Yankees in the news

One of them - Alex Rodriguez - has been making the news over here. A-Rod has been making headlines for all the wrong reasons - and rumors of an extramarital affair with Madonna don't get much more wrong.

I don't usually pay much attention to the sort of news that A-Rod's been making lately, but this one's been impossible to avoid. And I did learn something when I read an article comparing A-Rod with J-Lo and K-Fed. I had to ask who K-Fed was.

It's mostly nonsense as far as I'm concerned, but I've heard a few people describe A-Rod as the "David Beckham of baseball". I don't think that's quite right. A-Rod's not likeable, unlike Beckham and A-Rod really is one of the best players in the world, unlike Beckham.

The other Yankee in the news is Bobby Murcer, who's actually in the news for worse reasons than A-Rod is. Murcer was a Yankee in the 60's and 70's and was the first Yankee I ever liked. He was a star for them when I went to my first game at Yankee Stadium in 1971. I loved watching him play when I was a little kid and I got to like him even more when he returned to the Yankees near the end of his career. There have been very few Yankees I've liked, but Murcer was one of them. Always had a soft spot for him.

Bypassing the referendum

I can't remember where I first came across it, but I remember after the Lisbon vote reading the comments of some Fine Gaeler - Gay Mitchell? - blaming the government for holding a referendum in the first place. His argument was that there was no constitutional imperative to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. I figured that was just some post-game point-scoring by the opposition. I thought so little of what he said that I read it and moved on. Didn't really strike me as important.

Then on July 5 I read a comment by Sarkozy that had me wondering if a non-referendum solution was being seriously considered.

“If the perspective of a second vote in Ireland has been raised it is because it has happened before,” Sarkozy told journalists, referring to Ireland’s second referendum on the Nice treaty in 2002. “We need some kind of vote to get out of the situation – in parliament or in a referendum, I don’t know. But when democratic society says ‘no’, you need a democratic solution.”

Catch that "in parliament"? But, would they? Could they? If all the parties agreed not to make it a difficult issue in the Dáil?

It would be an almighty act of arrogance, but an act of desperation too. And, desperate people will try desperate measures.

I thought to myself this could only be attempted after a prolonged and fairly vigorous softening up campaign. I still think it's unlikely, but today Ruth Barrington, a member of The Irish Times Trust, takes up the theme that the referendum was unnecessary.

Although the conventional wisdom holds that a referendum is required to ratify all EU treaties in Ireland, this is not the case. The treaties enlarging the EU, with the exception of our own in 1972, have been ratified through the Oireachtas. It is ironic that radical treaties that have expanded democracy to formerly totalitarian states can be ratified by the Oireachtas but rules of procedure treaties, such as Nice and Lisbon, which update and regulate our relationships within the union, are ratified by referendum.

The beginning of the softening up?

More on Dillon's column

I don't feel like I did justice to all that John Dillon's column was (or is). The first half was about insulting Americans. The second half of the column was a dig at President Bush (ho hum).

Dillon mixes in poll numbers with some of the more extreme rumors that only those disconnected from reality (that is, working in academia) could believe.

There is a feeling that Bush might even face indictment for some of his more free-wheeling acts. Someone heard a rumour that the Bush family had been engaged in buying a large hacienda in Paraguay, but that the deal fell through when Paraguay signed an extradition treaty with the US. Looks like it may have to be Albania after all for Dubya! They love him there.

Okay, I've seen a version of this Paraguay rumor before. I'll wait until the NY Times or Washington Post treat it seriously before I even consider it. But, again, who cares? If Dillon wants to give credence to "rumors" only even half-believed by those in academia and among the pongy perma-protesters of the far left that's his business.

What annoyed me was how he figured it was all right to mock Albanians. Albanians are still getting used to the light of freedom after enduring decades of grotesque tyranny followed by nearly 15 years of unrest. So they've done their fare share of suffering.

Still, Dillon mocks them because they welcomed Bush warmly when he visited in 2007. From the Washington Post's report on Bush's visit to Albania in June 2007:

"People here understand what evil can do," said Alfred Pllumbi, 28, an airport manager who walked the streets celebrating the visit. "And President Bush has fought evil."

Throughout Bush's eight-hour stay here, he was treated like a star. Crowds stood in the baking heat to catch a glimpse of the president's motorcade. They cheered and chanted when he emerged from his vehicle. At one point, Bush, in shirt sleeves, greeted a throng of exuberant Albanians outside a cafe in Fushe Kruje, a village near Tirana. Bush shook hands and hugged his screaming admirers, one of whom managed to rub his head.

They're free and they're happy, but to Dillon they're simpletons.

Stats & dogs

You just have to read John Dillon's column from Sunday's Sunday Independent. He once (apparently) lived in America, but that doesn't stop him from bashing Americans. He doesn't bash all Americans because he has friends there - "admittedly, of the liberal, academic persuasion, but good Americans all, and lovers of their country".

Those liberal academic types are the good Americans. The rest? Well …

It is a well-known statistic that much more money is expended on pets in the US than on aid to the Third World. Now I personally don't have much of a problem with that. After all, what has the Third World ever done for us? But it does perhaps point up an order of priorities that Americans may have to think about over the next few years.

I didn't know that. It's a "well-known" statistic, though. Or at least "well-known" presumably amongst Dillons friends in academia. It's also false.

In 2006 Americans spent $38bn on their pets whereas public and private sums given to overseas aid added up to $59bn. And how might this compare with Irish or European pet spending or overseas aid? I don't know. Nor does Dillon, I'd wager.

To be honest, I'm not a pet guy. I don't own a pet and I've often marveled at the amount of money some people spend on their pets. But, that's their choice. Other people's pets are hardly a concern of mine.

People choose to spend their money on all sorts of things. Americans seem to like owning pets. Irish people spend a lot of money on alcohol. An awful lot. Which is worse? I don't care, but a comparison in spending is interesting. Although I haven't found great numbers, it does look like Irish people spend a lot more per capita on alcohol than Americans do on cats & dogs or whatever. (In 2005 Americans spent $319 per household on pets whereas in 1999 the average Irish household spent €1,675 on alcohol¹.)

None of this matters even a little other than that Dillon misused of some of this information to smear Americans as a particularly self-absorbed, wasteful people. It's a falsehood born of the prejudice and anti-Americanism commonly found in Europe and in the halls of American academia, where John Dillon finds his American friends.

¹ In 1999 the average American household spent $318 on alcohol.

Solving problems without stress

First I was mad at Microsoft. I installed their recommended security patch and, after the requisite restart, couldn't access the internet. It wasn't Microsoft's fault, however, but the fault of my firewall - ZoneAlarm. Microsoft was fixing a problem that they'd been made aware of a while back, but somehow ZoneAlarm didn't (or couldn't) adapt their product in time for the patch's release. The patch caused ZoneAlarm to basically just shut down internet access.

It took me about 15 minutes to figure out what had happened and reverse what I'd done. That was it and I was back online.

I know that to you most of this is either uninteresting or gibberish or both. Still I'm shaking my head in wonder today. Wondering at how complex the "surfing the internet" still is; wondering at how many different pieces are necessary to be working together to provide security; wondering at how much less stressful I found this problem than I would have if it had happened 4 or 5 years ago (thanks to my greater knowledge and the improvements in Microsoft Windows, which make it much easier to 'undo' these sort of updates if necessary).

If this had happened in 2003 (or so) I'd have had hours of hair-pulling, nail-biting, stomach-churning aggravation before I would have somehow stumbled onto the solution and made all the necessary changes to get back online. Fifteen minutes. That's all it took today.

Blame it on the fees (or lack thereof)

If students had to pay to train to become doctors we probably wouldn't have the problem we have now. According to the Irish Times we're soon going to have too few doctors.

Ireland is facing a future shortage of family doctors involved in full-time clinical practice. The research, conducted by Prof Fergus O’Kelly and his TCD colleagues, surveyed all GP graduates between 1997 and 2003. It found that women GPs are half as likely as their male counterparts to work as full-time doctors at partnership level. Within the next eight years, an increasing number of family doctors will retire – some 40 per cent of GPs will stop working. And most leaving the profession will be men who have been involved in full-time medical practice. How, given the evidence of this survey, will they be replaced?

Forget the male-female thing because that's not the issue. The issue is that there is no cost to becoming a doctor because the state picks up the tab.

If students had to cover the true cost of becoming a doctor there would be far, far fewer giving up or taking time off after taking the taxpayer's dime to acquire an expensive degree. If medical students left college owing €100,000 (or whatever) very few would be able to afford that option.

The abolition of third-level fees has created a number of problems, but this may be the most glaring.

