associate it with fianna fail /gael “let’s bail out the bankers” austerity.
      I truly think if we cut ourselves loose from that, imposed genuine austerity that’s supposed to help the people, then we could be looking genuinely hopeful within a few years.

      Reply
    • Sooner or later we will have to learn to live within our means. Better to do it now rather than waiting for the credit flows to run dry.
      “There is no means of avoiding a final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved.”
      - Ludwig von Mises

      Reply
    • At least some of those government agencies bring money into the country and run at a net profit. Salaries should definitely be looked at but cutting all non-essential government agencies would send thousands onto the dole. Plus, those salaries are taxable so really the savings being made would not be the expenditure currently spent on those agencies but the expenditure cut (minus taxable income ( plus cost of welfare for newly unemployed)), which is a much smaller sum and would have major societal consequences. Maybe draconian cuts are the way forward. Without access to detailed figures, its hard to know. But those cuts will have consequences. Our choices are cuts with consequences or borrowing with consequences. Consequences await us no matter what.

      Reply
  • Im tired of hearing this “share the pain” under kennys “Democratic revolution” while I watch the elite blatantly share no pain whatsoever… Bankers pay has never been better, doctors fees havent come down one inch as an example. The much heralded freeze and capping of bankers and top of the steaming heap public servants pay was just a 3-1 watered down whitewash… They have so hard of a neck that they dont even hide it… Half arsed consultants to ministers get way above the cap…. wait a minute, what cap?… there is no law for this cap… it was just verble shite from the slimiest taoiseach ever to hold power. You need a shower after looking at the slimey git never mind touching him…

    Reply
  • groggs 17/01/12 #

    we need a bail in

    Reply
  • I doubt very much that Mr. McDonagh will be complaining of political interference.

    Reply
  • This is a little bit strange. A nameless author of a dubious article pushing not just one opinion on us but ten opinions on why we should be, and I find this word very interesting, “praying” for a second bailout.

    Here’s my one reason why we shouldn’t: We are already screwed enough from the first one!

    Reply
    • And where would we have been had we not taken the first one? You say that it as though we didn’t need money at the time!

      Reply
    • Maybe, John, the bondholders would have been be burned and we would have returned to the bond markets just like Iceland but that is an entirely hypothetical situation so I won’t speculate further.

      The fact is that we ARE screwed and this IS because of the first bailout (which was mostly to ensure that the extremely wealthy bondholders did not get burned and not to keep the country running).

      Either way you completely missed the point of what I was really getting at John and you also seem to be missing what’s going on around you. Here’s a hint: We are being severely shafted by the IMF and the ECB – the IMF were never this benevolent organisation that give countries a bit of a dig out when they need it every now and then. Have a bit of a read up on them, I guarantee you a quick Google search will get you up to speed in no time at all, and then come back to me.

      Reply
  • an interesting piece, but sounds like it was written by a hedgefund marketeer – probably gambling on futures that this will happen. Croke park is a joke as Dublin Fire Brigade are now planning to charge for call-outs, even though they’re public sector workers and funded from taxes.

    Reply
  • The first bailout was not the cause of any of our problems. Our problems were caused by a huge property bubble followed by a suicidal bank guarantee, all of which can in turn be traced to our inept and corrupt politicians.

    Namawinelake is respected blogger and he makes good points here.

    Reply
    • Not just corrupt politicians. It was the whole Irish establishment and way of thinking prevalent in business and the professions. The same thing that has driven the country to the wall a number of times since 1932… This isn’t the first time. (1950’s, 1980’s stand out in particular.)

      What the comments above reveal to me more than anything is how successful the cover-up tacitly perpetuated by our establishment has been – ie. the protecting and defending of certain Irish individuals, organizations and institutions; by ensuring that certain premises have consistently been used in reasoning processes, self-referential logic, avoidance of transparency, self-deception and denial and more cover-up of this self-deception. And of course, in getting everybody to wave and point towards Brussels and anywhere else but our own shores.

      But yes, a good step to improving perception and facilitating expression of what is really going on is to drop the name the establishment knows you by, to better engage in close observation of this establishment. You’d be surprised at the change that comes about. And of course, you won’t scupper your job prospects by saying something you shouldn’t have said in their view.

      Reply
  • Aaron 17/01/12 #

    there is no such thing as “cheap money” . they might offer some discount because they know that Ireland cannot sustain these cuts for longer time. lets see what rates the Irish bond is at when they come to market .

    Reply
  • So essentially what this column is saying is that we are Gombeens and inadequately able to run the country ourselves, maybe we do need a second bailout but I wouldn’t be thinking we need one on this basis, no wonder this column is anonymously written.

    Reply
  • Bit of a dubious article if you ask me. The first reason is the only one that would stand up.

    We are committed to cutting our budget deficit back to 3% by 2014 so we will still need to borrow some money at that point. We would need to see what rate the markets are prepared to offer us at that point. If rates are still up around the 7% we may not have a choice in the matter. However if rates are somewhere between 4%-6% it might be better for us to stand on our own two feet at that point.

    For those who say cut the budget deficit completely, while that would be good in the long run the level of cutbacks and tax rises that will be necessary to get us to a 3% deficit are going to be severe. Assuming we can achieve that level by 2014 then it might be no harm for us to run a small deficit for a few more years and give the economy some breathing space from the austerity mesaure. Hopefully that would also allow the economy to grow so that if we didn’t increase our spending again the deficit would actually disappear through growth.

    Of course the point here is that if we are going to have to experience this pain over the next few years we need to steer clear of auction politics at the next election and reject parties offering us unsustainable tax cuts and spending increases. Because if there are signs of growth in the economy that is exactly what will happen. We, as a nation, have to start thinking longer term in our outlook and not purely in the “what’s in it for me” attitude which contributed to the collapse that we have experienced.

