Sort of convenient but it’s still left open on who organized it. It’s just said to get the company back for SQ and kids.
SQ then comes back in as a consultant on a ludicrous salary along with Junior when the takeover happens. Doesn’t take a genius to know what the purpose of those payments were.
You don’t mess with the church. They’re well able to deal with any mob
Executives helped campaign for Seán Quinn to win back firms
John Mooney
November 24 2019, 12:01am, The Sunday Times
Seán Quinn, centre, commanded huge support among locals, including Patricia Gilheany, in the the red cardiganLORRAINE TEEVAN
Share
Save
Two directors of Quinn Industrial Holdings (QIH) advised and encouraged the protest campaign run by Concerned Irish Citizens (CIC) that sought to prevent the sale of companies once owned by tycoon Seán Quinn.
Emails seen by The Sunday Times show the CIC campaign was advised by Kevin Lunney, the QIH director who was abducted outside his home in Co Fermanagh in September.
Lunney prepared draft letters for CIC to send to the administrators of Quinn Insurance after it ran into financial difficulties, and he also advised a group spokeswoman, Patricia Gilheany, on what issues to raise when speaking publicly to the media.
In one email sent in 2011, Lunney told Gilheany to talk about job losses, instability and how taxpayers’ money was being wasted by Anglo Irish Bank through its pursuit of Quinn after a receiver was appointed to sell its assets. The advice was given after Gilheany wrote to Lunney to say she might be invited to speak on Liveline, the RTE Radio show hosted by Joe Duffy, and she wanted to prepare for media questions.
“You should also talk about the redundancies already stated last week with more expected in the near future,” wrote Lunney. The email was copied to two of Quinn’s children, Seán Jr and Colette, and other parties. The Quinn family declined to comment when contacted yesterday.
CIC ran a high-profile campaign on Facebook which purported to represent the views of people in Cavan, Leitrim and Fermanagh who opposed the sale of the Quinn Group. The emails show it was provided with information and draft documents by Lunney and others who were once key figures in Quinn’s organisation.
The sale of Quinn’s assets triggered protests and, unrelated to those, a series of arson attacks and other forms of intimidation.
Other emails show John McCartin, a former Fine Gael councillor and non-executive director of QIH, was also in regular contact with Gilheany about the establishment of QBRC, a business entity which sought to have ownership of the companies retained locally.
In the email, McCartin complimented Gilheany for “driving OB nuts”. This was a reference to Paul O’Brien, the executive appointed to oversee the sale of the businesses. He also thanked her for deterring potential investors including the Lagan Group from acquiring the assets. “We’ll have to make sure you keep it up,” he said.
“I think we have O’Brien under pressure. I think there’s a great ‘good cop, bad cop’ thing going on between QBRC and CIC. We’re playing it cool and level but the pressure you’re putting on is very important. It shows what the alternative to dealing with us will be like,” McCartin wrote in one email.
In another email, Gilheany sought permission from McCartin before posting a link to a newspaper story which had reported on his criticisms of DUP leader Arlene Foster, who had given an interview to say businesses would be reluctant to invest in the border region if the campaign of sabotage against Quinn’s former companies continued.
“Probably no harm, Patricia. She deserved a slap on the wrist,” wrote McCartin. “She let O’Brien make a cat’s paw of her so she can suffer the consequences.”
Gilheany declined to comment yesterday, citing legal reasons. McCartin referred questions to QIH when contacted. A spokesman for QIH declined to respond to specific questions about the contents of the emails but said it had always been the company’s position that the businesses should remain in the locality under local management, and that anyone with information about intimidation or criminality should immediately report it to the authorities.
Sounds like lunney was trying to run with the hare and the hounds, and got bitten.
Sounds like he double crossed the quinns
That’d be the obvious inference. Ive thought for a while that he’s come across as an oddball who’s only interest has been his own financial gain
What an absolute shower of cunts they all are. Venal venal people.
I wouldn’t necessarily call it a double cross. He was obviously going to be on Quinn’s side to begin with but saw the light at some stage.
What is becoming clear is that there appears to have been two campaigns here. The first before Quinn got the consulting gig and had the support of the wider community and the second after Quinn quit/was fired from the consulting gig.
The impression I got was that Quinn wanted back in the big seat when he was brought in a consultant whereas the agreement was that a buy back would be facilitated in due course.
Quinn is obviously an ego maniac and a cunt to boot.
I’d say he saw the opportunity
Realistically, the Americans were probably not going to sell so the directors knew what way the wind was blowing. You had Quinn in there as a consultant pretending he ran the show and it was only a matter of time when it really wasn’t.
Easy for the local community to get together in 2011. At that stage it was easy to just blame the bank rather than Quinn and jobs were at stake. Years later and the jobs are still there but the Quinn’s aren’t necessary.
Lunny trying to swap waves mid race?
Well I guess the point was for the locals back then that a huge amount of the business could be lost to the locality, including himself. Easy to roll behind a common cause then, when the takeover was done and dusted and nothing much had changed then what’s the point in rowing behind someone just because they want to be in control.
has the gahliban issued a statement
I’m hearing relatives of a famous GAA and FF Cavan family have been implicated.
Father of Eddie?
Guys, could you explain to a layman what the reasons might be for withholding the identity of one of the four charged today? I usually associate this type of anonymity with sexual offences when the identity isn’t disclosed to protect the identity of the victim.
Under 18?
Plays rubby?
