Archives

On a Saturday in April Republican Sinn Féin (RSF) gathered outside the Garden of Remembrance at Parnell Square in Dublin for their national centenary commemoration. As Garda Special branch approached members and onlookers from the public for their names and addresses, the RSF colour party formed up in front of the garden. To the music of the Coatbridge band which lined up behind the colour party, they marched down O’Connell Street, passing the Gresham hotel and the now closed Clerys department store. The parade marched alongside barricades present in the middle of O’Connell Street which had been erected ahead of the official State commemoration that took place on the 27th March, Easter Sunday. The symbolism of the colour party’s flags brushing against the barricades as they marched was not lost. The parade turned at the Middle Abbey Street junction to continue their march up the other side of O’Connell Street to the GPO, where they ceased. Once again Garda Special Branch constituted an obvious presence, looking on as the colour parties of Republican Sinn Féin, Na Fianna Éireann and Cumann na mBan formed up facing the GPO and stood to attention. The occasion was in great contrast to Provisional Sinn Féin’s Easter Rising commemoration in Dublin the following day, which has been described in the Irish Times by historian Eunan O’Halpin as “necessarily decommissioned”. Mandates and Support When we hear the words ‘dissident republican’ in popular outlets they are ubiquitously followed by references to violence, the Omagh bombing in 1998 or low levels of public support. Since May of this year the threat level from republicans has been raised by security services from moderate to substantial. Sinn Féin President Gerry Adams has announced that “dissidents have no support”. Moreover, in the aftermath of the killing of two British soldiers at Masareen and PSNI Constable Stephen Carroll in 2009 the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland, Martin McGuinness, while standing on the steps of Stormont Castle, famously labelled so-called dissidents as “traitors to Ireland”, and referred to an absence of support for such groups in the community. Narratives about so-called dissident republicanism are shrouded in questions of mandates and legitimacy. A common criticism levelled at Republican Sinn Féin, and the Continuity IRA (CIRA) which shares RSF’s ideology, is that they lack public support- in votes – and that they fail to secure elected representatives. In fact Republican Sinn Féin does have an elected Councillor in Galway, namely Tomás O’Curraoin who has held the position since 2009. Councillor O’Curraoin has always contested the election on an RSF platform. However, to concentrate on mandates in an electoral sense neglects the historical reality that republicanism has not traditionally taken its mandate from the polls. 1798, 1916 and the First and Second Dáileanna are invoked as legitimising the current republican campaign. Legitimacy is not sought at the polls; rather, a line of continuity is drawn through republican history. To put undue emphasis on electoral mandates fails to acknowledge the core of republican ideology. A dream deferred As talk of continuity and unfinished business hung in the air that Saturday outside the GPO, I snapped the adjoining photo of RSF President Des Dalton and the commemoration’s guest speaker John Hunt. The image coincidentally captured the reflection of a blowing tricolour on the glass of the GPO; the reflected flag was on a pole in the centre of O’Connell Street. This image embodies more than a 1916 commemoration. It reveals a living historical link between the 1940s and present day republicanism. Competing with a helicopter over-head, John Hunt addressed the crowd with an oration entitled, ‘1916: A dream deferred’. After the speech Hunt was congratulated on his oration and the ninety-six year old veteran replied “if I hadn’t got a cold you’d have heard me at the other end of Connell Street”. A rebel till the end John Hunt travelled to the commemoration from Chicago in the US where he has lived since the late 1940s. Originally from Limerick he is one of only two surviving internees of the Curragh internment camp in the 1940s, Tom Doran being the other. Hunt was born in Athea in Limerick in 1920. His childhood memories include attending republican commemorations. The earliest commemoration he can recall took place when he was nine-years old. He attended a commemoration at Gortagleanna in Knockanure in County Kerry with his Father. A few years later John was among the crowd listening to a speech by Tom Barry in Abbeyfeale, County Limerick. John worked as a cobbler and was an active member of the local unit of the Irish Republican Army. Early in 1940, along with approximately 500 other men John was interned for IRA activity. He was first taken to police barracks in Limerick and was then transferred to Cork jail. His final destination was Tintown at the Curragh military camp. In the huts the IRA maintained its structures and members reported to the Officer Commanding. In protest at poor conditions and at the treatment meted out by Free State soldiers, who were former comrades, internees burnt a number of the huts on 14 December 1940. The resulting punishment was solitary confinement for a number of the men including Hunt. In 1941 Hunt was sentenced to four years and was transferred to Mountjoy prison and then on to Arbour Hill where he spent one year before being transferred back to the Curragh. His eventual release came in 1945 when he was one of the last men active in that era to be released. Hunt’s attendance at the commemoration was viewed through the RSF lens as conferring legitimacy to the organisation. A line of succession was stressed reaching back to the Fenians, the Young Irelanders, Robert Emmet, Wolfe Tone and the United Irishmen. From the podium John Hunt bellowed out “as a young man, in the darkness of my prison cell, I understood that the sacrifices of the republicans before me would inspire generations yet unborn”. Hunt went on to quote the oft-cited words of

