Controversy over Nama

Madam,  –   A very simple question should be asked about the motivation of the present Government for not nationalising the …

Madam,  –   A very simple question should be asked about the motivation of the present Government for not nationalising the banks, a question which, to my knowledge, has not yet been asked. How many  members of Fianna Fáil and their building developer friends own ordinary shares in either AIB or the Bank of Ireland, shares which would be worthless in the event of nationalisation? Is that what Nama is really about?

It was interesting to read that the article by 46 economists (Opinion, August 26th) was signed by two noticeably right-wing economists, Moore McDowell of UCD and Constantin Gurdgiev of TCD. Apparently even they now recognise that the free-market neo-conservative idea of taking from the poor and the middle-classes and giving to the rich is a bankrupt one, so isn’t it time for a detailed answer to the question I ask above?   – Yours, etc,

PETER THOMPSON,

Ferrybank,

Arklow,

Co Wicklow.

Madam, – The third element of the proposed alternative to Nama is that “the State, on a temporary basis, becomes the pre-eminent shareholder in the banks, working swiftly to float a reorganised banking system anew” (Opinion, August 26th). Are the proposers really suggesting that a bank run like Irish Rail would provide a safe bridge over choppy economic waters to future economic growth? – Yours, etc,

CONOR FOLEY,

Rothe Terrace,

Kilkenny.

Madam, – Prof Lucey’s article has been comprehensively answered. First, only 46 out of, as reported 250 “leading” economists signed the article. That is less than 20 per cent. Second, the financial markets pushed up the price of Bank of Ireland and Allied Irish Banks by almost 10 per cent.

READ MORE

Should we add eye-wipe to the haircut and face-wash Nama metaphors? – Yours, etc,

MICHAEL ANDERSON,

Moyclare Close,

Baldoyle,

Dublin 13.

Madam, – We should remember that developers created unprecedented employment and generated masssive revenues for the Irish State coffers over the past 10 years. We should also not forget that our democratically elected Government played no small part in creating the financial mess we now find ourselves in by not taking the heat out of the building market. It may be argued, therefore, that as a nation we have some moral duty in taking over the resulting bad loans.

However, it is reported that some €30 billion of the toxic loans were generated by investments in foreign countries. These would not have generated tax revenues for the Irish State, nor would they have created any meaningful employment for Irish workers. These were investments for personal enrichment. I do not believe that the Irish taxpayer should be held responsible for these debts. – Yours, etc,

FRANK DOHENY,

Gortacarnaun,

Roscahill,

Co Galway.