Talk:Institute of International and European Affairs

More focus on what the IIEA does

This article places overdue focus on the assets and income of this organisation (both of which are quite small) over what this organisation does. There is also a selectively negative focus on the personal and work backgrounds of some of its current and former staff. Perhaps this page should be modelled to be closer to the format of one the following pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruegel_(institution) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_House https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_and_Social_Research_Institute Ballystrahan (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Note the Chatham House article has been tagged as having serious issues (including WP:PAID) and could be deleted; the Bruegel (institution) could probably also be tagged as per Chatham House. The problem when many institutions create article pages on Wikipedia is that they assume that Wikipedia is a WP:BROCHURE for their enterprise. The first issue is that we cannot use their website/own histories as sources (per WP:PRIMARY); the second issue is that editors then begin to add sources discussing issues in their enterprises (with proper WP:RS)), and then they come to delete these edits. Ultimately, things get done here on discussion and consensus. This Talk Page is the first forum for such a discussion, and I will watch this talk page now for specific concerns/issues you may have. Also note that it is likely that you have a WP:COI with regard to the IIEA, and therefore should avoid editing the article directly; instead use the talk page. thanks. Britishfinance (talk) 18:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

I do not have a WP:COI with regard to the IIEA. The current difficulty with writing about it is that much of the non-IIEA information available online is very limited and does not provide a clear narrative about what it does. I though this book would be useful because it conveniently provides a lot of raw material and has an ISBN. However, I understand your point. I am happy to collect additional independent material over the coming months for potential inclusion in the page in a consensus-based way. Ballystrahan (talk) 06:24, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Review subsection on Research

The subsection stating that:

“There are no known IIEA (or IEA) research papers in the databases of relevant peer–reviewed research journals; nor is there evidence of IIEA (or IEA) research being considered in the mainstream academic or research media (including major international newspapers).” 

should be changed to incorporate the following evidence:

O'Ceallaigh, Dáithí, and Paul Gillespie, eds. Britain and Europe: The Endgame: an Irish Perspective. Institute of International and European Affairs, 2015.

Reviewed in FT here: “‘Britain and Europe’, by Dáithí O’Ceallaigh and Paul Gillespie” https://www.ft.com/content/48bd1840-ff0c-11e4-8dd4-00144feabdc0

and in the Irish Times here: “Britain and Europe: The Endgame. An Irish Perspective review: What would happen to Ireland after a Brexit?” https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/britain-and-europe-the-endgame-an-irish-perspective-review-what-would-happen-to-ireland-after-a-brexit-1.2263991

Council of the EU general secretariat reviews paper on US corporate tax reform here: INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN AFFAIRS Cut to the chase: US corporate tax reform –the implications for Irelandby Frank Barry https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/37227/ttr_2018_61.pdf

Review of "Brexit: A status report" https://www.ft.com/content/ab345d0a-e48c-11e6-9645-c9357a75844a

Dan O’Brien, chief economist interviewed in FT: “Apple and state aid: End of the affair” https://www.ft.com/content/8dd1b256-70f8-11e6-a0c9-1365ce54b926

FT features Karl Whelan writing at the Institute of International and European Affairs (IIEA) in debate with Hans-Werner Sinn: “The wonkiest web debate ever – Germany’s ‘stealth bailout’” https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2011/06/08/588331/the-wonkiest-web-debate-ever-germanys-stealth-bailout/

IIEA research on Brexit in Oireachtas report: https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/committee/dail/32/seanad_special_committee_on_the_withdrawal_of_the_united_kingdom_from_the_european_union/reports/2017/2017-07-04_brexit-implications-and-potential-solutions_en.pdf

Other sources include:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/beware-threat-of-nationalism-says-think-tank-9w2kzld0r

https://archiv.ihned.cz/c7-66575500-qf5p9-41f8e0ecda232b3

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/mcguinness-brussels-too-often-used-as-a-punchbag-9czvcqrgw

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/04/15/the-united-states-owes-the-world-1-trillion/

https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/agriculture-doesnt-have-to-be-longterm-brexit-loser-37994167.html

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/ireland-likely-to-gain-from-trump-tax-changes-despite-50bn-outflow-1.3853627?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fbusiness%2Fey-entrepreneur-of-the-year%2Fireland-likely-to-gain-from-trump-tax-changes-despite-50bn-outflow-1.3853627