The World Giving Index consistently ranked Ireland in the top five until 2015, when it dropped to its lowest rank of ninth perhaps due to certain scandals in the Irish charity sector. Before the recent revelations concerning Console there had been a number of high-profile scandals over the last five years, affecting the reputation of the sector as a whole. To-date, there are 18,543 civil society organisations in Ireland, with just over 8,000 charities. While reputational damage can be difficult to quantify, charities have reported a drop in their fundraising income in the wake of each controversy. A survey conducted by The Wheel, a national representative network for the voluntary sector in Ireland, in 2014, showed that 59% of the 297 charities surveyed reported a drop in public funding (by as much as 10%) from the previous year. Reductions in government funding, largely due to austerity measures in the past few years, have further savaged charity’s income. Consequently, in the past few years charities have seen their income shrink while demand for their services continues to grow. Historically, charities have relied on people giving up their time and money to a help others. However, the latter half of the Twentieth Century saw charities’ operational plans shifting towards private-sector business models, and charities are fast becoming accountable to the standards and norms of the private sector. While the ongoing Console scandal gathers headlines and the charity is now to be wound up, it is important to note that fraud can occur in any sector.Nevertheless, there are certain measures that can be undertaken to mitigate the dangers. More stringent governance codes, tighter regulations, stricter oversight and greater investigative powers must be imposed. In particular, certain provisions of the Charities Act 2009 have yet to be passed. Part IV of the Charities Act 2009 would grant the Charity Regulatory Authority investigative powers to take pre-emptive action into the affairs of charitable organisations. This includes the power to require them to produce documents, entry and search of premises, and the ability to impose intermediate sanctions under Section 73(5)(a), including the removal of the charitable organisation from the register for such period as the Authority deems necessary. Moreover, in order to ensure uniformity, the Charity Regulatory Authority should set a financial reporting standard for charities, such as the Statement of Recommended Practice for Financial Reporting by Charities (the SORP). The role media play in shaping public perceptions of the charity sector is crucial when assessing a charity’s virtuousness. Media coverage of a controversy, though appropriate in holding management to account, can foster negative perceptions which damage an entire sector. This is not surprising given the inbuilt cognitive bias called the availability heuristic: a quick method for making judgements about the likelihood of something happening. Altruism Ireland was formed to build up a partnership of trust with the general public; a trust founded on transparency. Transparency is more than a buzzword. The truth is people won’t, and shouldn’t, donate their hard-earned cash unless there is trust that the money is being suitably spent. Therefore, each charity that comes on-board its platform is given a transparency score out of ten, based on three main criteria of communicating their projects, results and financial standing. The latter includes the requirement to disclose a CEO’s salary. The reason for this is not to expose individuals, but to help combat public scepticism around ‘golden salaries’. In May of this year, The Journal.ie reported on top charity executives earning in excess of €100,000 euro a year. What Altruism Ireland asks is for people to make informed decisions. Ultimately it is a matter of personal sensitivity to decide if a salary is appropriate for the level of responsibility of a CEO, but before making any judgements about salaries, Altruism Ireland encourages people to look at CEO compensation as a percentage of total expenses. For example, a charity with an annual income of €10m is more justified in paying their CEO €100,000 a year (1%), compared to a smaller organisation with an income of €1m. Furthermore, unlike private fundraising platforms that charge in the region of 5-7% on donations, Altruism Ireland charges 0% commission, ensuring more of the money that people raise goes directly to the charity and into the hands of those who need it the most. Donating and fundraising for charity ought not to be driven by a for-profit motive. Negative perceptions, however, continue to have real-life consequences. The World