The world's biggest sponge

Sometimes I just marvel at how much water this small island can hold. Okay the sun is shining so far today, but the amount of rain we've had over the past 3 or 4 weeks would sink most larger land masses.

Doom & Gloom

Maybe I just need to read and pass on all of this in order to get it out of my system. Anyway, I thought David McWilliams was excellent in this comparison of the Japanese experience with what may (will?) befall us.

Will Irish house prices fall back to levels seen in 2000/2001 or even to levels seen last century? Will our house prices drop by 70pc before they stabilise? These numbers need to be considered because there are plenty of reasons to be fearful.

The similarities between both Ireland and Japan are striking; the main difference is that the Japanese controlled their own interest rates and thus were able to cut them to soften the blow. As EU inflation topped 4pc this week, it looks likely that we will be facing higher not lower rates for the foreseeable future. Not good.

One similarity is the capacity for self-delusion and failure to face up to the magnitude of our crisis.

… When I read the silly valuations in the 'Irish Times' property section, particularly the "Take 5 at €400,000" section, I am reminded of the Japanese Imperial Palace delusion. Clearly a two up, two down in Rialto is not worth the same as a seven-bedroomed house in the Dordogne. Now that prices are falling rapidly, the idea that pokey Irish houses are worth more than French chateaux will look increasingly daft.

The other problem for Ireland is the sheer extremity of the housing boom. Irish house prices have risen 380pc since 1996, compared with 260pc in the UK -- the next frothiest market. House prices fell in Germany and of course Japan in the same period. While in Switzerland -- Europe's technically most sophisticated economy -- house prices only rose by 5pc in the 12 years since 1996.

As a result of this binge, Ireland is the most indebted nation in Europe. Outstanding residential mortgage debt now amounts to 192pc of our total GNP! This is truly shocking and depressing when you consider that in Germany, outstanding mortgage debt only amounts to 3pc of GNP.

Even in the US -- where many disingenuous Irish commentators are suggesting this crisis originated -- outstanding mortgage debt only accounts for 44pc of GNP.

192% of GNP. How long before one of the banks falls?

This is why the personal debt comparisons with Germany are so instructive. The German has no property-related debt to speak of. This means that the average Gunter doesn't really mind if European interest rates rise, as it will make no difference at all to his budget at the end of the month.

In contrast, the average Paddy, who has seen his personal property indebtedness rise by over 500pc since the late 1990s, will be roasted by a rise in rates.

The Celtic Sabertooth Tiger is extinct.

ESRI Forecasts

The ESRI now says we're in recession. It was only last October that they forecast growth of 2.9% for this year. I remember back in the 90s they were consistently way low on their estimates of growth when the economy was taking off.

So, what to make of their forecast that we'll see growth returning weakly in 2009 and more strongly in 2010. According to Paul Tansey, not much.

Yet, the conventional wisdom now holds that, whatever the economy's current travails, it will rebound to reasonable health in the years from 2010 onwards.

The key text quoted in support of this consoling prognosis is the Economic and Social Research Institute's Medium-Term Review 2008-2015. The ESRI does indeed foresee annual average growth of 3.8 per cent in real Gross National Product between 2010 and 2015 in its central forecast.

… The ESRI notes that "the benchmark forecast assumes that domestic policies will accommodate the objective of maintaining competitiveness over the medium-term".

However, the central problem lies in the fact that it may not be within the capacity of domestic policies to revive Irish price competitiveness. Ireland's arsenal of policy instruments was depleted on entry to the euro. Monetary policy and exchange rate policy were surrendered to Europe.

Thereafter, the use of both policy instruments was dictated by the requirements of the core euro zone economies, not by the needs of the peripheral players such as Ireland.

Our economy is just too small and too far out of synch with the rest of the Eurozone to justify being part of the Euro.

"Pet project"

I absolutely loved this headline from yesterday's Irish Independent: "Greens' pet project to survive cutbacks".

It's a headline from an article by Sam Smyth.

The Government will blow €400,000 on a Green Party pet project, at a time when they are preparing to cut €500m from spending on essential public services.

The cabinet quietly approved purchasing carbon credits for government travel last week. The move was part of deal reached with the Greens during coalition negotiations following last year's general election.

"Blow €400,000", "pet project" - I love it.

Look, I don't care how much you might think carbon emissions are the primary cause of global warming (or whatever) this is a stupid program. If John Gormley wants to plant trees every time he flies that's fine, but he shouldn't be using our money to salve his conscience. He can plant his own trees. Better he cancel one (or more) flight(s) a year and get his fellow ministers to do the same. That would save money and 'the planet'.

You think the government should plant trees in Ireland? Fine. Provide the case that this is a good use of taxpayer's money and do it. Drop the nonsense.

It's time to raise interest rates

That's what Angela Merkel thinks. Mr. Sarkozy doesn't agree nor does anyone in Ireland, but let's face it, the Euro is Germany's baby. Germany is the biggest economy and the Germans as a people have a much greater fear of inflation than do other Europeans. So, even though the ECB is independent, I think Merkel is more likely to be happy this week than is Sarkozy (or Berlusconi or Zapatero or Cowen).

I still wonder how bad things will have to get here before people start demanding that we leave the Euro. Now that would be a drastic move, unlike voting 'No' to the Lisbon Treaty.

Years from now when people look back and ask what led to the "Celtic Tiger" the answer will be obvious to all: cheap oil, cheap credit and an undervalued currency. There'll be no drivel like our "well-educated workforce".

Free! Free! Free!

From today, the Irish Times is free online. This is the another big blow in newspapers' attempts to charge subscriptions for online access. The Irish Times has been charging for many years and obviously couldn't make it work.

I understand the motivation (businesses need to make money), but unless we had the biggest case ever of industrial collusion it was always going to be hard for some papers to charge while others were making their content available for free. I'm sure there are other papers still charging for access, but the only one I can think of right now is the Wall Street Journal (and some parts of the Journal are free online).

Le secrétaire d'Etat aux affaires européennes

No, I can't speak French. I wish I could today. I'd like to know if I'm getting a bad translation of this article from Le Monde. I'll have to live with the translation of what Mr. Jean-Pierre Jouyet, France's "Europe Minister" (Secretary of European Affairs? - see above) had to say about Ireland's vote.

French daily Le Monde reports Mr Jouyet as saying that "Europe has powerful enemies on the other side of the Atlantic, gifted with considerable financial means. The role of American neo-conservatives was very important in the victory of the No."

Ah, Cheney & Rumsfeld again. Lovely. Wrecking "Old Europe's" best laid plans by writing a big check for the 'No' campaign. Ahhh, the satisfaction.

Where did Mr. Jouyet get this nonsense from? Well, apparently it goes back to our friend Lucinda Creighton's attempt at playing the Anti-American card during the campaign.

Sheesh. Talk about paranoid. Europhiles across the continent sure are having trouble remaining connected to reality. A light campaign smear in Ireland and next thing you know French Government Ministers are quoting the Da Vinci Code as an explanation for what went wrong with their grand project.

Miss Creighton, can you please restrain yourself before posting on your web site in future? Your campaign hyperbole is causing members of the French government to make fools of themselves. This is on your head young lady.

The inexplicable 11%

I love reading poll data. You sometimes see things that the reporters ignore when they write a story about the poll.

A Eurobaromoter poll conducted after the Lisbon vote doesn't tell us a lot. I don't think so anyway. It does, however, raise questions either about some of the people who vote or about polls.

Try this. Eleven percent of the 'No' voters believed the Lisbon Treaty was "good for Ireland". What were those 11% (98,000 people) thinking? Why would they vote 'No' if they believed the Treaty was good for the country? I can't come up with any reasonable explanation as to why such a large number of people might have voted this way.

Now before you get too excited, before you start screaming about those numbskulls who make up the 11% and how they cost the 'Yes' side the vote there's this: eleven percent (odd symmetry, no?) of the 'Yes' voters believed the Treaty was "bad for Ireland". Now it's possible that these people could at least have reasonably felt that the Treaty was bad for Ireland, but good for the EU. So maybe there's some explanation for these people. Still, that would mean 80,000 voters were willing to say 'Yes' to something for the sake of the EU at Ireland's expense. Doubtful.

These figures are so strange that I can't help but wonder about the poll itself. How clear were the questions? How representative the sample(s)? 180,000 strange birds voting in the referendum just seems too outlandish. To me this calls the whole poll into question. The media may be running with it, but I would suggest that the government should not be overly dependent on it.

More clarity

Thank you Mr. Joschka Fischer. The former European powerbroker when he was Germany's Foreign Minister has provided further clarification regarding Ireland's position in the EU.

