# Should Brian Lenihan have read the anglo report?



## thedaras (12 Feb 2009)

The Finance Minister says no-one in his department will face disciplinary action for not telling him about a controversial deposit of €7 billion in Anglo Irish Bank.

It's emerged that the department informed the financial regulator of the deposit from Irish Life and Permanent when it was revealed in a report last October, but did not tell Brian Lenihan.

The Minister admitted in the Dail that he hadn't read the report into activities at Anglo Irish Bank in full - sparking opposition demands for his resignation - which he's rejected.

But speaking to Newstalk's Breakfast Show, Brian Lenihan says at the time, this transaction wasn't out of the ordinary, and he has complete faith in how the issue has been handled. 
Read more latest news 
this is taken from newstalk 106 website .Brian Lenihan was interviewed on newstalk this morning
.




Firstly, Im hoping this is the correct forum?

I listened to Brian Lenihan say that he had not read the full Anglo report.
It was 750 pages of which he read as far as I recall 50.
The 7bn issue would have been read by him if he had read the 120 pages relating to this issue
Do you think he should have at least read the 120 pages?
Do you think he should resign?


----------



## fobs (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*

I think he should have read the 120 pages. At the very least all matter that were being referred to the financial regulator by his team should have been flagged to the minister and also Brian Cowen.

Unless he wants to be able to deny knowledge of more wrong-doings coming out there is a serious flaw in the way this matter was handled either by Brian lenihan.PWC (not highlighting the seriousness of this issue) or his team for failing to red-flag it to Brian Linehan.

This whole Anglo mess seems to be a cess-pit and we may never know the full extent of the matter.


----------



## Guest116 (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*

He cant possibly read everything, whoever works close with him failed here, they should have made him aware if it.


----------



## Padraigb (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



aristotle25 said:


> He cant possible read everything, whoever works close with him failed here, they should have made him aware if it.



In general, people at the highest level in organisations can not read everything. That's why you need good senior staff: to read, to filter, to summarise, to brief, to advise.

Yes, I think Brian Lenihan should have read the relevant section or sections of the report. They should have been flagged for him. I think PWC should have flagged them in writing the report, and senior department staff should have made sure that he got the message.


----------



## thedaras (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



aristotle25 said:


> He cant possible read everything, whoever works close with him failed here, they should have made him aware if it.


Who said he could or should read "everything"? Though HE Commisioned the report!!
But Would it be too much to ask that he would read the 120 pages? ie; the relevant ones concerning the 7bn loan.
I would liken it to say for example,you were applying for a morgage and you look for a report on the details of several types,so you get report and read just a little bit of it,and dont bother to read the information that is most relevant to your present situation,eg;the current interest rates.
I dont think ignorence is a defence.....
surely the buck stops at him?
If as you say the people whom work with him should have made him aware,then should they be sacked? or should that be COULD they be sacked?
Is it acceptable that any or every minister can say,ah well,my staff should have told me?
And does anyone know what was in the 50 pages he did read? And why he choose to stop after 50?


----------



## briancbyrne (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*

given the wage and pension entitlements he gets I think he should read it!!......perhaps a little light reading material for whatever jaunt he's away on this paddy's weekend.
Same old story - no accountability.


----------



## sparkeee (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*

Hes a total ass,he should be sacked.He is giving away the keys to the country and hasn't bothered to read possibly the most important document to pass under his nose in his long and inept political carreer.


----------



## sam h (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*

Yes he should have read it....front to back & back to front.  He should have had a team to explain any bit he didn't 100% understand.  He is the Minister of Fianance & this is such a crucial document and resulting in a HUGE cost for the Irish taxpayer.  

We Irish are terrible at holding the "man of the street" liable for any misdemenour, yet the "big shots" walk away scot free (well other than the large "going away"/"dissapointment"/"thank but no thanks" lump sum of cash they get AND the several pensions they get.   

The problem is  do we have any decent altenative?