Giving Index; an annual report published by the Charities Aid Foundation which ranks how charitable a nation is, consistently ranked Ireland in the top five. That was until 2015, when it dropped to its lowest rank of ninth. Again, it is hard to quantify whether this is a direct result of certain scandals in the Irish charity sector, but it seems likely to have played a part. In order to combat a further fall and the lack of dialogue between the public and the charity sector, Altruism Ireland seeks to act as a bridge between the two in order to generate a better understanding of how the sector operates, and in doing so facilitating trust. The ultimate aim of all involved in the charity sector is not only to ensure Ireland’s status as a highly generous society, but to turn it into the most efficient and transparent one. John Clarke is Relationship Manager of Altruism Ireland By John Clarke

JUNE 2016 The day before Brexit, Permanent TSB shares soared amid speculation that the 75%-state-owned bank may eventually merge with another lender. Shares surged by 10 per cent though they had fallen by more than half since the government sold shares last year. Michael Noonan said: “The share price has been under pressure for a myriad of reasons”. He listed some of them but failed to include the important legacy issue of under-paid depositors. After the vote for Brexit, Davy Stockbrokers reported: “Brexit has clearly heightened the uncertainty around the timing and price of the sale of PTSB’s residual UK assets, delaying the bank’s normalisation”. The shares had sunk by around another quarter. If the bank ever merges, its partner may have to address legacy issues that just might create significant liabilities. RECENT OVERCHARGING Meanwhile in June the bank consented to Joseph Wallace, a mortgage holder from Mahon, Co Cork, being discharged from his bankruptcy after it overcharged him interest. Wallace claimed he would not have had to go bankrupt, after being unable to meet repayments on his home, if he had not been overcharged. He told the High Court he only learned of the overcharging after becoming bankrupt. The outstanding mortgage at the time of Wallace’s bankruptcy was around €326,000 with €75,000 arrears, his barrister told the court. However, the actual amount, without the overcharge, was around €284,000 with €52,000 arrears. Wallace was charged interest at a rate of 4.5 per cent when he was entitled to 1.5 per cent. David Hall of the Irish Mortgage Holders Association welcomed the judge’s decision and said his organisation was in discussions on behalf of a number of other people in similar situations who had cases pending. In 2014 the TSB shareholders challenged the constitutionality of laws permitting the bank’s €4bn recapitalisation by the State. The matter was referred to the European Court of Justice. Another headache. THE ENORMOUS PRECEDENT From 1958 to 20 February 1993 TSB Bank, a forerunner of Permanent TSB, did not disclose the basis of calculating interest in its application form for new accounts, in the notice of interest rates in its branches and in the daily newspapers – with a view to ‘defrauding’ most depositors. The bank was convicted and fined £1000 for breaching the Consumer Information Act 1978, as a result of a private prosecution by me, after the aptly named William Fagan refused to prosecute. Mere days after the convictions and fines, the bank started paying everyone the full advertised rate. DISCOVERY OF ‘FRAUD’ In April 1990, I had opened an Investment account with TSB Dublin, lured by its offer of significantly higher interest than other banks. Ten months later, I lodged a bank draft and enquired as to when the draft would attract interest. I was shocked to find that interest was paid from the 21st of any month on the lowest monthly balance. I closed the account in January 1991. Two months later, I wrote to the bank requesting a copy of the rules Swindle at TSB 2016, and 1958 to 1993 Victims of Windle-stopped-Swindle never reimbursed £339m leaving PTSB open to possible claims by Srinivasan Devrajan Depositors or their successors who held a deposit or investment account with TSB Dublin or in Cork and Limerick Savings Bank between 1958 and 20 February 1993 are invited to contact the author July 2016 1 5 of the bank and whether interest was calculated on a daily basis. The bank sent me a cheque for about £62 on an ex-gratia basis, without prejudice. Smelling a rat, I sued the bank in the High Court. On 2 September 1992 TSB settled with me, out-of-court, for £30,000 and a commitment that I did not inform other depositors that they had been ‘defrauded’. As part of answers to interrogatories raised by me, the bank conceded that the accounts were “not strictly investment accounts” though that is precisely what they were called. Six months later I launched a private, criminal action against TSB. ORDINARY AND CUSTOMARY PRACTICE OF BANKING The ordinary and customary practice of banks and building societies in the State is to pay daily interest on deposits. MODUS OPERANDI OF THE ‘FRAUD’ ON MOST DEPOSITORS FROM 1958 TO 1993 TSB Dublin and Cork and Limerick Savings Bank ‘defrauded’ most depositors from 1958 to 1993 by not paying the clearly and categorically advertised interest on savings and investment accounts. The banks tricked depositors by not disclosing, in the application forms for accounts and in newspaper advertisements of interest rates, the following material information: 1. Interest was calculated on the lowest monthly balance (Rule 18 certified under the Act of 1863) 2. Monies could be held for up to 60 days (from the 21st of any month to the 20th of the second following month) without earning any interest, regardless of the sum of money lodged or withdrawn. 