# Who IS Kevin Cardiff and why was Nessa Childers threatened?



## onq (15 Nov 2011)

The Department of Finance was intimately involved in the Bailout, the Banking Crisis and Other Economic Issues.

Kevin Cardiff was one of the Big Wheels in that department.

How does someone who seems to have swallowed wholesale the assurances by  Irish banks which have since been shown to be lies get PROMOTED within  the department to the number One slot?

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2010/12/14/kevin-cardiff-the-smartest-guy-in-the-room/

How did someone like that then get put forward for an Auditor's Job, his department having apparently miscounted 3.6 billion Euro?

http://www.independent.ie/national-...vant-cardiff-for-euro180k-eu-job-2927521.html

Why does someone like Nessa Childers whose conscience makes her object  to this person being nominated to the European Court of Auditors get  threatened by her own party?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1115/childersn.html

I am really, really, REALLY getting tired of seeing people who have what  seems on the facts presented by the media to be questionable competence  get promoted to positions of authority and high earnings.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (15 Nov 2011)

Kevin Cardiff was the Head of the Banking Section who advised Brian Lenihan not to listen to McWilliams idea of a blanket bank guarantee. 

I am sure that there were problems on his watch. But he has a record of achievement and respect within the civil service. 

I dealt with him a few times when I was chairman of the Consumer Panel of the Financial Regulator and, although my dealings with him were limited, I got the impression that he was a good guy. 

There is a big problem that civil servants can't go publicly and defend themselves or promote their achievements. And of course the politicians love to blame them. I would generally have more confidence in the civil servants that I have met than in the politicians I have met.

Cardiff has an easygoing manner and I believe he projected himself very badly in front of an Oireachtas Committee. 

Brendan


----------



## onq (15 Nov 2011)

I didn't want to parade that appearance on AAM, because I too have met officials and some of them have a poor ability to present themselves, never mind defend their position or that of their department.
I don't see that as a particular failing as their calling and nature seems to tend towards a behind-the-scenes supportive role.

Yes, the man exuded a certain degree of autocracy in front of the Oireachtas Committee.
This was commented on by one of my neighbours whose views on matters  like this I respect, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

However then I saw this thing rolling on into a plum EU job in the face of the recent 3.6Bn "find" and then Nessa Childers alleged intimidation.
I felt it appropriate to air this on AAM where more informed posters like your good self might shed some light on it.

To say I am concerned about the progression and apparent promotion of Mr. Cardiff would be an understatement.
It would be questionable at the best of times, given the train of events described above by the press.

This is anything but the best of times, with in excess of the missing €3.6 Billion about to be taken out of the budget this year.
With all the talk of "accountability" going around, I think the fact that the government "recommended" him needs to be explained.

Now there's this bullying of Nessa Childers to not speak against his nomination, which is going too far.
This won't be seen as helping our image abroad.


----------



## 44brendan (15 Nov 2011)

ONQ. I agree that Mr Cardiff does have some hanging issues which should be fully addressed before any recommendation becoming final. possibly the worse side of this job is that it being seen as a way of sidelining an incompetent official to Europe (which may not be true but is the general perception). 
In terms of the treatment of Nessa Childers I have to date only heard her own commentary on the matter and have missed any official response from the Labour Party. With Willie Penrose also raising issues re an inner5 clique within the Party this raises the threat of a repeat of the Cowen/Ahern days!!


----------



## onq (15 Nov 2011)

Your comments about the quality of the Auditor's position echoes my initial impression - I got the impression that Europe knows this and resents it from the second link in the OP.
Willie Penrose today was a surprise, but I don't think the barracks closure was the real reason - something for another thread, possibly on politics.ie 
The attempt to intimidate and silence Nessa Childers is a far more important issue than the Cardiff recommendation or Penrose's resignation.


----------



## NOAH (23 Nov 2011)

*cardiff rejected - great news*

at last a bit of good news.

noah


----------



## dewdrop (23 Nov 2011)

On the ball !


----------



## thedaras (23 Nov 2011)

Kevin Cardiff has been rejected for Court of Auditors role by one vote.


----------



## Knuttell (23 Nov 2011)

I dont understand??

I thought incompetence at such a high level was always rewarded,werent they reading the script?


