Michael Collins and the Czar of Russia

In 1919 Michael Collins was elected as Minister for Finance in the first Dáil Éireann. The first Dáil was convened following the 1918 election at which an overwhelming

Members of the First Dáil, 10 April 1919 First row, left to right: Laurence Ginnell, Michael Collins, Cathal Brugha, Arthur Griffith, Éamon de Valera, Count Plunkett, Eoin MacNeill, W. T. Cosgrave and Ernest Blythe. Kevin O’Higgins is in the third row (right)

majority of the entire Irish people had voted for pro-independence candidates. At the time, Ireland was a backwater of empire, a country without international recognition, sovereign independence or even a line of credit.

The general (sic) consensus is, that with few cards to play, Collins was an outstanding success in this role: “In overall terms, Collins’ performance in Finance was outstanding by any criteria. … Collins’ personal organization skills were exceptional, allowing him to hold four major positions simultaneously, prompting him to impose order and clarity on a world of disorder and confusion. If his unexpected death robbed the state of its most capable administrator, it also denies the historian the opportunity to compare him with his successors in Finance.” Andrew McCarthy

His master stroke was the raising of a National Loan which, with a target of £250,000 actually generated some £400,000 for the fledgling state. This loan was raised from ordinary Irish people, not bankers, not governments, not the IMF nor the European Central Bank.

For a country with only the resources of its people, primarily agricultural in nature and with only its potential to sell, this was a true triumph of confidence on the part of Collins. Indeed at this time Belfast was the industrial centre of Ireland. It had been for some time with the shipyards among the best in the World. There were other industries, of course, such as the Linen mills but these were already in steep decline by 1919.

As for the Czar, (well, the Russian Republic, I plead artistic licence) ordered Ludwig Martens the head of the Soviet Bureau in New York City to acquire a “national loan” from the Irish Republic, offering some of the Russian Crown Jewels as collateral. The jewels remained in a Dublin safe, forgotten by all sides, until the 1930s, when they were found by chance! Perhaps FJH can offer some further information? 😉

We are all, I am sure, aware of what happened next, partition, independence for most of Ireland and a divergence of economic as well as political fortunes, so where are we now?

Today most of the Island is a dynamic outward looking, open economy with a highly educated, well paid and generally happy population. Yes, I know the past few years have been difficult but, coming from a very high plateau, the fall has been checked and the re-bounce is well underway. As the Irish Times says “Irish people enjoy among the highest quality of life and standard of living in Europe, according to the European Union.” – Well, some of the Irish People at least.

In the north eastern six counties there is a different story to be told. Whatever the rights and wrongs of partition it is, nevertheless, an established historical fact. Both juristictions withdrew into a self regarding political and economic cul de sac from which the south only truly emerged thirty years ago. In the north, that is yet to happen. With the decline of the heavy industries upon which Belfast in particular prided itself the search is still continuing for its place in the economic world.

Is the north east best served as a destination for low wage service companies (eg: call centres) or, like the rest of the country, should it be marketed as a destination for successful, ambitious companies requiring a young, smart, highly educated workforce, a business friendly environment and unfettered access to the wider European economy or should it be constrained by a Daily Mail reading, mostly elderly, backward looking collective of pin striped, bowler hatted, myopic neo-victorians?

One of the most awkward questions of recent years is the level of subvention or subsidy by the colonial paymasters in Westminster. The most interesting point is that there is no solid answer to the actual figure here is the source material. As may be seen from this link the figures are, at best, arbitrary, at worst a best guess. Meanwhile an ongoing argument is engaged regarding Sinn Fein and the DUP regarding welfare reform and the price of implementing a Tory government policy, a Tory govt that was not elected or voted for in any way in this part of the world.

My question is simple, how do we approach, define and challenge this economic question?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Horseman predicts the future

Good evening,

I’ve been quiet of late due to a combination of some number crunching on behalf of nameless third parties, the summer silly season and some domestic stuff of no consequence. At the suggestion of commenter Jon Wallace I’ve begun some background work on continuing Horsemans annual balance sheet analysis for 2014. Enda, over at Endgame in Ulster, has previously done some good work on this here.

