Madam, – There is no clearer and more appropriate term to describe the “bad bank” Nama than the word “scam”.
Many commentators, including your own Vincent Browne, have made the point more evocatively than I could, but it is worth saying again and again, because the extent to which this plan pilfers the public purse to shore up private financial interests can hardly be overstated.
In essence, banks that are worth nothing because they recklessly lent money on foolhardy property ventures, are being given billions of taxpayers’ money in order to protect the financial interests of those who have a stake in these institutions.
These stakeholders – the shareholders, corporate bond holders, the management cadre and large (over €100,000) deposit holders – have significant financial claims on institutions which are worth nothing. Therefore, their financial claims ought to be worth nothing too.
There is a real alternative to this crazy plan; namely to nationalise the entire banking sector, protecting the small deposit holders in order to ensure systemic continuity, and then reforging the banking sector under a new regulatory regime.
Doing this will take new expertise and a whole lot of political courage. Not doing it will go down in history as perhaps the greatest single act of economic injustice on this island since the Penal Laws. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Is the Peter Sutherland offering his advice on the state of the Irish economy (April 13th) the same Peter Sutherland who, as a non-executive director and member of the remuneration committee of the Royal Bank of Scotland, approved the outrageous pension package for disgraced former chief executive Fred Goodwin?
Mr Sutherland does, at least, declare his role with Goldman Sachs. Is this the same Goldman Sachs whose persistent lobbying of, and revolving-door relationship with, the US government helped US investment banks expand their balance sheets beyond anything resembling prudent levels? The build-up of toxic debt we are all now having to clean up was largely initiated by the activities of the Wall Street cartel that Goldman Sachs led.
And is there any chance that we could be spared further lectures on how to solve our crisis from the very people who got us into this mess to begin with? – Yours, etc,
Madam, – As it seems the Thais cannot get Thaksin Shinawatra to return, perhaps we could send them Taxing Lenihan instead. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Nama will ensure that the big boys are looked after, opines Vincent Browne. Quite so. Therefore let us revive that old prayer, so fervently recited in times alas long past, “God bless the developers and all their relations and keep us all within our stations”. – Yours, etc,
Madam, — If, as Sarah Carey claims, “half the family are auctioneers”, (April 15th) how can your good newspaper give her a quarter page to lobby on behalf of Irish auctioneers to prevent their exclusion, en masse, from performing valuations for Nama, the National Asset Management Agency? Perhaps they could be allowed to do so when pigs fly, the moon turns blue, our fat cats face the music and the “Take Five at . . .” in your Property Supplement features an Irish property that is substantially similar to those from other countries listed with it? – Yours, etc,
Madam, – I must disagree with Tom Neville’s assertion that the banks, builders and speculators were not under any duty to the Irish Public (letters, April 15th). All businesses have a responsibility to the society of which they are a part just as all citizens do. Business needs a functioning society in order to do business successfully and society needs business to offer products and services, create wealth and employment and raise living standards. So we have laws and regulations aimed at protecting and nurturing this mutually beneficial situation. As we’ve seen, some of this regulation has failed dismally but if people really believe that business does not have any duty towards society we are in a lot more trouble than I thought. -Yours, etc,