Archives

Why I resigned from Direct Provision Working Group, End Direct Provision – Video

By Anton McCabe Growing links between some unions in the Republic and Sinn Féin are causing certain concerns in the Northern trade union movement. While in the North the trade unions largely succeeded in holding together in a period of communal division, as part of wider society they are not immune from its tensions. In the past there were significant sectarian splits, both in the Post-World War One period, and after World War Two. In the 1970s, there was a campaign to set up an ‘Ulster TUC’, withdrawing from the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) and establishing what would have been a Protestant trade union federation. This did not take off. Recently, there have been rumblings from some Loyalists about moving to set up some sort of new union. This, so far, has not even had the limited momentum of the 1970s. However, there are fears a volatile situation could open up if the Sinn Féin-trade union link develops in the Republic. Sinn Féin has largely occupied the Social Democratic space formerly occupied by the Labour Party. Union leaders such as ICTU President John Douglas and SIPTU General President Jack O’Connor have spoken of working with the party. Already among many Unionists there is a perception that unions have a nationalist agenda. Ironically, in the past it was Nationalists who were negative. Forty years ago, the perceived ‘typical’ Northern trade unionist was a Protestant male in engineering. At the time a significant section of nationalists saw trade unions as ‘Protestant’ and defenders of job discrimination – despite some of the leading figures in the Provisional IRA, such as John Kelly and Brian Keenan, having trade union backgrounds. Because of the run-down of traditional manufacturing, the stereotype of the typical trade unionist now is of a Catholic woman in the public sector. As before, this is simplistic. Since the Northern Assembly was set up, those politicians perceived as closest to the trade union movement have been Unionists. When David Ervine and Billy Hutchinson sat in the Assembly for the Progressive Unionist Party, they were members of the Amalgamated Transport and General Workers Union (now part of UNITE). They regularly met senior union figures to discuss how to promote a union agenda. Former Ulster Unionist Assembly member Fred Cobain was also seen as very union-friendly. A significant factor is that the North’s unions have fared better than their brothers and sisters in the rest of the UK. They have retained a relatively high membership. At 35%, Northern union membership is the second highest of any part of the UK. There has been a 23,000 increase in trade union membership in the last 10 years. This still represents a 7% drop in percentage terms. The North has the highest percentage of employees covered by collective agreements of any part of the UK. That numerical strength hides certain weaknesses. Twenty-six percent of the workforce is in the public sector, the highest percentage of any part of the UK. That public-sector workforce is strongly unionised. Outside the public sector, union membership is patchy. Where such exists, there is generally not the same level of organisation. The North’s unions have, despite those weak points, had a degree of success. In March, there was a widely followed one-day strike across much of the public sector. This was a first for the North’s trade union movement, in that it was political – against the Belfast Agreement, and thus against an Executive that contains the five main parties, including Sinn Féin. However, the campaign against cuts in public spending has not since had the same degree of public visibility. Meanwhile, the political issue continues to simmer. A spokesperson for ICTU in the North said that the unions have been independent of political parties “as has been demonstrated over 50 years”. At its Irish conference the UNITE union, which has a sizeable membership on both sides of the Border, went further and passed a motion that the union “does not form links of any description or give support either directly or indirectly to political parties which are one sided and sectarian, or parties which are pro-austerity”. Clearly, a trade union-Sinn Féin deal is not a given. •

