# Government appoints experts to consult on indebtedness



## Brendan Burgess

*Government appoints experts to fulfil Programme for Government  commitments on debt*



Ministers Brian  Lenihan and Eamon Ryan today (25th  February 2010) announced the establishment of a  group of experts to work with the Government on our response to the  issue of indebtedness. 

The Independent  Chair will be Mr. Hugh Cooney an insolvency accountant with BDO Simpson  Xavier. The other members are as follows:

Matthew  Elderfield, Acting Head of Consumer Protection

David Duffy,  ESRI, author of report on Negative Equity 

Pat Farrell,  Irish Banking Federation

Tom Foley,  retired banker 

Paul Joyce, FLAC

Patricia  Rickard-Clarke, LRC

Brendan Burgess, www.askaboutmoney.ie

Senior officials  of the Department of Finance, Department of the Taoiseach, Department of  Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Department of Social and Family  Affairs and Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government . 
These experts  will work within Government and present their recommendations on a  rolling basis to the Minister for Finance, for consideration by  Government. The work will commence immediately.
The Terms of  Reference will be based on the Renewed Programme for Government and  include mortgage and non-mortgage debt. They include an examination of  measures to assist those in mortgage arrears to keep possession of their  family home with reference to the measures adopted in other  jurisdictions. The ongoing deliberations of the Law Reform Commission  will be considered, specifically reform of personal insolvency,  bankruptcy law and debt enforcement. 
The Ministers  thanked those who are willing to give of their time and expertise.

The Ministers  stated, “Keeping families in their home is a social and economic  priority. The Government also wishes to remove, as far as practicable,  debt enforcement proceedings from the courts. 
In our efforts to  achieve our aim, it is important that we do not jeopardise the ability  of the financial system to access credit. There are no simple solutions  to the debt issues we now face. 
We are confident  that the wide membership and expertise of all the individuals involved,  working closely with Government, will bring forward innovative  recommendations on debt management and enforcement.
Along with the  creation of jobs and the continuing work of Government on the future of  our banking system, this work can only help our national recovery.”
*Notes for Editors*
*Renewed Programme for Government* – page 15
*Protecting the  Family Home*
We will introduce  new measures to protect families having difficulties with their home  mortgage payments.
The existing  statutory Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears and the recently agreed  protocol between the Irish Bankers Federation (IBF) and the Money Advice  and Budgeting Service (MABS) on debt default will be further reviewed  with a view to expanding the options available for dealing with debt  situations, including for example, the use by banks and lenders of more  flexible mechanisms to avoid foreclosure in appropriate circumstances.  These could include:


reduced rates  
longer  maturity dates 
rolling-up  of outstanding interest 
bank taking  equity in the house 
bank taking  ownership and leasing back the property to the resident with rent  payments coming off the loan. 
 With reference to  the measures adopted in other jurisdictions, the Government will  examine ways of expanding its own mortgage-support measures. 
*Helping Those  in Debt *
We will reform  debt enforcement in light of the deliberation of the Law Reform  Commission, which has recently published a consultation paper on the  matter. We will regulate debt collection agencies.
We will create a  new system of personal insolvency regulations allowing for a statutory  non-court-based debt settlement system. 
We will seek to  establish a central Debt Enforcement Office to remove as many debt  enforcement proceeds from the courts as possible.
ends


----------



## senni

Fantastic..

At least a pathway will emerge so that people will not be in the dark as to what could or would happen in relation to their personal debts.


----------



## sandymount

I would be worried about the make up of the experts. 

The very people who got us into the problems we are experiencing are now having to come up with the solutions.


----------



## beolight

sandymount said:


> I would be worried about the make up of the experts.
> 
> The very people who got us into the problems we are experiencing are now having to come up with the solutions.



yes i am certainly alarmed at this prospect

how does it expect to have any credibility with the public when a simple google search will unearth a minefield of quotes which will reveal that some of these guys were actually cheerleaders  of  the property bubble and as such actively facilitated in creating this problem

is their any  media people out there with the gumption to take a look at these people

whats next is ken mcdonald going to be the chairman?


----------



## shanegl

senni said:


> Fantastic..
> 
> At least a pathway will emerge so that people will not be in the dark as to what could or would happen in relation to their personal debts.



Why would they be in the dark?


----------



## janeymak

sandymount said:


> I would be worried about the make up of the experts.
> 
> The very people who got us into the problems we are experiencing are now having to come up with the solutions.



Like this? http://quotesfromthebubble.blogspot.com/2009/07/brendan-burgess-founder.html


----------



## sandymount

duplicate


----------



## sandymount

janeymak said:


> Like this? http://quotesfromthebubble.blogspot.com/2009/07/brendan-burgess-founder.html



and Tom Foley,  retired banker. He was Austin Hughes's boss

http://quotesfromthebubble.blogspot.com/search/label/Austin Hughes


----------



## kaplan

A most disappointing line up here – leans far too much towards institutional rights and away from private citizen rights. Only one social justice voice (FLAC) and no MABS, NCA or FR Consumer Panel input? 


The Finance bias will always favour institutional protection - after all this is the Ministery that facilitated the consumer credit boom and is focussed soley on banking stability which directly conflicts with social justice and modern equitable principles of debt resolution.

The Greens have dropped the ball on this one as well -


----------



## asta

_"*Helping Those  in Debt *
We will reform debt enforcement in light of the deliberation of the Law Reform Commission, which has recently published a consultation paper on the matter. We will regulate debt collection agencies.
We will create a new system of personal insolvency regulations allowing for a statutory non-court-based debt settlement system. 
We will seek to establish a central Debt Enforcement Office to remove as many debt enforcement proceeds from the courts as possible.
ends"_ 

This is where this agencies remit should begin and end. The consequences of debt in Ireland, one of the most personally indebted countries in the world are horrific. Anything short of a complete reform of Bankruptcy Law is pointless. We need a system like that in the UK where is you can declare Bankruptcy and be, eventually, allowed to move on, with a fresh start, rather than facing the prospect of being hounded to the grave. 



_reduced rates_
_longer  maturity dates_
_rolling-up  of outstanding interest_
_bank taking  equity in the house_
_bank taking  ownership and leasing back the property to the resident with rent  payments coming off the loan. _

This approach I think could be useful in a very limited number of cases, but if rolled out as a national strategy for dealing with debt it would be a disaster. What are we really saying here. Reduce the capacity of the banks that made the loans, to collect on those loans, interest and capital, to allow someone who can not afford to live in that house to stay in that house*. *Why? Further threatening the banks that we are all but on life support at the moment. Someone has to pay these debts at the end of the day. It is just a matter of WHO that will be. The person who owes the debt or the rest of us. Debt forgiveness is never free.We need to get real, and become responsible for our own actions, and stop with the whinging sentiment of the second poster.

_"Fantastic.. At least a pathway will emerge so that people will not be in the dark as to what could or would happen in relation to their personal debts." _

No we don't need a "pathway" from the government. We need to grow up, and take some personal responsibility for our actions.
If you borrowed the money, pay back the money. If you can't pay. then fess up, take the (massively reformed, I hope) consequences and move on.
I know two people in the UK who defaulted on their mortgages - it was inconvenient, sad in one case, but no one died. Both happily and well recovered at this stage.


----------



## kaplan

@asta : for a good treatment of modern debt resolution regimes and the principles underpinning them you could read the LRC proposals available on their website. http://www.lawreform.ie/submissions.9.html

Who pays etc is well covered in a balanced argument for reform of personal insolvency including a discussion on the UK system - which is not the only one.

Inherent in modern consumer society, with its dependency on credit, is a principles based system allowing for debt resolution in way that limits costs to society and allows people to become productive members of society. The issue is less about attributing blame but allowing for a just and equitable resolution that balances the rights and obligations of creditors expectation of repayment and debtors ability to pay. Debt forgiveness has to be earned - there is no suggestion of a free lunch or allowing for free riders. Most financially vulnerable people unnaffordable indebtedness is not about an un-willingness to repay but about a severely limited ability or no ability to repay through circumstances beyond their control. To suggest they should be consigned to a life of pecuniary without anyhope of becoming once again productive members of society is to deny a safety net afforded in almost every other mature democractic society.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Folks

I won't be discussing the work of the group or my own views on this topic on askaboutmoney or otherwise in public.

But I will bring any ideas or views brought up here to the group. 

If you have a new idea, it's probably best to start a new thread. 

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess

*IBF welcomes establishment by Government of expert group  on consumer debt*​ 

 The Irish Banking Federation (IBF) welcomes  the establishment by Government of an expert group to examine the issue of  mortgage and consumer debt and to make appropriate policy recommendations.   

 The IBF also welcomes the opportunity to  participate directly in the work of the group and looks forward to doing this in  a positive and constructive manner.  IBF already has a long-standing working  relationship with a range of stakeholders in the development of debt management  solutions for consumers.  The positive output of this is most recently reflected  in the following:



The _IBF  Pledge to Homeowners_ makes clear that legal action to repossess a home will  not be commenced by IBF creditors provided the customer talks with the lender at  the earliest opportunity so that a mutually-acceptable arrangement can be  agreed, maintained and reviewed thereafter on a regular basis.  An Oversight  Committee involving representatives of MABS and IBF under the independent  chairmanship of Prof. Martin O’Donoghue is monitoring the application of this  Pledge.
 


The IBF/MABS _Protocol on Debt  Management_ enables IBF creditors and MABS money advisers to work  together effectively to help personal customers to address and manage debt  problems and, wherever possible, to formulate a mutually-acceptable, affordable  and sustainable repayment plan.  
 


