Skip to content

Thursday, Sep 2nd 2010


Denis O’Brien and the “Little People”

denisobrien.JPG

In a letter to the Irish Times on the 16th of August written in response to Denis O’Brien’s opinion piece in that paper prescribing what the Irish government should do to rectify the downturn in the economy, Macdara Doyle of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions wrote the following:

“Madam, Not even the combined talents of Lewis Carroll and Jonathan Swift would have been capable of generating the high farce which The Irish Times delivered on Thursday: a billionaire businessman who refuses to contribute a cent towards running the country is given space in your pages to lecture the rest of us on how it should be done.

Mr. Denis O’Brien is worth more than €2 billion and chooses to absent himself from this country for the bulk of the year in order to avoid paying tax here.

Consequently, it is the view of Congress that he should not be afforded a public platform from which to lecture and hector those of us who do contribute.”

High farce indeed. Many of the absurdities in the piece have already been laughingly torn to shreds by Michael Taft in the ILR and on his own blog, but there are a couple of points mentioned by Macdara that are worth looking at further.

Firstly, his reference to Swift suggests viewing O’Brien in the light of one of the satirist’s most famous works, Gulliver’s Travels, in which the shipwrecked Gulliver finds himself as the saviour of the little people of Lilliput. This is especially apt considering that at the moment Dennis O’Brien is CEO of Digicel, which is making a fortune selling phones to poor people right across the Islands of the Caribbean: Jamaica, Haiti, Trinidad and Tobago, Fuji, Timor and Papa New Guinea.

The history of the rise of Digicel is summarized in a recent Forbes magazine article about O’Brien and his mobile phone business. His business dealings in Ireland are well known: the setting up of 98FM and Communicorp; his buying up of radio stations in Ireland and throughout Europe and his winning of the mobile phone license allowing him to establish Esat Telecom and the subsequent selling of that enterprise to BT, earning him a personal profit of €300 million. It is this money which Macdara is complaining about because, controversially, O’Brien chose to leave Ireland after that and was able to avoid the subsequent substantial tax bill he would have to pay if he remained resident in Ireland.

Having accumulated this whopping lump sum, O’Brien put part of it to use buying a mobile phone license in Jamaica. The attraction for O’Brien was that there was very little mobile phone ownership in the Caribbean country up to this point. As Forbes puts it:

“…the real pull was that this was a country where only the elite had access to phones. In a place like that, he could get the masses to love him.

He paid $48 million for a license and rolled out a battle plan he would use on other invasions: spend lavishly on the network (1,000 towers in Jamaica), build clean stores with cheery staff (a rarity in many developing countries) and lure customers by offering new services like per-second billing and big discounts from the competition (80% less for phones and 50% less for calls).”

Leaving aside, for the moment, the militaristic, colonialist and indeed imperialist language used to describe this entrepreneurial act (‘battle plan’, ‘invasions’) the business model seems to be: get as many customers who so far have not been able to afford mobile phones as possible by offering them cheap handsets and rapidly build new networks using borrowed funds so that they can use them. This has allowed Digicel to take the market share in each of these countries even when governments in some of them are doing everything they can to stop it.

And it is in this respect that O’Brien is like Gulliver, who on his arrival in a conflict-torn country is not attacked, but is championed by the little people. In the account provided by Forbes, the countries that O’Brien has moved into are considered some of the most dangerous on earth, yet his business manages to flourish.

“In an April riot in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, the mob not only spared Digicel stores from its burning and looting but even gathered in front of a few of them and cheered. Says a jubilant O’Brien, as he reads an e-mail on the news, “They’re calling us the Company of the People.”"

While in Fiji

“…Commodore Frank Bainimarama had just seized power and subjected Digicel’s chief there to a four-hour interrogation. Would the $20 million Digicel spent there go down the drain? No. A week after the coup O’Brien was sitting on a veranda with the new ruler, sipping tea. “Everyone was saying, ‘Don’t go. It’s unsafe,’” he says. “But that’s exactly the time to go in.”"

obrienwithphone.JPGIs his audacity breathtaking, the entrepreneur as adventurer and hero, or should he be seen in another guise, as the colonial orientalist carving out the resources of a foreign land for personal profit? The difference is that unlike previous empire builders, the profits of his endeavor will never be repatriated. The Forbes relates an event during a whistle stop tour of four Islands which O’Brien commutes around in one day using his Lir jet. He is in Tonga and he has been told of plans to get the King of the Tongo to officially open a store. However, there is no time to dwell on the King, the Forbes’ piece says:

“O’Brien has to fly to three more countries today, and his next meeting is in Vanuatu, 3,200 miles away. “Every man for himself,” he yells to two dozen young staffers as they rush to vans heading to the airport.”