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/ptsb-s-profits-soar-bad-news-for-smes-and-brexit-logic-1.3807969?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fbusiness%2Fptsb-s-profits-soar-bad-news-for-smes-and-brexit-logic-1.3807969

https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/new-alliances-with-small-likeminded-eu-countries-will-be-needed-after-brexit-37787154.html

https://www.ceps.eu/ceps-events/britain-and-europe-the-endgame/

Ballystrahan (talk) 17:16, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

More information for Activities section

Here are a few pieces of information that may be of value on what the IIEA does:

Collaboration with the Oireachtas to interview former President of the ECB Jean-Claude Trichet on the banking crisis (WP:N(E)).

https://inquiries.oireachtas.ie/banking/hearings/jean-claude-trichet-iiea-event-not-an-official-inquiry-hearing/

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/press-centre/press-releases/20150428-banking-inquiry-to-engage-with-jean-claude-trichet-at-iiea-event/

See RTE article for context: https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0430/697732-banking-inquiry/

Oireachtas briefings on international affairs and climate change

https://www.oireachtas.ie/ga/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_european_union_affairs/2015-11-04/3/?highlight%5B0%5D=tutty&highlight%5B1%5D=iiea&highlight%5B2%5D=iiea&highlight%5B3%5D=tutty&highlight%5B4%5D=iiea

https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/committee/dail/32/joint_committee_on_european_union_affairs/submissions/2019/2019-06-12_opening-statement-jill-donoghue-director-of-research-institute-of-international-and-european-affairs-iiea_en.pdf

https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/committee/dail/32/joint_committee_on_communications_climate_action_and_environment/submissions/2016/2016-10-25_opening-statement-joseph-curtin-iiea-ucc_en.pdf

https://www.oireachtas.ie/ga/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_environment_culture_and_the_gaeltacht/2012-07-17/4/?highlight%5B0%5D=iiea

Collaboration with Trinity College Dublin

https://www.tcd.ie/triss/news/iiea.php

Collaboration with Royal Dublin Society

https://www.rds.ie/Members/Our-Work/Projects/Climate-Smart-Agriculture

Joseph Curtin, IIEA staff member also member of the Irish Climate Advisory Council

http://www.climatecouncil.ie/aboutus/councilmembers/

https://www.josephcurtin.com/about

Ballystrahan (talk) 20:55, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Reversion of Ballystrahan edits

@Ballystrahan: You are deleting large referenced sections of this article without any agreement or discussion on the Talk Page; they have been reverted. You have also used a fully WP:PRIMARY source to re-do the history section which is not acceptable as an WP:RS here; such sources can only be used sparingly (if at all); although we can add this source as a bibliography at the end. It is also likely that you have a WP:COI here given your use and knowledge of such PRIMARY sources and your desire to delete sections that deal with issues in the institute; it is therefore recommended that you do no edit the article directly, and instead, suggest changes on the talk page for consensus. I am re-watching this talk page now and will discuss any questions you have, it would be good to have someone who it knowledgeable on the IIEA support on this article, however, we need to get independent secondary sources as our WP:RS. thanks. Britishfinance (talk) 17:56, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Response by Ballystrahan

@Britishfinance: Thank you for your comments. Is there any easy way to look back at my revisions? I'll try and find an additional source for the history section. However, there are some aspects of this page that should change without any need to find new sources, most of which I made in the page before they were reverted. These aspects are as follows:

1. "Tom Arnold, the former Assistant Secretary of the Irish Department of Agriculture, " should be changed to "Tom Arnold, the former CEO of Concern Worldwide" since this was his job prior to becoming DG of the IIEA and there are multiple Assistant Secretaries of government departments. This is referenced in the source material.

2. "former Irish Fianna Fáil Minister of State for Children, Barry Andrews" should be changed to "former CEO of GOAL and Irish Fianna Fáil Minister of State for Children, Barry Andrews" or some variant for the same reason.

3. In the controversies section, "The IIEA has been labelled a quango" should be changed to "The Phoenix magazine has labelled the IIEA a quango" since it is the only source to have done so.

4. "It is estimated that over 50% of the IIEA's income is directly or indirectly Irish State funded." should be changed to "The Phoenix estimated that over 50% of the IIEA's income is directly or indirectly Irish State funded." for the same reason.