It has happened. After France and the Netherlands rejected the European Constitutional Treaty, Ireland's "No" vote is the second and probably decisive blow against a united and strong Europe. June 12, 2008, will have to be remembered as the day that made European history. No matter what desperate rescue efforts will be undertaken, they cannot hide the fact that the European Union has left the world stage as a serious foreign policy player for at least 10 years (if not for much longer).

… There is still a minuscule chance to avert the debacle if Ireland with its "No" vote remains isolated within the EU.

I don't think anyone ever even imagined France and/or the Netherlands being "isolated within the EU". The votes of the French & Dutch don't matter nor do the rules of the EU nor the pleasant language about Ireland being a partner in the European project.

Again, if we do eventually vote again and approve Lisbon at least there can be no more spin, no more BS, no more naivete, no more denying what the EU is and what our role in the Union is.

April 2009 a good time for Lisbon II

One good thing about the 'No' vote is that we can wait to see how the wind blows in the US election. If we have a second Lisbon Treaty next spring we'll have had enough time to see if President Obama's protectionist policy proposals look like a runner. If they do, then a 'No' vote would be all the more costly as the world's big blocks start throwing up the shutters. It would be foolish to remain outside the EU in such circumstances (unless Ireland is offered some alternative membership in NAFTA). If, however, the protectionist noises fade away after the election then the dangers of being on the outside of the EU would be lessened.

A mid-April re-run of the Lisbon vote should be late enough to know where things are going.

Clarity

Regardless of how this "Lisbon Treaty" ends up, we have clarity now regarding Ireland's real position in the EU. We are not a "partner" in this project. We are expendable and our so-called "veto" was never as firm as the 'Yes' campaign would have us believe.

We didn't have a "veto". We had a "vote" where if we had to we would stand with other countries that shared our concerns on neutrality or taxes or whatever. If any of these issues led to conflict with the 26 other members we were always going to be beaten down. We had no clout and only a minimum of influence. That we had power and influence was the great lie that our politicians peddled (& possibly even believed).

At least the next vote can be more honest. Isolation and possible penury against servility and dependence. It may not be pretty, but at least it's a clear choice.

Two speed Europe

Okay. I'll admit it. I'm slow. Or at least, I'm missing something really, really important with regards to the EU.

Why is a "two-speed" EU (or Europe, as I hear it more often) such a bad thing? From what I understand a "two-speed" Europe is one where some countries plow on with various reforms, etc. while other countries opt out of those reforms (or whatever).

"Nobody wants to see that" is the refrain whenever the possibility of a "two-speed" Europe is brought up. Well, why not?

First of all we already have a multi-speed Europe, dont' we?

The euro is used in only 15 of the EU's 27 countries. Many of the countries not currently using the euro are the new members from E. Europe, most of whom plan to adopt the euro by 2012. However, Britain, Sweden and Denmark are outside the Euro and don't want to join. More than one speed there, no?

Britain and Ireland are outside the Schengen zone. Another change of gears.

So, what exactly is a "two-speed" Europe and why is it so fearful a development for Ireland. Often this fear is expressed in some form of "loss of influence" terms. Well, just how much "influence" does Ireland have exactly? Because, let's face it, our power and strength are hardly likely to sway the Germans, Italians, French, etc. anyway. How much worse off would we be if we were outside the EU's decision-making center, but in a position to negotiate our relationship with the EU? Would we really be that much worse off?

The other day I heard someone gasp at this thought and follow up with (something like) we'd end up like Norway? Norway?

Norway is not a Member State of the EU, and the relationship with the Union is therefore based on other forms and means of close contact and co-operation. This co-operation enables Norway to maintain a very high level of economic integration, and political co-operation, with the EU and its Member States.

Is being outside the EU really costing Norway that much? And, besides, they're not in the EU. Ireland would remain in the EU, but in the slow lane, so to speak, if we had a "two-speed" Europe. Although I'll admit that maybe I'm missing something really, really big here, I wouldn't mind being in the slow lane although I'm sure Irish Eurocrats and politicians would blanche at the very idea.

I'm not even sure where the high speed Europe is heading, but if the fast lane is the highway to hell I'm just as happy to proceed at a leisurely pace.

"Beer-soaked" - an addendum

{I hit the "Go" button on my post last night too quickly.}

Of the 27 countries for which I found 1970 data on alcohol consumption only 5 had a lower per capita consumption than Ireland: Turkey, Japan, Norway, Iceland and Finland. Only one of those nations (Finland) is in the EU today. In other words, when compared with other EU countries Ireland in 1970 was pretty far from "beer-soaked" unless Cohen believes that every EU country was even more "beer-soaked" (or "wine-soaked" or "vodka-soaked") in 1970.

This is why I said that Cohen had fallen back on a stereotype - and an inaccurate one - when he described Ireland in 1970. Stereotype, bigotry, hysteria - I'd like to say that this is a new low for the New York Times, but I doubt it is. Unfortunately.

"Beer-soaked"

I have more to say about Roger Cohen's column in today's NY Times. Cohen decided that he couldn't make his case without playing on a (inaccurate) stereotype about Ireland and Irish people.

Cohen wrote:

I can’t think of a country that’s benefited from European Union membership more than Ireland. It has catapulted itself in a few decades from beer-soaked backwater to the Celtic Tiger whose growth rates, foreign investment and rags-to-riches story were the envy of every languishing small nation with a thirst for a makeover.

Did you catch that "beer-soaked backwater"? Yup, if not for the EU Ireland would still be a land full of drunks.

Truth is, the EU could more easily be blamed for turning Ireland into a "beer-soaked cesspool". In 1970 Irish & British per capita alcohol consumption was nearly identical (7.0 liters per person in Ireland, 7.1 in Britain). By 2004 Ireland's per capita consumption was 13.6 liters per person whereas Britain's per capita was 11.5.

You see? Ireland's alcohol consumption has nearly doubled since we joined the EU. Maybe Mr. Cohen could have spent the ten minutes on google that it took me to find those stats. Ignoramus.

Cohen's fit of pique

Whoa! Roger Cohen needs a break. Clearly he's working too hard. He also needs to read David McWilliams's from yesterday's Irish Independent. He should also read Gideon Rachman from the Financial Times earlier in the week.

The European Union has a difficult balance to strike between efficiency and accountability - between democracy and technocracy. The lesson of the Irish referendum, and of the French and Dutch votes before it, is that the balance has tilted too much towards technocracy.

Even Anne Applebaum's Washington Post column from Tuesday might help him with some perspective.

So pay no attention to the wailing in Brussels: If the most enthusiastic Europeans in Europe didn't care enough to read the treaty they've just rejected, then maybe it's just as well it didn't pass.

Maybe had Cohen read those columns he might have tempered what he said in today's New York Times.

Yet here we have the Irish, in a fit of Euro-bashing pique worthy of the worst of little-Englandism, rejecting the renegotiated Lisbon treaty essential for the functioning of an expanded 27-member E.U. Biting the hand that feeds you does not begin to describe this act of bloody-mindedness.

The Lisbon Treaty is essential. It alone can create a streamlined decision-making mechanism for a 27-member union. It alone can forge the meaningful presidency and foreign-affairs posts that will give the E.U. the increased political clout that its economic weight demands.

"Pique"? "Biting the hand"? "Bloody-mindedness"? At least he's respecting the Irish people's democratically expressed wishes. NOT!

Like I said, Cohen needs a break. He's clearly overwrought (as are too many in the pro-Lisbon camp). The vote is not the calamity he and others have portrayed it as nor was the 'No' vote a fit of "pique" or "bloody-mindedness". The European Union has a problem with legitimacy among the people of the EU. Taking the time to try to understand this phenomenon would be a worthwhile exercise for those at the center of the EU's power structure.

"Let them eat cake"?

Alistair Darling. What was he thinking? Surely he knew how that would look on the evening news?

There he was on the BBC news last night standing there in his tuxedo speaking in the well-appointed surroundings of the Mansion House asking for restraint from the unions. He's barely finished wiping the pheasant and Château Lafite from his lips and he's up chiding organized labor for even possibly considering asking for pay raises to help offset the costs of their members' rapidly rising gas and electric bills.

I think he has a point, but the optics were so bad that even I winced. If I were a labor leader I'd be using that clip to stir the masses.

Debt repaid

David McWilliams in today's Irish Independent explains how the Irish people are truly good Europeans and have already repaid the €33bn that we've received in aid over the past 35 years.

Ireland is a proper European partner to the Joe Soaps from Warsaw, Riga and Vilnius, while the French and Germans have closed their doors to them.