The general idea is to analyse demographic changes over the previous year and apply the findings to likely future trends. I’m happy as the proverbial Pig in the brown stuff doing this type of number crunching. The key figures are based around census returns, births, deaths, immigration, emigration, community background and, of course, election results. It may take me a while!

I’d spent a couple of hours on this today when I stumbled upon some interesting conclusions that I thought were worth sharing with you.

The 2001 Census results for community background by age were as following:

2001
Age Band	Catholic (%)	Protestant (%)	Other (%)	None (%)
0 to 4	49.1	43.1	0.4	7.4
5 to 9	49.5	44.9	0.3	5.3
10 to 14	50.4	45.3	0.3	4
15 to 19	51.4	45.2	0.3	3.1
20 to 24	49.5	47	0.5	3
25 to 29	46	50.4	0.6	3
30 to 34	44.7	51.9	0.6	2.8
35 to 39	44.6	52.6	0.5	2.4
40 to 44	43.7	54	0.5	1.8
45 to 49	42.2	55.6	0.5	1.7
50 to 54	39.7	58.6	0.4	1.4
55 to 59	36.6	62	0.3	1.1
60 to 64	35.8	63	0.3	0.9
65 to 69	35.1	63.9	0.2	0.7
70 to 74	33.4	65.8	0.2	0.7
75+	30.2	69.2	0.2	0.4

This, extrapolated to the 2011 census should have led to the following:

2011	BASED ON 2001
Age Band	Catholic (%)	Protestant (%)	Other (%)	None (%)
0 to 4
5 to 9
10 to 14	49.1%	43.1%	0.4%	7.4%
15 to 19	49.5%	44.9%	0.3%	5.3%
20 to 24	50.4%	45.3%	0.3%	4.0%
25 to 29	51.4%	45.2%	0.3%	3.1%
30 to 34	49.5%	47.0%	0.5%	3.0%
35 to 39	46.0%	50.4%	0.6%	3.0%
40 to 44	44.7%	51.9%	0.6%	2.8%
45 to 49	44.6%	52.6%	0.5%	2.4%
50 to 54	43.7%	54.0%	0.5%	1.8%
55 to 59	42.2%	55.6%	0.5%	1.7%
60 to 64	39.7%	58.6%	0.4%	1.4%
65 to 69	36.6%	62.0%	0.3%	1.1%
70 to 74	35.8%	63.0%	0.3%	0.9%
75+	32.9%	66.3%	0.2%	0.6%

The actual 2011 figures were:

2011 ACTUAL
Age Band	Catholic (%)	Protestant (%)	Other (%)	None (%)
0 to 4	49.2%	36.4%	1.0%	13.4%
5 to 9	49.3%	40.1%	0.8%	9.8%
10 to 14	49.5%	41.9%	0.7%	8.0%
15 to 19	49.0%	42.9%	0.6%	7.5%
20 to 24	48.9%	42.3%	0.8%	7.9%
25 to 29	50.9%	40.7%	1.2%	7.1%
30 to 34	49.7%	42.4%	1.5%	6.4%
35 to 39	46.8%	46.2%	1.3%	5.6%
40 to 44	45.4%	49.4%	1.0%	4.3%
45 to 49	44.7%	50.8%	0.9%	3.6%
50 to 54	43.5%	52.8%	0.8%	2.9%
55 to 59	42.1%	54.5%	0.8%	2.5%
60 to 64	39.2%	57.9%	0.8%	2.1%
65 to 69	36.3%	61.4%	0.8%	1.5%
70 to 74	35.4%	62.8%	0.7%	1.1%
75+	31.3%	67.2%	0.6%	0.8%

There has been much speculation here and elsewhere regarding the effects of immigration/ emigration and the increasing trend towards secularisation so how far out was Horseman with his predictions? Not a lot is the answer, here is the variation between his predictions and the actual results:

