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: 11 °C Wednesday 22 May, 2013

Treaty campaigns dispute ESM access in latest referendum debate

The ULA’s Clare Daly and Fianna Fáil’s Micheál Martin clash over whether Ireland could get ESM funds after a No vote.

Image: Laura Hutton/Photocall Ireland

CAMPAIGNERS ON EITHER side of the Fiscal Compact referendum have again clashed on the question of whether Ireland could have access to funding from the European Stability Mechanism if it rejected the treaty this week.

In a debate on RTÉ’s Today with Pat Kenny show, the Socialist Party’s Clare Daly argued with Fianna Fáil’s Micheál Martin about the possibility of Ireland being able to access the ESM, irrespective of whether voters chose to ratify the treaty in Thursday’s vote.

Daly, taking issue with claims that a Yes vote would guarantee access to the fund, said any of the 17 Eurozone countries “can block an application to the ESM, whether we accept this treaty or not.”

This was in response to claims from Martin that it was “very clear that legally we won’t have access” to the ESM if Ireland was to vote No.

Daly also asserted that irrespective of whether any applications were approved or not, Ireland would still have the right to apply for funding from the fund – a statement contested by both Martin and the EU Affairs minister Lucinda Creighton.

Martin claimed clauses limiting access to countries which had ratified the Fiscal Compact were “there in black and white”, though Daly said such clauses were part of the ESM treaty’s ‘recitals’, or preamble, which she contested had lesser legal standing.

Creighton argued that removing the “safety net” of ESM funding would make it more difficult for Ireland to access funding on the open bond markets, which would be necessary to cover the budget deficits that Ireland would return in the coming years.

Lawyer Caroline Simons, representing the No side, said the treaty had failed to address the “elephant in the room” of Ireland’s banking debts, and that the ESM created confusion by not making it clear the rates at which member states would borrow.

‘Leave us short’

Later, Daly suggested the economic turmoil that would be seen if Greece left the euro would likely be replicated if Ireland did likewise, and it was therefore “true to say they wouldn’t leave us short”.

Creighton believed there was “no comparison” to be made between Greece and Ireland, saying Greece was in particularly “profound difficulty” and was “experiencing indescribable poverty” which would probably take decades to recover.

There was also conflict between the sides on whether the Fiscal Compact would address the factors that caused the current financial difficulties in the first place; Simons claimed banking debts accounted for 30 per cent of the government debt, a statistic questioned by Creighton.

Elsewhere, there were conflicts over whether the pursuit of a default like that of Iceland would be advantageous to Ireland; Daly argued that Iceland was now benefiting from higher growth and lower unemployment, though Martin said this was at the cost of seeing personal savings lose much of their value, while corporate debt had ballooned.

All four participants agreed that they wished for Ireland to remain part of the Eurozone, irrespective of their stances, though Daly said Ireland’s continuing membership “wasn’t up to us” while Simons feared the ESM would be exhausted by the time Ireland required it.

“If Spain is first, there’s nothing left for us,” Simons said, later telling Martin: “You’re trying to deal with loaves and fishes… the problem is, Mr Martin, you are not God.”

Read: Mick Wallace erects giant pink Vote No banner on Dublin restaurant

More: It’s polling day (if you live on one of five islands in Donegal)

Read next:

Comments (74 Comments)

  • I think I heard a few claps of thunder when Caroline reminded Meehole Martin that he wasn’t God.

    At least someone was listening to the reasoned arguments from Caroline Simmons and her Vote NO stance. Can I say for gods sake vote NO on Thursday?

    Reply
  • “If Spain is first, there’s nothing left for us,” Simons said, later telling Martin: “You’re trying to deal with loaves and fishes… the problem is, Mr Martin, you are not God.”

    This line sums up perfectly what FF the party of destiny think of themselves. If FF think its a good idea to vote Yes, then I think most undecideds will know instinctively to vote No.

    Reply
    • And If Sinn Féin think its a good idea to vote NO, then I think most undecideds will know instinctively to vote YES.

      Reply
    • A truly brilliant rebuttal by Ms Simons!
      This brilliantly describes the farce that is the, as yet non-existent, ESM.