By Michael Smith The Equality Tribunal, the Employment Appeals Tribunal, the Labour Relations Commission and the National Employment Rights Agency will soon be merged together into the Workplace Relations Commission (as recommended by An Bord Snip Nua). Many of the reforms envisaged by the Workplace Relations Commission are necessary and will benefit both employers and employee. These include: shorter waiting times for hearings and more effective measures for the enforcement of decisions. Existing Rights Commissioners and Equality Officers will become Adjudication Officers when the Workplace Relations Commission is instigated on 1st October. A further 19 Adjudication Officers have been selected through a transparent process conducted by the Public Appointments Service. Some of these have already begun hearing Equality cases. However, the new Adjudication Officers are being paid a low daily rate. This means most of them are working part-time. Some have expressed fears that this could lead to potential conflicts of interest. The Employment Appeals Tribunal will be dissolved as it is an expensive system requiring a Vice Chair (facilitating political appointments of Solicitors and Barristers) as well as a worker member and a business member. Instead, under the new system an adjudication officer will sit on her own (in private) hearing complaints. However, at least one reform flies in the face of transparent administration of justice. Section 41 (14) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 states: “The Commission shall publish on the internet in such form and in such manner as it considers appropriate every decision (other than information that would identify the parties in relation to whom the decision was made) of an adjudication officer under this section”. Anonymisation of decisions is a retrograde step. The Employment Appeals Tribunal currently holds hearings in public: anybody can attend. They deal with important issues like unfair dismissal e.g the Sean Quinn v IBRC case. The Equality Tribunal holds it hearings in private but publishes all decisions on its website with both employers and employees named (unless in the case of a minor, certain disabilities or sexual harassment cases). From 1st October this will no longer be the case. Employment law practitioners say that the most powerful sword over bad employers or service-providers has been the threat of their name in the papers. Both Equality tribunal redress and EAT awards tend to be quite low so reputational damage can be the main factor in preventing employers attempting to defend the indefensible. There is every likelihood now that employers will no longer bother with the first instance stage and will put their energy into settling just before the appeal stage at the Labour Court (which, in fairness, will be in public). However, this imposes a huge cost on the taxpayer as Deputy Chairpersons of the Labour Court are paid at the equivalent of Assistant Secretary in the Civil Service level (€119,000 to €137,000). It will also discourage the use of the Early Resolution and mediation service. All litigation is about assessing risk. Even in the existing system, the odds of an employee winning a case are low -approximately a one in three chance in the Equality Tribunal and odds of about one in five with an unfair dismissal case in the EAT. Why would an employer settle a case at an early stage when it would be as cost-effective to do it at a later stage? In a time when court reporters are allowed access to the family courts, questions have to be asked about why this approach to something as important as employment rights is being taken. While the Bill was going through the Oireachtas it was clear there was no appetite for anonymisation of decisions during the public consultation on the WRC. Trade Unions certainly do not want it, neither do legal representatives (they like the deflected fame) and IBEC has never publicly canvassed for it as employees are also named. This is one of the downsides of the vested enfranchisements that underpinned social partnership. And the Labour party notably did not take a stand on this. If this part of the Act is not amended, it will mean that cases like the Philip Smith v RSA, Sheehy Skeffington v NUIG or the three Filipina workers against the UAE Embassy in Ireland would never have benefited from the public illumination of daylight. Anonymisation of employment law decisions does not occur in any other country. Why is Ireland so out of step with international best practice? The current government has brought in very important legislation creating a register of lobbyists and the shielding of whistleblowers in the Protected Disclosures Act 2014. Anonymisation of employment law decisions is against the tide of this increased transparency in Government. •

By Frank Connolly Yet another storm is brewing in Wicklow following a decision by county council officials to dispose of its freehold on a significant commercial property on the Bray seafront. A number of elected members were shocked to learn in recent months of the disposal for just €10,000 of the freehold on the property where the upmarket Barracuda restaurant is located on the town’s famous promenade. At their monthly meeting on Monday (7th September) councillors were informed that the decision to sell the freehold was made following legal advice which suggested that the holder of the lease had a right to purchase the fee simple on the property. The leaseholder, Jim Flynn, held a 250-year lease on the property which was granted by Bray Urban District Council in 2004. This was an extension of a 65-year lease first granted by the council to the previous owners in 1991 which, council officials said, was confirmed by a vote of UDC members in 1998 as required under legislation. When the details of the unusually