    Reply
  • I tend generally to pay more attention to those who divulge their name alongside their musings rather than those who hide like cowards beneath the cloak of anonymity!

    Reply
    • In case you haven’t noticed, what NWL is saying is intelligent, honest and contrary to the interests of the Irish establishment. It’s all very well for muppets to bleat in their own name about central banks and EU bureaucrats and generally make noise and wave blame and responsibility away from where it really lies. Away from home.

      The truth hurts. Bleating hurts no one. If you have no choice but to depend on the Irish establishment in some connection for your living and to put bread on your table, it is very dangerous for you and your to ‘bite the hand that feeds you’. ie. it becomes a lot harder to make a living.

      All that is required is to state the truth as well as you can. This does not of necessity require a name and address to be supplied.

      Reply
  • This column is ridiculous, at best and Ill-informed, wholly misrepresentative of the financial situation of everyday people, at worst. What about the people who are struggling to stay afloat? What will they do? Should we be grateful our internal institutions will be finally working, while our young leave and our elderly spent their n

    Reply
  • (i hit return by mistake) Nights shivering in homes, or worse, planning to jump off a bloody bridge? This column is nonsense..

    Reply
    • Paul, while people lord the merits of another possible bailout, our society is unravelling. I care about that. I am not a detached economist, or a soulless bureaucrat. My point is that it is the poorest people who will suffer, as always, while people like yourself tell us how good things are. It’s nonsense. You missed the point.

      Reply
    • No Kenneth you really have missed the point.

      All Governments in good times and bad need to raise money. We did it through the tiger years, and through the boom years and we’ll have to do it now. Its a matter of cashflow. Our national income doesn’t match our spending and our taxes don’t all arrive on the 1st of Jan. The nation needs money to keep running.

      Your point is valid. The nation is in pain. Why add more pain by borrowing at 7% and 8% when we can do it at 3.7%.

      Reply
    • Eoghan,
      While we do need money to function, the question now is not whether we need a bailout, it’s whether we need a SECOND bailout that will commit our state to a generation of poverty. All of these deals come with conditions, and considering the austerity being imposed by the first ‘bailout’, do you believe the second one will somehow improve our situation? In a society, literally, unravelling, are we supposed to believe committing our kids to dept is the key? Surely, the point of these bailouts were to ease our situation. Have they? Walking around this country do you feel like things are getting better? All I care about is our society Eoghan, and while a second bailout might make sense to some, I believe it is suicide and I cannot support it.

      Reply
  • The duration of the austerity depends a lot on the future state of the euro. The sums of the debt are too huge for the government not to need support. The IMF are actually the good uys in this respect and would have allowed more favaourable terms had it not been for the ECB imposing worse conditions to prop up the euro as the main priority and assist Ireland at a much lower priority. Past vigilance by the office of the understaffed financial regulator was woefully inadequate, There’s no getting away from the fact we’re in the shite, we still don’t know the depth. On the basis that government ministers are saying we don’t need another bailout, then it is likely we do.

    Reply
  • TP 06/02/12 #

    Namawinelake is a fantastic blog that asks the hard questions and does investigative work beyond the scope of most Irish so-called journalists.
    The dissenting comments above sadly tend to reflect the general idiocy of Irish society.

    Reply
  • Nama wine lake is anonymous. Why does the Journal.ie and every radio station in the country accept anonymous comment? It’s a cheap and easy way to allow extreme views. Give it up.

    Reply
  • The lady doth protest too much

    Reply
  • No need for that, Michael. I’ve done a fair bit of reading on it, though technical jargon like ‘getting shafted by the IMF’ is still too complicated for me, I admit. If you had made the point explicitly that we should have defaulted on the bank debt, then I would have been more in agreement with your comment.

    But once we did agree to pay back that debt, we were all in. The fact is that it’s out of our hands now. This bailout money doesn’t *just* pay back bondholders. It’s also paying for essential public services. And I think the author has a point in that we are getting a little political house-cleaning done at the moment. Doctors in this country apparently make 100% more than doctors do in Germany (why don’t you google it?); when this money is coming out of the public purse, and where previous governments haven’t seen fit to tackle it, then I’m glad Euro/IMF are.

    It seems to me that our only hope lies in Europe heeding the advice of countless economists who’ve stated that austerity is choking Europe, and pursue a different course of action (these economists include Larry Stiglitz and Paul Krugman [both Nobel winners], and our own McWilliams; all very amenable to a google search).

    But -and this is only my opinion, feel free to contradict- this will only happen when the action comes from Europe. They’re in charge now, whether we like it or not. And what other way could it be when FF/FG are what we send to the negotiating table. We have unimaginative, regressive and weak politicians. What’s our alternative?

    Reply
    • This was supposed to be a reply to Michael Quinn ^^^ but it didn’t post as such for some reason.

      Reply
    • Hi John,

      Whilst I respect some of your opinions you are still missing my point entirely. Let me spell out what I originally meant by “dubious article” written by “nameless author” with a pointer to the strong language such as suggesting we should be “praying” for a second bailout. I was hinting at the propaganda machine being in motion for this particular piece.

      You should also note that a second bailout won’t do anything to change the inflated salaries of the few and will only serve to keep them in their ivory towers that little bit longer. We need a major change in attitudes from the politicians and they need to start growing some balls quickly. I recall somebody from Iceland saying something along the lines of them not having any money to pay the bond holders but we can pay them in fish if they like.

      As groggs brilliantly put it above we need a “bail in” not a bail out.

      Reply

Add New Comment