The IBF  supports key recommendations in the Law Reform Commission’s  “Consultation Paper  on Personal Debt Management and Debt Enforcement”, including:   
 


The development of an effective alternative to imprisonment for those  who are unable to pay fines and civil debt 
The development of a non-court-based system for dealing with personal  debt
The regulation of debt collection agencies and of commercial debt  advice agencies

 “These and other initiatives are helping  tens of thousands of consumers to work with their lenders in managing their  mortgage and other debt repayments through these very challenging times.  And we  are fully committed to working with all key stakeholders in continuing to make  this happen”, states Pat Farrell, IBF Chief Executive.                                                  
*Note:  *Irish Banking Federation (IBF) is the leading  representative body for the banking and financial services sector in Ireland,  representing over 70 member institutions and associates, including licensed  domestic and foreign banks and institutions operating in the financial  marketplace here.   
*Contact: *Felix O’Regan, IBF Head of PR and  Public Affairs, tel. 6715311, 087 6481644


----------



## Bronte

kaplan said:


> A most disappointing line up here – leans far too much towards institutional rights and away from private citizen rights. Only one social justice voice (FLAC) and no MABS, NCA or FR Consumer Panel input?
> 
> 
> -


 
I'm really surprised that nobody from MABS is on there.  They are the people dealing with debt at the coal face.  I also think someone from the St. Vincent de Paul and one of the community welfare officers would be a good idea.

My fear is this is another committee/quango that will produce a report that will be biased towards the insitutions and not the individuals and that will not be implemented in any case. 

How long before a report is made and decisions taken.  It's right now that people are in trouble and they need solutions now.  

Why not just simply copy what another jurisdiction does in a good way to solve people in debt.


----------



## Coles

The consultation group will need to have some idea of where the economy and property market are heading.  What assumptions will these discussions be based on?  Will the group be permitted to discuss property prices?


----------



## canicemcavoy

Can I ask how these "experts" are selected appointed?

In thread a while ago where Brendan recounted giving out to David McWilliams (http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=958583#post958583), Brendan claims to be a skeptic yet says he would not listen to skeptical arguments until _after_ they've been proven right - the strangest definition of the word "skeptic" I've ever heard. 

In the same thread, Brendan himself said that he doesn't have the theoretical economic training to evaluate arguments related to the property market. 

Yet now he's been appointed to an expert committee related to property.

I'm sure Brendan is a very nice guy, but I'm at a loss to see what exactly he brings to this committee.

How are these committees appointed exactly?


----------



## grackal

You are happy to pass on views to the panel?

Speaking as a person who is not in debt, mortgage free and paying income tax... is this going to be a state lead bail-out, and is it going to cost me? 

Are those who bought property in the boom going to pull the ladder up after them, getting rewarded for bad decisions and being allowed stay in houses they cannot afford at the expense of the taxpayer?

As far as I can see, there are two parties to this problem: overwhelmed mortgage holders and the banks that gave those mortgages. Its up to those two parties to work something out. The governments only input should be to reform bankruptcy laws.


----------



## Howitzer

grackal said:


> the governments only input should be to reform bankruptcy laws.


+1.


----------



## Bronte

canicemcavoy said:


> In the same thread, Brendan himself said that he doesn't have the theoretical economic training to evaluate arguments related to the property market.
> 
> Yet now he's been appointed to an expert committee related to property.
> 
> I'm sure Brendan is a very nice guy, but I'm at a loss to see what exactly he brings to this committee.


  So what if he's not an expert on property.  All the so called experts on property got us into this mess so much good they are.  Anyway this group is about debt not property.  I'm glad Brendan is on the committee at least we can feel someone we 'know' is in there.  I'm sure he's gained a wealth of experience with all the posts on AAM of people in debt.


----------



## canicemcavoy

Bronte said:


> So what if he's not an expert on property. All the so called experts on property got us into this mess so much good they are.


 
How about appointing experts who foresaw the mess? Crazy idea. Just a thought. There are some out there. Brendan himself has labelled some of them "sensationalist".



> Anyway this group is about debt not property. I'm glad Brendan is on the committee at least we can feel someone we 'know' is in there.


 
How very Irish to want someone appointed on a cosy basis (cos they "know" them) and nothing to do with expertise.



> I'm sure he's gained a wealth of experience with all the posts on AAM of people in debt.


 
I'm not sure is that sarcasm but I imagine there'll be some very hollow laughter at that sentence. Do you think that perhaps if AAM's policy over the past 5 years had been different, many people flooding here looking for advice might not be?


----------



## Brendan Burgess

canicemcavoy said:


> Brendan claims to be a skeptic yet says he would not listen to skeptical arguments until _after_ they've been proven right - the strangest definition of the word "skeptic" I've ever heard.
> 
> In the same thread, Brendan himself said that he doesn't have the theoretical economic training to evaluate arguments related to the property market.



Canice,

They are very strange quotes? 


> he would not listen to skeptical arguments until _after_ they've been proven right



I can't find anything which you could even misinterpret to claim I said that. 

A skeptic knows the limits of their knowledge. As I pointed out on many occasions, I am one of the few people who does not and did not claim to be able to predict house property prices. Most people think they know, when they don't.

I am wondering if you are confusing the word "skeptic" with "cynic"?  They are completely different. They are often . 



> In the same thread, Brendan himself said that he doesn't have the theoretical economic training to evaluate arguments related to the property market.



Can't find that either.


----------



## LDFerguson

Coles said:


> The consultation group will need to have some idea of where the economy and property market are heading. What assumptions will these discussions be based on? Will the group be permitted to discuss property prices?


 
David Duffy is an economist so presumably he will supply this input, insofar as it’s needed.


----------



## LDFerguson

canicemcavoy said:


> I'm not sure is that sarcasm but I imagine there'll be some very hollow laughter at that sentence. Do you think that perhaps if AAM's policy over the past 5 years had been different, many people flooding here looking for advice might not be?


 
Are you saying that people made six-figure decisions based on what they read on an internet chat board?  If they did, is that the fault of the board?


----------



## jhegarty

canicemcavoy said:


> How about appointing experts who foresaw the mess? Crazy idea. Just a thought. There are some out there. Brendan himself has labelled some of them "sensationalist".



But this is a panel about debt , not a panel to predict the future prices of houses.


----------



## canicemcavoy

Brendan said:


> A skeptic knows the limits of their knowledge. As I pointed out on many occasions, I am one of the few people who does not and did not claim to be able to predict house property prices. Most people think they know, when they don't.


 
As far as I'm aware, that's not the definition of a skeptic - that's the definition of an indeterminist. 

A skeptic is one who doubts accepted beliefs. The "accepted belief" in the past decade in Ireland was that property prices were based on sound principles, would continue to increase, and then would have a soft landing. People like David McWilliams and Morgan Kelly were skeptical of this belief. Yet I've noted that these are the people you seem to reserve the most ire for. It's a circle I find hard to square. 

If you _have_ condemned those who cheer-led the property bubble in this forum, I apologise but I have never seen it.



> Can't find that either.


 
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showpost.php?p=958883&postcount=10


----------



## canicemcavoy

LDFerguson said:


> Are you saying that people made six-figure decisions based on what they read on an internet chat board? If they did, is that the fault of the board?


 
Are you saying that people take no heed whatsoever of Ireland's largest financial web-based forum? In that case, (a) what's its point and (b) why does Brendan use it to back up his "unique position" when appearing in front of Dail joint committees?


----------



## LDFerguson

canicemcavoy said:


> Are you saying that people take no heed whatsoever of Ireland's largest financial web-based forum? In that case, (a) what's its point and (b) why does Brendan use it to back up his "unique position" when appearing in front of Dail joint committees?


 
There's a huge difference between (a) using sites like Askaboutmoney to gather useful information and opinions and (b) basing a massive financial decision solely on what one reads on such a site. The former is what the site is about, in my opinion. Anyone who would do the latter is certifiable.


----------



## canicemcavoy

LDFerguson said:


> There's a huge difference between (a) using sites like Askaboutmoney to gather useful information and opinions and (b) basing a massive financial decision solely on what one reads on such a site. The former is what the site is about, in my opinion. Anyone who would do the latter is certifiable.


 
Noone's claiming people *solely* based their decisions on Ask About Money. That's a strawman argument. I imagine noone makes their financial decisions on *any* single source of information.


----------



## Coles

LDFerguson said:


> David Duffy is an economist so presumably he will supply this input, insofar as it’s needed.


No doubt it's a minor issue.  Is this the David Duffy that wrote the May 2006 Daft.ie property report?  The report at the very peak of the bubble that failed to even recognise it?

I don't know... see, I'd like to have some people who actually have a clue about what's actually happening.  Maybe someone like Morgan Kelly?  I know he's not respected around here, but he has been right, consistently. 

I know all these experts will strive to do their best for the Public (as usual), but it's hard not to be a bit concerned when one of them gave out this gem of advice in the Sunday Times newspaper less than a year ago.



> _If you’ve a real need to buy now – for example, if you are starting a family – don’t allow the fact that your job is a bit uncertain to put you off. If the worst happens, the government has ordered AIB and Bank of Ireland to lay off homeowners in arrears for at least a year, while other lenders must give them a six-month breather._


_
Hopefully nobody actually read that, eh!
_


----------



## LDFerguson

canicemcavoy said:


> Noone's claiming people *solely* based their decisions on Ask About Money. That's a strawman argument. I imagine noone makes their financial decisions on *any* single source of information.


