Irish institutional investors may have finally shown some teeth and small investors at least were able to make their feelings known. But last Friday's Smurfit annual meeting really was a bit of a damp squib.

Michael Smurfit's self-belief and ego is such that he really believes that he's worth every penny of the £5.2 million (#6.6 million) pay package he receives from the company. Criticism of his pay and the extraordinary influence the Smurfit family has on the management of a public company is water off a duck's back. Michael Smurfit apparently cannot see why anything should change.

At least he adopted a marginally - and marginally is the operative word - more conciliatory tone to smaller shareholders. Many first-timers to a Smurfit a.g.m. might find it difficult to believe this, but they have not seen him at work at previous annual meetings where questions were answered with questions and small shareholders were treated with withering contempt.

Whatever about Michael Smurfit, one of the more illuminating comments from the chairman was that his two brothers, Alan and Dermot, are paid more than Gary McGann because they have been with the group longer. It seems that the remuneration committee headed by Ray MacSharry believes length of service alone justifies a higher salary for the Smurfit brothers.

What arrant nonsense. Executive salaries are supposed to reflect responsibilities. The two brothers of Michael Smurfit have the salaries but not the responsibilities, and that is impossible to fathom. Ray MacSharry's performance in defending Michael Smurfit's pay package was, quite frankly, risible. Michael Smurfit is at the top of the salary pile because of his expertise and experience, Mr MacSharry told the shareholders. There was nothing about the pitiful shareholder return, which was the main focus of the attack on his pay package from the Irish Association of Investment Managers.

At Smurfit, there seems to be a remuneration committee that is as far removed from shareholders as Michael Smurfit himself. It seems incapable of saying "no" and is determined to provide excessive rewards for executives who have been shown incapable of generating anything like a reasonable return for shareholders.

Smurfit even went to the extent of bringing in a couple of Wall Street analysts to give a post-a.g.m. presentation on what a wonderful company Smurfit really is. Analysts - both the domestic and international variety - have been describing Smurfit as "undervalued", a "buy", "good value", for so long now that their comments and recommendations should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Forget the twaddle about US investors recognising the true value of Smurfit; US institutions certainly do not have a monopoly on investment wisdom. Current Account has said it before. There is far better value, better management and better prospects elsewhere on the Irish stock market.

And those companies who have overtaken Smurfit in the Irish market's pecking order have another advantage - they don't have Michael Smurfit as either their chairman or chief executive.

Finally, a brief comparison. Elan is the Republic's biggest public company, worth more than #18 billion. Its performance has been outstanding. Chief executive Donal Geaney was paid #1.3 million last year. Kerry Group is roughly the same size as Smurfit in market capitalisation but Kerry has delivered the goods for shareholders, Smurfit has not. Last year Denis Brosnan picked up just #846,000 in his total package and his bonus of #292,000 was more than 10 times less than Michael Smurfit's bonus.

Smurfit is now a minor Irish public company worth #2.3 billion and its performance for years has been truly dismal. Its eponymous chairman and chief executive received #6.6 million last year .

Either Donal Geaney and Denis Brosnan are grossly underpaid or Michael Smurfit is grossly overpaid.