Consultants refuse to give evidence over licence
The refusal of both Danish-based Andersen Management International (AMI) and its former managing director Michael Andersen to testify prompted tribunal counsel John Coughlan SC to query the wisdom of hiring independent consultants who are not amenable to the processes of the State. Mr Coughlan described as disappointing that neither Mr Andersen nor AMI was available to give evidence about AMI's role in the GSM licence evaluation process.
Explaining why he won't come, Mr Andersen said he was bound by confidentiality obligations. Also, attending the tribunal would expose him to material penalties by the consultancy's new owners, AMI Ementor.
Mr Coughlan said: "As things stand, a suggestion by Mr Andersen that he may be available to give evidence in the future is not very helpful since clearly the tribunal cannot be expected to dispose of its business solely in order to accommodate the resolution of a dispute, if any, between Mr Andersen and Ementor." AMI, which evaluated the bids for the licence, said that despite reservations about the financial weakness of one of Esat Digifone's backers it was still the best application. The consultants also said the evaluation process was carried out in a professional way. But the consultants said that due to budget constraints in the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications, further work that the consultancy would normally have carried out was not done. It also said security in the department was surprisingly lax. On November 22, 1995 almost a month after Esat Digifone was declared winner Mr Lowry told the Dáil there was no undue haste in the announcement. On October 24, the former minister told a press conference the winner was Denis O'Brien's Esat Digifone consortium.
During Dáil questions, Mr Lowry said in a case as sensitive as this it was best to end speculation and announce the winner as soon as possible.
He said the competition process was patently fair and should be used as a model for other such competitions.