And this call seems to extend to his business philosophy.

There is another point made by Macdara that is worth highlighting in relation to the O’Brien’s business dealings, especially in Papa New Guinea. In his Irish Times piece O’Brien mentions “My own businesses overseas have benefited from the expertise of officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs“. Macdara responded by saying:

“Unfortunately, Mr O’Brien failed to furnish an address where we might forward the bill for the services of which he availed, at our expense.”

But it is not only the services of the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs that O’Brien is able to avail of, free of charge.

While discussing the development of his business interests in Papa New Guinea, a country with one of the highest murder rates in the world, and which is notoriously corrupt, the Forbes article mentions the problems that he has had to overcome:

“Government officials in Papua New Guinea weren’t so amenable at first. Soon after Digicel won a license in an auction in 2006, telecom minister Arthur Somare invalidated it on a hazy procedural ground. Lawsuits quickly followed, and O’Brien kept his license. (We should point out here that Somare is a son of the prime minister.) In any case Somare then submitted a bill to parliament to nationalize O’Brien’s operations. The fight got so bad that the man who oversaw the original auction, Thomas Abe, received anonymous threats against his family and had to move houses several times.

Digicel had a lot to lose. It had erected dozens of towers and poured concrete for dozens more. O’Brien used this to his advantage. He brought members of parliament into Digicel’s main office to show them a wall map of PNG with pushpins representing planned cell sites in villages that never had a landline connection. The plan to nationalize Digicel was defeated.

Somare wasn’t through. A few months later he decreed that Digicel could not beam microwave transmissions from its towers, potentially rendering them useless. O’Brien’s response: He launched his service on the sneak, selling phones for a heavily subsidized $6, one-fifth the state monopoly’s price. He gave away a chip that allowed state phones to run on Digicel’s network. He also gave away $6 prepaid phone cards–250,000 of them in only ten days.

Within five months Digicel had 350,000 customers, 200,000 more than the state firm, and letters began to pour into newspapers ridiculing the state for threatening a rival. “Childish and pathetic,” sniped one letter. An editorial called for competition to shake up the water and electricity monopolies, too. O’Brien contacted friends in foreign embassies to lobby the government to not touch the company. “The EU funds PNG. So do Australia and New Zealand. So we used diplomacy,” he says. A former PNG army commander was quoted ominously in a magazine saying governments that ignore the people’s will are often toppled by coups.”

On the surface, we can see that the story Forbes magazine is telling here (let us assume they are based on facts) is inevitably one told very much from the pro-Western, neo-liberal point of view. If PNG is a country that relies on money from different Western countries, including the economic might of the EU, it suggests that its attempts to prevent O’Brien’s business taking hold were based on national self-interest. If O’Brien was successful in acquiring a majority share of the market then over time the majority of the profits accrued from that market would leave PNG. Capitalist production has always required an ‘expanding’ market into which to sell. Control of the means of production in itself is not enough. It also has to ‘capture’ the markets and control them by using its greater financial power to keep out ‘foreign’ competitors.

What is worth highlighting here, however, is the access that O’Brien has within the diplomatic services of Australia, New Zealand and the EU. That an individual business man can bring pressure to bear on a government (which incidentally has a Minister who happens to be related to the nation’s leader - how banana republic is that?) by using the paymasters in these Western Governments is staggering.

What hope has a small Third World country in those circumstances? And again, it’s worth emphasizing, Denis O’Brien pays no tax in any of these Western jurisdictions. Instead he is encouraged by these countries to exploit the resources of a country that is fighting, perhaps by stretching the procedural legislative mechanisms available to it, and which, we should note, are often imposed by Western governments under the guise of the ‘normal Representative Democracy‘ required if aid is to be given in the first place, against that exploitation. And why are they fighting? To line their own pockets? Perhaps, but it seems more likely that they are merely resisting the significant economic power that the Irish tax payer, in part, has afforded Denis O’Brien, in their own national self-interest.