lengthy 250-year lease emerged several councillors were annoyed to discover that there were no records of the 1998 decision upon which it was apparently grounded or of any discussions surrounding what appeared to be the extremely generous terms given to the then leaseholders. The property was developed as an aquarium under the 1991 lease and more recently by Flynn and others as the popular Barracuda restaurant and a coffee shop. Flynn has plans to open a gastropub on the site but when he sought to acquire the necessary licence found that there were questions surrounding the leasehold which he then decided to purchase outright. Ignoring calls from some councillors for the Garda or the Attorney General to be called in to examine the controversial disposal of council property, without any evidence of the necessary agreement by elected members, either this year or back in 1998, the acting county manager Bryan Doyle insisted that everything was above board and that the decision was based on sound legal advice. He said that elected councillors had made the original decision to allow the now dissolved Bray UDC to grant the lease back in 1991. He also said there was a notice of disposal made by a vote of elected members to extend the lease in 1998 but there are no records of any such decision. The county manager confirmed that council staff are still looking for the file containing the 1998 notice of disposal. It was this decision on which the 250-year-lease arrangement was based in 2004. The agreement was signed on behalf of the council by then town manager, Des O’Brien and then Cathaoirleach and current Labour TD, Anne Ferris. The terms of agreement required the lease to pay the UDC €100 per annum. The agendas of the 1998 Bray UDC meetings, which could establish whether the necessary notice of disposal existed, are also missing. Doyle warned that if the council had not disposed of the property to Flynn it could be exposed to a costly claim for compensation. The row was compounded by the revelation from the chairman, councillor John Ryan of Fine Gael, that he is a partner of Flynn’s in an unrelated consultancy business ‘Great Place to Work’. He stood down from the chair while the Barracuda matter was discussed and told Village that he had not been present at a meeting earlier this summer when the controversy first arose. Ryan said that he accepted there were genuine concerns over the disposal and fears that other valuable council owned lands could be transferred into private hands for little or no consideration and for that reason had allowed the matter on to the agenda for discussion at the most recent meeting. “I declared the fact that I shared a directorship with Jim Flynn and I have informed the ethics registrar of the council to that effect. I have no interest in the Barracuda restaurant”, Ryan said. Wicklow County Council told Village it was preparing a report for the Members on the matter which will be considered at a Council meeting scheduled for the end of September. The row is the latest in a series of controversies surrounding the disposal of properties by Wicklow County Council to private interests. Officials in the Department of the Environment are continuing their investigation into the granting of valuable council lands to a company controlled by developers Sean Dunne and Sean Mulryan, in 2003 and 2004, to facilitate their massive Charlesland residential scheme near Greystones. Wicklow auctioneer, Gabriel Dooley, has submitted an extensive file to the department outlining what he claims were improper dealings between the prominent developers and elected members and officials of the council. Elected councillors did not vote on what the council has described as an ‘exchange of easements’ with the developers when lands were provided for road access to the Charlesland development. The easements were exchanged for €10, according to the contracts agreed at the time. In July, Mulryan told the Oireachtas banking inquiry that he was not aware of the details of the land transfers and said it was a matter for the county manager at the time. •

By Frank Connolly Is it possible that the row that has engulfed the National Assets Management Agency (NAMA), a leading solicitors firm and senior politicians in the North over the disposal of its Project Eagle portfolio of distressed loans could spill over to its controversial operations south of the border? The involvement of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) in the on-going investigations into the 2014 sale of the 850-property portfolio to New York based investment firm, Cerberus, has also cast a long shadow over the intensive discussions to save the devolved administration in Belfast. The Financial Times reported on 7th September that the DOJ has served a subpoena for information on Cerberus over allegations that improper payments were made, or intended to be made, in connection with its successful acquisition of the Project Eagle assets for £1.3bn (€1.6bn) last year. The assets of commercial and residential properties had an estimated value of £4bn