… We have close to 300,000 immigrants working from the new accession states here. Let's say they are on a wage between the minimum wage of €17,000 and the average wage of close to €35,000 a year. So let's say €25,000. That's a total wage bill of €7.5bn per year.

As we are now going into our fifth year of open borders, it is likely that Ireland has put back more cash in the pockets of poor European immigrants in five years that the EU has given us in 35 years.

… If you want to see what European integration is for ordinary people, don't watch the pomp and ceremony of the leaders' summit tomorrow, go to the arrivals hall at Dublin airport.

There, amid the stonewashed denims, shaved heads and East European biker jackets, you will see the true hope that Europe brings. It is a chance of a better life for the immigrants and their children. It is the chance to bring money home, to plan and to invest in the future. This is what Europe is all about.

"Ungrateful"

How many times have you heard or read about how Ireland is "ungrateful" for voting 'No' after pocketing all that EU money?. And it's apparently a truism that Ireland has benefited more than any other country from membership of the European Union¹.

Every time I heard/read this line of argument the same two thoughts came to mind: (1) was this explained at each referendum that a 'Yes' would mean the end of the right to vote any way but the "right way"? and (2) now Europeans understand how Americans can get so annoyed by Europeans because Europe owes at least as much to the United States for Europe's peace and prosperity as Ireland owes to the EU.

¹ The single market provided no benefit to Germany, France, Italy, Holland, the UK, etc.? What is that worth to each of those countries? What are Ireland's lost fishing rights worth? Etc. You cannot evaluate the value of EU membership to an individual country by looking at direct transfers.

Why 'Yes'?

One theme that has been discussed to death is why so many people voted 'No'. What seems to have been almost totally ignored is why so many voted 'Yes'. I haven't talked to that many people about the vote, but I haven't met anyone who even made the effort I made to read the treaty (that is, get a hard copy, read parts of it, get a soft copy and do a search for key words). So why were so many - over 750,000 people - willing to vote 'Yes'?

The only explanation I can come up with - and I think this is actually a positive reason - is that a lot people trust their government. They voted 'Yes' because they believe, despite all the bad press that politicians get, that the deal that their elected representatives made is one that is good for the country.

I have to assume that quite a few of those who voted 'Yes' would not vote for the government parties, which means that although they have some differences with Fianna Fail, the Greens & PD's they have faith that the government did actually get the best possible deal for Ireland in their negotiations with the other EU countries. 46% of the electorate was sufficiently trusting in the government to vote 'Yes'.

The opposite, however, is not necessarily true. People could have voted 'No' simply because they didn't like the deal or don't like the EU. In fact, only 17% voted 'No' because they didn't trust the government. Overall, there is a lot of trust in the government and our elected officials. That's not a bad thing.

Still surprised by Lisbon vote

Over the weekend I spent a lot of time reading and thinking about the Lisbon Treaty referendum. In fact, until I found out that Willie Randolph had been let go late yesterday it was pretty much all I'd been thinking about. I watched the European Championships each night with a newspaper in my hand reading analysis (what happened?) and speculation (where now?).

As I wrote last week I was a pretty soft 'No' voter. I even hesitated before making my mark on Thursday evening. Even after casting my own vote I was pretty sure it would pass. Again, I was surprised when it failed. I was more surprised by the turnout than the margin of the 'No' victory. A high turnout was presumed a plus for the 'Yes' side. In the end, turnout was 53%, which is pretty high (higher than the 50% who approved the Nice Treaty in 2002) and can't be easily dismissed.

I've been sorting through so many thoughts on this vote and the EU generally that I'm figuring on writing a bunch of shorter posts rather a confused book-length post.

Classless disgrace

My team. Uggh. The NY Mets are a no-class joke of an organization.

Last night at 3am NY time they fired their manager, Willie Randolph. Randolph was - perhaps - not the greatest manager, but he deserved better than this. And, they fired Randolph after the team won last night (and has won 3 of 4). And, not only had the Mets won and not only was it 3am in New York, but the Mets had only arrived in California after a cross country flight late the previous night. They could have fired him the day before, but decided to wait because it was Father's Day. Nonsense.

Willie probably should have been fired after last season's collapse, but this team's troubles are little to do with Randolph and mostly to do with the man who put this team together and that's not Willie, but Omar Minaya.

Sure, I'll go on rooting for them, but this stinks. Big time.

Thrice 'No' for the EU 'Constitution'

It'll be on every bulletin across the EU and probably even the rest of the western world. Ireland has voted to reject the Lisbon Treaty. I'm surprised, but not shocked. It doesn't seem to have been all that close either, although most of the votes aren't counted yet. Still anything over a 53% vote for 'No' is, to my mind, a pretty solid rejection. That makes it a hat trick given that the French & Dutch already said 'No' to this constitution in treaty's clothing.

Mary Flynn, a nurse from Dublin, summed up a general sentiment when speaking to the Washington Post.

"I don't understand a good lot of it; I don't know what it does," Flynn, a 49-year-old nurse, said of the complex, 300-page treaty. Ireland "would be nothing," she acknowledged, without the billions of dollars the E.U. has given this once-poor country in the past 35 years. But she said she voted against the treaty: "If you don't know, you vote no."

The analysis of what went wrong will go on for days/weeks, but people were being asked to/bullied into agreeing to simply trust the politicians. Not a winning formula in a referendum.

No! Yes! No!

I've thought a lot about the Lisbon Treaty. Initially I was all set for a 'No'. Then I started to consider the implications for Europe and began to lean towards 'Yes'. It was only in the last 24 hours that the truth that this is, essentially, the EU Constitution and that was already rejected by the French & Dutch that I've firmed up in the 'No' camp.

I don't feel comfortable transferring sovereignty to an entity that thinks so little of democracy that they dismiss the voters' decision and press on with their plans none-the-less. I'm going to vote 'No', but if the treaty was subjected to a referendum in (at least) Holland and France (other nations were promised referenda too) I would probably have voted 'Yes'.

So, I'm doing what we've been told we shouldn't do by so, so many. I'm voting on grounds that are not actually part of the treaty. I'm voting 'No' simply because the Eurocrats and Europhiles who govern us simply do not care what the voters think.

Out of Many, One

If we approve Lisbon we'll have provided the basis on which the restructured EU can streamline the process of decision-making. We won't be one nation, but we will be one fairly unified people of many nationalities from one end of Europe to the other. We may never be one nation, but that doesn't mean we can't be one transnational people. It is, ultimately, where we are headed.

This fact is denied by the 'Yes' side and accentuated by the 'No' side in the treaty debates. To my mind it is the primary weakness in the Yes argument. If the Yes campaign would own up to this and make the case that this is a good thing for both Ireland and Europe I think people would be less suspicious of the EU.

Recently, John Bruton wrote a column promoting the 'Yes' campaign. {I wasn't sure it was appropriate for the EU's Ambassador to the United States to play so direct a role in the campaign, but that's another issue.}

Bruton appealed to me with a few sentences.

The European Union is the greatest peace process of the 20th century. It is the world's only multinational democracy. No other region of the world has pooled sovereignty among nations that once were at war as the EU has done.

Although I'm not keen on his language and I think the EU can get too much credit here, he's not a million miles from the truth. The EU has been great at deflecting, defusing, channeling national rivalries. Without the EU what sort of Europe would we have?

I think the dilution of the power of the nation state has been fundamental in this. Why are the 'Yes' people so uneasy making this case? Why can't they admit this is what's happening and argue the positives of this?

I'm guessing that they know (or suspect) that the public isn't willing to accept this, that the dilution of our national identity is not a winner. But, why not? Irish people seem to like traveling around Europe. Many have lived in other EU states. There are thousands of people from across the EU living amongst us here. We enjoy fairly easy trade, share a currency, and pool our sovereignty on many issues.

The Lisbon Treaty is all about continuing this process and making it easier. We are many nations, but we are, gradually, becoming one. In fact, the motto for the Lisbon Treaty could be e pluribus unum. Had this been admitted up front maybe the 'Yes' side wouldn't be so worried right now.

No wonder Cork wins so many All-Ireland's

The answer was there all along, but until I saw it in today's NY Daily News I never made the connection. Here's the headline: Source: Roger Clemens, host of athletes pop Viagra to help onfield performance. Well, in Cork they're breathing it in with every breath.

Brian's beggin

He's on his knees. He's pleading. Don't vote 'No'.

The poll today makes it look pretty sticky for the Yes folks, but I think they'll still get their victory. Cowen has that look in his eyes that we've all seen in a zillion disaster movies. He looks like George Kennedy telling us the dam's gonna go (or whatever).

Elm Park

I don't know anything about the development at Elm Park other than what I see from the road. It's massive and so new looking. Tonight as I was driving by I had a thought I first had a few months back: that Elm Park is one big white elephant and that someday it will be a symbol of everything that went wrong as the economy went into its inevitable property price crash.

Now maybe I'm dead wrong and all those units - residential and commercial - are sold and/or will be sold. I hope so. It just looks so darn big, so darn new and so darn empty whenever I pass by.

I don't care what John Gormley thinks

I love driving. Not always, true, but there are times when I just love the feeling of being in the car, cruising along, listening to the radio. I was driving out of Dublin this evening just late enough so that the traffic was nearly gone.

Popped in a CD that I found in the glove compartment. Hadn't listened to it in a while and I wasn't sure what would be on it. It was one I made myself and it just says "random" on it. First song up - Immigrant Song by Led Zeppelin. {That's another thing about driving: for me the songs have to be utterly familiar. Anything unfamiliar requires too much concentration.}

Light traffic all the way and hardly a red light. Perfect.

Lidl

Have I mentioned Lidl before? I don't think so.

For those of you who don't know, Lidl is a supermarket. Sort of. Really it's a lot more than that. It's an experience. It's a surreal experience.

Lidl is a German supermarket chain. I don't know how long they've been in Ireland, but my first time in Lidl was probably less than 2 years ago. And I don't go that often. It isn't the kind of store where you go when you need stuff.

What makes Lidl different? I have trouble pinning it down. Maybe it's the 'foreign-ness'? It's a great place to practice your German, so many of the products have German labels. The foods available are probably available in Tesco and other supermarkets, but Lidl is so much smaller that the odd, non-local foods stand out more. Toilet-seat shaped sausages, for example. Always reminds me of being in a German deli in New York, only down market. Oh, and, there's actually no deli, only packaged foods.

Maybe it's the way the food is displayed? The freezers, in particular, always look 3/4 empty. Every time I've been in Lidl I've had the feeling that shoppers from the Soviet Union would have felt at home in Lidl's frozen foods section. One, maybe two products available and acres of empty space. Half of the rest of the foods are just dumped on pallets on the floor. It's as if they want it to look like the store is run by a former Commissar from Nizhny Novgorod?

The size is also odd. The stores are actually pretty small. Which brings me to my next possible explanation. Maybe it's the range of things you find there (given the size)? The fact that Wal-mart sells snow tires, lingerie, milk by the gallon, birthday cards and beer-keg size containers of Vaseline doesn't surprise me because the stores are so big. You could park a few 747's in most Wal-mart stores.

Lidl - at least around here - is small. Yet, despite that, the last time I was in Lidl I could have picked up a chainsaw and/or a motorcycle helmet. My previous trip to Lidl they had trumpets and trolley jacks. You never see the same products twice. And, you can't count on finding something there. I bought shaving cream there a while back and thought it was good. Last time I was there they had no shaving cream. I can't imagine any other supermarket simply having no shaving cream. Maybe out of one brand, but never none at all. Like I said, you can't go there when you need stuff.

It's all just part of the appeal. Every trip you find something new and you find something missing. Every trip is an adventure. Lidl has to be experienced.

What were the names of the horses?

If you'd won £8,000 "at the races" wouldn't you remember the names of the horses and what best you'd placed? I sure would. Bertie Ahern said yesterday that some of his previously forgotten sterling deposits were the result of his having backed winners in one or two bets. I can't believe he said this yesterday and there were no follow-up question about the the racetrack and/or the horse's name (or horses' names)? Surely he'd remember the name of a horse on which he won £4,000?

If this story is true then Bertie Ahern must be among the more successful gamblers in history, unless he has massive losses that he also hasn't owned up to.

Hijab in schools

I told you that the other day I spent a bit of time catching up on my newspapers. I came across this angry column from Martina Devlin (May 22). Devlin's writing about veils, Islam, women, etc after the issue arose at a Wexford school. 13-year-old Shekina Egan wants to wear a hijab to school, but it's not part of the uniform. The school principal allowed her to wear the hijab. I don't really have a problem with his decision.

Now truth is, if the school says that the hijab is not part of its uniform then it shouldn't be allowed. If the principal wants to make an exception to the uniform policy to allow a girl to wear a veil/hijab that's his call. He's the ultimate authority when it comes to discipline and his decision is law.

Devlin, however, wants to ban hijabs, pretty much anywhere in Ireland. She doesn't want women wearing the hijab in "banks, hospitals or libraries, not in the guards or civil service and most definitely not in schools".

She also says:

Here's what banning the headscarf is about: the State demonstrating our belief in gender equality. It's about removing a symbol of repression and submission.

Yes. In order to demonstrate "our belief in gender equality" we're going to tyrannically remove a woman's choice to wear the hijab. I once heard a woman describe a wedding ring as a symbol of submission. Should they be banned too?

Why is she so worried if some women want to wear a hijab? I think it's because She believes we're on a slippery slope.

Today the hijab which covers the hair and shoulders, tomorrow the niqab or full-face veil, the day after the burqa hiding everything from tip to toe -- described as a mobile prison by women obliged to wear it.

I suspect that Devlin is worried that Ireland is going to adopt Sharia. I don't think that's going to happen.

Regardless, a woman covering her hair (& shoulders) is hardly extreme. I would, however, agree that the niqab (covering the face) is too extreme. We in the west must see a person's face when we deal with them. It's part of our culture and we can - and should - resist any attempt to normalize the niqab.

There is a huge gulf between the hijab and the niqab and we non-Muslims should acknowledge this. I mean, it's not like it's that long ago that women in veils (aka nuns) were a pretty common sight here. I still see some occasionally. A woman wearing a veil is not the extreme behavior that Devlin wants us to believe it is.

Hands off!

This from Ireland.com yesterday:

A further 19 beaches also failed to meet a higher aspirational "guide" level designed to encourage cleaner bathing water.

Nine of these were in Co Dublin: Skerries, Sutton, Portmarnock, Merrion Strand, Bray, Greystones, Donabate, Malahide, Loughshinny.

Bray? Greystones? Those unclean beaches are in Wicklow, not Dublin.

Hold that thought

I think I have some things I want to say, but I can't remember at the moment. I know you're all waiting with bated breath for more of my pearls of wisdom. Unfortunately, it's just so darn nice out that all I'm doing on this holiday Monday is sitting in my comfortable chair in the backyard reading newspapers. I have like a 4 month back-log to get through, so you'll have to wait til tomorrow.

Jim Corr - Moron or marketing genius?

Jim Corr. Remember him? It took me a few minutes, but then I remembered who he was. He's the brother of the three attractive sisters and they were a nice pop band a good few years ago, if you like that sort of thing. Anyway, Jim was the one nobody took much notice of.

Until today. Today all the papers here feature Jim because he said some ridiculously stupid things.

Corrs guitarist Jim Corr has claimed that there was overwhelming evidence that the 9/11 attacks in America were carried out by "rogue elements" of US President George Bush's "neo-con administration".

In a rare intervention into the political arena, the male singer with The Corrs band also came out against the Lisbon Treaty claiming that it is " tip-toe totalitarianism in the West".

In an interview with Matt Cooper on Ireland's Today FM's 'Last Word', Corr made the case for voting 'No' to Lisbon, claiming it could introduce the death penalty to Ireland and contribute to a "new world order".

Corr's opposition is based on his three years "studying the New World Order which the European Union is a part of".

This is sheer lunacy or idiocy, right? But wait. What if you're a member of a band, one that hasn't sold a lot of records lately? What if you find yourself troubled by the fall-off in income?

Well, saying stupid things and getting in the news is better than not being in the news at all, right? And, let's face it, even the truthers have money to spend and there are probably enough of them to make it worthwhile to be their favorite band, right?

I hope Corr is cynically playing for those chumps' change because morons are a dime a dozen these days.

Maybe try a different pitch?

The Ireland Tourist Board is advertising during the Mets' radio broadcasts. The ads are pretty standard fare, but I think if the tourist board got creative they could come up with some great ads for use during Met games this season.

First of all, it's a little odd that the ads are so female oriented when I'm guessing that the audience for Mets baseball on the radio is predominantly male. And, given the Mets play so far this year, not just male but either hopelessly optimistic or masochistic. Maybe a bit of both.

Anyway, if I was going to advertise Ireland during Met games, I'd promote Ireland as a peaceful refuge, where news and conversation about the Mets is non-existent (so long as they don't run into me).