      Reply
    • Thats right David, you continue to support Edna as much as you want… He deserves his total compensation package of 500,000 per year (Hope you don’t rebute me this time Gavan ;) )
      Anytime anyone throws out anything you don’t want to hear, you automatically attack SF. Why the hell can you not acknowledge that Kenny and all the members of the Government are being over paid for the position they hold. Even some of our ministers are getting paid more than President OBama… what the hell is wrong with you and your ilk, if you think they deserve these wages.
      The mask is coming down and exposing FFg/FF/Labour for the greedy money grabbing financial terrorists that they are.

      Reply
    • David, I have to point out the flaw in your logic.

      We`ve had weeks of TV debates, news articles and posters showing sinn fein advocating a `no`.vote.If undecideds will vote yes based on sinn fein calling for a no vote, how come they`re still undecided?

      Reply
    • 90% of Irish economists ‘back a Yes vote’

      15:57, 25 May 2012 by Post Reporter

      Survey claims nine out of ten economists back Yes vote

      Nine out of ten of “Ireland’s leading economists” say a yes vote in the Fiscal Treaty is in Ireland’s best interest, according to a new survey,

      The Indecon International Economic Consultants survey of the views of 44 economists in Ireland also claims that one of the most significant impacts of the Treaty vote arises from the inability to access EMS Funds if Ireland voted ‘No’.
      http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/Politics/90%25+of+Irish+economists+%27back+a+Yes+vote%27/id/19410615-5218-4fbf-93e6-390982093312

      Reply
    • Broken Dreams

      A Mother stands alone in tears
      Looking down the winding road
      Seeing a car in the distance
      Talking away a precious load
      Two children from the cradle raised
      They were her hopes and dreams
      But in search of a life of gain
      They must leave this isle of Green

      The house behind her is now empty
      It was once a bustling home
      The door was always on the latch
      It was the Family Throne
      Seeing our Nation sold out for profit
      By those in power who abused control
      Condemning Irelands finest Children
      To seek life’s fulfilment far from home

      P.J. Brennan

      Do not be afraid
      Do not believe the lies
      Do not allow them to blackmail you
      Do not give away anymore of your childrens future
      Do not loose what little control and sovereignty we have left

      Remember the lies
      Remember the broken promises
      Remember you are represented by traitors

      I will be voting no, everyone I know will be voting no also. Do not believe the polls.

      Vote No for your children, for Ireland’s future, for the people
      Vote Yes for politicians, bankers, unelected EU dictators

      Reply
    • Regarding your study Gary.
      100% of non-state employed economists have not endorsed this treaty.
      100% of Nobel prize-winning economists (who have commented on the fiscal compact), have described it as “economic suicide”.

      Reply
    • Gary, are you capable of actually setting out your stall yourself. Your contribution around here seems to be posting opinions, articles,and blogs of people who agree with you. Last week you held up a dodgy drag-fill excel spreadsheet that a bloke posted up on boards.ie like some king of golden chalice of truth and vision, that was predicting our growth figures for the next 25 years, which used STATIC figures for growth year-on-year. I noticed, despite the ridicule, you’re still claiing to have a ‘spreadsheet with figures proving blah’ blah blah blah

      If you want to convince people gary, why don’t you take a day before the referendum, and for that whole day discuss your points rather than ‘well don’t take my word for it, heres a link to some bloke that agrees with me….’

      Reply
    • Market Analyst Peter Tchir describes ESM as a “big scam”.

      “For now, let’s assume that every country approves running the ESM in conjunction with what has already been committed (I find it hard to believe that everyone will agree, but let’s just make it easy for now). Then the EU has €500 billion of new money to play with – allegedly. It has all become such a blur, but the ESM had the same concept of “stepping out” members and potential overcollateralization that I am not sure that €500 billion is achievable. I think it is only a headline, but again, let’s pretend they can get to €500 billion.

      Okay, let’s make a capital call for the full amount. I will assume it is based on the same percentages as EFSF with the 3 stepping out members. Italy, please pay €96 billion. Spain, we need €64 billion from you. Where exactly are Spain and Italy going to get that sort of money to pre-fund the deal? They aren’t. That is the big scam here again. It is “self-insurance”. The vehicle will not be pre-funded in a meaningful way since the countries don’t have the money to put up. There may be some amount of paid-in capital, but it will be small.”