----------



## Eithneangela (23 Nov 2011)

So, Europe is not a dumping ground for failed top level Irish civil servants any more! Unfortunately, that probably means that he has to be kept 'employed' in the Irish Civil Service, at no loss of income, until retirement age.


----------



## blueband (23 Nov 2011)

good news for sure.  it was close though!


----------



## STEINER (23 Nov 2011)

only sensible decision.  but is the taxpayer stuck with him now especially if he retires on a fat pension.


----------



## Yorrick (23 Nov 2011)

The E.U. are setting a bad precedent here. Where can we send our also rans if there are no jobs in Brussels for them ?


----------



## Purple (23 Nov 2011)

He should never have been put forward for the position as this was bound to happen. It projects all the wrong images of this country. I do feel he has been scapegoated though it shows a bad lack of judgement on his part that he allowed himself to be put in this position.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (23 Nov 2011)

Purple said:


> ... it shows a bad lack of judgement on his part that he allowed himself to be put in this position.



I doubt if he had any choice. The government probably made it clear that they wanted a clean break with the top civil servants who were around during the last administration.


----------



## Purple (23 Nov 2011)

So what happens to him now?


----------



## 44brendan (23 Nov 2011)

Now the man is between a rock and a hard place.I.e Europe doesn't want him and Ireland doesn't want him. I'm sue the next move will be an early retirement with the "miserly" exit package that senior civil servants are entitled to. With his government experience & insider knowledge of how things work he should have no problems in picking up a lucrative private consultancy.
Call me a cynic


----------



## Purple (23 Nov 2011)

44brendan said:


> Now the man is between a rock and a hard place.I.e Europe doesn't want him and Ireland doesn't want him. I'm sue the next move will be an early retirement with the "miserly" exit package that senior civil servants are entitled to. With his government experience & insider knowledge of how things work he should have no problems in picking up a lucrative private consultancy.
> Call me a cynic



You're a cynic


----------



## NOAH (23 Nov 2011)

i forgot to add that his retirement will be a "doddle"  

noa


----------



## kennyb3 (23 Nov 2011)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Kevin Cardiff was the Head of the Banking Section who advised Brian Lenihan not to listen to McWilliams idea of a blanket bank guarantee.
> 
> I am sure that there were problems on his watch. But he has a record of achievement and respect within the civil service.
> 
> ...



His CV makes for very funny reading - involved in tax policy in 2005/6 - wow thats worked out well for us hasnt it.

He who give't away cannot take back.


----------



## horusd (23 Nov 2011)

I was glad the Court of Auditors rejected this man. There were too many questions relating to his competence. Maybe that's a harsh judgement given what Brendan has said about him, but  we have got to stop rewarding failure and start sending clear messages about responsibility.

Trevor Sargent set a good political example of what should be normal in this country, and is very normal across the water. Everyone from the top down should have cards clearly marked, failure or subtantial errors should carry a serious penalty.


----------



## Padraigb (23 Nov 2011)

horusd said:


> ... There were too many questions relating to his competence....



But a shortage of informed answers.


----------



## Sunny (23 Nov 2011)

Interesting thing will be to see if the government try to force through the nomination or does European democracy work. They obviously don't want him around because of his record so let's see how the public sector deal with him. Probably the same as the private sector. Large pay off and big pension.


----------



## blueband (23 Nov 2011)

i heard on the 6 oclock news they could ask for another vote on it!


----------



## Knuttell (24 Nov 2011)

blueband said:


> i heard on the 6 oclock news they could ask for another vote on it!



Oh for Gods sake what part of PFO are they having problems with?


----------



## Delboy (24 Nov 2011)

Good news! for who?
we're stuck with him here now....so there may be 2 top dog's now in the Dept of Finance both drawing down the top salary, eventual pay-offs etc
Or he may get a big package to go now

either way, the Irish Taxpayer takes the hit


----------



## Purple (24 Nov 2011)

I don't see how Ireland being humiliated in Europe again is good news.


----------



## Shawady (24 Nov 2011)

Apparantly it's still not a given that he won't get the job.
Prioneas De Rossa is still going to push for him to get it.


