A chara, Brigid Laffan’s argument (Opinion February 15) is quite simply brilliant.

The European Commission and European Central Bank are aggressively promoting austerity and bank-bailout policy prescriptions on Troika programme countries such as Greece, Portugal and Ireland. The European Council, driven in the main by Germany and France, are supporting the Commission and Central Bank in their efforts.

 The social and economic impact of these policies on citizens in the Eurozone periphery is generating deep seated anger. As a result the reputation of the EU is being undermined among a growing section of the very population it claims to serve.

So what is Professor Laffan’s solution to this conundrum? Let the IMF take the flack and maybe people won’t be so angry with the EU!

The problem with this argument is that it ignores the fact that the ECB are responsible for the aggressive bank-bailout end of the Troika programmes and the European Commission is responsible for the aggressive austerity being imposed on member states.

The EU institutions are taking the heat because they are responsible for the policies doing so much damage to the lives of people in Greece, Portugal and Ireland.

If Professor Laffan wants to see relations between citizens and EU institutions improve I suggest she starts arguing for a change of policy away from austerity and bank-bailouts and in favour of debt write downs and investment in economic stimulus – Is mise, Eoin O Broin, Clondalkin.

A small but important victory

Something important happened in January. A group of determined women workers took a stand and won.

For many people the start of 2012 brought only bad news. Cuts to vital services like DEIS teachers and Community Employment Schemes have caused distress and anger.

Stealth charges and tax hikes squeezed already hard-pressed families more than they can bear.

Young people forced to emigrate for lack of work, said good-bye to their families and friends, off to spend another year away from home.

Newspaper headlines told readers that if they thought budget 2012 was bad, they worst was yet to come.

And then on a cold January morning more than 100 women workers in the La Senza lingerie chain were sacked in the most callous fashion, their January pay and overtime withheld and no redundancy offered.

But the women from Dublin and Cork refused to go quietly. They refused to allow their employer to trample on their rights and deny them the dignity that should be afforded to all workers.

They stood together and occupied the La Senza premises in Liffey Valley, Clondalkin.

Not only did they demand the pay that was owed them; they demanded that La Senza be held to account for their actions.

Within a matter of days the women successfully mobilised public and political support behind their demands.

Active assistance from their trade union, Mandate, ensured that their determination was matched by experience.

They negotiated directly with the administrators acting on behalf of the company. They explained their case to the listening media and public. They lobbied politicians from all political parties.

They demonstrated, with strength and style, the power of collective action; the power of solidarity; the value of taking a stand.

In doing so they sent out a powerful signal to workers and employers across the country, particularly in the retail sector.

For workers they demonstrated the importance of being a member of a union; the need to know your rights; and the power of collective action in the face of unfair and illegal treatment.

For employers they demonstrated the danger of taking your work force for granted, denying them their basic human and legal rights, and thinking you can get away with it without a fight.

By Friday the women workers in La Senza had won. The company backed down, wages were paid in full, and the dignity of the women workers was restored.

 The La Senza occupation was a victory, not just for the workers involved, but for all of us.

Interview with La Senza workers spokesperson Tara Keane

On Monday 9 January 2011 a group of women workers from the La Senza lingerie chain occupied the company’s store in Liffey Valley Clondalkin after the company had sacked them and withheld their pay. Eoin Ó Broin  spoke to the spokesperson for the workers, 20 year old Tara Keane from Inchicore about the workers experience of the week long occupation.

“On Monday morning I went into work and received calls saying that there were men there packing up the other stores shops. A few of us spoke together and decided that we would sit-in in solidarity with the girls who had just lost their jobs.  As far as I was concerned my job was still there. I hadn’t been told otherwise. So we went straight to Liffey Valley from work sat with the girls

“On Monday night KPMG phoned me and said my job was gone and not to come to work on Tuesday morning. That made us more determined to do the sit-in. The way we found out was just absolutely appalling.

“On Tuesday morning I made a few phone calls to the media. We expected to be booted out by Tuesday afternoon. But it just snowballed once the media took interest. Then everyone got behind us so it just gave the movement a lot more power.