      Reply
    • @ PJ B – If you are going to continue to subject the readership here to your poetry, I would respectfully request that you limit your output to one new poem per article. Strangely enough, these poems do not improve in quality or relevance when you place the same piece in the comments of many articles.

      Better still, please set up a poetry blog or post your poems to a poetry forum. I apologise if I am in error, but I was under the impression that the comments are for debating the articles, not an outlet for creative writing endeavours.

      Reply
    • Karswell, I disagree.
      Irish patriotic struggles and episodes of oppression have historically been poetically documented.
      I believe it is appropriate.

      Reply
    • Perhaps fetishising the “patriotic struggle” and “oppression”, rather than focusing on finding solutions that will benefit as large a majority as possible may be one of the reasons why this country finds itself in these mires every 30 years or so? A new strategy perhaps?

      Reply
    • My own view is that political dysfunction, incompetence and corruption play a larger role in Ireland’s cyclical mires than poetic fetishisms.
      Each to their own.

      Reply
    • I’m with Sean here. Again. We do need to awaken some sense of pride here in Ireland. It was visionaries and poets that had the courage to read the Proclamation on the steps of the GPO, and in so doing taking on the British Empire!

      We could be the country that takes on the Banking Empire now. It was not for greed that the sons of Roisin died. It was for liberty and justice. There is no justice in expecting a nation to shoulder the burden of a banks bad debt. We all know this is an elitist CON.

      I find Padraig Pearse’s writings very inspirational and here while he is speaking of the British Empire he could well be speaking of the Banking Empire, Wall St and bondholders today.

      “They think that they have pacified Ireland. They think that they have purchased half of us and intimidated the other half.

      They think that they have foreseen everything, think that they have provided against everything; but the fools, the fools, the fools! – they have left us our Fenian dead, and while Ireland holds these graves, Ireland unfree shall never be at peace.” Padraig Pearse.

      It is time Ireland stood up and took her place. I want Ireland to lead the way on Thursday and state clearly that there is an alternative. Let Ireland be the lighthouse in these unchartered waters. A beacon of hope. People before banking institutions.

      Reply
    • @ David Higgins.. Is the treaty about SF or FG!? Your own party leaders were the ones saying that this has nothing to do with party politics!? So what are you on about??!

      Reply
    • This is the perfect time to post my list of no side tactics.
      1. Pull on the heart strings.
      2. Try to drum up nationalistic fervour.
      3. Claim the person is a sheep, an idiot or whatever other name they fancy.
      4. Scaremongering. But they *are* stealing our babies.
      5. Blame anyone else, especially the Germans. (Often included with xenophobic mentions of Nazis, Fascists etc).
      6. Claim the person is being paid for their opinions.
      7. Claim bias at every possible opportunity.

      Reply
    • Gary, could you add that the (loaves and fishes) ESM will provide credible and sustainable funding for Ireland.
      Sorry, that’s yes side propaganda…

      Reply
    • Lol Gary. You’re so tenacious. Any chance of switching sides?

      And btw the yes side are even more guilty of that. “Pull on the green jersey.” “Do your patriotic duty” blah blah… Just so happens that some of us don’t need to be told.

      Reply
    • @Karswell I am sorry if you are upset but I will not apologize for my poetry. I am 70 yrs of age and a very proud Irish man, I have six children and five of them have had to emigrate for work. My poetry is in keeping with the theme of the article, Ireland and the lives of Irish people. The problem with Ireland is that the people have lost their identity and their pride. Pride isn’t shouting at a TV screen whilst wearing a green jersey or a plastic hat. Pride is standing up for your people, yourself, your children, your future.

      Reply
    • PJ Brennan
      Keep posting your poetry here , I love the verses and the sentiment . It brings the seriousness of the state of our nation into reality.

      Reply
  • I couldn’t care less about the ESM fund tbh. Colm McCarthy referred to it as a credit union yesterday. Credit union my backside. What EU are trying to create is a Super Bank. it’s not a benign credit union. It’s a cancerous Super Bank.

    Where are we going to get the €11.1 we have to contribute to same? We’re going to have to borrow it. Borrow from whom? A feckin bank of course. This is one BIG CON. A Treaty of Debt. Vote NO and call a halt to the madness!

