We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Updated, 18:06
IRELAND HAS RAISED almost €4.2 billion in its first sale of long-term government bonds since before it was forced into an EU-IMF bailout.
The National Treasury Management Agency said investors had bought €4.19 billion of new bonds, due to be repaid in October 2017 and October 2020, as part of its operations earlier today.
In addition, investors swapped €1.04 billion of existing bonds – which were due to be repaid in either 2013 or 2014 – for the later ones, which carry a higher interest rate.
The issue of the new long-term bonds marks the first time Ireland has raised cash on a long-term basis, independent of the EU-IMF bailout programme, since September 2010.
The bonds maturing in 2020 will carry an annual interest rate of 6.1 per cent, while the loans up for repayment in 2017 carry interest of 5.9 per cent.
The NTMA, which is responsible for managing Ireland’s national debt and funding needs, had surprised many investors when it announced the swap-and-sell arrangements this morning.
This evening the Minister for Finance, Michael Noonan, said the return to markets was a “very welcome and positive development”, and said the majority of the demand for the new debts came from foreign investors.
“The strong demand and the fact that over €4 billion of this is new money is a significant step for Ireland in regaining our economic sovereignty,” he said.
Noonan said the auction showed investors were reacting favourably to the commitment by EU heads of government to break the link between banking debt and sovereign debt, but warned that this commitment needed to be delivered upon if Ireland was to return to the markets on a full-time basis.
NTMA John Corrigan said he was “very pleased” with how the activity had been received, “particularly the fact that investors committed more than €4 billion of new money to our first long-term issuance since September 2010.”
He added that the return to independent borrowing was a “very significant step for Ireland on the way to full bond market access”.
He also said that today’s exercises meant the NTMA now had a “significant proportion” of the €8.2 billion it needed to repay a tranche of bonds which are due to mature in January 2014 – a point which had previously been seen as a significant “funding cliff”.
The amount raised is similar to the amounts Ireland had routinely raised in monthly bond auctions prior to September 2010, after which it opted against issuing further bonds due to the rising costs of borrowing that ultimately sent Ireland into its €67.5 billion bailout.
Though the interest rates paid by the NTMA today are down significantly on the rates it would have paid on second-hand markets only months ago, its rates are still higher than they had been before the bailout was needed – and are still far higher than other eurozone countries pay.
An 8-year loan for Germany, similar to the 2020 bond issued by Ireland today, would only cost it an annual interest rate of 0.963 per cent. The UK would pay interest of 1.09 per cent, while France would pay 1.831 per cent.
The costs are not much higher than what Italy would pay, though – with the Italian government being charged 5.807 on second-hand markets this evening – while Spain would pay more than Ireland did, at 6.742 per cent.
Earlier this month, the NTMA sold €500 million of government debt in the form of three-month treasury bills which are different to bonds in that they run over a much shorter period of time.
The ‘T-bills’ reached a yield of 1.8 per cent – beating the 2 per cent interest rate they were expected to pay – and were over-subscribed.
The NTMA had said last week that it planned three to four more auctions of short-term treasury bills before the end of the year, and that “market conditions permitting” it planned to issue a more conventional long-term bond, like that sold today.
Additional reporting by Hugh O’Connell
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Climate crisis? More like climate scam to tax your very existence.
Hey Damocles, this is the weakness of democracy Shane Bradley was talking about^^^^. Short-termist idiots like this case here have a vote, and also breed.
This is simply put and well said. The weakness of all democracies, our own included, is short termism and superficiality. Rarely do politicians see beyond the next election or beneath a newspaper headline.nThis is why when the economic bubble was expanding in the mid 2000s not one of the main political parties had a ‘let’s be prudent and stop spending’ manifesto and if they did, would they have enjoyed electoral success? I think not.nSo too with our fragile climate, which needs unpopular short term pain (public transport resources, running costs of cars increasing even more, water charges etc) for unseen and inexperienced benefits ( a sustainable future). Now that’s a real vote winner!!!
That’s a bit arrogant, Shane.
The majority of the electorate are shallow, vacuous people who are incapable of long term thoughts and only care about the latest glittery bauble presented by the greedy politicians, while only a small minority like yourself are capable of seeing the great vision?
Give people a chance, they might surprise you.
They constantly surprise us Damocles.
They elect Jackie Healy-Rae, then Michael; they elect Lowry and Cowen and Ahern and all their ilk. They surprise us every time.
Frankly, I wish they’d stop surprising us quite so much…
I stopped believing in climate change and other fairy-tales when I was a child. Most sensible people realize that the Earths climate goes through cycles and future generations are heading towards an Ice age regardless. What never ceases to amaze me is mans stupidity in believing Global Warming is anything but a political movement designed for taxes and careers. 10,000 years ago Arizona was under 40″ of ice, so we know that temperature can vary on its own. Glaciers world wide have been shrinking for the last 300 years, this means that things other than CO2 change our climate.
