Sir, - I write, as an incensed taxpayer and as a consumer of Telecom Eireann's product, regarding the impending "sale of the century" by the State of certain of the people's assets. I do not mean the income-generating assets of the operational business but rather Telecom's extensive property holdings. These were acquired over many decades from surpluses which would otherwise have gone to the benefit of the taxpayer. Why should they be handed over gratis in addition to the jewel of Telecom's assets, the captive accounts of its service subscribers? I can foresee a scenario some years hence when Telecom, being fully privatised, will be a target for a take-over bid, part-funded by later asset-stripping or sales and lease-back of its property interests.
The people and business entities, as both taxpayers and consumers, are entitled to expect that the State in the privatisation will apply prudent commercial principles in the disposal of such assets. Let us remember this is not a forced sale to pay off debts. Therefore the State ought to separate the property or "roof" assets from its operational assets - customers, workforce, plant, vehicles, equipment, product distribution systems etc - and vest these in the Minister for Finance. The Minister would then grant normal commercial leases to the new privatised operational entity with five-year rent reviews as is the established practice in commercial property dealings - as, indeed, Telecom's competitors must. In this way we can avoid the insane excesses of Thatcherism which threw out not only the baby and bathwater but the bath as well.
We have two long-established British models to follow, one state and the other private. The Crown Property Office administers land which is theoretically the property of the Monarch and rents therefrom accrue to the British exchequer. The second - not unique but well-known - is the Westminster Estate which is a private family trust owning very valuable property particularly in central London. For at least two centuries it has renewed old leases and granted new ones but always at current market rents with period rent review clauses. Can anyone show that this practice of good estate management has commercially disadvantaged the business tenants of the Crown Property and the Westminster trust? For the State in the interests of the people to hold on to such property assets would be happy combination of good socialism and good business. - Yours, etc.,
Proinnsias Mac Ualgairg, Plas Thor, Baile Atha Cliath 7.