    Reply
  • Europe and this governments approach to this crisis has been delusional.
    The fiscal treaty objectives are to correct the public finances by imposing the burden of that correction on households that are among the most indebted on the planet. This is not a solution. It is economic genocide.
    Total borrowing of all nations only breach 200% GDP during times of war or other national emergency. Today the worlds debt to GDP levels have breached 300%. Ireland,s has breached 400%.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-global-debt-to-gdp-2011-12?nr_email_referer=1
    The establishment and rest of the feeble-minded continue to seek solutions that involve establishing new sources of credit and imposing the burden of unsustainable debt on those that cannot bear it.
    The IMF correctly pointed out at the onset of the crisis that debt restructuring is fundamental to resolving this crisis.
    If Ireland refuses to ratify and links ratification to debt restructuring, Europes elite will have no option but to yield.
    “Merkel is looking increasingly vulnerable on the euro zone crisis due to a backlash by voters in Greece and France against her austerity drive. Hollande’s May 6 election victory has shifted the debate in Europe, with other leaders rallying around his call for a new emphasis on growth alongside debt-cutting.”
    CNBC 24/05/12

    Reply
    • German and core nation taxpayers face being submerged in debt if Merkel and Draghi fail to come to grips with unfolding events.
      Bloomberg reports €1.2 trillion of debt that will land on core nation taxpayers if the situation in periphery nations cannot be contained.
      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-22/european-banks-unprepared-for-pandora-s-box-of-greek-exit.html

      German economist, Prof. Hans-Werner Sinn points to another €2.1 trillion of debt that Germans will be landed with.
      “Professor Hans-Werner Sinn, head of Germany’s IFO Institute, said German taxpayers are facing a dangerous rise in credit risk from a plethora of bail-out schemes. “The euro-system is near explosion,” he told Austria’s Economics Academy on Thursday.
      Dr Sinn said Germany is on the hook for much of the €2.1 trillion in rescue measures for EMU debtors – often by the back-door – that will saddle Germans with ruinous losses one day.
      “It is a horror scenario,” he said, warning that the euro system is splitting friendly countries into blocs of mutually hostile creditors and debtors, exactly the opposite of what was hoped.
      Earlier this week, the Foundation for Family Business in Munich filed a criminal lawsuit against the Bundesbank, accusing the board of disguising the true scale of risk born by German citizens.”

      The fact the total liabilities will be incalculable until after the event, but will be in Trillions and will drown core nations in debt.

      A €50-€60 Billion restructuring of Ireland’s debt would be sufficient (still painful) for Ireland to sustain and service it’s debt. €30 billion (promissory notes) could be written off at no cost to anyone.
      Ireland will not get any concessions if we ratify this treaty. Europe will have no option but grant concessions if Ireland refuses to ratify. Vote No.

      Reply
    • “The figures come from the Stability Programme Update released a few weeks ago.The projections of the structural budget balance are on the last page which has a table which shows that using the methodology applied by the European Commission it is projected that there will be a structural deficit of 3.5% of GDP in 2015. Just a few pages earlier it can be seen that the projected nominal GDP for 2015 is €178,850 million.

      It can be seen that the 3 percentage point gap is equivalent to €5,365.5 million. There must be some imprudent application of the rounding rule being used to bring this to the €6 billion figure used above.

      At this remove it is impossible to know what the structural deficit will be in 2015 (will we ever know?) and suggesting that there is a €5.4 billion gap to be filled may be an accurate representation of the situation. This is not what is being claimed though and there is repeated reference to “€6 billion of cuts” but the claim that this is based on the upcoming referendum are very wide of the mark. We cannot just vote away the necessity to reduce the budget deficit.

      The structural deficit can be reduced through a combination of three factors:

      economic growth
      structural improvements in labour and capital
      fiscal consolidation

      No allowance is being made for the first two to assist in reaching the target. Of course, the important point is that this target is not new and will be unaffected by the outcome of the referendum. As we have pointed out before there has been a EU regulation (equivalent to national law) that governments run a balanced budget since 1997 and that this was restated using the structural deficit in 2005.”
      http://economic-incentives.blogspot.com/2012/05/will-yes-vote-cost-6-billion.html#more

      Reply
    • “Seamus Coffey: David McWilliams’ analysis of private debt is stark … but it also 100pc wrong

      DAVID McWilliams wrote an article for Wednesday’s Irish Independent under the heading “Private debt so enormous that default is only option”. The conclusion is stark: In Ireland, given the magnitude of the debt, it is very clear to me that only a fraction of this household and corporate debt will be actually paid off. The figures scream default.