To keep things in context, a recent survey ‘The Petition Project’ featured over 31,000 of the worlds most esteemed scientists signing the petition stating “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide will, in the forseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere”
The Inconvenient Truth, like most political propaganda is for sheep.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.” Galileo Galileo
….and surprised again. Cheers for that Paula….
Go have a read:
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
BTW Paula your “petition project” ? “Doctor” Michael J Fox, “Doctor” Geri Halliwell, “Doctor” John C. Grisham and “Doctor” Perry S. Mason are all signatories. Now, I enjoyed Back to the Future as much as any other kid, but I don’t really think it qualified Michael J Fox to the point where his signature was sufficient evidence to discount the work of climatologists the world over for the past fifty years and the physical evidence they’ve uncovered and highlighted.
For anyone who genuinely wants to know the full story behind the “Petition Project”, take a read:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-11-12/#feature
Interesting article and very good points, the only problem is that if we were to reduce our beef farming then it will probably just move to somewhere like south America where it is in general not as sustainable and therefore increase carbon emissions worldwide but Ireland would have an A+
Well we could do a bit more tillage but buy doing so beef prices would rise, but still global warming is a theory, those climate scientists like to fudge reports to make them sound more dramatic, like those guys in England before Copenhagen 2009.
Yeah Peter, it’s just a theory.
Like, you know, the theory of gravity.
Anyday now, we’re going to prove that that silly gravity thing is just a theory and then we’ll all fly like pigeons…
The climate has always changed and always will.the cows have always belched and farted .and Molly will get paid to scare the s— out of us .more methaine.
Very true Eilish, but George Carlin put it better: “The Planet is fine, it doesn’t need saving. It’s the People who’re f*cked!”
This is the biggest load of rubbish i have ever read. Friends of the Earth should be called enemies of the people. What will people do when there is no food to eat or not enough lettuce to go around. Typical scaremongering from global warming morons. Ask any farmer if it’s getting too dry in the south of Ireland. It’s a complete washout. People like molly should not be entertained without facts and figures and also alternatives to her argument.
Yeah, quick, lets ask any farmer, anywhere in the world, if they’ve been seeing more extreme weather in the last decade or so. (Hint: The answer will be either “Yes” or “I’ve not been farming that long”).
Another great example of the Irish self-hate bias! No mention of the right of Americans to wastefully drive gas guzzlers, Canadian wastefulness in extracting shale oil or Chinese hunger for burning dirty coal ad inf. Paddy is attacking Paddy for producing less than 0.14% of the world’s greenhouse gas thus ignoring the real culprits and arguing for Paddy to shoot himself in the foot. Evidence if were needed that Irish journalism (like banking) is infected with mad cow disease!
While it’s a good point that those countries are being wasteful, telling others what you see they’re doing wrong (especially when Paddy has his own wrongdoings going on) often just gets people’s backs up. It doesn’t help the situation and distracts from what Irish people can actually change directly: the .14% of emissions as you put it.
Plus it doesn’t have to be a foot-shooting exercise, there is profitability in them their renewables.
While it’s a good point that those countries are being wasteful, telling others what you see they’re doing wrong (especially when Paddy has his own wrongdoings going on) often just gets people’s backs up. It doesn’t help the situation and distracts from what Irish people can actually change directly: the .14% of emissions as you put it.
Plus it doesn’t have to be a foot-shooting exercise, there is profitability in them there renewables.
Andrew – gross ineptitude is perhaps the best description of the “green movement” world wide and especially true of Ireland. It is not about cattle that are reared in Ireland to provide food for other countries, it is about consumerism and the mad unsustainable snobbish behaviours of humans in general. When the “airy fairy green loons” realise where the problem lies they might be able to solve it and the label of “gross ineptitude” might disappear.
Insects contain as much protein as beef and don’t produce any emissions, in years to come we will be ordering a plate of insects rather than a stake!
At which point, we’ll be doing what the majority of the human race already do.
BTW, pass those red M&M’s, would you? Gotta have me some of those insects…
Insect ‘meat’ is a more credible solution than we might imagine. Insects use a fraction of the space and feed resources of large animals. They give off close to zero methane and other harmful gases. They contain nearly twice as much protein per kilo and almost no fat.
A recent project at the Royal College of Art in London tried to imagine ‘cricket mince’ and ‘caterpillar croquettes’ on the prepared food aisle at your local Tesco: http://cargocollective.com/ento/Products
No worse than whatever foul grisel goes into a Supermac’s burger in my view.
