[DanBC]

> while Ireland is inspirational.

This Ireland? http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/eu-chief-barro...

> Europe did not cause of the problems for Ireland; Ireland caused a problem for Europe, the head of the EU government said.

> Following the bailout exit, the Government's bid to get backdated funding for the banking sector was dealt a spectacular blow as the head of the European Commission blamed the Irish banks, regulators and government for the difficulties in the country.

> Categorically rejecting suggestions Ireland should now be helped by Europe, at least in the short to medium term, European Commission President Jose-Manuel Barroso cut loose on Ireland.

[anonymousDan]

Barroso is far from a neutral observer in all this. Personally I think it is extremely disengeneous of him to say Europe wasn't a problem for Ireland (and indeed there were major efforts to row back on the above comments subsequently). While there's no doubt lax regulation of the banking sector was the major cause of Ireland's problems initially, it is now widely accepted that the Irish Government was told in no uncertain terms by the ECB that it must bail out the banks on its own and that private bondholders were not to be touched, so as to prevent further contagion in the wider European banking sector. Thus an Icelandic style solution to Ireland's problems was ruled out, on pain of withdrawal of all short term funding. Whatever the effects of burning private bondholders for Ireland's future reputation in the markets, it would have been a much more just solution (as well as being popular politically in Ireland). To completely ignore the hit Ireland was forced to take is thus a bit rich IMHO.

[fauigerzigerk]

I agree that it would have been better to put more of the burden of the housing bust on bondholders. However, Ireland has benefitted tremendously from Europe over the past decades.

It has received tens of billions in direct financial aid (and I don't mean the loans that were part of the current bailout). Its European neighbors have tolerated Irish tax policies that have put Ireland squarely at the center of the most fanciful tax evasion schemes used by both European and US corporations.

But it hasn't just been shell companies and tax evasion that has made Ireland rich. There's also genuine success that wouldn't have been possible if Ireland hadn't become a gateway into the EU for US corporations like Google.

So before choosing a path that was possible for tiny Iceland, Ireland did have to ask itself whether a move that could have destabilized the global financial system and threatened the existence of the EU was consistent with the solidarity it owes to those who have supported it in the past.

Ireland made the right choice at the time, but I also think that as things stabalize, it would be a good idea to renegotiate some of the bailout terms. After all, some of the foreign counter parties that were effectively bailed out by the Irish government benefitted greatly from the Irish housing boom while it lasted.

[anonymousDan]

Oh sure, I don't necessarily disagree with you, I was just trying to point out that Barrosso's comments are somewhat one-eyed and far from the final word on the matter.

[jwilliams]

The OP was probably referring to Northern Ireland, which is a devolved part of the UK (and uses GBP) - Whereas your article refers to the Republic of Ireland, which is in the Eurozone.

[taejo]

If OP was referring to Northern Ireland, then s/he should have said so, since "Ireland" generally refers to Ireland, and Ireland did secede, while NI did not.

[JoeAltmaier]

Isn't this more complicated than that? Declaring you've 'Seceeded' doesn't mean a new state is created/recongnized; there's a county in Iowa that 'seceeded' but it didn't change anything. Just sayin, how many people on the street know about anything but their hometown much less than the internal politics of Ireland.

[moocowduckquack]

Is pretty simple really.

Nothern Ireland is a part of the UK. So it definitely did not seceed from the UK.

The Republic of Ireland, is a seperate country with completely different government and currency, that used to be part of the UK but isn't any more, so it has definitely seceeded.

That county in Iowa, it is actually still part of the USA and has not managed to separate itself either legally, economically, or through force of arms. It is clearly not a separate sovereign nation. It has not seceeded from the USA.

[talideon]

No. Northern Ireland didn't secede in any sense. It's the rump of the Kingdom of Ireland within the United Kingdom. The 26 Counties seceded from the UK to become the Free State, while NI stayed within. This is regarded as partition, not secession, and happened before the secession of the South. The partition was performed by an Act of the UK Parliament, and secession was performed by the Anglo-Irish Treaty.

All this is pretty well documented as it was of significant historical importance, much more so than the reorganisation of the borders within a US state.