----------



## DerKaiser (24 Nov 2011)

horusd said:


> Trevor Sargent set a good political example of what should be normal in this country, and is very normal across the water. Everyone from the top down should have cards clearly marked, failure or subtantial errors should carry a serious penalty.


 
I disagree. I really don't know whether there are people who never make errors or whether they have deluded themselves into thinking they never make errors, but resignations en masse each time an organisation makes a mistake will leave no one to actually run the place.

Now there are serious levels of incompetence in evidence everywhere that the public can judge quite easily, e.g. RTEs complete lack of solid evidence before setting out to ruin a man's reputation, Anglo's loans to direactors breaching limits, Brian Cowen hungover on radio, etc. These are the type of things that heads should roll for.

Equally there are very innocent errors that don't signal imcompetence or wrongdoing. I'm not saying the €3.6bn misstatement of the national debt is the perfect example of one, but it's not as outrageuos as the likes of Sinn Fein and the media would lead us to believe.

There is an awful lot of sanctimonious outrage on relatively minor issues recently, and the over reactions actually take away from the outrage we should feel about the genuine wrongdoings that have crippled the country. I think we'd all need to think carefully about the extent to which we might make honest mistakes ourselves with little or no negative consequences.


----------



## shnaek (24 Nov 2011)

Purple said:


> I don't see how Ireland being humiliated in Europe again is good news.



An easily avoidable humiliation.


----------



## Sunny (24 Nov 2011)

I don't have a problem with the €3.6 billion. I do have a problem with his record in the Department on banking issues. He will probably blame the regulator and say it wasn't his fault though.

The biggest problem I have though is that it is obvious that Noonan does not want him in the Department for some reason. But instead of holding his performance to account in a fair and objective way, it is easier to send him over to Europe into a highly paid job. If he is not good enough for the Department of Finance, he is not enough for the EU.


----------



## Padraigb (24 Nov 2011)

Sunny said:


> ... I do have a problem with his record in the Department on banking issues....



Do you actually know what his record is?


----------



## Sunny (24 Nov 2011)

Padraigb said:


> Do you actually know what his record is?


 
Yes, he was in charge/worked closely with the Minister when formulating the Departments banking policy during the crisis. He is as much to blame for the decisions made as Cowan and Lenihan are. Both of whom have been publically slaughtered for their roles. That's why as Secretary General he got paid nearly €300,000. He is supposed to take responsibility. 

I have no doubt he has had a distinguished career and has done the Country some great service but the fact remains, he was in charge when decisions were made on the banks that have proven to be disasterous.

And now, the new Government decide they don't want him in the role and think that they can just send him off to Europe. It's Charlie McCreevey all over again....


----------



## Complainer (24 Nov 2011)

blueband said:


> i heard on the 6 oclock news they could ask for another vote on it!



They've recounted the votes. The outcome is 3.6 billion votes for Mr Cardiff vs 6 votes against.


----------



## Leo (24 Nov 2011)

Sunny said:


> ...he was in charge when decisions were made on the banks that have proven to be disasterous.


 
Did you read post #2?


----------



## DerKaiser (24 Nov 2011)

Just for the laugh, here's a post on independent.ie.  The first guy feels he is qualified to judge the seriousness of the issue despite not knowing what a billion even is, and 16 others gave him the thumbs up.

_Eamon92 5 hours ago
Has this Country gone mad.. Congratulations Mr. Cardiff for making an error of €3,600,000,000,000 here have a promotion.
 Gemma and 15 more liked this

Brine Clown 3 hours ago in reply to Eamon92
The modern day billion has been standardised to the US model which is a thousand million (1,000,000,000) as opposed to the million million (1,000,000,000,000) you have quoted. So it's only an error of €3,600,000,000 ! 
I'm glad you're not doing the accounts!_


----------



## shnaek (25 Nov 2011)

Sunny said:


> He is supposed to take responsibility.



Nobody in Ireland takes responsibility. That is why we are destined to fail. The govt are very keen to see the back of Mr Cardiff alright. Cheaper to send him to Europe than to pay him off - which would cost a heck of a lot of money.


----------



## horusd (25 Nov 2011)

The gov.t is showing serious hubris in pushing this to the plenary session. He was a bad choice to begin with, they should accept the rejection and move on. Europe already got an Irish cast-off in the form of Charlie McCreevey, they don't need another one.