I'd try something like, "You know, in Ireland nobody cares that Delgado's not hitting or that Pelfrey can't get anyone out or that Perez is walking half the National League". Or maybe try, "Nothing else seems to be working, so we're going to try and get every Met fan to come to Ireland and kiss the Blarney Stone. Everyone knows that's good luck". Or, "Instead of suffering through another two weeks of Met games, why not come to Ireland. Ireland has a long history of men flagellating themselves as part of spiritual, cleansing rituals". Or what if they show a couple of guys in a field on a rainy day singing "I'm gonna wash those Mets right out of my hair". Okay that last one probably doesn't work, but you get the idea.

Just trying to help out during these tough times for the Irish tourism industry.

Second child allowed

The Chinese government has said that parents who lost a child in the earthquake can apply to the government for permission to have another child. I've been surprised by how open China's government has been following the earthquake, but it's still a tyranny as this decision shows.

According to the policy, local governments can levy steep fines on couples who have more than one child; the children of those who defy the rules are sometimes denied government benefits, including access to a free education.

The committee announced Monday that if a couple's legally born child was killed in the earthquake, an illegal child under 18 years could be registered as a legal replacement. If the dead child was illegal, it said the family would no longer be responsible for outstanding fines, although parents would not be reimbursed for penalties already paid.

The one-child policy is an obscenity and this ham-fisted attempt to help grieving parents is an obscenity piled on obscenity.

It serves as a reminder that although we in the west have issues with our governments the people of China have far bigger problems with theirs.

The EU go-slow

There's little real enthusiasm for the Lisbon vote and that's just how the EU wants it. They want the voters to simply trudge to the polls, shrug their shoulders and vote 'Yes' without paying too much attention to what the EU is doing (rather than what has been done). There's no other way to interpret the reports that the EU is basically hibernating until after the vote.

According to both the Financial Times and the International Herald Tribune the EU is putting off doing anything, anything at all, for fear it will tip the balance in the referendum to the 'No' side.

The FT's John Murray Brown says that the pending referendum forced the the EU to (a) push back the date for budget reform proposals (agricultural matters in particular) and (b) silence any talk on harmonised EU corporate tax rates. Murray Brown also speculates that the choice of a June date for the referendum "may have been influenced by concern that France would unveil a bold defence initiative as a centre-piece of its presidency of the EU in the second half of the year".

Stephen Castle in the IHT has much the same story to tell.

The view that Brussels has been gripped by a go-slow is shared widely. "We all know this is happening, but we are all denying it - so you won't get me saying anything on the record," one EU diplomat said.

But the evidence is all around. In March, the European Union's 27 heads of government held one of their least eventful meetings in recent memory. By contrast, their summit meeting next month - which starts June 19, after the Irish vote - has a crowded agenda including climate change, biofuels, food price increases, planned laws on cars' carbon dioxide emissions and the role of the new European president.

Initiatives likely to worry or annoy Irish voters are being played down or delayed.

This is odd. Nearly every political party in Ireland is in favor of this treaty yet the EU is going out of its way to put off doing what it wants to do. Why? Why should they fear a 'No' vote when the political parties calling for a 'Yes' comprise 94% of the elected members of the Dail? If 94% of our elected representatives believe a 'Yes' is good for Ireland, why is there even a shred of doubt about achieving 50% in the referendum?

It's times like this that make the term 'representative government' seems a little, well, misrepresentative.

Defaced

Someone in this part of Wicklow really doesn't like Dick Roche, our local TD and Minister for European Affairs. Roche has erected a number of large, ground-level posters calling for a 'Yes' vote. On every one of these posters I've seen Roche's face has been cut away or painted over.

This protest seems somewhat sinister, but I'd like to think that this is just some 'No' campaigner's way of letting us know that Roche is the chief advocate for the faceless Eurocrats who control our lives.

UPDATE: I noticed last night that the Roche posters had been repaired. Some very enterprising individual has fixed new faces on all the damaged posters.

Referenda – what are they good for?

Well, not absolutely nothing. Not if you're an elected official anyway.

I think every elected official has a poster up urging a 'Yes' (or occasional 'No'). It's clear that our elected officials believe the referendum is a great opportunity to remind the voters who they are. Some of the MEP's, TD's and Councillors have have allocated virtually no poster space to convey a virtually unreadable message of 'Vote Yes to Europe' (or 'Vote No') while their mugs and names are unmissable. EU referenda are clearly all about building the brand name.

Euro-Johnny loses his head

RTE should be embarrassed after what happened at the Eurovision semi-finals on Tuesday night, which is what Johnny Logan should have said. Instead, he kind of lost his head on the radio the other day when he called into talk about it on Newstalk. Obviously Eurovision is more important to Johnny Logan than it is to, well, nearly everyone in Ireland.

Logan was okay at first, criticizing RTE, but the longer the interview went on the more irate he became and the more he lost me. Eurovision might have been (might have been) important once, but it's not any more. Not in Ireland, anyway. Logan needs to maintain perspective. His audience is older, people who remember when Eurovision mattered. He should just count his lucky stars that he came along when he did because he probably wouldn't win today.

What's up with the Irish Independent's web site?

Everyday this week the Independent's web site has been a day behind. Maybe they're updating it later in the day? I don't know, but I usually check early and where I used to be able to see today's paper, now I only see yesterday's.

1:35am Thursday morning

Baseball fans on the east coast of America often complain about how the World Series games often end after midnight. I've always thought that was wrong, but tonight watching as the Champions League Final in Moscow finished at 25 to 2 in the morning local time I thought Muscovites and others in the east would probably be a welcome finish time of around midnight.
…

I just heard that starting next year the final will be played on a Saturday, which at least means more kids across Europe will be able to see the final, which is a great idea. Still, the game should start an hour or two earlier too, but that doesn't seem to be in the plans.

Supreme Court? Now that makes sense

James Andrew Miller suggests that Hillary Clinton could be offered the first vacancy on the Court by Obama. This makes more sense to me than Vice President. I can't see her being Obama's understudy, but on the Court she'd be able to be her own woman - independent of Obama and Bill (no more elections). Yes I can see this as a real carrot for her.

Charter of Fundamental Rights

Not only is the Lisbon Treaty unmanageably long and ponderous, but it also contains this:

The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties.

The provisions of the Charter shall not extend in any way the competences of the Union as defined in the Treaties.

The rights, freedoms and principles in the Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the general provisions in Title VII of the Charter governing its interpretation and application and with due regard to the explanations referred to in the Charter, that set out the sources of those provisions.

That means you have to read – and understand – the Charter of Fundamental Rights too before you can pass judgment on the Treaty. Being an informed voter is just too big a job.

Reading the treaty

Dick Roche, my local TD & Europhile in chief for the government, berates Irish Independent columnist Bruce Arnold for misrepresenting the Lisbon Treaty in his column from May 3. Roche asserts this to be the case because Arnold misread parts of Article 93 in the treaty.

Roche writes:

Mr Arnold makes much of an amendment to Article 93 of the treaty. He is correct when he says that the words "and to avoid distortion of competition" are to be added to the article.

But he is ignorant of two essential points. The first point is that the amended treaty article contains the words "The Council shall, acting unanimously".

This means every member state has the right to veto any proposal.

The second fundamental gaffe in Mr Arnold's article is his contention that the change he refers to would allow the Court of Justice to outlaw our current corporation tax rate.

The revised article refers to indirect taxes not corporation or any other form of direct taxation.

Well, this is how Article 93 will read after the Lisbon Treaty has been implemented:

The Council shall, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.

Okay, maybe Roche is right and this change cannot alter our corporate tax rates. BUT, the phrase turnover taxes is in there and they can no be changed (imposed?) in order "to avoid distortion of competition".

I'm no tax scholar or lawyer (which is the biggest problem with this treaty nonsense), so maybe I'm way off, but my layman's interpretation of turnover taxes is that they are imposed during the various stages of production. So, maybe the EU cannot change our corporate tax rates, but they can do equal amounts of damage with taxes imposed on production.

The Court of Justice might decide that we're 'distorting competition' by NOT taxing software or financial services partly produced and/or provided here. Such a ruling could have the same effect as changing the corporate tax rates. Maybe? I don't know, but perhaps Mr. Roche will honor me by showing me where in the Lisbon Treaty this is ruled out.

Dutch baseball

Johan Cruyff, yeah I've heard of him. Before my time (soccer wise, anyway), but I know he was one of the greats. Hadn't realized he was once a catcher too - before he played soccer. Baseball in Holland goes back to WWII, when Dutch kids took it up in defiance of the Nazi occupiers. There are a couple of major leaguers from Holland and a few others from the Dutch Antilles, where baseball is very popular. Curaçao has become one of the powerhouses of Little League baseball.