5. "and has been the source of several members questions in Dail Eireann regarding the payments by Irish State departments to the IIEA.[21] Over the years diverse Irish State departments such as the Department of Defence,[22] and Irish State–owned companies such as the VHI, have been revealed as funders of the IIEA, despite no obvious relevance. As of November 2018, the IIEA does not provide a break–down on the proportion of its Revenues that are directly or indirectly Irish exchequer funded in its § Accounts. I" The sources cited do not back up the implied controversy of the paragraph and appear to be WP:NOR. It is not clear how being a quango is controversial in any case.

6. The "Political" section is entirely WP:NOR. I tried to re-format this section but was left with no substance at the end.

7. The "IIEA Offices" section is entirely WP:NOR. It is difficult to see how the requested market price of an asset versus its book value would be controversial in any case.

8. The "BREXIT Hub" section has multiple issues. If it is seen as best to keep it I recommend changing "The grant would pay for new offices closer to Dail Eireann, the IIEA's main source of funding;" to "The grant would pay for new offices closer to Government Buildings" since Dáil Eireann is not actually referred to in the sources, and neither is the "IIEA's main source of funding" bit either.

9. "Donal de Buitléir, former Assistant Secretary at the Revenue Commissioners." would be better changed to "Donal de Buitléir, former senior AIB official." or , better still, "Donal de Buitléir, former Director of PublicPolicy.ie ." since the source does not actually refer to him being an assistant secretary in the Revenue Commissioners, which he left nearly 30 years ago. A google search suggests that are many varied sources on his biography out there, e.g. [1] or, the original source for this here: [2]. However, I suggest is to removing this whole subsection since it is not clear how this is a controversy at all.

Ballystrahan (talk) 20:14, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ballystrahan. I am going to re-format your note above so we can number the specific items (I count nine – have I got that right?). I have some time tomorrow morning so will go through these one-by-one and give you my view on each them; I will make the direct change where I agree, and let us talk further where I am not yet in agreement and continue the discussion. Britishfinance (talk) 20:19, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Britishfinance. Thanks for your note. That seems good. I look forward to hearing from you.

Ballystrahan (talk) 20:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Here are two more suggestions on this topic:

10. “however, it is believed a material portion of the Subscription (and potentially Other category), are sourced from the Irish State (either directly from State departments, or via State–owned companies), and thus over 50% of IIEA income is funded by the Irish exchequer.” should be appropriately cited. WP:WEASEL

11. The Governance section contains undue emphasis on entities being state-owned or state-sponsored. This is particularly so in the case of Pat Cox. Cox is described first as a "former State–owned RTÉ journalist" despite the fact that he left RTÉ in 1989 or earlier and president of the European Parliament is clearly a more recent and important role. Including former Progressive Democrat, TD or presidential candidate would come before the RTÉ reference in relevance. The choice of wording also seems a little strange since all of these state-owned entities are household names and have their own Wikipedia pages. WP:WEIGHT

Ballystrahan (talk) 21:11, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

I have replied to the above below in the next section. Unfortunately, the COI is very strong here. 10:19, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

IIEA page neutrality dispute

This article has many issues. These mainly relate to weight and original research. Please see the topics under discussion in this page for more information. I am currently working on finding additional sources to improve the page but I would appreciate it if another editor could comment on the changes I have suggested here to date. Ballystrahan (talk) 09:48, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

At a summary level, the most dominant aspects of the IIEA, per the references, is:

A. Not a research think-tank (e.g. it has no work published in research journals, and is not cited in research); it is a forum-type think-tank.

B. Not a private-sector think-tank (e.g. none of its Chairman/CEO have ever come from backgrounds that are not Irish political figures, or senior Irish civil servants)

B. Gets most of its funding from the Irish exchequer (e.g. private sector sources are less than 50% of its funding)

All of Ballystrahan's Proposed Edits (above) try to present a very different picture, or even whitewash, these three items. After trying to re-write the History section earlier using unusual sources (not available online) that demonstrate that Ballystrahan has a strong COI in this topic, their proposed edits aggregate into the following groupings:

Proposed Edits 1, 2, 6, 9 and 11 are an attempt to show that B is not true (e.g. removing the main public-office credentials to replace with later private sector work)

Proposed Edits 3, 5, and 5 are an attempt to that C is not true (e.g. removing all references to the sources of funding)

The More information for Activities section is an attempt to soften A (e.g. evidence of doing more than holding forums); I don't have a major problem with this, but again, it goes to their COI.