----------



## ontour (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*

A 750 page report should have a good summary to highlight the salient points. This summary should be no more than a few pages. I would expect Brian Lenihan to have read the summary and asked questions of the people who created the report or the senior members of his department charged with identifying the actions from the report.

One of two things happened. Either the report was badly written and did not highlight this issue in the summary / abstract OR certain practices in banking have become the norm and were not seen as anything that needed to be raised to the front of the report. This is the difficulty when we decide to create / enforce / publicly review the ethical standards of banks retrospectively.


----------



## LennyBriscoe (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



briancbyrne said:


> Same old story - no accountability.


 
You hit the nail on the head their Brian. 

What irks me is the fact that government has sub contracted out its main decision making function to non government agencies who are more than likely costing this state a fortune. Some that come to mind are:

the hse
the commission for taxation
the finincial regulator
the energy regulator
the taxi regulator

All of which are generating endless reports that not even the minister is reading.

sorry slightly off topic

Time the government governed and got rid of these quasi government agencies.


----------



## bamboozle (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*

it just seems to be a case of passing the book, why in a department of Finance could no one have bothered to read the report then present to the Minister of Finance the pertinent facts,

it stinks just like the Financial Regulator who's office were fully aware of the loan's fitzpatrick had but allegedly failed to let Neary know.

surely somewhere in these state funded bodies people have a job to do and these same people are held accountable for their roles??


----------



## thedaras (12 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*

I think it was Gerald Keane ,who did an interview a few months ago saying that they are so many lovely reports with lovely red ribbons tied around them..
I think the ribbons remain untied...


----------



## bacchus (13 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



briancbyrne said:


> given the wage and pension entitlements he gets I think he should read it!!....



regardless of wage & pension, his day still has only 24hours.
He was failed by his senior staffs....unless he decided to ignore the sections of the report that he did not like, as it was going against the gvt plan.


----------



## Bronte (13 Feb 2009)

Minister's commission reports as a ploy to avoid making decisions, to deflect attention away from not dealing with a problem etc.  Well when they have the report they ought to read it or have a civil servant point out what's important.  I understand that Ministers don't have time to read every report but one would assume when we are in the middle of the biggest financial meltdown we have every experienced that a report on the financial institutions would be compulsory reading when one is after all the Minister for Finance and is using vast amounts of taxpayers money to recapitalise the banks.  I'd like to know why he didn't read the report, or why someone didn't read it for him and what was the point of the report for if no one was going to read it etc.


----------



## j26 (13 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



bacchus said:


> He was failed by his senior staffs....


Do you honestly believe that his senior staff completely ignored the existence of a section that comprises 1/6 of the total report?


bacchus said:


> unless he decided to ignore the sections of the report that he did not like, as it was going against the gvt plan.


You might be on to something there.


----------



## askalot (13 Feb 2009)

Of course he should have and his staff should have brought it to his attention. He now seems to be saying that the section of the report dealing with deposits was quite technical and would be difficult for most people to understand; I fear he is talking about himself.


----------



## yop (13 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



j26 said:


> Do you honestly believe that his senior staff completely ignored the existence of a section that comprises 1/6 of the total report?
> 
> You might be on to something there.




In one I think there for sure, at the end of the day the government are corrupt, I am sure people might think that is an extreme word to use but they are corrupt, the banks and builders and I may even put the planners into that bracket.

It started with a few reports a year, noteably Mr Ahern and his "horse win", the builders who seemed to get planning where the rest of use could'nt, then the banks are in full flow for the last few weeks, Anglo Irish and IRish life with their fraudulant transactions and now Mr Lenihan missing (on purpose possibly...) the details of this transaction.

I was listening last nite to an interview done by Eamon Dunphy with Paddy Kelly, you can get the interview online or in Itunes. Listen to the section at around 35 minutes and what Mr Kelly says about Anglo Irish and its staff, this interview was done on 12th Dec 08. This is the same man who said in the interview that he was not worried that the fact he owed "100's of millions to the banks" 

It makes me smell a rat there too. 

Sorry for the rant! I am just ready to explode with frustration how our country is been destroyed by these muppet and we will rapidly or have already become a laughing stock world wide.


