Brazen Bertie blanks opposition’s cheque queries

BERTIE AHERN has had enough of questions about blank cheques.

The Taoiseach told the Dáil yesterday he wouldn’t be answering any more of them.

Mr Ahern was discussing the recent report of the Moriarty Tribunal, which found his habit of signing blank cheques for Charles Haughey in the 1980s “undoubtedly facilitated the misuse” of taxpayer funds by the late Taoiseach and Fianna Fáil leader.

Referring to the testimony he gave to the tribunal, Mr Ahern said: “I went down and gave my good time to the eminent gentlemen, and enjoyed it no end, but I done that, that’s over, so I’m not answering any more questions.

“I’ve answered enough questions about signing blank cheques; I’m notdoing [it] anymore.”

When the opposition raised further questions on the issue, Mr Ahern responded tongue firmly in cheek.

“Sign blank cheques? I did. And signed loads of them for all kind[s] of organisations and clubs. For years. Gave it up now.”

That last sentence provoked peals of laughter from some of Mr Ahern’s Fianna Fáil colleagues.

The laughter continued when he added: “It cost the State a fortune to find me guilty, but anyway.”

The Moriarty report revealed how a practice had developed in the 1980s whereby Mr Ahern would sign blank cheques for Mr Haughey “without anyinformation about the intended payee or the intended amount of a cheque”.

Mr Haughey was then free to dictate the amount on the cheque and use it as he saw fit.

The tribunal said the practice appeared to become more prevalent after Fianna Fáil was returned to power in 1987 and that, by 1990 and 1991, Mr Ahern — who was by then the Minister for Labour — would pre-sign as many as 20 cheques at one sitting.

Catherine Butler, who was a special adviser to Mr Haughey, recalled observing Mr Ahern, on one occasion, pre-signing a full book of blank cheques.

The tribunal said it appreciated that this practice developed for reasons of “administrative convenience”.

It was also satisfied that “Mr Ahern had no reason to believe that the account was operated otherwise than in an orthodox fashion”. However, the report added: “It was nonetheless an undesirable practice [and] undoubtedly facilitated the misuse of the account by Mr Haughey.”

The tribunal gathered evidence of a range of examples where Mr Haughey used the cheques for his own personal benefit.