In the face of such pressure, however, it seems inevitably that some governments don’t even bother to resist. An Economist article from last year inform us about Digicel’s Haitian operation:

“Digicel’s critics say it has used underhand tactics, such as giving away free phones to journalists (though other firms do the same), and breaking industry rules by treating Haiti as part of Jamaica in order to offer cheap roaming. Haiti’s regulator, Conatel, found Digicel to be in violation of international standards, but was overruled by the government. Such rulings have also led to allegations that Digicel has undue political influence in some markets.”

“Undue political influence”; sounds familiar, doesn’t it? But that’s globalization for you. “Every man for himself and feck the begrudgers”. In the same article it is reports that:

“Mr O’Brien claims he has grown used to all the criticism, and suggests that jealous rival operators are behind it. “The problem with them is that they are too flat-footed,” he says.”

Denis O’Brien is perhaps not the tallest man in the world, but through his businesses in Ireland he has turned into a capitalist colossus. In the conclusion of his letter Macdara notes:

“…perhaps he really does believe that taxes are for “little people”.”

In Gulliver’s Travels the little people of Lilliput charged him with treason when he refused to help them; they attempted to tie him down, and ultimately, blind him. They failed. He broke his binds and skipped the country. There were other islands to conquer.

Discussion

We welcome and encourage lively discussion from the public about articles on Irish Left Review. You can leave a comment using the form at the bottom of the page. Please read through the existing comments before posting your own.

  1. Comment by: simon

    Aug 21st 2008 at 18:08

    Mr. Denis O’Brien is worth more than €2 billion and chooses to absent himself from this country for the bulk of the year in order to avoid paying tax here.

    Consequently, it is the view of Congress that he should not be afforded a public platform from which to lecture and hector those of us who do contribute.”

    So if someone does not pay tax here they should not be allowed an op-ed in the Irish Times? So the same would go for Barack Obama I guess.?
    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2007/0216/1171494162118.html

  2. Comment by: Donagh

    Aug 21st 2008 at 22:08

    So Barack Obama and Denis O’Brien are the same? Has Obama ever been a citizen of Ireland? Has he done business here and made significant profits as a result? Has he, having made that money changed residency to avoid paying tax on those profits. Obama’s comments were only marginally about Ireland, and when they were it was mainly to do with Northern Ireland and the peace process. He didn’t, as a non resident and non tax payer, recommend that Ireland cut back the public service wage bill while also suggesting that public services be directed to help business.

  3. Comment by: simon

    Aug 22nd 2008 at 11:08

    My point is does Dennis O’Brian’ non-tax paying status preclude him from having an opinion on the Irish state? Does it mean that ideas are only worthy of consideration if they come from people who fulfill certain criteria. And that people who don’t fill that criteria then we should not even listen to their ideas. That we should be closed to ideas that we don’t approve of the people who give them?

  4. Comment by: Donagh

    Aug 22nd 2008 at 12:08

    That idea behind the series that the Irish Times put together was to see what the captains of industry would do. However, if one of them is talking about what should be done with public money when he doesn’t contribute towards it is surely a little bit hyprocritical. I actually don’t agree with Macdara Doyles point that he shouldn’t have been provided with a public platform by the Irish Times.

    However, the IT is influential, but it is not the gate keeper of truth. The Irish Times is a private business and they can publish the opinion of who they wish, I certainly wouldn’t deny them the right, or the right of Denis O’Brien to express that opinion. I didn’t make reference to that point made by Macdara in my piece. It’s curious that you are quoting back to me something I didn’t discuss.

  5. Comment by: Hugh Green

    Aug 25th 2008 at 10:08

    They asked him, O Lord, whom should we trust. And he replied, stroking his beard:

    ‘Whenever I am in doubt about whether I need a haircut or not, I always go to a barber’s and ask, as I am confident that the barber will give an answer that is in my best interest.

    My friend, who is far sharper than me, goes to the barber and asks the barber to issue some recommendations on whether he needs a haircut or not, based on the assumption that the barber will give an answer that is in their mutual interest.