      The figures in the piece do indeed scream default, but the figures are wrong. 100pc wrong.

      Studies have shown that an appropriate maximum ratio of mortgage debt to gross household income is around four. The data provided in the McWilliams article indicate that total debt in Ireland is more than eight times Gross National Product, a widely used measure of national income. For countries it has been argued that they should not have a debt greater than three times national income.

      If Irish debt were eight times national income, Ireland would indeed be bust and there would be no way the debt could even be carried, never mind paid off. With such a debt burden default would indeed be an inevitable outcome.

      However, Irish debt is actually around four times national income and using figures 100pc greater than this is misleading. The data come from the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) who try to use gross and unconsolidated data as a measure of overall indebtedness. This can lead to unusual results.”
      http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/seamus-coffey-david-mcwilliams-analysis-of-private-debt-is-stark-but-it-also-100pc-wrong-3000117.html

      Reply
    • Ah yes, gary still on his unending quest to prove his point by posting links to people who happen to agree with him.

      Reply
    • Gurdgiev says No.
      Without a positive change in the EU’s political attitudes with regards to bank legacy debt and domestic economic growth Ireland’s current total debt is not sustainable.
      Kenny/Noonan and the ECB have made clear that they will not open negotiations on this debt.

      ” Given favourable economic circumstances, especially in regard to our exports, a positive change in EU’s political attitudes with regard to the legacy bank debt, and the return of domestic economic growth, the debt levels which Ireland now faces can become sustainable, in that a default on either private or public debts is not probable. However, we cannot consider these developments as guaranteed, and in their absence, restructuring of debts may become inevitable.”
      Irish Times

      Reply
    • @ Too True Left, trying to ridicule Gary for posting “links to people how happen to agree with him” is really scrapping the barrel for ways to discredit someone now. Those “people who happen to agree with him” are leading economists, journalists, and a host of other legitimate sources. It is actually what one is meant to do when engaging in a debate, reference accredited sources, not just bang the NO drum because you like the sound of it, and then attack/ attempt to discredit/ dismiss/ abuse anyone who doesn’t bang along with you.

      Reply
  • If a NO vote is attained, something tells me another vote will take place until a YES is achieved. Ireland needs to walk away and start again, hundreds of years fighting off invaders and we give in to this.
    Do what’s right for our TEDDY!

    Reply
  • If urope allows Ireland to default then it renders the ESM, the fund to keep the Euro stable, absolutely useless. Why would the eurozone and ESM risk bringing down the whole house of cards rather than extend the program (which they said they would do earlier this year anyways) of the country thats the star pupil, hitting its targets, meeting its commitments, and paying back its loans.

    Common sense tells us this would not be allowed happen The cost of not supporting obedient Ireland would be catastrophic, and they know we’re the one country whos government will pay them back, no matter how much our people have to suffer….

    NO to the lies
    No to the blackmail
    No to the threats

    Vote NO on Thursday

    Reply
  • Damianm 28/05/12 #

    This whole sorry saga just highlights that Politics in Ireland is a waste of space & money.. Not one politicain serves in the interest of the people or country.. They lie, spoof, spin to get the job, pay, perks, pensions and special advisor status for their cronies… Id like to see the journal run a poll of who in ireland trusts politicians to serve in the interest of this country and not their own interests ?? The current incumbents have destroyed any trust or accountablitiy in Irish Politics, if there was any to start with.. They have shown Irish Politics to be a shambolic, unaccountable, untrusthworthy and incompetent, self serving profession… How can any citizen of this country believe or trust our politicians or Parties any more ??? Especially when we are treated like idiots to vote on a treaty that isn’t yet agreed and WILL be changed but we dont know the details yet ?!?!? How Irish / Fr Ted are we to be voting on somthing that will change, But just because our political elite boobed again and agreed to proceed with the vote, we must vote YES ?!?!?! I personnelly will Vote NO as i will not vote for an unlimited line of credit to fund an unaccountable political elite and scam called croke park agreement (I have no problem protecting the salary and pensions of the front line lower paid earning below 60k but not the overpaid, bloated, incompetent levels of senior management that hide behind the front line workers)… I believe the Yes vote will win as the political parties will get a yes vote from the Public service to continue funding croke park…. The political parties will do whatever Germany and the EU request as they will then be allowed to continue with their inflated pay, perks, pensions & CPA… These people want a YES vote to continue funding their own lifestyles, SIMPLES….. It is a disgrace to see the willingness of the Political parties of Ireland especially labour fudging the elephant in room that Private Bank Debts be nationalised and repaid in full by the citizens of this country without a whimper ?!?!? They will agree to this and a YES vote as long as germany and EU leave their pay and CPA untouched…. This is a national disgrace and shows our political leaders and parties for what they are to allow this to continue… Self Serving, Cowards, Traitors ??? Take your pick…. And were is our president of the people to shout stop to this maddness sorting out his cronies on special advisor gigs !!!! Please VOTE NO and try and call a Halt to this maddness….