In keeping with Ballystrahan's strong COI in this area, they have also sought the deletion as OR, of any controversy or issue that the IIEA has ever been involved with any quoted with the main Irish WP:RS, which include the Brexit Hub issue (Proposed Edit 8), the Offices issue (Proposed Edit 7) (which Ballystrahan also earlier removed from the History section).

The IIEA that Ballystrahan is trying to get to, is a private-sector funded and governed research-type think-tank, but that is simply not what the references overwhelmingly say that the IIEA is. I warn Ballystrahan again to avoid such edits on this article given their what is a strong COI agenda. Britishfinance (talk) 10:17, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Dear Britishfinance, thank you for your comments. Please do not remove my neutrality dispute flag. I, rather than you, am flagging the fact that I am disputing this page and you removing it does not make the neutrality of the page undisputed.

Please refrain from ad hominem attacks. Rather than addressing any of the points I have made, you are simply attacking my motivations and threatening me. Regarding your points, I am not arguing against them precisely. I don't think these statements are quite true but, even if they were, I would not think they were a source of controversy, or its dominant aspects. Instead, I am advocating points 1-11, as I have stated above.

A: This point is mostly true. It's not primarily a research think tank. However, contrary to what you have written on the page and are unwilling to change, it does do some research. I have given an example above of a IIEA-affiliated publication in a research journal above. I have given more than one example of research citations (see above). There are also plenty of examples of academics writing IIEA research publications if you care to have a look (e.g. Frank Barry and Patrick Keatinge).

B: You haven't provided enough information to back this up. Unlike what you seem to claim, I don't know who most of the directors generals (I presume this is what you mean by CEO) have been, but the first was neither a civil servant or a politician. Instead he was an academic and journalist called Brian Farrell

C: This is probably true but you have presented this in a partial, original research way.

Regarding your accusations of COI, this is a red herring. This accusation seems to be primarily based on the fact that I one of the sources I cited in the expanded history section (all of which you subsequently deleted, in somewhat bad faith, I believe) was a book called "Vision and reality : a history of 25 years of the Institute of International and European Affairs, 1989-2014" by Tony Brown and published by the IIEA. This book is available in both the Trinity College Dublin and University College Dublin libraries, one of which I happen to have access to. The second basis to this seems to be based on the fact that I disagree with you.

Perhaps the best thing to do is to get some dispute resolution on this topic. Ballystrahan (talk) 08:01, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

References

Page update: IIEA neutrality dispute

I have updated the IIEA page to replace non-neutral content. I have replaced original research and added content and citations to the article, particularly in the history section. I have continued to include the criticisms raised in previous versions of the page (that are not original research) but have included additional information to give these more context. There are many other additions that could be made to the page. However, I believe that this edition at least gives a fuller and unopinionated description of the IIEA. --Ballystrahan (talk) 21:20, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Should there really be this level of hyper detail on this article. It identifies every member of the board in 2018 including the company secretary and the detailed finances over an extended period of time. We don't even have that with Bank of Ireland, Amazon (company) or Google let alone a fairly minor institution like this. Financefactz (talk) 09:14, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Also why are the financials shown from right to left instead of left to right. All very strange.Financefactz (talk) 09:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Financefactz. It does look quite odd and it appears to have been part of an attempt to present the IIEA’s activities as dubious. However, I would be cautious about deleting information on Wikipedia that is presumably correct. Maybe it would be good to consult some of the Wikipedia guidelines before deciding what to do with it. Ballystrahan (talk) 08:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, looking at your recent edits, it is worth pointing out that the IIEA is actually a charity. Ballystrahan (talk) 08:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

It is worth asking "Am I deleting this because I don't like it or am I deleting this because it will make the reader better informed?".Ballystrahan (talk) 08:52, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Notability is probably the relevant Wikipedia term. I think mentioning that the IIEA is a charity somewhere on the page is relevant and notable but that charities are exempt from corporation tax on profits is not. I think it's relevant to have the turnover and/or assets of the IIEA for one year but not to have their detailed accounts. The IIEA is not noted for the amount of revenue it receives or where it's from over time. Ballystrahan (talk) 13:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I have input what it is actually registered as in the CRO and the reference is the CRO itself (a primary source) rather than a newspaper etc so it is 100% correct in that regard. It may also call itself a charity. Excess detail that is not to do with the subject of the article is certainly to be deleted and should not be on this page. It is up to others to decide whether or not it is needed on another page.Financefactz (talk) 16:47, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I think you're right. You've done some good work on this page! Ballystrahan (talk) 09:26, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

References