----------



## RonanC (25 Nov 2011)

Sunny said:


> Yes, he was in charge/worked closely with the Minister when formulating the Departments banking policy during the crisis. He is as much to blame for the decisions made as Cowan and Lenihan are. Both of whom have been publically slaughtered for their roles. That's why as Secretary General he got paid nearly €300,000. He is supposed to take responsibility.
> 
> I have no doubt he has had a distinguished career and has done the Country some great service but the fact remains, he was in charge when decisions were made on the banks that have proven to be disasterous.
> 
> And now, the new Government decide they don't want him in the role and think that they can just send him off to Europe. It's Charlie McCreevey all over again....


 
Sunny, I am in no way defending Kevin Cardiff's actions or his role in the decisions made over the past 10 years, but he took over as Secretary General of the Dept. of Finance in Feb 2010. It appears from the bits that have come out that the Department were very much against a bank guarantee. In the end, the blanket bank guarantee was scrutinised and approved by the houses of the oireachtas and not the Dept. of Finance. If anything, those elected to the Dail and Seanad were much more responsible than Kevin Cardiff was. We also must remember why the guarantee was put in place. The banks met with Lenihan and Cowen, told them of their serious issues and that they would go bang and bring the country with them unless Government stepped in. The banks also lied about their financial situation and I'd imagine if Lenihan knew the full picture as we do now, a blanket bank guarantee would have been the last thing he would propose.


----------



## Complainer (25 Nov 2011)

RonanC said:


> The banks also lied about their financial situation and I'd imagine if Lenihan knew the full picture as we do now, a blanket bank guarantee would have been the last thing he would propose.



While you're probably right, it was the job of Lenihan and those around him to know what the truth was about these banks, and not have to rely on the honesty of these crooks.


----------



## Sunny (26 Nov 2011)

RonanC said:


> Sunny, I am in no way defending Kevin Cardiff's actions or his role in the decisions made over the past 10 years, but he took over as Secretary General of the Dept. of Finance in Feb 2010. It appears from the bits that have come out that the Department were very much against a bank guarantee. In the end, the blanket bank guarantee was scrutinised and approved by the houses of the oireachtas and not the Dept. of Finance. If anything, those elected to the Dail and Seanad were much more responsible than Kevin Cardiff was. We also must remember why the guarantee was put in place. The banks met with Lenihan and Cowen, told them of their serious issues and that they would go bang and bring the country with them unless Government stepped in. The banks also lied about their financial situation and I'd imagine if Lenihan knew the full picture as we do now, a blanket bank guarantee would have been the last thing he would propose.



But its not just the Guarantee. Before he became secretary general, wasn't he in charge of taxation and financial services in the Department. I don't know what his record is exactly but he must have been involved in the reckless taxation policies of the boom years and I presume he was involved in the reckless regulation of banks. Now I am sure he can wash his hands and blame politicians and the regulator but the simple fact is that he was there earning a huge salary. He has questions to answer especially if he wants a job in Europe. Also his performance the other week in front of the Dail Committee was awful.

Like I said, he has probably done the State some great service and maybe it is very harsh but the simple fact is that the Government want him out of the Department of Finance for some reason. My problem is that if they think he has done something wrong or hasn't performed, it should be dealt with here instead of just transferring him to a plum job in Europe just so they can avoid holding a senior civil servant to account.


----------



## Complainer (26 Nov 2011)

Wasn't it nice of Kevin to 'liberate' the Stock Exchange from the pain of a tiny commission, and free up Sean Quinn to go hell for leather on his greedy high-risk CFD attack on Anglo.

[broken link removed]

Hope it was a nice lunch.


----------



## DerKaiser (26 Nov 2011)

Complainer said:


> Wasn't it nice of Kevin to 'liberate' the Stock Exchange from the pain of a tiny commission, and free up Sean Quinn to go hell for leather on his greedy high-risk CFD attack on Anglo.
> 
> [broken link removed]
> 
> Hope it was a nice lunch.



The existence of CFDs or whether the tax system fails to discourage them are relatively indirect issues compared to the reckless behaviour of Quinn in his investments, Anglo in its lending and the regulator in his supervision.