 
Exactly.  Which is why I believe the reply to your earlier question (below) is "no".  Askaboutmoney's policy has long been NOT to allow speculation on house price movements, but to permit discussions based on facts.  



canicemcavoy said:


> Do you think that perhaps if AAM's policy over the past 5 years had been different, many people flooding here looking for advice might not be?


----------



## canicemcavoy

LDFerguson said:


> Exactly. Which is why I believe the reply to your earlier question (below) is "no". Askaboutmoney's policy has long been NOT to allow speculation on house price movements, but to permit discussions based on facts.


 
People came to AAM looking for advice on buying property. Was anyone banned from the site for telling them to do so on the assumption that property prices would keep going up and would not collapse?


----------



## jhegarty

canicemcavoy said:


> People came to AAM looking for advice on buying property. Was anyone banned from the site for telling them to do so on the assumption that property prices would keep going up and would not collapse?



I have been posting here for 5 years and have never seen a comment on rising prices treated any different to one on dropping prices.


People come to this site for advise on the process of buying a house (like I did) , not to find out if it is a good short term investment.


----------



## janeymak

Bronte said:


> So what if he's not an expert on property.  All the so called experts on property got us into this mess so much good they are.  Anyway this group is about debt not property.  I'm glad Brendan is on the committee at least we can feel someone we 'know' is in there.  I'm sure he's gained a wealth of experience with all the posts on AAM of people in debt.



Hi Bronte.

Have you read this?
http://quotesfromthebubble.blogspot....s-founder.html


----------



## LDFerguson

canicemcavoy said:


> People came to AAM looking for advice on buying property. Was anyone banned from the site for telling them to do so on the assumption that property prices would keep going up and would not collapse?


 
I've no idea.  I'm not a moderator.  But I do know that people have been banned for speculating on future movements of property, posting their own theories about what way property prices "are going to go", etc.


----------



## Howitzer

canicemcavoy said:


> People came to AAM looking for advice on buying property. Was anyone banned from the site for telling them to do so on the assumption that property prices would keep going up and would not collapse?


Just to be devils advocate, I'm pretty sure Qwertyuiop was.


----------



## Papercut

It’s important to bear in mind the aim of the committee & why it is being set up (to examine the issue of mortgage and consumer debt and to make appropriate policy recommendations.)

  Let’s face it, whether people approve of the appointments or not is completely irrelevant at this stage. The reality is that these are the people who are on the committee. So I suppose the only way to influence any of their opinions is by using any means possible, & putting forward any constructive opinions/suggestions relating to the matter at hand. 

  Pointless bickering on a forum run by one of the committee members is futile IMO & only waters down any relevant thoughts/suggestions that might eventually filter through, & is a waste of a valuable platform that we know is at least being read by one of the committee members.

  So, instead of grinding some sort of personal axe regarding what properties we bought/sold, how sensible we were/were not during the bubble or who said what & when, let’s take a step back, think outside the box & look at the issue at hand, not of what we would like it to be, & avail of what I see as a valuable opportunity to put forward any relevant suggestions that we can think of.

  I wouldn’t expect Brendan to comment on any suggestions put forward on this forum, but I am confident that he would read & consider them. That’s a bonus – one which shouldn’t be squandered IMO.


----------



## canicemcavoy

LDFerguson said:


> I've no idea. I'm not a moderator. But I do know that people have been banned for speculating on future movements of property, posting their own theories about what way property prices "are going to go", etc.


 
Is it possible for someone to ask for advice on whether or not to buy property, and get sensible answers, if discussing the reasons for giving your answer is banned?


----------



## Coles

Papercut said:


> So, instead of grinding some sort of personal axe regarding what properties we bought/sold, how sensible we were/were not during the bubble or who said what & when, let’s take a step back, think outside the box & look at the issue at hand, not of what we would like it to be, & avail of what I see as a valuable opportunity to put forward any relevant suggestions that we can think of.
> 
> I wouldn’t expect Brendan to comment on any suggestions put forward on this forum, but I am confident that he would read & consider them. That’s a bonus – one which shouldn’t be squandered IMO.


+1.  I agree completely.  Hopefully Brendan will consider whether or not it is appropriate that he should be on this panel of experts.


----------



## Sunny

Papercut said:


> Pointless bickering on a forum run by one of the committee members is futile IMO & only waters down any relevant thoughts/suggestions that might eventually filter through, & is a waste of a valuable platform that we know is at least being read by one of the committee members.
> 
> So, instead of grinding some sort of personal axe regarding what properties we bought/sold, how sensible we were/were not during the bubble or who said what & when, let’s take a step back, think outside the box & look at the issue at hand, not of what we would like it to be, & avail of what I see as a valuable opportunity to put forward any relevant suggestions that we can think of.
> 
> I wouldn’t expect Brendan to comment on any suggestions put forward on this forum, but I am confident that he would read & consider them. That’s a bonus – one which shouldn’t be squandered IMO.


 
+1.

I don't really see the point of the panel but its there so might as well be used. Brendan, fair play to you for getting involved. I wish you all the best on it.


----------



## janeymak

Sunny said:


> +1.
> 
> I don't really see the point of the panel but its there so might as well be used. Brendan, fair play to you for getting involved. I wish you all the best on it.



Eh there's a problem that needs solving, that's the point. Its the panel participants that should be rethought.


----------



## LDFerguson

canicemcavoy said:


> Is it possible for someone to ask for advice on whether or not to buy property, and get sensible answers, if discussing the reasons for giving your answer is banned?


 
If the answer involves speculating on whether house prices are going up, down or sideways then Askaboutmoney is not the correct forum for the question.


----------



## Coles

LDFerguson said:


> If the answer involves speculating on whether house prices are going up, down or sideways then Askaboutmoney is not the correct forum for the question.


Why not?  That's very strange.  Is property not an asset class?


----------



## LDFerguson

Coles said:


> Why not? That's very strange. Is property not an asset class?


 
It is.  Speculation on the possible future movements of other asset classes, e.g. shares, is also banned.  What's your point?


----------



## Sunny

janeymak said:


> Eh there's a problem that needs solving, that's the point. Its the panel participants that should be rethought.


 
There is no solution to this problem. Steps can be taken to minimise the social damage caused but the effects of negative equity and this property bubble will be felt for decades. 

The biggest change that can be taken is to change the personal bankruptcy laws but that was dealt with by the LRC. I don't see what this panel has to offer on top of this. 

Who do you want on it? Apart from maybe a role for MABS, I don't see any problem with the panel. 
Brendan has a more of track record defending consumer interests in financial services than anyone here. I don't always agree with him but I do believe that if we are going to go down this road, he is a welcome addition.


----------



## Bronte

Howitzer said:


> Just to be devils advocate, I'm pretty sure Qwertyuiop was.


 
Conversly AAM got really angry with me a few times for suggesting property was going down and for discussing house prices in a post where I thought the OP would benefit from discussing house prices.

I now understand that property price discussion was banned because everybody was going crazy whenever the subject came up.  This I try to accept.

Everybody instead of directing ire at Brendan/AAM should direct it at the powers that be who are really at fault.  We would be better off giving good suggestions on how the boom time debt is to be handled.

In relation to those who called the market right, it doesn't make them a better economist or forecaster than others, no one should believe one word of what any economist good bad or indifferent says, they should make their own minds up.  Those economists who were so right about it going down, ask them now to tell us when it will stop going down or will go up and you'll see how good they are.  The truth is nobody really knows. But we can all have opinions.

If anyone used AAM to make a decision on whether or not to buy a house well like LD said they need to be sectioned.


----------



## Coles

Is it permitted to discuss general index trends?  Even just long term trends?  Things like the ISEQ? Or FTSE or the Dow?  What about Bonds?  Interest rates?  What about currencies?  Money?  If you can't ask about money then I'm not sure if this is the forum for me...


----------



## Bronte

janeymak said:


> Hi Bronte.
> 
> Have you read this?
> http://quotesfromthebubble.blogspot....s-founder.html


 
Well I see now what BB looks like and there is some quotes he made. Ye guys know I'm not good at cyberland but all I can see is someone has selected certain remarks made by BB? What am I to understand?  PM me if necessary.


----------



## janeymak

Bronte said:


> Well I see now what BB looks like and there is some quotes he made. Ye guys know I'm not good at cyberland but all I can see is someone has selected certain remarks made by BB? What am I to understand?  PM me if necessary.



You said you were glad he is to be part of the process. After reading his advice, and comments, are you still glad?


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Bronte said:


> If anyone used AAM to make a decision on whether or not to buy a house well like LD said they need to be sectioned.



Hi Bronte

If people wanted to get a view on house prices on askaboutmoney, it was in this summary post. No one else even attempted an updated summary.

After that, they were referred to the Property Pin, where they could get even more insight.

Brendan


----------



## LDFerguson

Coles said:


> Is it permitted to discuss general index trends? Even just long term trends? Things like the ISEQ? Or FTSE or the Dow? What about Bonds? Interest rates? What about currencies? Money? If you can't ask about money then I'm not sure if this is the forum for me...


 
If I post any of the following: - 

"House prices are about to go up because..."

"House prices are about to go down because..."

"The ISEQ is about to go up because..."

"The ISEQ is about to go down because..."

...or any other posts speculating on the possible future movements of the value of an asset class, I would expect to be banned from Askaboutmoney, regardless of how well-reasoned my supporting argument was or whether or not I had a visionary track record of predicting the future. 

JHegarty hit the nail on the head earlier here.