Interesting link derrynairn, I may just go and buy some!
Ate insects regularly when living in Thailand.
No different from eating prawns or periwinkles.
some local farmers used to raise insects in cages for protein in their diet. Very cheap and convenient food.
Molly our Co2 emissions are relatively minuscule. Climate change is already happening and is more than likely irreversible. We however, have some of the worlds best real estate to deal with it, with our northern latitude and relatively high elevation. I would refute your drought stricken southern farm theory as folly. We should absolutely concentrate on departing from our fossil fuel dependence but mainly because we need to prepare for the transition as such power sources run out. The analogy of Co2 emissions and our economic depression is little more than a parlour trick designed to shed light on topics that are utterly unrelated.
It’s not the governments fault, it’s ours. We vote them in, they want to stay in. If you want them to tackle climate it means higher taxes. We don’t want that.
Oh give me a break, who cares……
It’s true to say that cows (or more properly, their complementary load of methanogenic bacteria) release merhane to the armosphere.
Yet there is a duplicity here. The figures for the impact of agriculure on global warming are derived from
making many assumptions which may or may not be true, and which this writer is disingenuously glossing over.
Grain growing accounts for, by far, the largest carbon impact of all human food production. The calculations for livestock usually include a “grain loading” which is not appropriate to include in a calculation for grass-fed herds like Ireland’s. Pastured animals also CREATE soil, an important carbon sink, while grain crops steadily destroy soil and replace it with petroleum based feetilisers. I would request the writer do separate calculations on the impacts of grain-fed v grass-fed herds, and the im
…pacts of spil-building practices versus soil-destroying practices.
Is she suggesting that Irish livestock farms, which suit local conditions should be converted to less suitable and more destructive practices?
Or that we should let our hillsides go to fire-hazard whin-strewn undegrazed wilderness?
Some useful practical thinking is in order. And truthful use of statistics.
*trigger finger*
We are currently jn a race between human ingenuity and human stupidity ! We Have an economic system that requires perpetual growth to survive in a finite world. That is why we do need to find ways to reduce the farting of cows – we are getting ourselves into complex problems that require complex solutions so yes jay we do need the scientists.
Not to overly dwell on the farting thing but imagine the climate change when dinosaur s were at it .no wonder they had to go.
That’s pretty much exactly what happened to them Eilish, more than once (there was more than one extinction event – they were around for a few million years, we’ve only been here for at most a hundred thousand). Asteroid impacts, ice ages, supervolcano eruptions; all (ultimately) forms of climate change, species couldn’t adapt to the new climate and died out.
Basic facts are that the banking crisis WAS a man made problem and “Climate Change” is not. The pseudo-science involved in this modern myth is nothing more than researchers with no real work being able to get easy funding for almost anything they want as long as they make a link (No matter how tenuous) to climate. Climate cycles have been around as long as the planet and is a natural cycle and to mention Al Gore adds insult to injury… This is the man that tried to convince everyone he invented the internet while he was running for president and believes in climate change so much that he makes absolutely no attempt to reduce his own so called “Carbon Footprint” You only have to look at his house. I’m all for green energy if it means cheaper energy, but the funny thing is that when I looked at the prices here in Ireland, If you want to purchase solely renewable source electricity it’s the most expensive electricity you can buy!!! SCAM SCAM SCAM
Once upon a time Jay, folks would have argued with you about that.
These days, they just recognise you as a quack.
But here, go read the actual evidence for yourself. No reason you have to remain a quack.
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
Mark, the words ‘head’, ‘wall’, ‘banging’ spring to mind. Honestly The Journal is not the place to be if you are looking for rational debate, science and factual comments. I’m with you on this and agree with the science supporting your argument but the majority of comments here are not worth responding to. Just hold on to the thought that The Journal commenters are not representative of the Irish people (hopefully).
Those are your words, Damocles. In 2007, all the main parties had manifestos based on 4-6% economic growth – why, if not to get elected? nThe astuteness of the Irish electorate (or indeed of any democracy) is hard to judge and I am not making such an assessment. My comment is about democracy…which is littered with short termism etc. I am not sure what the answer is… But we are all paying the cost of poor leadership. Also the standard of public political debate…. Someone once said..’everything is political, except politics, which is personal’ (or some such). The personal slanging matches that often characterise Dail discussions and TV debates illustrate this well.
Just paraphrasing.
The politicians might be just after the quick electoral hit but it’s the electorate that give it to them, right?
If the electorate were half as well capable of seeing the grand vision that you do then they’d abandon such politicians for those who offer the long term solutions you see, surely?