when they were taken over by NAMA. These allegations were first aired in the Dáil in July when Mick Wallace TD disclosed that an audit of Tughans solicitors had revealed that a payment of £7m was “earmarked for a Northern Ireland politician”. Belfast-based Tughans was engaged by US legal firm Brown Rudnick which in turn was working for Cerberus on the purchase. When Wallace broke the story, Brown Rudnick confirmed it had “agreed to share with Tughans our fee from Cerberus and this arrangement was disclosed to both Cerberus and Nama”. Cerberus has said that it has not been accused of any wrongdoing in the matter and welcomes the inquiries. It said that “these matters are related to the alleged conduct of third parties and not to Cerberus or any of its affiliates”. The New York firm is chaired by former US vice-president, Dan Quayle, and details of his private meetings in 2013 and 2014 with then-first minister Peter Robinson and his party colleague the DUP finance minister, Simon Hamilton, over the deal have generated angry exchanges with deputy first minister, Martin McGuinness. The Sinn Féin leader in the North claims to have been unaware of the discussions and of a memo of understanding sent by Robinson to NAMA that helped to seal the loan-book sale. Central to the deal which is now under scrutiny in three jurisdictions is the former Tughans’ partner, Ian Coulter, whose sudden departure from the firm early this year sparked correspondence to the Northern Ireland Law Society from the firm. Coulter diverted the £7m fees due to Tughans to an offshore account which, Wallace said, was to be used for the benefit of a politician or a political party. It later emerged that Belfast businessman, Frank Cushnahan, a former member of NAMA’s Northern Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC), was to receive £5m for his role in brokering a sale of the assets to another US vulture fund, Pimco. Cushnahan was recommended for the position with NAMA by former DUP finance minister, Sammy Wilson. Minutes of phone calls revealed by NAMA to the Stormont committee investigating the controversy show that Hamilton informed the agency in December 2013 that both Robinson and McGuinness had been updated on confidential briefings about the sale of the portfolio and in particular the bid by Pimco. McGuinness has rejected the claim that he was kept informed of the tender and sale process. The Pimco bid collapsed after the suggested £5m payment to Cushnahan was disclosed to the Agency by the US firm in March 2014, just five months after he left his position with the NIAC. Pimco then withdrew from the process. Its rival Cerberus was awarded the tender. Further complicating the inquiries is a claim by Belfast developer, Gareth Graham whose family owns Sean P Graham bookmakers that “inappropriate political relationships and potentially unlawful banking relationships” are at the heart of the disposal of lucrative assets in the North, including his own distressed loans. At a dramatic hearing in early September Graham told the Stormont finance and personnel committee of Cushnahan’s “malevolent influence” over his company since he was taken on as an adviser in 2005 and more particularly since he was appointed to the NIAC in 2010. He also claimed that Cerberus have adopted a “ruthless, unjust and unreasonable” approach towards his company since it acquired Project Eagle last year. It has been suggested that Graham has been targeted for unfair treatment in comparison with the manner in which better connected developers and distressed property owners in the North have been treated. It is this type of controversy which could foster fresh allegations of improper behaviour by some of the large number of asset managers, or vulture funds, that are buying up substantial loan portfolios from NAMA in Dublin and other centres across the country in some cases with developers whose hubris created the crisis in the first place. Cerberus has bought up some €20bn in distressed assets in Ireland and across Europe over the past two years. Another complication for NAMA is the revelation that Cushnahan shared a directorship with agency chairman, Frank Daly, on an obscure though well-funded and Dublin-based Catholic charity called Ciorani, for some years. Daly has said that his involvement in the charity is a private matter. •