----------



## Sunny

janeymak said:


> You said you were glad he is to be part of the process. After reading his advice, and comments, are you still glad?


 
For God's sake, thats why you think Brendan doesn't belong on the panel? 
Warren Buffett bought Irish banks shares around the time that Brandan made the comment about investing in them rather than placing the money on deposit. Do you think we should tell him to get lost if he offered his help?


----------



## janeymak

Sunny said:


> For God's sake, thats why you think Brendan doesn't belong on the panel?
> Warren Buffett bought Irish banks shares around the time that Brandan made the comment about investing in them rather than placing the money on deposit. Do you think we should tell him to get lost if he offered his help?



#Whats God got to do with it?
#I dont believe anyone who said this "_I would invest in AIB or Bank of Ireland rather than putting money on  deposit with them." 
_is qualified for the job.
#Ha, that made me laugh. Yes definitely.


----------



## Bronte

janeymak said:


> You said you were glad he is to be part of the process. After reading his advice, and comments, are you still glad?


 
That's an interesting question, yes I am because I'm not going to judge someone on selected quotes.  You can (and I don't mean you) play around with dates and quotes and we're all bound to be wrong sometime.  I don't have to agree with AAM to say that I'm glad a particular individual is on a particular panel.  I go with my gut feeling.  I had I think a negative view contrary to AAM on Patrick Neary a while back, I may not agree with decisions that are made and I've pointed them out and sometimes I've PM's the mods where I thought someone was treated unfairly.  In fact I've very serioulsy ranted quite a few times at lots of things in Ireland and at least on AAM they don't get deleted.  That's my experience so for that if nothing else I trust the founder of AAM.  

Who do you think should be on the debt panel?  Do you think BB should be on the panel and can you give your reasonings other than the quotes?


----------



## Sunny

janeymak said:


> #Whats God got to do with it?
> #I dont believe anyone who said this "_I would invest in AIB or Bank of Ireland rather than putting money on deposit with them." _
> is qualified for the job.
> #Ha, that made me laugh. Yes definitely.


 
Brendan's track record speaks for itself. He is will able to defend himself so I am not going to bother. It's up to you if you want to use the odd comment or post he has made out of thousands against him but I think most people on this site while not always agreeing with him, respect the work that Brendan has done. Not least on setting up this site.


----------



## janeymak

Bronte said:


> That's an interesting question, yes I am because I'm not going to judge someone on selected quotes.  You can (and I don't mean you) play around with dates and quotes and we're all bound to be wrong sometime.  I don't have to agree with AAM to say that I'm glad a particular individual is on a particular panel.  I go with my gut feeling.  I had I think a negative view contrary to AAM on Patrick Neary a while back, I may not agree with decisions that are made and I've pointed them out and sometimes I've PM's the mods where I thought someone was treated unfairly.  In fact I've very serioulsy ranted quite a few times at lots of things in Ireland and at least on AAM they don't get deleted.  That's my experience so for that if nothing else I trust the founder of AAM.
> 
> Who do you think should be on the debt panel?  Do you think BB should be on the panel and can you give your reasonings other than the quotes?



You go with your gut feeling, even though there's a slew of evidence against it. I would be far from expert in the field of choosing a panel but with those quotes and ideals he would be way down my list. I don't have to say a positive to cancel my negative do I?


----------



## Bronte

Really I didn't realise how clueless I am.  Someone is copying what I've posted on here to another website.  Is this normal?  I find that downright spookly.  If anyone doesn't like or find what I write funny I wish they had the balls to post it right on here where I can agree or disagree but at least debate in an open forum rather than behind my back.  

Could one of you savvy guys explain to me what is going on.


----------



## LDFerguson

janeymak said:


> I dont believe anyone who said this "_I would invest in AIB or Bank of Ireland rather than putting money on deposit with them." _is qualified for the job.


 
With the wonderful benefit of hindsight, I suspect that Brendan may not have been the only man or woman in Ireland who held that opinion at that point in time. Is everyone who bought Irish bank shares before the Credit Crunch therefore disqualified from holding a position on a committee about debt?

I wasn't aware that an ability to predict the future, or the lack thereof, was a requirement of this committee.


----------



## janeymak

LDFerguson said:


> With the wonderful benefit of hindsight, I suspect that Brendan may not have been the only man or woman in Ireland who held that opinion at that point in time. Is everyone who bought Irish bank shares before the Credit Crunch therefore disqualified from holding a position on a committee about debt?
> 
> I wasn't aware that an ability to predict the future, or the lack thereof, was a requirement of this committee.



Don't knock the hindsight!  How can someone so wrong be part of the solution?

How about this GEM. Do you consider this to be the thoughts of someone who can help?

_If you’ve a real need to buy now – for example, if you are starting a  family –* don’t allow the fact that your job is a bit uncertain to put  you off.* If the worst happens, the government has ordered AIB and Bank  of Ireland to lay off homeowners in arrears for at least a year, while  other lenders must give them a six-month breather._


----------



## kaplan

In his submission to the Law Reform Commission, Brendan Burgess wrote of two cases in which sought to illustrate how a person might deliberately financially plan to have debts written off - they are of course hypothetical cases to support his views.  Such extreme examples appear to run counter the principles of justice and equity on which the LRC recommendations are based.


----------



## jhegarty

kaplan said:


> In his submission to the Law Reform Commission, Brendan Burgess wrote of two cases in which sought to illustrate how a person might deliberately financially plan to have debts written off - they are of course hypothetical cases to support his views.  Such extreme examples appear to run counter the principles of justice and equity on which the LRC recommendations are based.




What did you say in your submission ?


----------



## janeymak

jhegarty said:


> What did you say in your submission ?



Yeah, you big baby.


----------



## LDFerguson

janeymak said:


> Don't knock the hindsight!  How can someone so wrong be part of the solution?
> 
> How about this GEM. Do you consider this to be the thoughts of someone who can help?
> 
> _If you’ve a real need to buy now – for example, if you are starting a family –* don’t allow the fact that your job is a bit uncertain to put you off.* If the worst happens, the government has ordered AIB and Bank of Ireland to lay off homeowners in arrears for at least a year, while other lenders must give them a six-month breather._


 
You can pull out selected quotes from Brendan Burgess until the cows came home.  I could pull out ten times as many where he was right.  Neither would prove anything other than the fact that he is a human being.  His long track record of working and campaigning voluntarily on behalf of consumers makes him an ideal candidate for this committee.


----------



## canicemcavoy

LDFerguson said:


> You can pull out selected quotes from Brendan Burgess until the cows came home. I could pull out ten times as many where he was right.


 
On the property market? Fire away.


----------



## LDFerguson

Have an objective look at the 11,100+ posts here on Askaboutmoney.

Anyway, see the remainder of my post - _Neither would prove anything other than the fact that he is a human being. His long track record of working and campaigning voluntarily on behalf of consumers makes him an ideal candidate for this committee. _


----------



## janeymak

LDFerguson said:


> Have an objective look at the 11,100+ posts here on Askaboutmoney.
> 
> Anyway, see the remainder of my post - _Neither would prove anything other than the fact that he is a human being. His long track record of working and campaigning voluntarily on behalf of consumers makes him an ideal candidate for this committee. _



That's an incredible leap of logic you have made there. So he's a human... who isnt? 

By your logic Willy O'Dea should be reinstated?


----------



## kaplan

@LDF
You miss the point on quotes - support for 100% mortgages and particularly interest only mortgages, captured in "quotes", considered the family home as an investment vehicle - a tradable financial asset. Therefore it seems the family home should retain its status as a tradable financial asset in an insolvency process. http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=130961


----------



## LDFerguson

janeymak said:


> That's an incredible leap of logic you have made there. So he's a human... who isnt?
> 
> By your logic Willy O'Dea should be reinstated?


 
Willie O'Dea didn't step down because he made predictions that didn't turn out to be true, with hindsight. That's an absurd comparison.


----------



## LDFerguson

kaplan said:


> @LDF
> You miss the point on quotes - support for 100% mortgages and particularly interest only mortgages, captured in "quotes", considered the family home as an investment vehicle - a tradable financial asset. Therefore it seems the family home should retain its status as a tradable financial asset in an insolvency process. http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=130961


 
Aren't we now veering into the territory of discussing whether or not we agree with Brendan's views, rather than his suitability for the committee?


----------



## salvidor

> The ongoing deliberations of the Law Reform Commission will be considered, specifically reform of personal insolvency, bankruptcy law and debt enforcement.



I think this is very positive.


----------



## janeymak

LDFerguson said:


> Willie O'Dea didn't step down because he made predictions that didn't turn out to be true, with hindsight. That's an absurd comparison.



Your right its absurd but relatively harmless. Unlike someone with a PROVEN track record of ideals and views  and ADVICE that if taken could probalby be harmful.

I find it grotesque and blind that you would think that someone fit to help home owners with such a record of stupid advice.  Right he's human *throws arms in air dramatically* . Its plain for most to see that this committee or panel needs people who didn't tell people to invest in banks and who didn't tell people to get mortgages with shakey job prospects.


----------



## LDFerguson

janeymak said:


> Its plain for most to see that this committee or panel needs people who didn't tell people to invest in banks and who didn't tell people to get mortgages with shakey job prospects.


 
Nope.  It's plan for most to see that this committee needs a group of people with combined expertise of banking, property, the law, economics and consumer issues.


----------



## UFC

I am also quite concerned about who has been chosen as panel members.

They all had a vested interest in talking up house prices/bank shares during the bubble, and their past opinions would make me think they are somewhat clueless about the basics of economics.