3. Money earned only 11/12ths of the clearly advertised rate, except for deposits lodged or withdrawn on the 21st day of any month. CENTRAL BANK OF IRELAND AWARE OF THE ‘FRAUD’ Dr Michael Casey, Senior Adviser to the Central Bank, advised by letter dated 6 March 1990 to TSB Dublin and Cork and Limerick Savings Bank that they should publish the gross and compound annual rate of deposits so that depositors could make an informed choice between the rates offered by different banks. The Central Bank knew that TSB was advertising Compound Annual Rate 1/12th higher than in fact paid, in breach of the Trustee Savings Banks Act 1989 section 27 (1), as is evident from the letter of Dr Casey which stated: “While we understand that the TSB’s traditional method of crediting interest to deposits might lead to some difficulties with expressing annual interest rates, we feel that these should not be insurmountable”. This is a subtle acknowledgement of the fact that the advertised annual interest rates were what most people would call fraudulent. The question arises on whose behalf Casey felt surmounting was needed. It was certainly not

A controversial proposal to de-zone lands for a data centre in county Wicklow has been defeated by local councillors. The successful motion to retain the zoning was proposed by Councillor Pat Vance. According to the council chief executive and the Department of the Environment the zoning of the lands at Newtownmountkennedy, was “piecemeal and random.” However, a proposal to de-zone the lands was roundly rejected by councillors at a meeting on Monday 4th July in the latest twist in a story which has even seen unsubstantiated allegations of malfeasance directed at members and officials of the council and other state agencies over recent years. As reported in Village, the manner in which the attempts by businessman, Brian McDonagh, to develop a data centre on the Newtownmountkennedy lands have been obstructed are nothing short of extraordinary. McDonagh and his brothers first obtained permission to build a data centre on the 81-acre site on the edge of the N11 at Kilpedder, Newtown in July 2010, but fell victim to unwelcome manoeuvres by members and officials of Wicklow County Council, An Bord Pleanála and the National Roads Authority when they sought to proceed with the development. When they first applied for permission to develop a business park on the site in 2008 it was zoned for business, science and technology but within months their lands were de-zoned to agricultural use while lands immediately on the other side of the N11 were zoned for industrial use under a new Local Area Plan. When they threatened the council with legal action over the de-zoning the McDonaghs were invited to a meeting in the Ramada Hotel in Wicklow by then chairman of the council planning committee, Pat Vance, where it was suggested that a proposal for a data centre on their lands would be considered favourably. In July 2010, the council granted permission to their new company, Ecologic Data Centre (EDC) to build a data centre but this was met with an appeal against planning by the National Roads Authority (NRA). After some bitter exchanges, the NRA withdrew its objection but not before serious financial costs had been incurred by the McDonaghs. In the Spring of 2011, An Bord Pleanála upheld an objection to the proposal from a local landowner but this was subsequently overturned when the McDonaghs proved in the High Court that the board had not acted fairly or properly in the appeal process. In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court upheld the decision following an unsuccessful appeal by ABP the following year. Since then Brian McDonagh has been forced from control of the company due to the accumulating financial difficulties caused by the incessant delays to the project. He is advising new owners on an energy recovery and data centre project. Meanwhile, other data centres have been sprouting up around the country in places that do not compare in terms of road, traffic, power and fibre optic access with the Newtown site. His experience including the bizarre manner in which his site was first zoned, then de-zoned and re-zoned again is the subject of one of the series of complaints concerning the administration of local government in county Wicklow that were sent to former environment minister, Alan Kelly and are still under consideration by his successor, Simon Coveney. Others include the manner in which various lands were acquired under compulsory purchase orders and others zoned at Charlesland, county Wicklow to the benefit of developers Sean Mulryan and Sean Dunne and their joint venture Zapi Ltd. The role played by Councillor Vance, who met privately with the two developers in advance of crucial planning decisions for the major residential scheme near Greystones in 2002 and 2003 are the subject of other complaints by local auctioneer, Gabriel Dooley. Last month, Vance was cleared of any wrongdoing after a lengthy investigation by the council ethics registrar into a complaint by Dooley that the councillor had failed to mention a house he acquired at Saran Wood in Bray in January 2003. The ethics registrar determined that Vance and his wife Mary had merely guaranteed a mortgage taken out with AIB. She accepted that the purchaser of the property was their son, Peter Vance, who is an employee of the bank. In her report the registrar, Helen Purcell, said she was unable to obtain the original mortgage for the property at 15 Saran Wood during her year-long investigation but accepted the veracity of other conveyancing documents describing Peter Vance as the purchaser. He sold the property in his sole name to a third party in September 2015. By Frank Connolly