“We are all so angry. It was just an impulse decision to occupy. We didn’t know what else to do. We had no answers from anyone; we had no paperwork to take to social welfare. As far as we were concerned the store stock and whatever money was in the safe were the only bargaining chips we had to get what we were entitled to.

“So the occupation was just common sense. If we left the store then La Senza would have won. By sitting-in we were shining a little bit of light on what they are doing, making bad publicity for them forcing them to resolve things as quickly as they can.

“The public support was absolutely incredible, completely overwhelming. From the moment Liffey Valley opened on Tuesday morning people stopped to read the signs we put in the windows, they came with food, money, blankets, and cups of tea. The stores in Liffey Valley were also great; they did collections, sent down tea every hour. The support was unreal.  I think what was happening to us was really resonating with people, because it is happening all across Ireland and I think we captured the mood of people who are fed up and not willing to take it anymore. That’s why they got behind us so much.

“We also had support from every political party. It wasn’t about party politics, they genuinely put that aside and everyone came together for us. We had support from Sinn Fein, Labour, People Before Profit Alliance, Fine Gael. It was incredible.

“And then there was the debate in the Dail. I definitely think it contributed to the campaign because it put pressure on the Government. As a result of the debate Minister Sean Sherlock meet with us twice and agreed to speak with Richard Bruton and Joan Burton about what was going on

“We all felt incredibly proud. It’s not something you imagine you can achieve, it’s not something I thought I would end up doing, but we knew if it was in the Dail it was going to be all over the media.

“The trade unions gave us huge support. I don’t think we would have gotten the result we did if they hadn’t been involved. Mandate came and really got the ball rolling for us, got us organised. I think it’s really important for workers, particularly in retail to join the union. If we hadn’t have had members in the union we really would have been lost.

“During the week negotiations took place with KPMG, the administrators acting on behalf of La Senza. Then on Friday evening we got words that it was all over.  I was absolutely delighted. I think I speak for all the girls when I say we were so emotional because we had been there all week getting two hours sleep a night, and then suddenly to realise we got what you asked. It was great, the pride we all felt was unreal. We didn’t expect to get a successful result. We thought we would raise awareness help the next people after us.  We were very proud and very happy.

“Reflecting back on our week long sit-in I would say that the main lesson from our experience is the importance of being in a trade union.  I would say to all workers, no matter what sector you work in, join a union. You have rights , there is legislation there to protect your rights, and if you take a stand like we did, you are standing up for your basic rights as an employee; don’t allow yourself to be bullied, don’t allow yourself to be treated badly.  We didn’t and we got what we asked for.”

Dublin Mid-West Sinn Féin has launched a weekly protest in Clondalkin Village against austerity and for investment in jobs. The protest will take place every Saturday at 1.30 at the Civic Offices, Clondalkin Village. The aim of the protest is to provide a focal point for people to express their anger at the savage cuts and tax hikes introduced by Fimne Gael and Labour in December’s budget and to call for a new approach based on investment in jobs and growth.

Speaking today Sinn Féin Dublin Mid-West representative Eoin Ó Broin said:

“Fine Gael and Labour have been in Government now for almost a year. Unemployment and emigration are rising. Mortgage distress and financial hardship are deepening. Poverty and inequality are at a 10 year high.

“There is a growing anger at the failure of Government to invest in jobs creation and economic recovery.

“People see the billions of taxpayer’s money that continues to be wasted on toxic bank including the €3.1bn that is due to be given to Anglo Irish Bank on March 31^st.

“Yet Fine Gael and Labour are cutting funding to vital front line services. Community employment schemes, community safety schemes, funding for teachers in disadvantaged schools, nursing home beds have all been subject to savage cuts in December’s budget.

“And to make matters worse the Government are heaping additional charges like the household taxes on hard pressed families, pushing them further into financial stress and damaging the local economy.

“In recent weeks we have noticed a growing anger among ordinary people, fed up with the cuts and charges and bank bailouts.