    My brother, who is sharper still, goes to the barber and asks the barber to issue some recommendations on whether he needs a haircut or not, based on the assumption that the barber will give an answer that is in the barber’s own self-interest, but my brother says that this does not matter, since the barber’s self-interest and his own interest coincide anyway.

    My colleague, who is ten times sharper than the rest of us put together, and reads the Irish Times to boot, goes to the barber and asks the barber to issue on whether he needs a haircut or not, based on the assumption that the barber will give an answer that is in the barber’s own self-interest, but my colleague says that this doesn’t matter, since the barber probably knows more about my colleague’s own interests than he does himself.’

    And so they all went out and bought a copy of the Irish Times.

  6. Comment by: Donagh

    Aug 25th 2008 at 10:08

    Well, the barber and the Irish Times are simply performing professional services, and when it comes to making difficult decisions its ‘always best to leave it to the professionals’, even when it comes to framing an opinion.

    Which reminds me, this morning my wife told me that I needed a haircut. I wasn’t so sure ;)

    Thanks for that well-formed wisdom, Hugh.

  7. Comment by: Patrick

    Mar 12th 2009 at 23:03

    I find it interesting that O’Brien decided to start operations in countries that have some of the highest corruption rates in the world, according to Transparency International.

    You would think that what with the Esat allegations that he would…

    …oh, wait a minute (as the penny drops).

This article is also being discussed on the following websites:

  1. Aug 21st 2008

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required, will not be published)

Best of the Web

  • Newspaper Circulation Figures

    CIRCULATION FIGURES:
    Jan - June 2010

    Irish Independent 144896
    Irish Examiner 46687
    The Irish Times 105742
    Irish Daily Star 93729
    Irish Daily Mirror 60460
    The Irish Sun 86064
    Irish Daily Mail 51338
    Weekend Herald 40933

    No comments »
  • EAPN Ireland | Workfare Won’t Work for the Unemployed

    Excellent blog post from Aiden Lloyd, on EAPN’s On the Line blog. This pretty much nails the governments ‘thinking’ behind the workfare scheme. It wants to be seen to be doing something, while doing absolutely nothing. The economic structure of the country is based on attracting foreign capital, aka laundering profits, which only really benefits a small minority. Everything else is supposed to ‘trickle down’ from this. They’re not interested in restructuring the economy to boost indiginous growth.

    Minister O’Cuiv aims to use these schemes to provide unemployed people with short-term work activity, to up-skill them and ‘get them back into the mainstream workforce as speedily as possible’. He further contends that ‘maintaining people’s employability through regular work activity will be important for getting people back into the competitive economy’. This stance is revealing and is indicative of government thinking in terms of job creation for unemployed people. It would appear that the decision has already been made that any recovery will be dependent on a general improvement in the global economy and that the immediate priority is to manage matters until this recovery comes about.

    No comments »
  • Hugh Green | Anglo Grinder

    Hugh Green, on foot of the largest profit loss in Irish history - the 8.2 bn lost by Anglo Irish Bank in six months - has started to look at the figures and its eye watering.

    Grants to Enterprise was ticking over nicely all the way through the boom, making up 5-7% of capital expenditure. Then bam! 2009 we’re up to nearly 25% of capital expenditure. Only problem is that in 2009, it’s mostly down to Anglo Irish Bank.

    And

    But seeing as we’re heading into the propaganda season leading up to the budget, talking about the ‘savings’ that will have to be made, what with the ‘fiscal austerity’ being demanded by the ‘markets’, in the form of cuts to welfare, education and health, consider austerity in relation to spending on Anglo Irish Bank.

    See chart for details.

    No comments »
  • Slavefare: government proposal is a sham

    This comment from an anonymous punter on progressive economy sums up many of my thoughts on the matter
    "The thing that annoys me most about this is that it's not a real proposal. The Department can't provide any detailed proposals because there aren't any!

    The Minister appears to have thrown a (bad) idea out there to convey the impression that something's being done to tackle our unemployment problem when the reality couldn't be further from the truth.
    He's accused unemployed people of widespread fraud, without offering them any hope of getting a real job.

    We've seen the biggest recorded job losses in the history of the state, and Minister O'Cuiv thinks the numbers are high because people are refusing jobs, or working and claiming - what jobs does he think are out there? Employers are complaining because they're inundated with applications for any job advertised, not because no-one's applying!