But you say that the politicians, and hence the electorate, go for the quick hit. Incapable and unwilling to see the grand vision …
Maybe you’re right, maybe we need a long term vision from some sort of ‘new’ politician.
People seem to oppose austerity but support Green austerity. This agricultural plan is in fact anything but short termism, quite the opposite, and will provide jobs and exports. When Molly says we are on target for the reduction in car emissions, that is down to the recession. We won’t get out of the recession unless industries, or agriculture grow and that will involve more emissions, unless we have technical solutions on emissions instead of solutions to reduce consumption or production.
Economic contraction is not a solution, it creates human misery. Molly seems to suggest that we should not try to implement this report, and not compete for more exports in beef or cattle, exports which will be replaced elsewhere at a possible cost to the environment anyway, “good” for Ireland’s Green reports, but neutral, or worse, for the world’s. Thats a mugs game.
Instead of austerity Greenism we could try to reduce emissions per cow. I was going to suggest it wasn’t past the ingenuity of humans to reduce cow emissions, or trap them, and in fact it has been done, just not implemented.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/mar/22/germany.climatechange
We need a world government to control population and climate change. Thankfully it’s well on the way now even if they are just the super rich banksters.
Surprised so many people gave thumbs down to the idea of a World Government.
So many of today’s problems are global problems and require global solutions.
while some aspects of climate change, over the long run, should give us pause. the alarmist mentality that it is any sort “crisis” has been vastly overblown.
simply put, those who advocate this crisis cannot scientifically support their own arguments in any form of fair, honest public debate.
add in the fact that, if you are a professor or scientist, and you don’t advocate for the current climate change junk science. you’ll very soon find yourself out of a job. and ridiculed by peers.
many researchers and professors simply follow the research funding. which, for the most part, only flows into those who advocate for climate science, to the point where evidence against such is ridiculed. most of the true scientific work is heralded by retired members of the climate science community, no longer forced to provide one side only of the argument in order to receive funding and keep their university jobs (after all professors and scientists who don’t bring in funding aren’t of much use to the commercial income of any school).
it gets so bad, that even students who propose otherwise in their own papers are automatically failed by some professors, regardless of the merits of their research. simply for going against the status quo of the governing “consensus” with their views.
Climate change is a massive lie!!
That is a somewhat unsubstantiated claim. At least the issue is in dispute and evidence is suggestive that something significant is happening our climate (melting polar ice, atypical weather patterns globally over the last few years). While it is true the evidence is not without it’s detractors, I for one think it’s taking an unnecessary risk with our and future generations well being to deny the possibility of climate change.
human evolution favours the forces of psychological denial
May sound like a contradiction, but the carbon impact of building and running and transporting a new car outweighs the impact of continuing to run an older “dirtier” car thats already been built and shipped. Especially hybrids. They use hard to get rare earth minerals much more than standard diesel or petrol cars.
Those are your words, Damocles. In 2007, all the main parties had manifestos based on 4-6% economic growth – why, if not to get elected? nThe astuteness of the Irish electorate (or indeed of any democracy) is hard to judge and I am not making such an assessment. My comment is about democracy…which is littered with short termism etc. I am not sure what the answer is… But we are all paying the cost of poor leadership. Also the standard of public political debate…. Someone once said..’everything is political, except politics, which is personal’ (or some such). The personal slanging matches that often characterise Dail discussions and TV debates illustrate this well.
Mark ,as will happen,life s like that
Actually, *death and extinction of the species* is like that Eilish.
Thing is, while we currently couldn’t do very much about asteroid impacts or supervolcano eruptions, we’ve already proven with the Montreal Protocol, we can control our own impact on the environment. And if we’re going to go extinct as a species, let’s do it because of something massive and beyond our control, not because we couldn’t stop a few cows belching…
@mark….Oh it must be true it’s on nasa’s website… Governments want you to believe it so they can tax it. I’d rather hear it from independent scientists
If you want independent scientific reports, look up the publications of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change..body of work reviewed is probably as extensive as possible to synthesise the existing research on the core issues. nTake it as a starter point to find additional literature to do your own reading around the issues. nObviously no one source can be unbiased enough so if you read widely you can come to your own conclusions. n http://www.ipcc.ch
http://carbon-based-ghg.blogspot.ie/2010/11/leaking-siberian-ice-raises-tricky.html when this happens were all shagged.cattle, insects people everything.
Yup, not to mention what happens if the Ross Shelf lets go or if the gulf stream shifts because of climate change. Mind you, at that point, as we sit here slowly freezing (our latitude is *cold* folks, if it wasn’t for the stream, we’d normally see winters like the one in 2010/11), all we’d here is “stupid scientists, call this global *warming* do you?”…
Is it still raining?
Ooo yeahh
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say