“So we have decided to organise this weekly protest to provide people with a focal point to express that anger and to demand a change of direction from government. We are urging all people who want an end to austerity and bank bailouts and who believe investment in job creation must be the Governments priority to join us at the protest on Saturday.” ENDS

Speaking in advance of today’s protest Sinn Féin Dublin Mid West representative Eoin Ó Broin said:

“There is a growing anger in the local community at the broken promises of Fine Gael and Labour. People are angry at the governments attacks on low and middle income families. People are angry at the billions being paid out to bondholders and banks.

“This series of weekly protests aims to give people an opportunity to express that anger. It is also an opportunity to call for a change of direction away from austerity and in favour of investment in jobs, services and economic recovery.” ENDS

O Broin said:

‘There are four community safety scheme workers in Clondalkin and Tallaght. They provide a range of vital services to local communities at very little cost to the exchequer.

‘In North and South Clondalkin the community safety forum workers coordinate the work of the local community safety forum – a vital link between the Garda and the local community.

‘They organise a wide range of activities to address the high levels of anti-social behaviour in the community including diversionary programmes for you people with a particular focus on times when anti-social behaviour is at its height.

‘They also work with local residents groups to organise clean-ups and reduce illegal dumping.

‘Their regular community newsletters are also an important source of information for people.

‘The Department of Environment is arguing that these services can be provided directly by South Dublin County Council. This is not the case. No funding has been allocated to the Council to pick up the various programes when the posts cease to exist in March. More importantly the community based nature of the workers, which enables them to work within the community with greater effect, cannot be replicated by Council staff.

‘The decision by the Fine Gael and Labour government to cut the funding from these posts is a serious blow to community. Not only will four individuals lose their jobs. But local people will lose vital services which will not be replaced. The Minister responsible must reverse this decision’ ENDS

The units, which were said to make up 20% of NAMAs residential property portfolio would be managed by local authorities and housing associations and funded via the Social Housing Leasing Scheme.

Minister Hogan told journalists that the agreement with NAMA was ‘one of the largest housing allocations made in the history of the State’ would ‘provide hope for individuals and families in social housing waiting lists’ and would be ‘a welcome Christmas boost to those most vulnerable in society.’

The implication was that the Government were taking the issue of social housing and NAMA’s statutory social dividend mandate seriously; that the 2,000 housing units were ready for allocation; and that they would make a significant dent in the local authority waiting lists.

Unfortunately none of these contentions are true.

Two weeks earlier in the 2012 Budget announcement the Government slashed capital funding for social housing by 23% reducing the available monies for social housing by €118m. Local authorities, already unable to provide additional social housing stock because of Fianna Fail-Green Party cuts, would be even more restricted in 2012.

Meanwhile social housing waiting lists continue to increase with over 100,000 households on local authority lists.

As for the 2,000 NAMA units themselves, according to parliamentary question replies published this month the Department of Environment did not know how many of them, if any, would be suitable for social housing, as they had not been inspected by local authorities.

Even if the properties are deemed suitable for social use there are significant question marks over the scheme that it to be used to finance the homes. The final number of NAMA sourced social housing units may be much lower than the 2,000 announced by the Minister.

Worse still the tax-payer looks set to pay twice for properties that it may not even end up owning.

The Leasing Initiative

The Social Housing Leasing Initiative was launched by Minister of State with responsibility for Housing and Homelessness Michael Finneran in February 2009. The then Fianna Fail junior Minister ring fenced €20m of the existing social housing budget to fund the initiative and said that between 2,000 and 4,000 units would be made available by the end of 2009 through the scheme.

The premiss was simple. Local authorities would enter into long-term leasing arrangements with private property owners for 10 to 20 years. In some instances voluntary housing associations would be responsible for management of the properties. Households on local authority waiting lists would be allocated the tenancies. The local authority would pay the  property owners at a discount of the market rent and take over all management and maintenance functions or fund a housing association to provide these services. The tenant would pay the local authority or housing association a differential rent.