Consultant's report better than throwing money away

You often hear how the government wastes money on consultants. And, I'm sure that many of the consultants are paid for stating the obvious, but even so sometimes the government needs to hear the obvious. And, if the obvious can be stated and acted on at a cost much less than the cost of behaving stupidly thanks to a consultant's report, then I'm all for more consultants' reports.

What am I talking about? Well, yesterday the government decided not to provide Waterford Crystal with the guarantee they were seeking. This was following advice from a consultant. And as long as the consultant didn't charge €39m, we've got a good result.

Tip of the cap

Amazing performance by Jon Lester of the Boston Red Sox last night. Lester pitched a no-hitter against the Kansas City Royals. These are rare feats in baseball, but that's only part of the story.

One day in August of 2006 Lester couldn't play due to soreness in his back. 4 days later Lester was diagnosed as having anaplastic large cell lymphoma. Cancer.

Lester underwent treatments and his disease went into remission. By the middle of the 2007 season he was back with the Red Sox and he pitched the last game of last year's World Series, won by his Red Sox.

Last night he achieved individual baseball immortality with his no-hitter. Amazing.

Highlights of the game here. And a good video taken by a fan from behind home plate here.

Learning English outside

One thing that strikes me with regards to the issues teachers are having with immigrant children is that children start school too young here. If children didn't go to school until they were 6 (rather than 4) that would give the children of immigrants 2 years of being out 'on the road' learning to communicate in English. As it is, kids being raised by parents who can't speak English are too young to have made friends before they head off to school. And in Ireland there's a real emphasis on learning even when the kids are only 4 (unlike what I remember of nursery school & kindergarten in New York). Rightly or wrongly school for 4-year-olds is a lot more than finger-painting, etc.

When I started first grade in New York many of my classmates came from homes where their parents didn't speak much English. But, they were 6 years old and had absorbed enough English from playing outside or whatever to get by in school. That's not the case here.

Bishop gets on parents - again

At the end of February it was Archbishop Martin. This week it's Bishop Willie Walsh who's letting parents have it for caring more about their children then some nebulous societal goals.

Accepting that it was natural for parents to try to enrol their child in what they regard as the most suitable school, Bishop Walsh said he had observed occasionally that there was a moving out to a country school from a town where immigrants were living.

"I would certainly try to discourage that as much as possible," he said. "Particular exclusivity in relation to class is not part of the Catholic ethos of our school system."

Archbishop Martin was concerned about Dublin's secondary schools, but Bishop Walsh is worried that parents are opting out of certain primary schools because some schools have a large percentage of (a) immigrants or (b) children of a lower social class. (Can't tell which he meant from what's in the Independent).

If it's the latter well, that's been going on forever here from what I can tell. If it's the former, what does he expect? Every parent has heard stories of (or even from ) teachers that they find it a struggle to teach children with whom they can't communicate and how this takes up an inordinate amount of class time.

I take it back

A couple of weeks back I may have implied that the government was wastefully adding to my recycling pile with its Preparing For Major Emergencies booklet (80 pages). I want to make a full retraction. In the right circumstances, with the right gathering of people around you can get a lot of fun out of this little gem. I recommend reading it aloud and asking the one question that the booklet itself repeatedly poses: What should I do in the event of a ...? (Fill in a disaster/emergency covered in the book.)

Basically the answer is call 999, although if it's a nuclear accident (presumably in Britain) you don't even have to do that. Just stay in, kick back, relax and put the t.v. on. And now that I've absorbed those sage bits of advice the booklet is in the recycling pile.

"Alarmist"

The Labour Party's Joe Costello has criticized one of the groups campaigning against the Lisbon Treaty. Costello says the tactics used by COIR – I never heard of them – are 'alarmist'.

Coir, campaigning against the treaty, erected posters bearing messages such as "People died for your freedom – don't throw it all away". Another says "Lisbon: it will cost you more tax – less power".

Okay, maybe those slogans are a bit 'alarmist'. But, I wonder if Joe Costello will criticize any alarmism from the 'Yes' side in the treaty debate. Maybe he could have a word with the Minister for Finance?

"A no vote would be a step into isolation and would send an extraordinary signal. We should be at the vanguard of Europe and not turning our back on the project," he said.

What makes Lenihan's comments amusing is that he made his remarks to an audience of the American Chamber of Commerce. And you can infer from the Examiner's report that the members of the Chamber are at least concerned that a 'Yes' vote will open the door to changes in the tax regime here. It seems to me that the Chamber's members are sending a subtle signal that a 'No' – no changes necessary – would not be all that unwelcome.

Front page of the Irish Times

The picture on the front of today's Irish Times is too much. The picture shows a mother overwhelmed with grief kneeling next to the body of her dead child, one of hundreds killed when a school collapsed in the earthquake in China.

I think the picture's too intrusive. The woman is too identifiable and even though she's on a city street she deserves a little privacy. We're crowding her when she needs space.

It's a tough one because the picture is an effective summary of the suffering of the people of China, particularly the parents who've lost children. Nearly all the parents who've lost a child have lost all their children due to China's one child policy.

I'm curious to see what other people have to say about it because I think it's a fine line and I'm not certain that my sense that the Irish Times has crossed that line is right.

Bloodiest battle on American soil before Antietam

250 years ago this July the French defeated the British in the Battle of Carillon. Carillon was the name of the fort the French built on a slip of land between Lakes George and Champlain. The British suffered heavy losses during the battle. They captured the Fort a year later and renamed it Fort Ticonderoga.

One of the most illustrious regiments in military history, the 42nd Highland, better known as the Black Watch, lost two-thirds of its thousand men that day. The regiment was devastated, especially its officer corps.

… The Black Watch Regiment, to this day, has no trouble remembering. Westbrook says the regiment, deployed in Iraq, has its base camp near Basra named Fort Ticonderoga.

I grew up 90 miles from Ticonderoga, but I've only been to the Fort once. Have to drag the children there someday.

"Impenetrable"? - not quite, but they didn't miss by much

Brian Cowen says that the Lisbon Treaty is not an 'impenetrable document'. He says this despite the fact he also admits he hasn't read the document. I agree. It's not impenetrable and I've also only read some of the document. It is, however, very far from easy to read.

There are two big problems with reading the Lisbon Treaty. One, it's a treaty, which means it's written in a language that no sane person speaks or reads. It's a clause lover's dream because it has so many clauses, sub-clauses, sub-sub-clauses that you can nearly end up drowning in one sentence.

The second problem is that the Lisbon Treaty is massive and it's essentially an amendment to the existing treaties that have established and reshaped the EU over the past 50+ years. How it differs from the failed EU Constitution I can't say, but at least the Constitution was a stand-alone document. You could read it without having to have access to the other treaties. That's not true of the Lisbon Treaty.

For example, Article 276 of the Lisbon Treaty says

Article 280 shall be amended as follows:
(a) the following words shall be added at the end of paragraph 1: ', and in all the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies.';
(b) in paragraph 4, the following words: 'and in all the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies' shall be inserted after the words: 'in the Member States', and the last sentence shall be deleted.

So that above amends this from the current EU treaties:

Article 280

1. The Community and the Member States shall counter fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Community through measures to be taken in accordance with this article, which shall act as a deterrent and be such as to afford effective protection in the Member States.
   
   
2. Member States shall take the same measures to counter fraud affecting the financial interests of the Community as they take to counter fraud affecting their own financial interests.
   
   
3. Without prejudice to other provisions of this Treaty, the Member States shall coordinate their action aimed at protecting the financial interests of the Community against fraud. To this end they shall organise, together with the Commission, close and regular cooperation between the competent authorities.
   
   
4. The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251, after consulting the Court of Auditors, shall adopt the necessary measures in the fields of the prevention of and fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the Community with a view to affording effective and equivalent protection in the Member States. These measures shall not concern the application of national criminal law or the national administration of justice.
   
   
5. The Commission, in cooperation with Member States, shall each year submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the measures taken for the implementation of this article.

Now those changes look pretty innocuous to me, although I'm not really sure what the implications of that deleted sentence might be. And this is what faces anyone trying to be an informed voter. Endless hours of trying to decipher what's significant from what's not. Really the whole referendum process is a farce.

In order to know what you're voting on you have to have access to the Treaty and some form of consolidation of all the previous treaties so that can you can see what exactly is being changed. There are over 300 articles in the Lisbon Treaty and you know the existing treaties do not make quick reading either. You have to flip back and forth between what was and what will be. For 300 articles. In this language.

Or you can do as nearly everyone is going to do and trust (or not) that the politicians know what they're doing and that what they will do suits you.