But of course, this is Ireland, so it's jobs for the boys. Who cares if they're the exact opposite of who you'd want on the panel!



			
				Bronte said:
			
		

> I'm glad Brendan is on the committee at least we can feel someone we 'know' is in there.


----------



## tyoung

It's not simply about expertise it's about judgment. While he may be an expert Brendan's judgment is poor. At a macro level he was enthralled by the Efficient Market Hypothesis. EHM holds that the current price of an asset reflects all the current knowledge about the asset in the marketplace. This means the severe undervaluation or overvaluation(bubbles) cannot occur. So he failed to see that a massive credit bubble was inflating a massive a massive property bubble.
 On the micro level interest only mortgages may make sense to a seasoned investor who has run the numbers and built in a margin of safety but the average punter just looked at the monthly payment and thought they could borrow more. 
Brendan knew that equities had been the best performing asset class over the last 200 years and that Irish equities had generally been in line or better than other markets. This knowledge led him to advise on a 100% equity allocation for "long term" investments(the term is getting longer and longer) and in particular that diversification outside Ireland was not necessary.
These are not sideline issues. They represent fundamental errors in judgment. Added to all of this is a certain arrogance and unwillingness to listen to others. Dismissing Morgan Kelly or David McWilliams because of the tone of their language or writings is not good enough! These guys were right! Listen and learn!


----------



## UFC

tyoung said:


> So he failed to see that a massive credit bubble was inflating a massive a massive property bubble.


 
A cynic might argue he did see these things but was making so much money from his large stack of bank shares that he was happy to keep quiet...


----------



## shanegl

UFC said:


> A cynic might argue he did see these things but was making so much money from his large stack of bank shares that he was happy to keep quiet...



Didn't just keep quiet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2q7bBVAo74


----------



## seantheman

Just wondered, at what point in my chosen profession will I be considered an expert? Will I know or feel it myself or will my peers tell me?


----------



## jack2009

seantheman said:


> Just wondered, at what point in my chosen profession will I be considered an expert? Will I know or feel it myself or will my peers tell me?


 when you take a gamble about the future outlook and guess right and get some press coverage.


----------



## Coles

jack2009 said:


> when you take a gamble about the future outlook and guess right and get some press coverage.


That seems fair enough, but then why is Brendan Burgess on this panel of experts?  He's the same 'expert' who in 2007 recommended that rather than put money on deposit with the banks, people buy their shares???  I assume he wasn't a large shareholder himself, was he?  Despite being bad advice that could be construed as a conflict of interest.


> _I would invest in AIB or Bank of Ireland rather than putting money on  deposit with them.
> 
> -Irish Indo, 18th August 2007._



There's a funny quote in that same Indo article from some 'financial adviser' called  Liam Ferguson.   I'm glad he's not on any panel of 'experts'!


> The last thing you should do when a  correction comes along is sell out. The losses at the moment are paper  losses; they only become real losses if you decide to sell.


----------



## canicemcavoy

The excellent Kathleen Barrington casts a cold eye on the scheme:

[broken link removed]



> Here’s a question for Hugh Cooney, chairman of the government’s Mortgage Assistance Group. Should the taxpayer be called upon to help fund the mortgages of troubled borrowers such as Twink?
> 
> The actor has said that she is ‘‘actively working on a solution’’ after Bank of Scotland (Ireland) earlier this month lodged an application to repossess her family home.
> 
> ‘‘Unfortunately, I find myself in this current situation - no different to half of the country that have lost their jobs or, like me, are single parents - trying to pay my mortgage, bills and raise two children on my own,” Twink said in a statement.
> 
> Except that she is not quite in the same position as half the country. *She lives in a 300-yearold Georgian mansion in the south Dublin suburb of Knocklyon, for which she and her former husband, David Agnew, are estimated to have paid almost €1million, while spending a further €390,000 on renovations.
> 
> *If the government were to agree a scheme under which someone in Twink’s position were to be offered reduced interest rates, longer mortgage terms, the rolling-up of outstanding interest, or even debt-forgiveness, there would be a corresponding impact on the balance sheets of the banks.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Then there’s the question of where you draw the line to allow people to stay in their homes. Should someone like Twink be forgiven some of her mortgage debt and allowed to stay in her mansion, or should she be forced to hand back the keys to Bank of Scotland (Ireland), a bank which gained a reputation for some pretty reckless lending during the boom years?
> 
> Is it fair to force a distressed borrower to sell at a time when there is effectively no market, forcing the borrower to lock in losses?* Is it fair to ask an ordinary taxpayer on the average industrial wage to pay for (say)Twink’s mansion with his/her taxes?*
> 
> [...]
> 
> The New York Times has reported that the [US] scheme has raised false hopes among people who simply cannot afford their mortgages, effectively delaying the day of reckoning for the banks and prolonging the economic uncertainty.


----------



## kaplan

@Canice

The Barrington piece reflects the moral hazard inherent in any mortgage relief scheme which clearly has to be controlled for. 

The US model you highlight has resulted from a different set of historic economic, social, legal circumstances. Which include an efficient personal bankruptcy system and cultural acceptance of home loan foreclosure, home repossessions and jingle mail. Studies of the US mortgage market have highlighted that three things are required before loan defaults become a serious issue: High rates of negative equity, rising unemployment and declining incomes. US experience is debt default problems reverse once people find new jobs. The taxpayer doesn’t foot the bill for personal insolvency – it’s borne by borrowers and lenders. Supporting crisis housing markets in some states and keeping people in their homes is proving more expensive then the efficient personal insolvency system. 

Here with rising taxation, declining incomes, joblessness, rising real interest rates, consumer debt default rates are so serious as to undermine economic recovery. Unlike the US, where the majority of consumer banks are functioning, our banks cannot afford to write off billions in consumer debt and people cannot afford to pay what they owe. Hence the consumer debt task group. 

We have accepted the inevitability NAMA which will result in debt forgiveness - borrowers will pay what they can and the balance will be have to be written off. It is inevitable that we will also have to accept consumer debt forgiveness where ordinary people will pay what they can and the balance is written off. As banking is a busted flush the only one that can keep banking functioning is the state - which means the taxpayer. Those that think this amounts to a charter for free riders and a free lunch will of course highlight the tax payers cost and ignore the economic and social consequences of forcing people to live on the poverty line without hope of ever becoming productive members of society. 

Highlighting one persons plight to surface the emotive issues around moral hazard helps in informing constructive debate - that for me is the intent of the article.


----------



## LDFerguson

Coles said:


> There's a funny quote in that same Indo article from some 'financial adviser' called Liam Ferguson. I'm glad he's not on any panel of 'experts'!


 
Sorry Coles.  Brendan Burgess might be willing to answer criticism about his "real-world" reputation, personal shareholdings, advice etc., from anonymous posters on this board, even though he doesn't know what some of their motivations or personal interests are.

But I'm not.


----------



## Dave Vanian

This thread amuses me. For the benefit of those who don't already know, many of the critics of Brendan Burgess on this thread are regulars on another financial website, The Property Pin. The Property Pin was set up some years ago by a group of Askaboutmoney posters who got thrown off this board for repeated breaches of posting guidelines. Rather than simply letting it go and moving on like adults, they set up their own board and have spent literally years slagging Brendan off and trying to make out that he's some sort of evil genius out of an Austin Power movie. 

Quotes from the Property Pin: - 



> "Come on, lads - into the breach." (Encouraging Property Pin regulars to post on an AAM thread.)
> 
> "F***ing moron." (Intelligent criticism of David Duffy on hearing he is on the debt committee.)
> 
> "He might know about trackers but he knows f*** all about honesty and being fair. Pri**" (Intelligent criticism of Brendan Burgess.)
> 
> "I emailed Pat Kenny's programme about this and included some posts from Brendan. I suggest others do the same if they get a chance. Nothing may come of it but you'd never know and it would be great to get this c*** _[DV - rhymes with "stunt"]_ sacked before this group even gets started."


 
Now if someone published stuff like that about my real name, while hiding behind anonymity, my lawyers would have the site shut down in less than one working day. But Brendan is obviously a bigger man than me as he never bothered. Or maybe he knows that nobody reads it anyway.

But when some of them (you know who you are) start to come over to Askaboutmoney, which people actually read, I think that the motivations need to be exposed. They're just sad little people who have been trying to have a go at Brendan Burgess for years, since they were thrown out of his site. 

Seriously - lads - grow up and let it go. In the final analysis, Brendan Burgess will be remembered as a man who did a huge amount of hard and unpaid work to help real people in the real world, through his years of consumer campaigning and through Askaboutmoney. Your little virtual club of Askaboutmoney rejects won't be remembered for anything except online negativity.


----------



## Dave Vanian

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



canicemcavoy said:


> However, I do find it odd - and forgive me if I'm misreading people - that a public figure, who has been appointed to a government body based partly on their leadership of this forum, cannot be criticised in an adult manner based on things they have said on this forum or, or indeed, elsewhere in the media.


 
I believe Brendan Burgess is as much open to criticism as the next man.  But I also believe that some fairness must apply.  Suggesting that he's incompetent because he openly admits that he didn't predict the price crash is unfair unless we have proof that the person doing the criticising actually did predict the crash.  As distinct from revising their story after the event.  And I discount economists who predicted a property price crash for many years before it happened.  If you keep on predicting the fall or rise in any asset class, eventually you'll be right.  

I also consider any negative reference to Brendan's personal finances unfair unless again we know the same information about the person making the reference.