Difference
Age Band	Catholic (%)	Protestant (%)	Other (%)	None (%)
0 to 4
5 to 9
10 to 14	0.4%	-1.2%	0.3%	0.6%
15 to 19	-0.5%	-2.0%	0.3%	2.2%
20 to 24	-1.5%	-3.0%	0.5%	3.9%
25 to 29	-0.5%	-4.5%	0.9%	4.0%
30 to 34	0.2%	-4.6%	1.0%	3.4%
35 to 39	0.8%	-4.2%	0.7%	2.6%
40 to 44	0.7%	-2.5%	0.4%	1.5%
45 to 49	0.1%	-1.8%	0.4%	1.2%
50 to 54	-0.2%	-1.2%	0.3%	1.1%
55 to 59	-0.1%	-1.1%	0.3%	0.8%
60 to 64	-0.5%	-0.7%	0.4%	0.7%
65 to 69	-0.3%	-0.6%	0.5%	0.4%
70 to 74	-0.4%	-0.2%	0.4%	0.2%
75+	-1.6%	0.9%	0.4%	0.2%

My conclusion is that Horseman was incredibly accurate in his predictions. Regarding the Catholic proportion of the election he was accurate to within 1% in all bar two age groups and <1.6% in the exceptions. Regarding the Protestant community he was marginally less accurate but the difference is almost entirely accounted for by the other or none categories. I am yet to hear or see a reasoned argument countering his projections.

As always, it is actual votes that count in the real world. My thinking is that the nationalist electorate is somewhat under represented due to electoral apathy and low turnout. The way to turn that around is possibly to address the economic issues that motivate most people to turn out and vote. Perhaps it is about time for the economic case for a re-united Ireland to be coherently made.

The day the lights went out

Today marks the 100th anniversary of the start of the Great European war of 1914.

It is right and proper that those who died during that conflict are remembered and their sacrifice recognised. Few families in Britain or Ireland emerged at the conclusion of hostilities four years later quite the same. For families in Germany, France, Belgium and many other countries around the World it was a similar experience. Families are similar the world over, they grieve and worry in just the same way. That war was possibly the last in which armies fought armies. Since 1918 civilian populations seem to have become part of the battlefield. Current events in Gaza are testament enough to that.

In Ireland, at the time,  there were two distinct lines of thought regarding the outbreak of War. There still are, more of that later.

Under the leadership of the Wexfordman John Redmond, the Irish Parliamentary Party encouraged Irishmen to join up on the premise that a home rule bill would follow as a “reward”. I have a one word response to that which I’ll not publish here. Strangely and conversely, the Dubliner, Edward Carson was encouraging Unionists across the country to do the same on the basis that, guess what, home rule would be prevented on that basis. (There’s a thesis there on the duplicity of the “Welsh Wizard”- Lloyd George)

Anyhow, as I am in danger of embarking upon an historical magical mystery tour, let’s fast forward to today.

Former Taoiseach, John Bruton (Or John Brutal as he was known in past days- Brutal being Dublin slang for useless) had this masterpiece in todays Irish Times. Meanwhile, our President was attending this event in France. In Dublin meanwhile, yesterday, there was this ceremony in Glasnevin cemetary of all places. As my Dad would have said, graves (nearby)  must have been spinning at a rate of knots.

I sense an attempt at rewriting history. A revisionism and redrawing of the maps of history. Much of it is writ large  on the pages of William Martin Murphys old propoganda organ, the infamous “Indo” or Irish Independent. It would be more properly titled the “Anglo Unionist” but there’s another blog in that argument.

Meanwhile other Irishmen were planning to fight for their own small nation against a neighbouring aggressor. Events that would culminate in the beginnings of the fall of an empire.

My own view is that the only use of a war is to learn the lessons of it’s causes and effects and to apply those lessons for the sake of our children. It appears not everyone shares that view.