The tenant would have all the same rights as if they were in a property owned by the local authority except the right of tenant purchase. If at the end of the leasing period the property owner did not want to continue with the arrangement the local authority would have a legal obligation to re-house the tenant.

Despite the available funding and ambitious targets the scheme was a total failure in 2009. Not a single new tenancy was commenced in that year. The private sector didn’t like the scheme because it required a long-term commitment at a time of great uncertainty in the housing market. Local authorities were luke warm with the proposal as it was organisationally and financially cumbersome. Housing associations found it difficult to make the scheme stack up financially.

With 2010 fast approaching it looked as if Minister Finneran and his advisors in the Department of Environment’s great idea had come to nothing.

Unsold Affordable Housing

Fortunately, for the Minister and his senior Departmental staff, a number of local authorities had a supply of unsold affordable housing units on their hands.  The units originated from the Part V portion of private housing developments which the local authorities were contractually obliged to buy if offers to purchase were rejected by two prospective buyers on the affordable housing list.

The number of such units was considerable as was the cost to the state. For example at the end of 2009 Dublin City Council had 300 such properties on their books costing them on average €1000 per property per month in mortgage repayments to the Housing Finance Agency.

Seeing an opportunity to solve two problems at once the Department of Environment amended the original terms of the leasing scheme to enable local authorities to lease the properties from themselves and allocate them to families on the social housing waiting lists.

They also created leasing arrangements with housing associations whereby the associations would buy the units from the Council with loans from the private sector and the Department of Environment would lease the property back from the association until the mortgage was paid.

From the end of 2009 through to the end of 2011 a total of 1,546 unsold affordable units were leased by local authorities to housing associations using the Leasing Initiative.

Assessing the Leasing Scheme

During the same period only 932 units were leased from the private sector, as originally envisaged, with 197 of these managed by housing associations, 322 by private owners and 421 managed directly by local authorities.

The availability of unsold affordable units held by local authorities allowed the Government to present the scheme as a success.

However the real measure of success must be the number of units leased from the private sector; 932 in three years, set against Minister Finneran’s ambitious target of between 2,000 and 4,000 per year.

Not only was the scheme an abject failure in respect to the number of units involved, it was also very costly.

The average length of the leases covered by the scheme is 11 years and the average cost of the units is €6,327 per unit per year. Which means that at current prices housing the 2,045 families covered by the leasing scheme for the duration of the leasing arrangement will cost the Government €174m.

Of course generally speaking social housing tenancies are for life, which means that the actual cost of housing a family under the terms of the leasing scheme for say, 50 years, would be more than €300,000.

When one considers that the average cost of purchasing a property for social housing in Dublin in 2011 was approx €169,000 then there is a real question mark over whether the social housing leasing initiative represents value for money for the tax-payer.

Back to NAMA

Whatever the limitations of the leasing initiative, the decision to use the scheme as a way of financing the use of NAMA controlled properties for social housing is highly questionable.

It must be remembered that NAMA, in the first instance does not own the property its controls, but rather owns the banking debts connected to those properties.

These loans, including those relating to the 2,000 properties being offered for social housing were bought from banks in 2010 with public money.

Under Minister Hogan’s proposal announced last December, the state is now going to pay for these properties to be brought into public use.

The form in which these transactions will take place is not yet clear. However there are three possible scenarios.

Scenario one would see the state leasing these properties from the developers using public money. The developers would then use that same public money to repay their debts to NAMA.  When those debts are paid in full, ownership of the properties would return to developers.

Scenario two would see a voluntary housing association purchase the NAMA properties with private finance. These properties would then be leased from the housing association by local authorities until such time as the mortgage is paid in full, making the housing association the ultimate owner of the property.

Scenario three would see local authorities purchasing these properties with finance from the Housing Finance Agency and using the leasing funds to repay the mortgage. In this scenario the local authority would be the ultimate owner.

