Sir, - I cannot help feeling vindicated by the recent events in Eircom. When all around me were rushing to get into the get-rich-quick scheme they thought the Eircom flotation to be, I resisted the temptations to buy despite all the slick advertisements and offers of loans from the banks. As I saw it, I was being asked to part with money to buy something which I already owned in the first place.
This flotation has shown who the beneficiaries of privatisation really are. Financial advisers, stockbrokers and banks certainly make millions out of the process. Managements also see it as an opportunity to seek almost limitless rewards. Is it any wonder these groups are the ones usually shouting loudest for privatisation?
It is also quite obvious that the ordinary shareholders don't benefit, and as I can't imagine too many people claiming that the service from Eircom has improved, the public doesn't benefit either. One argument advanced in favour of privatisation is that the management of the companies in question will improve. I can never understand this one: if the management of a semi-State company isn't satisfactory, it shouldn't require a privatisation to change this. If their salaries need improvement, this should also be done, but I don't think you need to offer rewards of up to 10 times more than the person responsible for running the whole country is paid!
I hope from this we learn the values of organisations such as the ESB, RTE and Aer Rianta, which despite their faults have served the country well in their current formats. Improvements can always be made, but semi-State ownership of such companies will always serve the interests of the greatest number of people as they all operate in highly regulated areas, where totally open competition will never exist anyway. - Yours, etc.,
Denis Coakley, Holywell, Upper Kilmacud Road, Dublin 14.