----------



## Bronte (13 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



j26 said:


> Do you honestly believe that his senior staff completely ignored the existence of a section that comprises 1/6 of the total report?
> 
> You might be on to something there.


  I think you're right, the cynic in me says you are.  As for the report being too technical, isn't Lenihan a lawyer, well able to read technical and complex documents?  In any case he's the Finance minister and furthermore he has the best brains at his beck and call surely should he find it too complicated.


----------



## Afuera (13 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



bacchus said:


> He was failed by his senior staffs....unless he decided to ignore the sections of the report that he did not like, as it was going against the gvt plan.


If his senior staff failed him, then they should be facing disciplinary action. The fact that noone is speaks volumes.


----------



## Afuera (13 Feb 2009)

*Re: should Brian lenihan have read the anglo report*



Bronte said:


> As for the report being too technical, isn't Lenihan a lawyer, well able to read technical and complex documents?


While lawyers have to reach a high level academically speaking, they are not known for their numerical skills. I think that the appointment of a lawyer for the position of Minister for Finance is questionable in the first place. Then again this is Ireland we are talking about...  A year of Greek and Latin at UCD is considered more than adequate to be placed in charge of regulating the entire financial system.



Bronte said:


> In any case he's the Finance minister and furthermore he has the best brains at his beck and call surely should he find it too complicated.


You'd imagine so, wouldn't you?


----------



## Firefly (13 Feb 2009)

Sorry if this sounds too obvious but I reckon he read the report and is lying


----------



## LennyBriscoe (13 Feb 2009)

Is the report available in the public domain? Would love to see how 'technical' it really was!


----------



## Padraigb (13 Feb 2009)

Firefly said:


> Sorry if this sounds too obvious but I reckon he read the report and is lying



It's not at all obvious. It was more embarrassing to admit that he had not read it than to say that he had.

Brian Lenihan might not prove to be the greatest Minister for Finance ever, but I do have the impression that he is truthful.


----------



## yop (13 Feb 2009)

Padraigb said:


> It's not at all obvious. It was more embarrassing to admit that he had not read it than to say that he had.
> 
> Brian Lenihan might not prove to be the greatest Minister for Finance ever, but I do have the impression that he is truthful.



Padraig, I am truthful, should i therefore be Minister for Finance?

Not been smart against you with that comment, just stating that if the minister is not capable of reading the report then how is he in the job, if his seniors cant read it why are they in the job.
I am sure they paid plenty for the report, at least it should be understandable instead of pages upon pages of sh*TE

I know that in my job I have to be able to read code (I am a programmer), if I cant read code then I shouldn't be a programmer. Would this not apply to the Minister?


----------



## Padraigb (13 Feb 2009)

I didn't mean to suggest that truthfulness on its own was a sufficient qualification to be a Minister for Finance or, indeed, for any other job (except, perhaps, soothsayer -- but there don't seem to be many openings for them nowadays).

It's an interesting and tricky matter to judge what technical skills a Minister needs, or even how much professional familiarity with the area. Does a Minister for Agriculture need a background in farming or agri-business? Does a Minister for Children need to be a parent (or a child)?

Some reports in the Department of Finance are quite technical, and one needs appropriate expertise to understand them. It might be economics expertise, or it might be accounting expertise, it might be legal expertise, or it might be expertise in another area. There might be nobody, even in the department's permanent and expert staff, with the full range. So the Minister must rely on the assistance of a team of experts. What I think went wrong here is that the import of the report was missed: some person or persons in the Minister's team made a big mistake.

I do believe it was a mistake, not an act of deception. I might be wrong about that.


----------



## levelpar (17 Feb 2009)

Why have a dog if you have to bark yourself?


----------



## upport (17 Feb 2009)

Perhaps he didnt need to read the report to know what was in it. Denis Casey said that The Financial Regulatory Body sugested that financial institutions should help each other in the current difficult financial climate. Who gave that instruction to the Financial Regulator? Is the Financial Regulator a government body?


----------