----------



## UFC

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> This is an example of what I'm talking about. UFC chooses to be anonymous and criticises Brendan because he didn't predict the property crash, thus inferring that he (UFC) was somehow able to predict it.
> 
> Yet we have no way of knowing whether or not this is valid. For all we know, UFC predicted double-digit growth in Irish property prices in 2009, but can now change his tune to suit an argument.


 
It doesn't matter what you think of me or who I am, what's important is Brendan was unable to see and (more importantly) was unable to heed the advice of economists who said we were in the middle of an obvious bubble.

So we have:

1) an inability to accurately analyse the economy.
2) an inability to open his mind to opinions he doesn't agree with.

Both of these are a very dangerous combination and makes me worried he is going to be able to influence billions of our tax money. 

You have to put aside your like of Askaboutmoney and Brendan and think of what's best for Ireland.


----------



## Dave Vanian

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> It doesn't matter what you think of me or who I am, what's important is Brendan was unable to see and (more importantly) was unable to heed the advice of economists who said we were in the middle of an obvious bubble.


 
The same economists who predicted nine out of the last two property crashes?


----------



## Dave Vanian

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



sinbadsailor said:


> Nobody had the courage to stand up to what was clearly a government/financial industry (note industry, not just banks!) to profit at the behest of the general public.


 
Did you?


----------



## canicemcavoy

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> I believe Brendan Burgess is as much open to criticism as the next man. But I also believe that some fairness must apply. Suggesting that he's incompetent because he openly admits that he didn't predict the price crash is unfair unless we have proof that the person doing the criticising actually did predict the crash. As distinct from revising their story after the event. And I discount economists who predicted a property price crash for many years before it happened. If you keep on predicting the fall or rise in any asset class, eventually you'll be right.


 
It's possible for a doctor to predict that if you keep eating high amounts of saturated fat food, you will eventually have a heart attack due to clogged arteries. Just because they can't predict the exact date on which this will happen, doesn't make an incorrect or worthless prediction.

On the same lines, it is possible to predict that in an economy where house prices keep rising way over the corresponding average increase in incomes, while the growth in jobs *outside of construction* is static, there is what is commonly known as a property bubble and eventually there will be a problem. Discounting this opinion is as unwise as discounting the aforementioned doctor.

(Bubble economists such as Marc Coleman could only come out with statements such as "there will be high population growth" to support the bubble. Based on this theory, most of Africa should be thriving by now. But never mind, the best is yet to come.)

You discredit all economists who predicted a property crash based on the fact that "it was years ago". Do you give credit to ecomomists who got it entirely wrong? Are there any economists whose opinions you thought were worthy of examination?


----------



## Sunny

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> Both of these are a very dangerous combination and makes me very worried he will be able to influence billions of our tax money.


 
He is not exactly going to be Minister of Finance. He is one part of a panel that if history is to be repeated will do up a report and will then be ignored. 

So what if he did or didn't get it right on property prices? Are we saying that only people who called the crisis can have any influence on any sort of Government policy in this Country going forward?


----------



## jhegarty

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



canicemcavoy said:


> On the same lines, it is possible to predict that in an economy where house prices keep rising way over the corresponding average increase in incomes, while the growth in jobs *outside of construction* is static, there is what is commonly known as a property bubble and eventually there will be a problem. Discounting this opinion is as unwise as discounting the aforementioned doctor.



All very easy to predict now isn't it.


----------



## Dave Vanian

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> It doesn't matter what you think of me or who I am...


 
Actually it matters an awful lot.  For all we know, you could be criticising Brendan because 

(a) you have a vested interest in this committee not having Brendan Burgess on it.  

(b) you have a large financial interest in property which is served by your arguments

Etc.

As I said, you could have been predicting double-digit Irish property increases in 2009 for all we know.


----------



## UFC

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Sunny said:


> He is not exactly going to be Minister of Finance. He is one part of a panel that if history is to be repeated will do up a report and will then be ignored.
> 
> So what if he did or didn't get it right on property prices? Are we saying that only people who called the crisis can have any influence on any sort of Government policy in this Country going forward?


 
I agree with you that there is a good chance their findings will be ignored, but they may not be, and that is why I think this is serious. And we're talking about 1,000,000,000+ euros at play here.

His inability to see we were in an bubble and his inability to listen to other people's opinions are the exact sorts of reasons why this country is screwed. Therefore I do not believe maintaining the status quo is the right thing to do. Let's get real experts, i.e. people who have a basic understanding of economics and who have an open mind, and who certainly aren't tainted with the "vested interest" label.


----------



## canicemcavoy

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



jhegarty said:


> All very easy to predict now isn't it.


 
I presume that's sarcasm; indeed, sometimes it is the cheapest form of wit.

It just goes to show that with some people, unless an economist had actually predicted the property crash to the exact month and day, will never be satisfied. That somehow, everything was fine with the Irish economy until 2008 ("the fundamentals are sound"), and then suddenly overnight everything went wrong. If you believe that, then further communication is impossible since our axioms are entirely at odds.


----------



## ontour

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> ............was unable to heed the advice of economists who said we were in the middle of an obvious bubble.



It is easy to pick the winning horse after the race.  Identifying the economists that were right as the ones that should have been heeded as opposed to all the economists who got it wrong undermines the understanding of the high level of risk and volatility in markets.  It is not simple to read, if it was you would take every penny you have and back those economist's next prediction.

The challenge for Brendan, going forward(!!),  is to utilise the collective input from this forum and other sources to give real world input to the discussion and decisions on debt management.  He has one view which should not be overly weighted just because he owns this site.  Over the last few months input and suggestions regarding debt issues have been gathered which I believe demonstrates Brendan's willingness to listen to a variety of perspectives.


----------



## UFC

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> Actually it matters an awful lot. For all we know, you could be criticising Brendan because
> 
> (a) you have a vested interest in this committee not having Brendan Burgess on it.
> 
> (b) you have a large financial interest in property which is served by your arguments
> 
> Etc.
> 
> As I said, you could have been predicting double-digit Irish property increases in 2009 for all we know.


 
OK, I am someone who has been crying out for about 5 years that we are in the middle of a ginormous property bubble.

I do not own property, although I could if I wanted to (and probably will when the market returns to a more stable level).


----------



## UFC

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



ontour said:


> It is easy to pick the winning horse after the race. Identifying the economists that were right as the ones that should have been heeded as opposed to all the economists who got it wrong undermines the understanding of the high level of risk and volatility in markets. It is not simple to read, if it was you would take every penny you have and back those economist's next prediction.


 
I work in IT yet I could see the prices people were paying for property made no sense. All you had to do was write the numbers down on a piece of paper and you could see property prices were totally out of whack with people's salaries.

But anyway, I don't expect everyone to get it, but I do expect our experts to get it.

But of course, this is Ireland, so I am being stupid and naive to expect our experts to be of a high standard.


----------



## canicemcavoy

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



ontour said:


> It is easy to pick the winning horse after the race.


 
Some of us didn't think of it as a horse race, or choosing a favourite economist like the way people choose a football team. Some of us didn't think it was that much crack, incidentally. I had many rows with my late father because he thought that not buying a house in the mid 00s was the worst mistake I had ever made.


----------



## Sunny

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> I agree with you that there is a good chance their findings will be ignored, but they may not be, and that is why I think this is serious. And we're talking about XX,000,000,000+ euros.
> 
> His inability to see we were in an bubble and his inability to listen to other people's opinions are the exact sort of reasons why this country is screwed. Therefore I do not think maintaining the status quo is right for Ireland.


 
The Government is not going to announce a multi billion euro bail out plan for householders in negative equity. Why the hell would you think they would?

What is link between his views on house prices and helping people deal with personal debt?


----------



## UFC

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Sunny said:


> The Government is not going to announce a multi billion euro bail out plan for householders in negative equity. Why the hell would you think they would?


 
I assume that's sarcasm, but if not, you do realise we are talking about FF here? Lords of the bailout. You are incorrectly assuming they will do the right thing.




Sunny said:


> What is link between his views on house prices and helping people deal with personal debt?


 
I am repeating myself now, but his inability to see what was staring him in the face (a bubble) and his inability to listen to people who have differing viewpoints (even now he thinks those with differing viewpoints - McWilliams, Kelly - are hysterical, even though they have been mostly correct so far) suggests he may not make decisions which are good enough (by my standards) for Ireland.


----------



## Dave Vanian

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> ...and who certainly aren't tainted with the "vested interest" label.


 
Again with the "vested interest" argument.  It's just too unbalanced.  The previous opinions of all the committee members are a matter of public record and can be brought up again and again.  But those accusing them of vested interests can apparently do so with impunity as their own track record or circumstances cannot be verified.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Sunny said:


> He is one part of a panel that if history is to be repeated will do up a report and will then be ignored.



I don't want to comment on the expert group, but I think that this is a mistaken view of what we will be doing. 

from the press release


> These experts  will work within Government and present _ their recommendations on a  rolling basis_ to the Minister for Finance,  for consideration by  Government. The work will commence immediately.


My understanding of this is that we are not going to talk for 18 months and then write a report. 

We will be making recommendations on a rolling basis which is  very different from producing a report a long time later. 

It is not my job to discuss how we will function, but I would guess that we will be open to ideas from every source - the media and discussion forums like Askaboutmoney, IrishEconomy.ie and The Property Pin.


----------



## canicemcavoy

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Brendan said:


> Who is saying that I cannot be criticized for things I have said on this forum?