    Reply
  • Yes side continue to use the same old fear card, can someone tell them shouting boo only works so long! Nobody but your party faithful are listening and most of them don’t believe it!

    Reply
  • Caroline Simons , is quickly becoming the new darling of the No side and for good reason! Talks reason and shots from the hip!

    Reply
  • The no side are really either angry at the government, or have some irrational fear of the Germans. All the rest of the stuff theyre banging on about is just window dressing

    Reply
  • And the no side arent trying to scare us?
    Vote for yes and all youll get is austerity?
    There’s going to be a ‘Super Bank’ and all of the other shite the nay sayers are spouting.

    Reply
  • 86% employment. Net jobs gain so far this year. Consumer index in March and April showing improvement. Purchasing mangers index showing improvement. Exports performing very well.
    Why are the NO campaigners hell bent on trying to destroy this. One can only conclude they have nothing left to loose and would rather see everyone else in the same boat. And if its about sovereignty, move on. It’s a bullshit argument trying to stir up nationalist pride over the welfare of people. If you’re that concerned about it get your arse down to the peat bogs and show some solidarity for an Irish way of life…

    Reply
    • Excellent points O’Reilly. Very good reading and all done WITHOUT the need of a fiscal compact. Imagine that…..

      Reply
    • That’s right Kerry. Just the support of one great big fat loan from the IMF/ECB and a little bit of confidence. #amazeballs

      Reply
    • And all done by a government about whom the No rabble-rousers believe to have done nothing for the country expect drag it further down into the depths. We can’t have it both ways. The “good news” stories cannot be ignored, just as the ” bad news” stories should not be ignored. These are only slight improvements, yes, but these slight improvements did not come about through actions taken by SF or the ULA. As stated before on this website, the very worst result for SF is that the economy begins to stabilise over the next 18 months. I would not trust a party who see the continued collapse of a country’s systems as positive progress, but that is exactly the stance of SF. They will profit from misery, but that should be the province of religions and cult-leaders such as I, and not the province of political parties intending to become powerful enough to be a part of a government.

      Reply
    • o’reilly, the job figures do not take into account the people who emigrated last year. If the people who had to leave to find work stayed in the country the unemployment figures would be well over 520,000

      Reply
    • O’Reilly, I must get some of your happy pills.
      The fact is our economy currently stands on a foundation of running sand. The cracks that started at the foundations are now reaching the roof. Structural collapse is imminent and the governments solution is to impose an unsustainable dead load on the building.
      Our banking system is now among the walking dead. Institutions that handle debt/credit are becoming infected and falling one by one. First the public finances, increasing numbers of households unable to service their debts, today Bloxhams, the ill-conceived Nama has only a faint pulse and will certainly collapse soon.
      Unless some way can be found of reducing the dead load on this economy it will collapse in on itself. The governments approach is the opposite.

      Reply
    • Clearly the yes side are focussed purely on the text of treaty while the No side have give beyond thst to see the repercussions and can se a why to get the bank debt burden lifted giving us owl room to grow. The yes sides only argument is where will we get te money? that is my main argument for a No vote as when they say “your not getting any more money” We say well we can’t afford to pay bank debt we will have to write it off! Do you not know they will be throwing cheap money at us or we refuse and default.