In all three scenarios the tax-payer will have paid twice for the same property – the first time when the debt passed from the bank to NAMA in 2010 and the second time when the local authority paid for the long-term lease of the property. In scenarios one and two the final ownership of the property is in private rather than public hands.

It will be some months before we know how many of the 2,000 NAMA properties are suitable for social housing; more time will pass before the complicated financial arrangements involved in the leasing scheme will be put in place; and only then will families currently on the housing waiting list actually get to occupy their new homes.

It is too early to say if Minister Hogan’s target of 2,000 will be met in 2012. What we do know is that whatever the final number the tax-payer will have paid not once but twice for these properties. Worse still, on the basis of the operation of the leasing scheme to date, the state will end up owning only a small percentage of the properties if any at all.

 O Broin said:

‘Workers from La Senza’s Dublin operations have, since Monday January 9th, occupied the Liffey Valley Store, Clondalkin. Agents acting on behalf of their employer contacted them yesterday to inform them that they were being made redundant and that the copmpany was not offering any redundency.

‘In response to this shocking treatment by their employer, staff from the stores in Clondalkin, Grafton Street and Blanchardstown have occupied the Liffey Valley premises.

‘Ten staff took part in the first day of the occupation and up to 40 women are expected top participate in the occupation by today. The staff are made up of a mixture of college students, young single mothers, women with families and mortgages.

‘It is completely unaccepctable for these women to be treated in this way. To be told on a Monday morning that you have no job is a disgrace. To then be told that no redundency package would be provided by the company just added insult to injury.

‘A worrying trend is emerging with companies behaving in this unjust and wreckless way. In response to this cavalire attitude workers in Vita Cortex Cork and now in La Senza in Dublin are taking the only course of action open to them, occupying their place of work untill an adequate settlement is put in place by the company.

‘However if the company is unwilling to respond then the Government must intervene.

‘I am also calling on the general public, particularly in Clondalkin, to show practical support to the workers in La Senza by calling in to the occupation in Liffey Valley.’ ENDS

 The Dublin Mid West live register figure for December was 8925 up from 8917 in November.

 Ó Broin said:

‘Today’s news from the CSO shows that unemployment in Clondalkin and Lucan has risen for two months in a row. In December 8925 people were on the live register. While the picture for the country overall indicated a marginal drop in unemployment for December, Clondalkin and Lucan have seen an increase.

 ‘After two months of marginal drops it is deeply depressing to see that unemployment in Dublin Mid-West is on the rise for the second month in a row, particularly when other parts of the country have experienced a small drop in joblessness.

‘There are now 443,200 people on the live register across the state. 14.3% of the labour force is out of work. Acording to the latest CSO figures 1,500 more are emigrating every week.

‘In October the Government said that the economic future was looking brighter and that unemployment was decreasing. Todays figures tell a very different story.

 ‘The response by the government has been to reduce investment in capital programmes that will result in up to 7,500 job losses; to cut 6,000 jobs from the public service; and to reduce the spending power of low and middle income earners with stealth taxes, vat increases and social welfare cuts all of which will lead to thousands more job losses.

 ‘The policies of this government will only further depress our economy, increase unemployment and increase emmigration. All of which will leave more families from Lucan and Clondalkin without work and dependent on ever decreasing social welfare payments or prospect of life away from family and friends in Asustralia or the US.

‘It is time that the government listened to the people and fundamentally changed their approach. It is time that government put job recreation and employment at the centre of its policies as proposed by Sinn Féin in our pre budget submission.

‘Dublin Mid-West’s four government TDs are voting for policies that are forcing more and more people from Clondalkin and Lucan into unemployment and emmigration. Their support for the anti-jobs and anti-people budget in December. It is time they were held to account for their actions’ ENDS

At first I thought it was because my views were diametrically opposed to his. Maybe it was the ideological gulf between us that bothered me.

But then I realised that I read a great many writers who, despite holding opposing views to mine, are informative, interesting and challenging.

I then wondered was it because he is a master of lazy argumentation; one of those writers whose arguments clumsily shift from one point to another claiming that their sequence proves a point when clearly it does not.

