Howlin's compromise on pay rejected by the Taoiseach

Brendan Howlin, the Minister responsible for overseeing a pay cap for special advisers, tried repeatedly to come to a compromise agreement on the pay of Ciaran Conlon.

The negotiations over the bumper salary of €127,000 that was finally set out for Mr Conlon show that Brendan Howlin had serious concerns about it and did not believe it could be justified under any circumstances.

He also said it would set a poor example and would provoke other Ministers into seeking higher pay for their advisers, or ask for salaries – that were already agreed – to be renegotiated.

The new emails, obtained from the Department of Public Enterprise, show that the Department of the Taoiseach repeatedly intervened in the process and would not accept a compromise of ca €115,000, which Howlin had pleaded with them to accept.

It would have presented a face-saving solution to the sensitive problem and was still, as Mr Howlin himself pointed out, a 25% increase on the original offer. In the end, he caved in following a demand that came directly from the Taoiseach [see below post].

Some of the documents on which this are based are posted here, with the more important exchanges coming towards the end.

A lengthy story that I wrote, which outlines it in further detail, is available here:

These new emails, now released by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform,  should, to my mind, have already been released under an FoI request that was submitted to the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation about the same matter.

That they were not is suspicious. The decision on their release is currently being appealed and will in due course be made known to the Information Commissioner.


Enda Kenny overruled two Ministers to give €35,000 pay rise

Taoiseach Enda Kenny personally intervened to have a special adviser awarded a salary of €127,000, 37 per cent more than had been recommended.

These are some of the Department of Enterprise communications, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, which outline the chain of events leading to the decision.

After the general election, Ciaran Conlon was appointed as an adviser to Enterprise Minister Richard Bruton. Under new guidelines set out by the Department of Finance, a salary cap had been put in place for such positions, ranging from around €80,000 to €92,000 per year. It appears from the emails however, that Mr Conlon had already been promised an annual wage of €127,000.

A difficulty arose when both Minister for Public Expenditure Reform Brendan Howlin and Finance Minister Michael Noonan refused to grant this higher salary. A memo in the Department of Enterprise explained that they were willing to pay him at the higher end of the scale, approving a pay level of €92,000.

Ciaran Conlon, a former communications chief with Fine Gael, was not happy with this, writing in an email: ‘This is getting ridiculous. The minister sent over a memo on this issue weeks ago. This has been passed at the very highest level in Government Buildings.’

Enda Kenny then intervened with his private secretary writing to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and expressing the Taoiseach’s wish for a salary of €127,000. The Department caved in and a new contract for Mr Conlon was drawn up.

The story I wrote in this week’s Mail on Sunday outlines what happened in more detail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2069731/How-Irish-PM-ordered-officials-break-salary-cap-old-friend-PR-adviser.html

Here are the documents:


Anglo vs the Commissioner for Environmental Information

I received notice party documents yesterday from McCann Fitzgerald solicitors in to the impending case between Anglo Irish Bank and the Commissioner for Environmental Information. NAMA are also taking a similar case. Both are in relation to requests I submitted to both organisations in early 2010.

To be clear here: my sole motivation is the public’s right to know more about Anglo Irish Bank and the National Asset Management Agency – two organisations that are costing the State a fortune, and are two of the most important bodies in the history of the State. The Environmental Regulations were the only avenue open to me from a right to information standpoint – so I have pursued the case, in partnership with Fred Logue, who holds similar views – and we intend seeing it through to the end.

These are the court documents: