Former AIB Director appointed as advisor to Dept of Finance.



johntrenchard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
991
i think this pretty much sums it up

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo]YouTube - Nelson[/ame]
 

DeputyEdo

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Messages
3,449
Did you expect anything different?
FF wont let all their buddies from the banks suffer, they'll give them cushy jobs, ensure they don't go to jail and defend them to the media if they have to.
This country is run by a government who care about themselves and their buddies only.
 
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
89
He was a non-executive director. Big difference.

Perhaps it isn't the wisest choice from a PR point of view tho.
 

DCon

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
5,889
Someone pointed out earlier, and it is true, that O'Leary was against bench-marking and stepped down from the board.

The report of the Benchmarking Body recommended that public service workers be given an average increase of 9%. This recommendation was a sham as it could not justify these increases with facts. Jim O'Leary, the economist on body resigned in protest.

However, In 2000 the economy was booming and tax revenues were flooding in to the Government. The Government bought off public service workers by giving this 9% increase.
We have the highest paid public servants in the World - Temp, frontpage - Sligochampion.ie

I do not like O'Leary hinting that he saw the housing bust, and should have said something, but AIB Sr. management held a different view.
 

stanley

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
10,358
He was a non-executive director. Big difference.

Perhaps it isn't the wisest choice from a PR point of view tho.

Non-exec part is very true, the execs are/were in control of the info flow to the main Board and what happened was a scenario similar to Fas, theory of regulation but no application.
 

Ultor

Active member
Joined
Mar 24, 2010
Messages
144
Another case of JFTB.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
So even after this man admits he made a grave error he's deemed worthy of what i presume is a cushy job with a tidy renumeration package.

'During the property boom, he said, senior bankers believed the economy would achieve a "soft landing", where property values would "plateau or fall modestly" rather than crash. He said at that time the sceptics could have and should have articulated their doubts more consistently'

Is he trying to blame the sceptics for not articulating their doubts???

Really, ffs like. There were numerous people both within the country and without warning that the economy would have a crash landing.

Mr. O'Leary is attempting to shift the blame onto those very commemtators that called for restraint and not those in Government or their advisors for the crisis.

No wonder FF gave him a cushy number.
 

Oldira1

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
1,466
He was a non-executive director. Big difference.

Perhaps it isn't the wisest choice from a PR point of view tho.
Not True. From a legal point of view, there is no difference between the executive and nonexecutive directors in terms of their responsibilities towards the company and its shareholders.
 

farnaby

Well-known member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
1,934
"If we keep the same people and the same ideas that were around during the Celtic Tiger years, we'll have a boomy boom again!"
FF psychotic logic
 

Anorakphobia

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 13, 2007
Messages
911
Colin Hunt and FF

In a morning when FF shamelessly appointed another Celtic Tiger economist and AIB board member to a senior advisory position at Finance, I thought a look at how a similar appointment 6 years ago worked out.

The boy done good!

Of all the cronies and pals FF stuffed into positions of influence and pay in the last decade, I think this lad is well up the list.

The ex stockbroker who was a merciless shiller of the Celtic Tiger as well as a life long FFer and Mc Creevy policy acolyte (think decentralisation, then read below) was signed up by Martin Cullen as a special advisor in 2004 before moving on to fill a similar role for Bozo the Clowen to 2007. More anon!

So you’d think a guy who one assumes played an instrumental advisory role in three of the greatest debacles to ever hit this country
1. Public Transport policy
2. Decentralisation master plan
3. Pumping the property bubble
might get the boot.

Not a bit of it (especially as Colin apparently played a blinder in FF HQ in May 2007 in helping inflict FF on us for another 5 years)
Post this outstanding work, Hunt simply had to be rewarded and boy was he.
Strike 1 Appointed to Aer Lingus board
Strike 2 Appointed by Batty to chair Education Strategy group

But it’s his full time gig that is perhaps the most interesting.
Colin made his way to Macquarie Capital in October 2007.
Macquarie were very ambitious to get involved in the lucrative PPP contacts and Colin’s arrival seems to have coincided with a remarkably successful period for them in securing these contracts.