But, undoubtedly true as this charge is, I wasn’t convinced it was the cause of my unease.

Then, on the last Saturday of December while reading his end of year commentary on the Eurozone crisis, I suddenly realised what it was. I found what bothered me about Stephen Collins.

It is his blatant disregard for the facts; his caviller attitude to the truth; his misrepresentation of events; and his blunt and brazen dishonesty that really gets under my skin.

In his article, published in the Irish Times on Dec 31, Collins made a series of claims some of which I disagree with; some of which of which are unfounded; and some of which are simply untrue.

Let’s look at them in turn.

Collin’s argues that 2012 will be the year in which Ireland’s membership of the Euro will be decided. This is nonsense. Ireland is a member of the Euro. No political party is advocating a withdrawal from the common currency. A recent Eurobarometer poll indicated that 78% of people in the state wanted to remain in currency. No EU member state is arguing against Ireland’s continued membership. There is no mechanism for the expulsion of a member from the Euro.

So contrary to Collin’s claim, as long the Euro makes it to the end of 2012 Ireland will remain a member.

Collin’s then claims that the survival of the Euro is dependent on the passing of the inter-governmental treaty currently being negotiated in Brussels. He makes this argument despite the fact that almost every reputable economic commentator has questioned the relevance of the treaty’s content to the causes of the instability in the Eurozone.

Indeed many seasoned experts are arguing that if implemented the inter-governmental treaty may deepen the causes of instability.

In fairness to Collins this argument is not dishonest; it’s just not supported by the facts.

Collins goes on to make the bizarre claim that the government is ‘rightly…doing everything possible to ensure the country stays in the Euro.’ The implication is that there is some threat to our Euro membership. There is no such threat.

This is an invention of Collins’ used to bolster his argument.

In a transparent attempt to discredit those of us who want a referendum on the treaty and who are willing to take the Government to the High Court on the matter Collins described us as ‘anti-EU campaigners’. Stephen rightly knows that opposing the current direction of EU integration or the economic and fiscal policies advocated by some member states is not the same as opposing the EU itself.

But why let facts get in the way of argument.

Collins then states that ‘the greatest losers from and Irish exit from the euro would be the Irish people’. In my view he is right. This is why neither politicians nor the electorate are advocating such a course of action and why is it not a credible proposition or likely eventuality.

Finally we get to the nub of Collins’ argument. He says that the logic of a rejection of the proposed inter-governmental treaty would be ‘to exit the euro’. The implication of his argument is that opposition to the treaty is tantamount to opposing the Euro and if rejected in a referendum would result in an Irish exit from the currency.

These arguments are simply false.

I am opposed to the treaty as it is currently drafted. I am opposed to it because it is bad politics and bad economics. I am not opposed to the Euro or continued Irish membership of it. Indeed my desire to see the currency stabilised is part of the reason why I and many others are opposed to the measures contained in the treaty.

It is bad politics because it undermines democratic decision making at a national and EU level. It is bad economics because it is anti-growth and will make it harder for countries such as Ireland to rebuild our economies, reduce our deficits and get our Government debt to sustainable levels.

Many of us believe that the social consequences of Greek austerity, which Collins graphically details in his article, will be visited on us if we consent to the decade of austerity that the draft inter-governmental treaty will entail.

Stephen thinks we should support the treaty. That’s fair enough. But he clearly does not want to debate the treaty on the basis of its content or consequences.

Instead he prefers to use lies, misrepresentations and lazy arguments as part of a strategy of to frame a false debate.

In December the Minister for Finance Michael Noonan used the same argument. He claimed that any referendum on the treaty would be a referendum on our continued membership of the Euro.

Maybe the Minister, and his cheerleader in the Irish Times have realised that an informed public debate on contents of the treaty and its impact on Ireland and the Eurozone will lead to its rejection in a referendum.

So when the facts don’t support your argument what else have you got but blatant a disregard for those facts; a caviller attitude to the truth; misrepresentation of events; and blunt and brazen dishonesty.