By Frank Connolly The recent appearance of Michael Fingleton at the banking inquiry served only to reinforce the widespread view that the Oireachtas hearings have done little to elucidate the real causes of the Irish financial collapse. The former head of Irish Nationwide Building Society accused everyone else but himself and his poor and self-serving stewardship of the institution for its failure and the matter of the €5.4bn it has cost the Irish people. There was much talk of Fingers’ €27m pension pot (which he managed and accumulated over decades of shrewd investments on his own behalf), his €1m bonus, which he once promised to repay or donate to charity but never did, and the €11,500 watch he received on retirement in April 2009 just months after the Society folded under the weight of its billions in bad loans. What would have been more interesting would have been an examination by the Committee of Inquiry of his relationships with the developers whose profligate borrowing from INBS contributed directly to the scale of the Irish collapse, the largest of any developed country in post-war history, and with the politicians who let it happen on their watch. Presumably for legal reasons, Fingleton was not asked about a €1.6m mortgage he personally authorised for former finance minister and then EU commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, in 2006 notwithstanding terms of reference obliging the Inquiry to examine the role of politicians in the banking collapse. McCreevy received the loan to allow him to obtain a 20-year mortgage to purchase a property at the K Club in Straffan just before the Ryder Cup was held at the luxury Kildare course. Given that McCreevy had a mansion built for him a few miles down the road by Sean Dunne in the 1990s, for an undisclosed amount, it seems a little extravagant even by the standards of the time to seek a 107% loan on the basis of “minimum paperwork”. It also happened to make a nonsense of the rules of the building society which did not permit 100% mortgages and which had valued the apartment at a mere €1.5m. At a hearing of the banking inquiry in early July, McCreevy was none too pleased when he was pressed by Labour senator Susan O’Keefe over the fast-tracked €1.6m loan from INBS. “I don’t know if this comes within the remit of the committee”, he complained. “I was a bank customer”. He said that he applied for and received the loan in 2006, “…a long time after I was minister for finance. I applied for a loan in the normal way and gave normal documentation and it was nothing to do with my time in finance or anything else”. He was forced to withdraw his claim that the Senator had “sneakily” thrown in an allegation concerning the controversial loan and instead described her question as an “innuendo”. The terse exchange was in tune with McCreevy’s refusal to accept that there was any property bubble, or at least any during his term in finance between 1997 and 2004, or that he had done anything wrong in his handling of the economy over those years. The K Club was also the location of another apartment where Sean Dunne had moved his selection of paintings and other works of art from his former Shrewsbury Road home until they were seized last year by court official assignee, Chris Lehane, as part of the developer’s bankruptcy process. Among the ‘treasures’ found in the vacant apartment was none other than a portrait by Tom Byrne of Dunne’s favourite lender, Michael Fingleton. At the time of the raid, Dunne denied ownership of the K Club property which he said was held in an Isle of Man-registered trust called Traviata. A painting by Dunne’s sister, Anne Donnelly, of the famous yacht the Christina O aboard which Dunne and his new wife, Gayle Killilea, celebrated their €1.5m wedding was also found among the art works. Fingleton, along with a host of other property and political luminaries, attended the lavish wedding in 2004. In 2013, it emerged that Fingleton’s son, Michael junior, a former INBS manager, was the landlord of a £12m (€14m) office block in England previously owned by Dunne. Dunne bought the property PGS Court in Waltham on Thames in Surrey for £9.3m in 1999 but was forced to sell it in 2011 for a reported £5m. Two years later the Isle of Man based Kulio (IOM) was listed as owner of the PGS building while Hibernian Capital, of which Fingleton junior was sole director, was named as its landlord on planning application documents. The property was leased by Kia Motors in 2012 for fifteen years. The previous year, the father and son hit the headlines when it emerged that Fingleton senior had transferred a sum of €608,498 to Michael junior’s London account from two accounts in Montenegro in Eastern Europe not long after he was hit for a €13.6m debt order from Ulster Bank. During bankruptcy proceedings in the US in December 2013, Dunne named Fingleton junior as a key player in a deal involving his wife’s company, Mountbrook USA, and Kulio Ltd in which he claimed to have been paid an agent’s fee of €175,000. Another favourite customer of the Fingleton’s one man banking operation, Sean Mulryan, also gave evidence in July and confirmed his status as a senior member of the elite political and banking circle. He described McCreevy as “a life-long friend” who shared his interest in horses; as was his successor in finance and later Taoiseach, Brian Cowen. Three weeks earlier, on 2nd July, during his first of two appearances at the inquiry, Cowen was asked whether he had held discussions with any property developers before giving his evidence and he name dropped Mulryan as one he had met casually at a ‘social occasion’ just four days previously. What he did not mention was that the social occasion was the latest lavish bash at Mulryan’s 18th-Century Ardenode Stud in Ballymore Eustace where