    No comments »
  • Social Europe Needs a New Economic Model | John Palmer at Social Europe Journal

    There is however, a deep issue at stake if defence of decent European social standards is to be placed at the heart of policy making and not to become an increasingly powerless lobby at the margins of the debate. For that to happen the European Union must surely break with an almost exclusive emphasis on GDP as the be all and end all of economic policy objectives. The time has come to replace GDP with a far wider, more socially and environmentally responsible measure of economic progress.

    No comments »
  • Michael Burke’s common on Michael Taft’s post on progressive-economy@tasc re Service exports

    In the late boom year of 2005 the Gross Value Added (GVA) of the building and construction sector was €12.9bn and industry ex bulding was €33.6bn (2009 National incomes and Accounts, Table 4). By contrast the GVA of 'Other services', which includes financial services was €67.6bn.

    If we turn to the separate Input-Output tables, the 3 categories of financial services (finance, insurance and related) comprised €32bn.

    These are very large numbers and they are based on a fiction.

    The CSO link provided by Michael Taft shows Ireland has a trade deficit in services with the US of some €17.4bn, whereas services trade with the Europe and the rest of the world is in surplus.

    1 comment »
  • New Left Project | NLP Blog

    Good post on the BBC's official response to criticism of their Panorama documentary on the Gaza flotilla
    The BBC has, predictably, “dismiss[ed]” claims that a recent Panorama documentary on the Gaza flotilla was biased towards Israel. But its response itself illustrates the crux of the problem:

    “Israel has been accused of breaking international law by seizing a Turkish ship. Israel says they were terrorists. Turkey insists they were innocent victims.”

    That same opposition was proposed throughout the documentary on the flotilla: were the activists terrorists, or were they innocent peace activists?

    No comments »
  • Companies Dodge $60 Billion in Taxes Even Tea Party Condemns - BusinessWeek

    The Double Irish’

    On advice from Ernst & Young, Forest Laboratories Ireland reorganized that year, dropping the country from its name. The newly dubbed Forest Laboratories Holdings Ltd. established a registered office in Hamilton, Bermuda, declaring the island its tax residence. This unit took control of licensing the patents.

    A second subsidiary in Ireland inherited the old name. It handled the manufacturing, sublicensing the rights to the patents, according to a corporate disclosure and an internal Forest flow chart tracing the arrangement that was reviewed by Bloomberg.

    The change helped the Irish subsidiary cut its effective tax rate to 2.4 percent from 10.3 percent the year before the reorganization, according to its annual reports. It did so by deducting from its taxable income the fees that went to Bermuda, which has no corporate income tax. Charlie Perkins, a spokesman for Ernst & Young, one of the so-called Big Four, declined to comment on its work for Forest.

    No comments »
  • Ireland: A recession of the banks, by the banks, and for the banks | afoe | A Fistful of Euros | European Opinion

    And yet it’s not clear that the worst is over. The banks haven’t yet made a big move on distressed home mortgages and no one is clear what will happen when forebearance is no longer a viable strategy. Notwithstanding the government’s attempts to compare tax revenue to “profile” (i.e. a very recent projection), the fact is that tax revenue is stagnant at last year’s depression-like levels despite an apparent recovery in economic statistics. And while there are those desperate hotels, the tourists will still find fussy and expensive restaurants (plus VAT).

    Are there any tricks left in the bag? The government is looking at privatization, most likely as a way to realize a large amount of cash at fairly short notice — essentially a portfolio switch of state-owned companies for all the bank liabilities it has taken on. And there are some bizarre Thatcherite echoes in the possible appearance of a poll tax by the end of the year (dressed up as a “flat rate” water charge or property tax)

    No comments »
  • How Much Did Eurozone States Spend On Bailing Out Private Banks? | Irish Public Policy

    As a percentage of GDP the Euro-area average is 25.4%, the EU 27 is 31.2%. This is about 1,870 billion for the entire Eurozone. Nothing compared to what has been allocated to the Greek government. But, get this, Ireland spent a whopping 231.8% of its GDP, massively above any other country. Most of this is accounted for by the blanket guarantee of bank liabilities.

    No comments »

Link Archives »