      Reply
  • Very telling that both on No side failed to answer my question – what will be the consequences for Ireland if they are wrong and the country is unable to access funding after we reject the Stability Treaty and the ESM safety net

    Reply
    • The no side has answered this question many times Stephen. Are you contesting that Ireland will not be offered funding, that europe will not keep its commitment to fund program countries until they’re able to return to the markets? Are you contesting that we will be allowed to disorderly default rather than have our program extended, knowing what that will mean for the eurozone?

      Reply
    • Eh… Maybe Enda Chicken Speech Kenny will have to do his feckin job and find the funds elsewhere.

      Maybe he might have to create another tax band and start taking the wealthy in this country. You know, the top 10% who had an increase in their disposable income last year while the rest of us scrape by trying to pay for their gambling.

      It won’t go down to well with his friend Denis O’Brien. But shure he could offer him a state contract. Maybe the water meter one….

      Reply
    • That’s because you’re asking the wrong question Stephen.
      In midst of a collapsing credit bubble, you don’t ask where can I source more credit.
      You ask where do I start restructuring debt.
      Think about it. Vote No.

      Reply
    • Too Trueleft
      Are you really willing to bet that we will be able to obtain finance?
      The no side, or you have not answered this question at all – you just answer it with another question

      Reply
  • From the Business Post
    Myth: we could vote No and still be sure of getting money from somewhere for a second bailout, if we need it

    Reality: the rules are clear. Countries which do not implement the treaty are not entitled to avail of funding under the European Stability Mechanism, the permanent bailout fund.

    Those who argue otherwise believe that we would not be let “go bust” and that money would be found or the rules changed. There is no way of knowing this in advance.

    Another issue is that the money available from the ESM will – likely the current EU funding – be available at an attractive rate. Even if further funds were available, there is no guarantee they would be at this rate, or that they would not include other terms and conditions.

    Sources believe it is unlikely that the IMF would lend to Ireland on its own. This is because we have already borrowed a lot from the IMF – well above the normal amount it would lend a country of Ireland’s size – and the IMF wants the security of lending alongside EU countries to increase its chance of getting its money back.

    http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News+Focus/Myth+vs+reality%3A+the+facts+behind+the+fiscal+treaty/id/e5be1f99-09e4-452e-92ab-e303cb2359d0

    Reply
    • The establishment urges a yes vote who would have thought it? Was the Business Post railing against the excesses of the the celtic tiger back in the good old days or did it say nothing?

      Reply
    • Gary, would those be Government sources… because we have heard so many facts and figures from Government sources, eg forecasting 3% growth for last year and again for this year…. budget plans being built around those growth forecasts.
      We will get the money we need from the Markets, if we vote No and demand Germany takes the Banking debt off our books. The markets are demanding this in return for lower interest rates on our bonds. Its that simple. And we dont need to penalise the least well off in our society in fture budgets to achieve the common end goal of a relatively balanced budget.

      Reply
    • Kerry. Sorry but why when people disagree with the no camp they are ‘the establishment’ or ‘the elite’ or ‘vested interests’, maybe you’re just wrong. We have a survey which says 90% of the economists are looking for a Yes vote but I’m expected they are all being paid off in some way. Very dishonest tactics.
      http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/Politics/90%25+of+Irish+economists+%27back+a+Yes+vote%27/id/19410615-5218-4fbf-93e6-390982093312

      Reply
    • Gary, On News-talk yesterday, they did actually discuss the poll on teh economists, and News talk (who support a Yes vote) investigated that same poll and found every single one of the economists were in some form or another on the Government payroll.
      We have had Nobel winning economists (not even Irish) who have published papers saying that voting No is Irelands last chance to get the Banking debt taken off our books. But what the hell would a Nobel Prize winning economist know about anything, right?

      Reply
    • Gary, are you contesting that europe will contradict its promise earlier on it the year to support Ireland, and allow a catastrophic disorderly default of the one country meeting its commitment and paying its debts.

      Are you GENUINELY contesting that?

      Reply
    • And again Cal as long as we just willy nilly believe that all these economists have no ethics whatsoever. Where do you guys get off accusing people they are dodgy or liars without any evidence. It’s disgraceful.