 
I thought that was what our friend from the aforementioned punk band was suggesting; he says I misunderstood him and I accept that.

As for personal abuse, yes, you are absolutely within your rights to delete any personal abuse of you.



> The cold facts of the matter are that I did neither dismissed nor endorsed, McWilliams or Kelly during the property boom.


 
But you dismissed them after the boom?

I must say I find it odd that someone interested in finance has never even heard of Marc Coleman. You really should read him, if only for entertainment value. His last book is genuinely ROTFLsome these days, based seemingly on a trip to Narnia.

I'm now genuinely curious - if you did not read economists and not rate them at all, on what did or do you base your opinion of the property market?

(Personally, I never paid too much attention to the _predictions_ of ecomomists but, rather, on what data they were basing said predictions on.)



> But as you have recommended him so strongly, I will pay more attention to him in future.


 
Ah. I think sadly, the problem here is, it's far too late.


----------



## Mpsox

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*

There is a definition of an economist as someone who spends half of their career coming up with an economic theory and the other half of their career explaining why it doesn't work. 

So Brendan may not have been 100% correct on the property bubble, so what?, he's not perfect. It's easy for some posters to say it was obvious that the bubble was going to burst but I question if any forecastor expected the perfect storm we sailed into. Did I see it coming, yes, basic laws of supply and demand dictated that, but I didn't expect the scale of it. I thought(hoped) for a softer landing. 

Bear in mind as well that property ownership is a long term investment. It's quite possible, in 20 years time, Brendan may have been proved right. Who knows? One of the failings of the last few years is that many people did not invest long term in property, they speculated for short terms gains. There is a fundamental difference between the two.

As for vested interests, *everyone* on here has a vested interest in someway. UFC for example, as someone who doesn't own property, has a vested interest in property prices continuing to fall so that when he does go to buy, the property will cost less. 

Some comments have been made about Brendan not listening, I don't believe these are correct, I believe he listens, but he doesn't necessarily always agree. That is his perogative. After all, this would be a very boring place if we all agreed with each other. There are people on here who I don't always agree with and one or 2 who I probably never have or never will agree with. It's doesn't mean I don't listen to them. It just means that my opinions differ.


----------



## Sunny

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Brendan said:


> I don't want to comment on the expert group, but I think that this is a mistaken view of what we will be doing.
> 
> from the press release
> My understanding of this is that we are not going to talk for 18 months and then write a report.
> 
> We will be making recommendations on a rolling basis which is very different from producing a report a long time later.
> 
> It is not my job to discuss how we will function, but I would guess that we will be open to ideas from every source - the media and discussion forums like Askaboutmoney, IrishEconomy.ie and The Property Pin.


 
I will take your word for it Brendan! Just cynical about these things! There has been alot of good work done by various panels on various subjects sitting on some desk gathering dust!


----------



## casiopea

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> I am repeating myself now, but his inability to see what was staring him in the face (a bubble) and his inability to listen to people who have differing viewpoints (even now he thinks those with differing viewpoints - McWilliams, Kelly - are hysterical, even though they have been mostly correct so far) suggests he may not make decisions which are good enough (by my standards) for Ireland.



Hi UFC,

This is where Im baffled though.  Brendan is not our taoiseach, he is not a TD or the  minister for finance - he is certainly not in a position to make decisions that will impact Ireland as you imply above.  He has started a financial website that has many contributors from many verticals *but* like all anonymous forums you should not take the advice as gospel, you should always double check, double check and double check again.  He is a consumer advocate - but they can always be wrong. At the end of hte day when talking about property prices, interest rates, shares etc. you are predicting the future on what you know now...but its still the future. In short, Im not really too sure why you (and many others) seem to feel that he should be held up to a particular standard or indeed that he *should* be right?  

I personally feel many are feeling the recession and just want someone to blame and are picking easy targets.

Just my 2c


----------



## canicemcavoy

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Mpsox said:


> There is a definition of an economist as someone who spends half of their career coming up with an economic theory and the other half of their career explaining why it doesn't work.


 
I'm sure that Brendan will, at the next meeting of the mortgage debt group, be sure to pass the best wishes of everyone at AAM on to David Duffy of the ERSI, who all think he picked a wonderful career.


----------



## sinbadsailor

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> Did you?


Well I'm not a leading figure in financial/political circles nor do I have any  means to be any great influence over a large group of the Irish public. So if thats the question then apart from trying to educate those close to me, then no I didn't.


----------



## kaplan

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*

If one considers the remit of the task group which says its an *expert* group on consumer debt then the question that arises is what specific *expertise* is a person being appointed for?

Considering the task group mandate this indicates a demonstrable expertise in consumer debt and or consumer protection such as legal, economic and social dimensions of consumer debt and or indebtedness. 

Having established the area of expertise then it’s a matter of considering a past record of achievement. 

What is the record of achievement the expert person has in using the expertise they are being appointed for?

If a person comports themselves as a consumer advocate – then as advocacy is an expertise which is measured in results achieved, it should be relatively easy to show this as as results in consumer protection advocacy in financial services are quite public. 

If a person is appointed, as it is perceived they are a consumer advocate with relevant expertise, experience, qualifications and track record of success in advocacy on consumer financial services then it is also a matter of considering their publications, espoused thinking and views on consumer protection at micro and macro levels. 

These are tests if you like of a person expert on consumer debt, having an established track record in consumer advocacy where they can demonstrate achievements that have been recognised as achieving positive outcomes for consumers. It is likely that such a person would have a record of publications addressing either the theory of consumer protection and or its practical implications. 

Finally surely consumer protection is advocating for the wise use of money, protecting unsophisticated consumers against the abusive marketing of credit and the promotion of safe and sound credit products. Does recommending 100% interest only mortgages to first time buyers fit the safe and sound financial product category? 

Products designed as interest only first time buyer mortgages and stretching affordability criteria were at the heart of the US mortgage market problems. Similar products here also caused serious predictable problems.


----------



## Dave Vanian

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



sinbadsailor said:


> Well I'm not a leading figure in financial/political circles nor do I have any means to be any great influence over a large group of the Irish public. So if thats the question then apart from trying to educate those close to me, then no I didn't.


 
Brendan was working in a recruitment business when he set up Askaboutmoney out of his own pocket, although previous to this he had campaigned on consumer finance issues. 



sinbadsailor said:


> Nobody had the courage to stand up to what was clearly a government/financial industry (note industry, not just banks!) to profit at the behest of the general public.


 
In the internet age, anyone can make themselves heard if they try.


----------



## Dave Vanian

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



kaplan said:


> If a person comports themselves as a consumer advocate – then as advocacy is an expertise which is measured in results achieved, it should be relatively easy to show this as as results in consumer protection advocacy in financial services are quite public.


 
Well said - Brendan's achievements to date in the area of campaigning against unfair practices in personal finance are presumably a large component of why he was asked to join this voluntary committee.


----------



## UFC

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



casiopea said:


> Hi UFC,
> 
> This is where Im baffled though. Brendan is not our taoiseach, he is not a TD or the minister for finance - he is certainly not in a position to make decisions that will impact Ireland as you imply above. He has started a financial website that has many contributors from many verticals *but* like all anonymous forums you should not take the advice as gospel, you should always double check, double check and double check again. He is a consumer advocate - but they can always be wrong. At the end of hte day when talking about property prices, interest rates, shares etc. you are predicting the future on what you know now...but its still the future. In short, Im not really too sure why you (and many others) seem to feel that he should be held up to a particular standard or indeed that he *should* be right?
> 
> I personally feel many are feeling the recession and just want someone to blame and are picking easy targets.
> 
> Just my 2c


 
Hi Casiopea

You need to read this thread: http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=132994

Brendan has been appointed to a group of experts who will advise the Government on how to handle the issue of debt reform/forgiveness.


----------



## jhegarty

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> Hi Casiopea
> 
> You need to read this thread: http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=132994
> 
> Brendan has been appointed to a group of experts who will advise the Government on how to handle the issue of debt reform/forgiveness.



But that's now. 

You are criticising him for what he said (a few posts carefully selected from 11,234 posts) in the past.


----------



## What Goes Up

*Post Moved from: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> Quotes from the Property Pin: -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "F***ing moron." (Intelligent criticism of David Duffy on hearing he is on the debt committee.)
Click to expand...


There were links supplied with that "intelligent criticism".
I'll supply the links:

Original quote with links:
http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewto...359705#p359705
     Quote:
                                                                      Originally Posted by *What Goes Up...* 
_They've got David "In many cases  negative equity will not be an issue" Duffy on the panel as well.
http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewto...307474#p307474
http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewto...307481#p307481_


----------



## Coles

LDFerguson said:


> Sorry Coles.  Brendan Burgess might be willing to answer criticism about his "real-world" reputation, personal shareholdings, advice etc., from anonymous posters on this board, even though he doesn't know what some of their motivations or personal interests are.
> 
> But I'm not.


Fair enough, but it wasn't actually meant as a personal criticism, and I didn't mean to cause offence.  In fact I have no idea who you are.  The humour was in the fact that your advice was actually sound, but the context in which it was given was not.  Clearly you didn't see the bubble or consider it's impact.  You're not unique. 

But we need people who did.  We need 'experts' who understand what is happening because we are only begininig this journey, and every mistake will compound the misery of our citizens.  I actually broadly agree with Brendan's submission, but I hope to God he understands the responsibility he has towards the Public.  I wish him the best of luck in this post.