Quinn borrowed to invest, the means by which he did this was made more efficient by the existence of CFDs, but banning/discouraging CFDs for this reason would be akin to not granting planning for high buildings in case people threw themselves off the top.


----------



## Complainer (26 Nov 2011)

DerKaiser said:


> Quinn borrowed to invest, the means by which he did this was made more efficient by the existence of CFDs, but banning/discouraging CFDs for this reason would be akin to not granting planning for high buildings in case people threw themselves off the top.



So what do we do to stop another Quinn/Anglo/CFD happening?


----------



## mandelbrot (26 Nov 2011)

Complainer said:


> Wasn't it nice of Kevin to 'liberate' the Stock Exchange from the pain of a tiny commission, and free up Sean Quinn to go hell for leather on his greedy high-risk CFD attack on Anglo.
> 
> [broken link removed]
> 
> Hope it was a nice lunch.



20/20 Hindsight is a great thing.


----------



## DerKaiser (26 Nov 2011)

Complainer said:


> So what do we do to stop another Quinn/Anglo/CFD happening?



The likes of Quinn can do what they want with their own money be it CFDs or whatever else.  The problem was he used someone else's money, and that someone else was an "institution of systemic importance".  So we identify every "institution of systemic importance" and properly regulate their risk controls.  There might be other reasons to tax CFDs but not to indirectly compensate for lack of decent regulation.


----------



## onq (27 Nov 2011)

I disagree with the principle that people "can do what they like with their own money", if that means moving it out of Irish accounts and putting the rest of us taxpayers further in debt.


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2011)

onq said:


> I disagree with the principle that people "can do what they like with their own money", if that means moving it out of Irish accounts and putting the rest of us taxpayers further in debt.



Do you think the state should have the right to stop people moving their own money to another country?


----------



## DerKaiser (27 Nov 2011)

Purple said:


> Do you think the state should have the right to stop people moving their own money to another country?



Bring back the Berlin wall! Presumably people could not move either....


----------



## onq (28 Nov 2011)

No.

Not when its costing the taxpayer billions in a recession in increased borrowing to recapitalize the banks
Not when the only reason the money-movers money remained "safe" in the first place was the state guarantee - again backed by taxpayers.
How do these people repay the taxpayer?
By forcing the state to borrow more.

With freedom comes responsibility.
People are quick to trade on the former
Precious little of the latter being shown these days.

Pay your debts, honour your commitments and support those who have supported you.
Its a fairly clear line to follow and those who don't will sooner or later feel the flat of the blade.


----------



## kennyb3 (28 Nov 2011)

onq said:


> No.
> 
> Not when its costing the taxpayer billions in a recession in increased borrowing to recapitalize the banks
> Not when the only reason the money-movers money remained "safe" in the first place was the state guarantee - again backed by taxpayers.
> ...


 
So we should keep money here to fund debt forgiveness:
    	> Resolving the mortgage arrears crisis   	>  ONQ's proposal for Universal Debt Forgiveness

Sign me up. 

Moving money creates liquidity problems at best, it doesnt add to the deficit nor does it add to the national debt.


----------



## Superman (28 Nov 2011)

onq said:


> No.
> 
> Not when its costing the taxpayer billions in a recession in increased borrowing to recapitalize the banks
> Not when the only reason the money-movers money remained "safe" in the first place was the state guarantee - again backed by taxpayers.


Actually savings were protected before the state guarantee - up to €100,000.

Also the state guarantee was introduced for Fianna Fail's benefit - not for the benefit of the savers. (And if you are being generous - for the benefit of the state).

Thirdly the cost of recapitalising the banks is due to Fianna Fail's decision to guarantee bondholders - and especially existing bondholders, for their own reasons.

EDIT:
If you accept that the guarantee allows the government now to have additional rights regarding citizens' deposits, then surely by the same logic, if I stand outside your house all night long (unasked for), I can then claim the keys to your house in the morning.  You benefited from having me there in front of your house all night after all.


----------



## ajapale (28 Nov 2011)

Topic Reminder:   Who IS Kevin Cardiff and why was Nessa Childers threatened?


----------



## onq (29 Nov 2011)

Thanks Ajay.


----------