      Reply
    • Wish the government would come clean and admit we shall need a second bailout! The gun has been put to Kennys head! Ratify this treaty or risk not getting any more money! And then at the same time, if we vote yes it seems we have to find 11 billion as our contribution to the bailout fund! I say we vote no and take our chances! Threaten them with complete default. Then we shall see how tough our European bullyboys really are!

      Reply
    • You going to answer my question Gary on the Business Post?

      On your 90% of the economists how many (a percentage will do) were warning about the housing bubble before it burst?

      I’d say FF/FG/Lab and a lot of the mainstream media are the establishment Gary. Unless your suggesting that FF/FG/Lab & the main stream media in this country are radical?

      Reply
    • Trueleft. I think most people believe we’ll get funding from somewhere, just at what cost. And I for one would rather we didn’t get screwed while trying desperately to fund the country after a no vote.

      Kerry. I posted about a report which shows 40(odd) of our top economists want a Yes vote. Now you want me to prove what they all said on the housing bubble?!?!!? I have no idea what they said about the housing bubble, I’m not making any claims about it, you are. Why don’t you back-up your innuendo with some proof for a change?
      I can’t help but notice you haven’t demanded similar proof for the tiny number of economists who actually support a no. I mean it was David McWilliams who suggested the bank guarantee, how forgetful you guys are.
      All I see with this talk of ‘establishment’ is further attempts to smear people’s reputations as they don’t agree with you. As I’ve said it’s a very dishonest debating tactic.

      Reply
    • Eh, gary, you were trotting out the soundbite ad-infinitum ‘where will we get the funding without ESM access??’, now you’re saying you’d rather we access the funding through the ESM at an affordable rate than get screwed by the markets.

      If we can’t access the money anywhere other than the ESM, then how can we be screwed by the open market?

      tripping over yourself again gary??

      Reply
    • Trueleft. Not to state the obvious but no one knows where we’d get the funding so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. Most people seem to think we’d get funding *somewhere* just at a higher cost, which we really don’t need

      Reply
    • limofax 28/05/12 #

      Gary, your dishonesty is astounding. David McWilliams promoted a bank guarantee for depositors only. Fianna Fail then decided to give a blanket guarantee to the banks debts as well. Had they done what David McWilliams said, we wouldn’t be in this mess now. I suppose you just happen to be one of the few clowns that believe in Fianna Fails recent attempts to offload the blame for our financial crisis onto McWilliams. I think Duffys circus are hiring, you should apply.

      Reply
    • CAl – when you mention Krugman and Stiglitz, Gary goes quiet. I’ve been asking his opinion on what they have to say for the past 2 weeks and as yet nothing. Sean O’Keefe also put it to him yesterday and got no response. Maybe you will have more luck than both of us.

      Reply
    • Gary

      Those who can – DO, those who cant – Teach.

      Reply
    • Well Gary if they like most of the economists were talking about soft landings etc., before the crash I’m not so sure I call them experts and so would not have such a high regard of their opinions.

      Regarding the referendum there is no guarantee that even if we voted yes we would :
      1. Be granted funding, not that we will need funding according to the 2 teachers.
      2. No measures of what we might have to do to gain access.
      3. There is no money in the ESM.
      4. Greece has signed up to provide euro 20 billion to the ESM !!

      Vote yes so that Greece can bail us out if we need a second bail out which according to our government is highly unlikely………

      Reply
    • Limofax. Let’s assume for a moment that McWilliam’s version of what happen is true and he did tell Lenihan only to guarantee the deposits. The problem with this, as I understand it, is senior bonds have a higher status than deposits. So there was no way to do it as he suggested, surely he should have known this?

      Kerry. I see you’re not going to prove your assertion that all these 40 economists said we’d have a soft landing then. Didn’t think so.

      Reply
    • limofax 29/05/12 #

      That’s your problem Gary, you don’t understand it!

      Reply
    • Sorry Limofax but you are 100% wrong about Mcwilliams only supporting a guarantee for depositors. Firstly, all depositors up to 100k were already covered.
      Secondly, and more importantly here’s a direct quote from McWilliams that a brief read through of wikipedia would show you:
      The only option is to guarantee 100 per cent of all depositors/creditors in the Irish banking system. This guarantee does not extend to shareholders who will have to live with the losses they have suffered. However, it applies to everyone else.

      Reply
  • sorry about the grammar, mobile text big finger syndrome.

    Reply

Add New Comment