The foundations of the historic St Mary’s church on Dublin’s City Quay are in danger of being undermined by the construction of a giant office block on its neighbouring site, according to local residents. The site is being developed by Targeted Investment Opportunities (TIO), a consortium of Bennett Construction, Oaktree Capital and NAMA (a public agency). On 5 July parishioners claim that they were “shocked”, during devotions, by vibrations in the church. During a visit by local people and Village that same day significant vibrations from pile-driving on the site could be clearly felt in the central aisle. Lawyers for the developers deny this. The work was stopped later that day to allow for consultations between solicitors for the church and the developers. The development also threatens to block light that now comes through the diamond-glazed windows on the side of the church closest to it. Light on one side of the church will be entirely blocked. While permission for site clearance has been given, work has started – led by two large piledrivers – on foundations for the offices. It is unclear if this has been authorised.The developer denies that its work has or will damage church property and claims that the works carried out so far have not triggered the need for a commencement notice under buildings regulations. In May An Taisce complained that work had started in breach of conditions under planning regulations, requiring submission of a construction management plan and landscaping plan before the work started. According to St Mary’s Parish Association Chairman, John Nolan, the work has already seen interference with the door to a long established right of way improperly blocked by the contractors, though the developer’s lawyers claim it is in fact a cul de sac. He claims that cracks on the internal walls and ceiling of the church have only appeared since the work started in recent weeks. Nolan, who runs the Dublin Stevedores company and is a native of the area said that the Parish Committee was not aware of the scale of the development intended on the neighbouring site and that the works have already had a serious impact both on the church property and on the children of the primary school on Gloucester Street. “We do not object to an office development on the site. In fact, we welcome it as it has lain derelict for a long time. However, we are concerned about possible damage to the church property, the blocking of a doorway and a right of way on the side of the church and the manner in which the construction work has affected churchgoers, residents and children in the school”, Nolan said. The St Mary’s primary school which adjoins the Church had to be evacuated during examinations in late June due to the construction work, while a child was hospitalised after it was alleged that he fell into a hole dug by the builders on the site. An Taisce originally objected to the planning application to Dublin City Council, based on the scale of the nine-storey office and its impact on the church, a protected structure located in a conservation area. “St Mary’s is a protected structure and in considering a planning application the council is supposed to look at its special character and the impact on its setting of any such development”, Ian Lumley of An Taisce told Village. Following an appeal by An Taisce of the council’s May 2015 decision to grant planning, a Bord Pleanála inspector recommended that the scheme should be cut back by three storeys on its western side adjoining the church so protecting light access to the building. However, the recommendation was rejected by the Bord and permission for the full development was upheld later last year. An Bord Pleanála contended that it could not adjudicate on the blocking of light into the church as that is not a planning matter. Following the visit to the site on 5th July, the developers agreed to suspend pile-driving for six days. In a letter written in response to a detailed complaint from church solicitors, Mason Hayes and Curran, on the same day, A&L Goodbody, solicitors for TIO, claimed that its client had complied with all planning conditions and building regulations but conceded: “However, as a gesture of goodwill and at a significant cost and inconvenience our client agrees to postpone these works until Monday 11th July 2016 to allow your client to take technical advice…..subject to you, your client, its architects and engineer agreeing to meet with our client, its architect, its engineer and us on or prior to Friday 8th July, 2016”. It is not clear if it is now applying for a commencement notice. Aesthetics and history are now in the hands of the law. By Frank Connolly