Just two months after Colin’s arrival at Macquarie they were awarded the hugely lucrative Decentralisation PPP contacts for Portlaoise, Carlow and and Mullingar.
How emotional it must have been for Colin to see his new employer bring to fruition the plan of his two great hero's (Mc Creevy and Cullen).

Macquarie haven't looked back since Colin joined them either, subsequently winning or in pole position for the following

1. The building and servicing for 25 years of 4 new schools in Laois/Offaly (hmmm?)
2. The building and servicing of 6 more new schools nationwide
3. The overhaul of the National Concert hall
And
4 The Gort to Tuam PPP

Link to Macquarie PPP projects attached

Decentralisation PPP
 

stanley

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
10,358
Not True. From a legal point of view, there is no difference between the executive and nonexecutive directors in terms of their responsibilities towards the company and its shareholders.

The non-execs are dependent on the execs for info, reports etc., in order to use the skills they were brought in for.
 

Libero

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
2,994
Anorakphobia said:
Of all the cronies and pals FF stuffed into positions of influence and pay in the last decade, I think this lad is well up the list.
Yeah, it seems Alan Ahearne was a once-off. While O'Leary isn't the worst of them, Lenihan is now back to finding senior economic advisors from the shallow and fetid pool of Official Ireland's insiders, in spite of the state of their track records of analysis and prediction.

Then again, will it make any difference to the Department of Finance? This is the same Department where Lenihan appointed as the new Secretary General, the man who had previously been head for the Department's Financial Services division, responsible for vigilence of the banking sector and - after that success story - the formulation of the crisis response that has served the country oh so well.
Appointment of Kevin Cardiff as Secretary General of the Department of Finance - Department of Finance - Government of Ireland
 

Eire Nua

Active member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
173
if Hunt is embedded in fianna fail as your post suggests then it seems a bit suspect that he was responsible for the ' HUNT report' on higher education...surely this report should have been done by someone more independant ?..... i notice there have been many delays in issuing the report ...is this to give time for FF editing? :shock2:
 

Oldira1

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
1,466
The non-execs are dependent on the execs for info, reports etc., in order to use the skills they were brought in for.
Are you suggesting that the executive directors may have been economical with the truth?

As an economist O'Leary would have expected to take a global view of the banks operations. If it was obvious to many outside economists we were in a property bubble ,how did a man with access to a lot more information miss it?
 

adrem

Well-known member
Joined
May 27, 2004
Messages
924
Someone pointed out earlier, and it is true, that O'Leary was against bench-marking and stepped down from the board.
Someone?? Someone??

Cruel and heartless DCon . . . ah . . . how quickly they forget !:lol:
 
Last edited:

CarnivalOfAction

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
16,393
So even after this man admits he made a grave error he's deemed worthy of what i presume is a cushy job with a tidy renumeration package.

'During the property boom, he said, senior bankers believed the economy would achieve a "soft landing", where property values would "plateau or fall modestly" rather than crash. He said at that time the sceptics could have and should have articulated their doubts more consistently'

Is he trying to blame the sceptics for not articulating their doubts???

Really, ffs like. There were numerous people both within the country and without warning that the economy would have a crash landing.

Mr. O'Leary is attempting to shift the blame onto those very commemtators that called for restraint and not those in Government or their advisors for the crisis.

No wonder FF gave him a cushy number.
Economic illiterates advising economic illiterates; we've turned a corner!
 

stanley

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
10,358
Are you suggesting that the executive directors may have been economical with the truth?

As an economist O'Leary would have expected to take a global view of the banks operations. If it was obvious to many outside economists we were in a property bubble ,how did a man with access to a lot more information miss it?


Not just economical with the truth they witheld same from the non-execs, remember which guys went down 2 yr ago to see Biffo/Lenny, not a mention of non-execs and their opinions, probably they did not know about it.

The question is did he have access and the answer seems to be a defo NO, execs in AIB treat non-execs as outsiders, treat with great caution.

O'L's global view aint worth a damn if he cant benchmark it against internal AIB info.
 

meriwether

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
12,539
Not True. From a legal point of view, there is no difference between the executive and nonexecutive directors in terms of their responsibilities towards the company and its shareholders.
Yes there is.

Non-execs and execs have different roles tasks. Their responsibilities are derived from their roles, ergo, they have different responsibilities.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top