And, ultimately, that's what Brian Cowen is saying: "Trust me".

Hey look. It's Peter Sutherland.

Peter Sutherland. I'd forgotten about him. When was the last time he was in the news? Oh yeah, during the last EU treaty referendum. The pro-EU forces always call on Sutherland (and others) whenever they want to bully/intimidate/cajole the electorate into a Yes vote. Sutherland is more of the cajoling type, but you know it's referendum time when you hear the name Peter Sutherland in the news.

Sutherland is like so many of our ex-political big-wigs, some who's done very well out of the political opportunities that the EU offers. And, of course, there are many in today's political parties across the spectrum who would love the chance to show their stuff on the bigger stage. It's this blatant self-interest that always causes me to tune out the politicians when they start getting all huffy and hyperbolic during the EU referendums.

In case you're thinking of a visit to Ireland

I almost never link to blog posts, but I thought today I'd make an exception. Anyone interested in Irish cuisine will appreciate (regular commenter) Mahons's review of the Full Irish Breakfast.

Governor Clinton

New York State has never had a woman as Governor. And, in 2010 there will be an election for a new Governor.

To my mind, being Governor of New York is a better prospect for Hillary than being Vice President under President Obama. She would not be the powerful Vice President that Cheney is under Bush and her ambition would cause a lot of friction.

Also, seeing as some people do not believe she'll be too old in 2016, she'd be better positioned to run for the White House after 5 years as Governor than 7 years as VP. She doesn't have to worry about a lack of national profile as she'll always attract the media.

If I were Hillary that's what I'd be looking for from the Democrat elders who want me out right now. I want a clear run at the nomination for Governor (that's you out, Chuck and you too Andrew). The Democrats would have to convince the current office-holder that the job's not really his cup of tea, but I somehow doubt that would be too difficult.

I doubt any Republican (Bloomberg or even Rudy G.) would have a prayer against her, so if the Democrats give her the nod, the job's as good as hers.

{Although New York has never had a woman Governor, the state has had two previous Clintons serve as Governor. George back in the 18th Century and his nephew DeWitt who was governor from 1817-1828. Neither is related to Bill.}

Family home of the "Schoolmaster in Politics"

I had a vague idea that Woodrow Wilson had roots in Ulster, but until I read this morning that his ancestral home had burned down I didn't know that there was an ancestral home. I've been in Omagh twice in the past 10 years. One time I discovered that Ulysses S Grant's ancestral home was in that area. Now I learn that Wilson's family came from the same region.

Other than Andrew Jackson's family home, very little is made of the fact that these ancestral homes exist. I think that each of these homes should be a little museum about the President and his family. I don't know why more isn't made of these places.

And, this goes for this part of Ireland too. Nixon's ancestral home is in Timahoe, Co. Kildare (not Laois, as I sometimes read). I once stumbled into Timahoe and all that was there was a small sign acknowledging this fact. I haven't been to Ballyporeen, so I can't say whether much is made of the Reagan connection. I have been to the Kennedy home near New Ross, Co. Wexford and I thought even here that the pitch wasn't quite right.

I don't know. Could be just me, but I think that each of these places should have something of a story to tell, one that would be of interest to people from both Ireland and America. And it's not just Americans. Thomas D'Arcy McGee one of the Fathers of the Confederation in Canada was from Carlingford, Co. Louth. I don't thik I saw any reference to him when I was last there, but that was 15 years ago.

Anyway, I think these places are of interest and should be knit together in some form of tourist trail and each place should tell something about the life of the President (or whomever) and the life of his ancestors.

Just glad to get that off my chest.

Number 2 on the ticket

To be honest, I'd be surprised if Hillary opted to accept the number 2 slot on a ticket with Obama. I just can't accept that she's anything other than 100% driven towards being President someday. However, she'll never be President if Obama wins in November. She'll be too old to run in 2016 and I just can't believe that being Vice President with no hope of being President is all that attractive to her. 2012 is her last realistic shot.

But, what if she believes that Obama won't win in November? Then it makes perfect sense for her to be on the ticket. That way she's seen as a good Democrat, a good team player. And when they fail in November she'll be seen as having been right that she would have won where he lost. And by being on the ticket she'll deny any other possible aspirants the national limelight that might propel them towards a 2012 run. I honestly believe she'll be on the ticket only if she feels confident that Obama can't win.

Is Hillary done?

Sure seems like it's over now, doesn't it? I still think she's more likely to win in November than is Obama, but I also don't think there's anyway she can get the nomination now. Right?

Well, yeah, she's done. I can't see how she can carry on now. She has nothing going her direction. She probably could (and should) demand something be done about Michigan and Florida, but even those two states won't change the fact that she's behind in delegates and the popular vote. She can't win.

But, can Obama still lose? Well, there's always the possibility that the superdelegates will decide that Obama just won't win enough white votes in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and elsewhere to win in November. It's possible, but not probable.

What I find really interesting when I look at the popular votes is the number of states where Obama won more than 60% of the votes. Mississippi, Wyoming, Hawaii Virginia, Maryland, DC, Nebraska, Illinois, Georgia, Minnesota, Colorado, Kansas, North Dakota, Idaho and Nebraska. And Hillary won exactly one with greater than 60% of the vote: Arkansas. Yet in the overall totals Obama has won 49.6% of the votes and Hillary 47.3% (excluding IA, NV, ME, WA, FL & MI).

If you're a superdelegate this sort of information has to give pause for thought. Why did Obama win by such large margins in those 14 states and yet fall short in California, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Ohio? Any superdelegate worth his salt would want an answer to that question.

Tar Heels & Hoosiers

I think the suddenly strong sun has fried my brain. I found it hard to read about today's primaries over the holiday weekend and I'm not so sure which way things will go today. My instinct is that Hillary will win in Indiana. North Carolina, however ...

I was expecting that Hillary might take that too, but her recent good run didn't seem to have enough momentum to give her the victory I thought might really push her to the front. Then it will be Obama. He doesn't need to win in NC, but a win there indicates that that he's weathered the storm. There probably aren't any other opportunities for Hillary to show that she's turned the tide.

If Hillary loses in Indiana it's over. Nothing left for her in that situation other than destroying Obama so that he loses in November and she can run again in 2012.

No, I think it'll be a split, which means the primaries will not finish the job. Team Clinton will then go into overdrive to woo a sufficient number of superdelegates to get the nomination. I'm not sure they'll succeed, but who better to play the carrot and stick game behind closed doors? I definitely wouldn't want to be a superdelegate; I bet a lot of them will head off on long, long summer holidays leaving their cell phones at home.

I know I'm not the only one who ...

thinks that the breaks are starting to really go Hillary's way. I'm almost at the point of thinking that she can't lose, if she can win the nomination. And, I think the nomination is looking more likely daily.

Fine job, one omission

I don't want to be begrudging. I thought Bertie did a decent job delivering his fine speech, although I was surprised Bertie didn't use a teleprompter. He touched all the right emotional buttons, made his points on immigration and US-EU relations and, mostly, thanked America for helping achieve peace in Ireland.

I don't have any real complaint about anything he said, but there was one point that I was surprised Bertie didn't make. The theme of his speech was that in the past, when Ireland needed help, America was there. Now all of that is behind us and a new relationship between the United States and Ireland, inside the EU, is being forged. All fine, excellent actually.

What surprised me is that Bertie didn't take the opportunity to include a little plug for free trade and free capital movement and how these flows in goods, services and investment were benefitting both America and Ireland. He should have told the audience that the number of Americans working for Irish companies is growing rapidly and is now at 80,000. That compares with 100,000 people people employed by American companies in Ireland. It will be good for both countries if those figures keep rising.

I can't understand why he left it out unless it was because he was afraid of upsetting the Obama camp, given Obama's fairly protectionist utterances during the campaign. It's a point that Dermot Ahern has made in the past and I think Bertie should have mentioned it again. I suspect had he included that little tidbit in his speech it would have been news to a large section of his audience. And, it would have emphasized that the new US-Ireland relationship is much more of a two-way street than it was in times past.

Otherwise, as I said, Bertie did a nice job.

Munster fury

Does the press ever tire of this story? There is nothing even vaguely newsworthy in the fact that Ryanair has raised its prices for flights on the weekend of the Heineken Cup Final in Cardiff. Well, duh? Demand suddenly shoots up and, lo and behold, prices do too.

Yet, every year (it seems), Munster's fans, who should know better by now, moan about the price of Ryanair flights to wherever their next big match is. We hear about it on the radio and read about it in the press.

Sometimes I wonder why the news doesn't more often inform us that water's wet.