Erikka Askeland: Irish public in a patient mood over ?50bn bank bailout

THE €50 billion question for Ireland is why bail out the banks at all, or at least all the banks? The vast, almost unimaginable, sum is the worst-case scenario cost of the country's bank crisis.

In an effort to draw a line under the extreme folly of the "Celtic Tiger", Ireland will pump a further €6.4bn into Anglo Irish Bank, €3bn into Allied Irish Bank and ?€2.7bn into Irish Nationwide Building Society, which joined the circle of Irish bank shame when it turned out to have the worst quality property loans of them all.

Was it just the fear of an O'Lehman event that has caused the government to put its populace into so much hock? Would the failure of Anglo really have toppled the entire Irish banking system? For one thing it may have got rid of that annoying problem of having two banks with the same three letter acronym.

But times are too febrile, and the laws that be in Europe and at home have deemed the measures "horrible" but "manageable". That is, manageable until the so far well behaved Irish tax payer starts revolting against the loss of vast swathes of public services outside schools and hospitals.

Of course, Ireland is not Ecuador, and finance minister Brian Lenihan is not likely to be threatened by marauding public-sector workers like Rafael Correa, Ecuador's president, who had to be rescued from his own police force. But the road the Irish government has taken is undoubtedly harder on the Irish people than on the banks' senior debt holders. But then these international lenders who-must-be-pacified may be the only way Ireland can get back on her feet.

Equality is always to be desired - but at what cost?

A FUND manager at an Edinburgh investment firm recently admitted to me he was worried about whether the rather colourful badinage that passed for convivial banter in his office would pass muster in a court of law if at some point someone took offence and decided to sue. He expressed horror at the notion of actually hurting someone's feelings and that if offence was caused, all it would take would be a quiet word to sort it out.

Of course it should be so simple, but often it is not. He also admitted that his firm employed no female fund managers, nor were any of his colleagues openly gay. And that is where problems could and often do arise.

When everyone is essentially the same, it is easier to share a world view, or as the case may be, a caustic sense of humour. But when the majority of a group shares the same values, it can give rise to situations that put the minority that have different values in a tight spot. And this is just one of the reasons why the seven-headed hydra of employment law was created.But isn't it just such a pain to deal with? Even the government admits that the Equality Act which came into force last week would cost UK businesses 189m just to work out.

But Lynne Marr, an employment partner at law firm Brodies, says that the act is just bringing into line some disparate bits of case law and European law into something that makes more sense. But, oh no, it's not simple. Pretty much every employer is going to have to review and probably amend applications forms to ensure its questions about the health of applicants doesn't cross that line.

Yet it is those elements of the Equality Act that have been left out - to perhaps come back in April or not at all - which would have proved even more challenging. We shall see if the Tories and Lib-Dems decide to bring in Labour's proposed rules about positive action, which gives firms the green light to hire or promote a woman ahead of a man to boost numbers and not have to fear being sued by the guy who lost out.

Or the dual discrimination rule, which means disabled lesbian mothers can only use two "categories" to press a discrimination suit - on the basis of being a disabled mother, say - rather than all three.

Of course the elephant in the legislation is gender pay audits, which may come into force in 2013, but may not. Of course, gender audits were trialled in the public sector first, bringing level what for years had been some terrible discrimination practices which saw women being paid far less for equal work, but which nearly bankrupted some local authorities. Such is the dual edged sword of equality - we must create a fair society, but can we afford it?