1. I have to say that I take offence at the suggestion that I am offering apologia on behalf of anyone, but in all the circumstances, I'll forgive you (for the moment, at least)
Given the damage suffered by our economy and electorate, and the fact that you and others appear to be suggesting that no-one in the Banks should be prosecuted I won't be begging for forgiveness for calling it like I see it.
2. The expression "those who perpetrated the current economic crisis" implies that the crisis can truly be said to have been caused by an identifiable person or group of persons. I have my doubts that such is actually the case
Your expression of doubt is noted but its a naive comment following on the OP's deconstructionist remarks earlier. Pumping cheap money into an economy leads to a boom - ask any of the monetarists, this site is blessed with a lot of them. The sole means to do this were the lending companies, the most prolific of which are well known. This was foreseeable were this done in a competent, qualified manner following good practice. It was not.
3. To call advice "improper" is not the same as calling it "criminal". If the latter meaning is what is really intended, then I have to ask you to specify the crimes. People seem to have considerable difficulty doing so
The issue is one of degree, not kind. The crime was fraud on a grand scale. Fraudulent misrepresentation of financial products as being appropriate when by any measure they were not.
4. I agree that where a great wrong has been committed, justice must be seen to be done. But, again, what "great wrongs" have been committed ? A great disaster has occurred, but that is not the same thing
Negligence on a grand scale that has led to suicide and penury for many is not so easily wished away. The great wrong is clear to anyone not using sophistry as a screen through which to filter the world we are currently enduring.
5. I agree that crimes revealed when, to use Buffett's useful metaphor, "the tide goes out", revealing their "nakedness", should be prosecuted. Mr FitzPatrick's concealment of his loans is a case in point, but that crime did not cause the collapse of Anglo, never mind the rest of Irish banking, and he should not be punished for it as if it did.
On the contrary, I am quite certain that the tide has not been allowed to go out, as evidenced by Mr. Dukes apparent inability to acquire the necessary access codes to Anglo files. I will be surprised - and this is belief and rank speculation on my part - if we find that moving the odd €80 Million around the accounts was the most interesting of Anglo's activities. Again, fraud and professional negligence are likely to be a part of that disingenuous whole.
6. I also think that those who retired with large pensions and pay-offs (and those who haven't) should have to answer for their stewardship, but I would not necessarily expect that to result in any criminal charges, or in any other charges e.g. of non-entitlement to their pensions. I would like it if it did, though. (Is that an apologia ?)
Yes, as far as I'm concerned, it is, to such a degree and in the face of such an unparalleled disaster that I am concerned to see someone as well respected as you and Brendan Burgess (we don't always see eye-to-eye, but I respect him) being party to it. The coda to the contrary "I would like it if it did, though" seems misplaced given the previously expressed views.
7. My view is that the banking collapse was due to a multitude of factors, some internal to this country (e.g. property madness) and some external (e.g. loss of risk awareness). The immediate cause was bad lending and the current bank directors should be asking those responsible to explain why they should not be penalised civilly. If they find crime, they should report it, but I doubt they'll find much
Here is the great divide that cannot be spanned, never mind crossed. "Bad lending" is the very definition of why the senior bankers should immediately fall on their swords. It went on under their governance and is what directly led to the current crisis, and as far as we know following their insistence on chasing greater market share and thereby raising share price, with the eventual result that most of the middle demographic of Ireland saw their lifes savings and pensions funds whittled away to nothing. The collapse was the coda to a decade of incompetent management of the banks, with the disaster we face the proof of the pudding that they are in an ultimate sense incompetent. These were the people who accepted repackaged sub-prime loans as ASSETS (!) for goodness sake - or SAID they did, which I personally find hard to believe, which started the rot.
8. Anyone who knows better, as I have said on my website, is to be encouraged to initiate a private prosecution, and I am willing to assist them.
What I find particularly galling about the current debate is that the proof is there, the dead body is on the floor, the casualties are round about amidst a great weeping and gnashing of teeth and your goodself and Brendan and a few others are standing around scratching your heads asking
"Was there a crime committed here?"
Unbelievable.
Part of the litany of bad governance and incompetence of AIB - one of the two "pillars" that are being touted around Europe and what the Irish economy will be built on - is listed here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_Irish_Banks#Controversy
This is just a simple list and shows a corporate culture that seems to be built on bad practice.
There is plenty more if people want to go digging for the dirt they'll find it - here is a sample betraying their mental juggling.
In their world view, nothing is "wrong", there is no "crime" its something for the solicitors to deal with
[broken link removed]
Senior AIB official =being questioned by an SC about AIBs re disclosure of AIB's 20% interest in Quarryvale
Q.269 Had AIB's interest had been registered, then the public would have known and
politicians would have known that they had voted on a project in respect of
which Allied Irish Bank held 20 per cent interest, isn't that right?
A. Presumably the information would have been available to them, yes.
Q.270 Presumably there are very good reasons why the Oireachtas has decided that 20
per cent interest in a company should be disclosed on the register of a public
company, isn't that right?
30 A. Presumably they have.
Q.271 And I presume that the shareholders of Allied Irish Bank would have been
anxious to know that their company held 20 per cent interest in the Quarryvale
project?
A. Well maybe they would. I can just say to you that in terms of the -- what
happened here was we took legal advice and it was done with that full legal
advice as being a legitimate exercise. So if there's any implication that it
was under hand well then that's a matter for Fry's.
==========================================================
Fergus, with the greatest of respect to you and Brendan, there is a widespread feeling that the previous government and the banks treated the electorate like mushrooms.
This systemic mistreatment of the electorate and abuse of the institutions of the state has got to stop and the people responsible have to be held accountable.
Personally, with the multitude of items seeming likely to be discovered, I don't see the current delay in prosecution as the likelihood of their being none.
I think the DPP is considering the likely fallout for Irish business if the full extent of the perfidy becomes known and charting a middle course.