----------



## Calina

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> This thread amuses me. For the benefit of those who don't already know, many of the critics of Brendan Burgess on this thread are regulars on another financial website, The Property Pin. The Property Pin was set up some years ago by a group of Askaboutmoney posters who got thrown off this board for repeated breaches of posting guidelines. Rather than simply letting it go and moving on like adults, they set up their own board and have spent literally years slagging Brendan off and trying to make out that he's some sort of evil genius out of an Austin Power mivie.



I would rather disagree with this assessment of the Property Pin, speaking as someone who has posted there for quite some time. I think if you were to look at most of what's there, it consists of quite a broad range of discussion on property related economics, wider investment matters, politics and how they interplay. I don't believe it was set up as a home for disgruntled ex-AAM posters per se although it probably benefited from an influx of posters courtesy of policy changes here. That is my take on it anyway. Additionally the profile of posters there has changed over the time I have been a member there; this is true of every single internet forum I have ever contributed to however. 



Brendan said:


> Hi Calina
> 
> On 1 April 2009, I set up a spoof House Price Discussion forum. So I moved the thread into that.  When April Fool's day was  over, I moved the whole forum including that thread.
> 
> It's back in its rightful place now.
> 
> http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=31710



Brendan, thank you for moving it. I appreciate that.


----------



## Coles

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> In the internet age, anyone can make themselves heard if they try.


That's right.  People tried to discuss the property/credit bubble here but were banned, so they went to the Property Pin.


----------



## UFC

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



jhegarty said:


> But that's now.
> 
> You are criticising him for what he said (a few posts carefully selected from 11,234 posts) in the past.


 
Are you trying to suggest what happens in the past is irrelevant? I think most people would (and should) disagree with you.

Your past actions are very relevant if you are in a position where you can influence how our tax money is spent.


----------



## casiopea

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



UFC said:


> Hi Casiopea
> 
> You need to read this thread: http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=132994
> 
> Brendan has been appointed to a group of experts who will advise the Government on how to handle the issue of debt reform/forgiveness.



Thanks UFC,
I was aware of the appointment and my opinion still stands.  I dont think Brendan has spoken inappropriately about house prices in the past.  I  dont think he is always right but I dont expect him or anyone to be - it is the future, there has to be some speculation and therefore some incorrect predictions.  I think he is qualified for the job and has done more for many peoples financial wellbeing (by simply setting up this site) than most.   

Finally at the end of the day the only person responsible for my debt is me (- I know you are not personally blaming Brendan for any debt you may have) a lot of this thread seems to be generated by a general bitterness and a looking to lay the blame as we are in harder times.  Someone like Brendan, who puts himself out there, voices his opinion, doesnt hide behind a username is a very easy target.  In my humble opinion that is whats happening here.


----------



## canicemcavoy

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



casiopea said:


> Finally at the end of the day the only person responsible for my debt is me


 
Many people including myself would agree with you. I presume then you don't support the idea of a mortgage debt scheme which takes the burden off those who paid too much for property and spreads it across taxpayers?


----------



## casiopea

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



canicemcavoy said:


> Many people including myself would agree with you. I presume then you don't support the idea of a mortgage debt scheme which takes the burden off those who paid too much for property and spreads it across taxpayers?




Hi Canicemcavoy,
I think that discussion warrants a thread of it own and that we are danger of pulling things seriously OT if we go into it.  The short answer is your assumption is correct with a caveat(!)

I dont support schemes that will enable developers, banks, investors, risk-friendly punters or even unlucky folk to dig themselves out of debt. I dont think the irish tax payer should have to support that. I do however feel that some ordinary people are finding themselves in extraordinary times and some with young families are having trouble living from day to day.  These I feel should be means evaluated and supported.  Its when you see, read, hear about families like this (who worry how to keep a roof over their childrens heads and feed them at the same time) that these black and white arguments become very unrealistic. 

All off topic though.  Mod, feel free to delete or spawn a separate thread.

cas.


----------



## Afuera

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> Well said - Brendan's achievements to date in the area of campaigning against unfair practices in personal finance are presumably a large component of why he was asked to join this voluntary committee.


Or the cynic could just as easily argue that it was due to his pro-banking outlook and "don't rock the boat" nature shown during his policing of the financial regulator.


----------



## sinbadsailor

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*



Dave Vanian said:


> Brendan was working in a recruitment business when he set up Askaboutmoney out of his own pocket, although previous to this he had campaigned on consumer finance issues.



It would be nice to see whether Brendans opinions, convictions and throughts on consumer finance have changed over the years of his rise into his current government linked post.



Dave Vanian said:


> In the internet age, anyone can make themselves heard if they try.



Of course you can make yourself heard, the trouble with this is you either end up being a target for corruption by the powers you are against in order to gain control of your followers of you are a target for all kinds of character and professional assassination. In other words, you would need to be pretty sure to be capable of causing major change in order to survive going against the grain.

In the end, there are those that belive that the government that are elected by us, should watch out for us, not take advantage at every given opportunity.

I would put money on the fact that whatever may or may not be implemented will give banks profit and cost us as tax payers and consumers more, every time. This is the only constant in any discussion.

Take NAMA now for example, its been approved and now the detailed concerns of its inner workings are coming out. All too late. Where was all this detail when they were trying to get support for it.


----------



## kaplan

Judging a persons’ credibility as an effective consumer protection advocate is less a matter of subjective opinion, but a matter of considering achievements. In the absence of achievement then one is left with assessing credibility based on actions, views and espoused beliefs. In my opinion, Brendan is genuinely committed to consumer advocay and has made a strong personal contribution in certain consumer protection areas, far more than many others including many posting here and elsewhere. 

But does this make him an expert consumer advocate on financial service consumer protection including consumer indebtedness? 

Many of his views and actions are not what I would consider to be representative of someone who truly appreciates consumer protection theory, principles and practical application or understanding of personal insolvency principles and practice. 

My view is Brendan at times appears to demonstrate an ambiguity from attempting to reconcile conflicting shareholder, prudential regulatory and consumer advocacy values and principles. Seeing the world through the lens of a sophisticated investor, it’s an advocacy which appears at times to lean towards banking rather than consumer interests. 

For example in his submission on personal debt he mixes home mortgage indebtedness with other debts. The use of extreme examples to highlight a hypothetical potential for financial planning abuse ignored the real practical intent of the principles and values underpinning personal insolvency regimes and earned debt forgiveness which is to provide a financial safety net for hopelessly indebted ordinary people whilst limiting the economic and social costs to society. It was not a submission one would expect to read of a consumer protection advocate as it echoes a pro-creditor Dickensian concern for moral hazard.

In 2002 in a submission on the formation of IFRSA in relation to its consultative panels Brendan wrote_:_

_“Rather than enshrine a Consumer Panel and an Industry Panel in legislation, the legislation should provide for (unspecified) panels to be set up to represent Consumer and Industry interests. A single panel will achieve more than two separate panels. *It is wrongly assumed that the interests of industry and consumers are diametrically opposed.* *On most issues, a very broad level of agreement would be reached*._ ” (my italics)

This confusion between what are regarded as distinctly differing prudential regulatory and consumer protection mandates seems to be at the heart of an ambiguity which at times leans more towards banking issues rather than consumer concerns. Or to put it in another way consumer interests are reflected through the lens of a finance professionals' and investors' concern with banking profitability and shareholder value. One that appears to believe the rational consumer actually exists. 

The belief in the rational consumer is at the heart of the prudential regulators approach to consumer protection as a form of meta regulation and is not one shared by independent consumer protection agencies or leading academics. Furthermore the shareholder value view which is aligned with prudential regulatory concern for banking profitability frequently conflicts with consumer protection and is not one that is easily reconciled. 

Another ambiguity is seen in references to home mortgages being as a form of savings and investment recommendation to first time house buyers to use interest only finance and risk over borrowing. From a consumer protection perspective this would increase the risk of financial vulnerability in what was a credit fuelled property bubble. From a professional investors perspective that considers homes as savings vehicles and tradable financial assets it may constitute fair advice. But few if any consumer protection advocates would ever agree that family homes should be considered are either savings vehicles or tradable financial assets. This treatment of the home as tradable financial asset was central to the abusive marketing of credit both here and in the US. It is not the view of consumer protection advocates who act to guard against the abusive behavioural manipulation of consumers use of credit by banks. It is why many consumer protection advocates, agencies and academics believe consumer protection should include consumer product regulation, particularly credit products.

Being an effective communicator or moderating a website doesn't mean one is expert rather one has an informed opinion and views which may be conflicted and ambiguous. In my opinion Brendan appears to be conflicted and ambiguous. My opinion is this ambiguity concerning prudential regulation, consumer protection, a professional investor status together with stated opinions, recommendations, advice and public actions are at a remove from someone who appreciates and singularly espouses consumer protection theory, its principles and practices.

I have written of the imbalance of the task group which does not include representation of professional consumer advocates with credible professional expertise in consumer indebtedness and consumer protection such as MABS and the NCA. The exclusion is telling. I should hope it’s not the case that indebted consumer interests will be claimed to have been fully, appropriately and expertly included for in the current group.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

*Re: What I have actually said about property, prices and borrowing*

Folks

I have allowed unprecedented personal abuse of me in this thread. If such abuse had been posted about any other named person, I would have faced defamation suits. But I have left it there as it says more about the poster than it does about me.

Askaboutmoney provides a great forum for proposing and challenging conflicting views. 

Please continue to argue about issues, but we are not allowiing  any further attacking of the person. You can, of course, continue to abuse me on The Property Pin.

I have set the record straight about what I actually said here.


----------

