‘Ahern must clarify peculiarities at tribunal’

FINE Gael launched a stinging attack on “glaring contradictions” in Taoiseach Bertie Ahern’s explanations of his personal finances last night as the Mahon Tribunal was beginning a week of explosive hearings.

FG senator and senior counsel Eugene Regan insisted the Taoiseach must use his appearance before the corruption probe to clarify “extraordinary peculiarities” regarding the money he accepted from businessmen and friends while finance minister in the early 1990s, which the senator said was equivalent to €300,000 in today’s prices.

The inquiry was recalling AIB official Rosemary Murtagh to give evidence today after her testimony in July that a deposit equivalent to IR£28,772.90 was “probably” in dollars provoked controversy. Mr Ahern had insisted the 1994 deposit, into then partner Celia Larkin’s account, resulted from Stg£30,000 given to him by his then landlord Michael Wall.

However, Mahon lawyers claim the amount does not equate to a sterling conversion, but is exactly equal to a $45,000 dollar deposit on that day’s trading. Mr Ahern emphatically insisted during the general election campaign that he has never dealt in dollars.

Mr Wall will take to the stand at Dublin Castle after Ms Murtagh, and is likely to be quizzed as to why he made a will leaving Mr Ahern the Drumcondra home the Fianna Fáil leader was renting from him in the mid-1990s.

Mr Ahern’s ex-partner Ms Larkin will give evidence tomorrow with the Taoiseach scheduled to follow on Thursday and Friday.

Senator Regan claimed it was clear the Mahon Tribunal was not happy with the Taoiseach’s explanations so far and Mr Ahern needed to give a thorough clarification of his transactions.

“His appearance must be seen in the context of the extraordinary peculiarities of his story, such as he operated no personal bank accounts while minister of finance. That he saved precisely IR£50,000 and kept that sum of money in a safe.

“That he has no records or documentary proof of loans he is alleged to have received, and that he can identify no one at the dinner of 25 people in Manchester where there was a “whip-around” for the Taoiseach,” he said.

Senator Regan also said serious question marks remained about what the Taoiseach did with the “dig-out” money he received from friends.

“It is a peculiar suggestion that a solicitor, Mr Brennan, would, unknown to the Taoiseach, take it upon himself to approach the Taoiseach’s personal friends for the purpose of arranging a collection of funds to discharge legal fees due to him, Mr Brennan, and then subsequently not use the money for that purpose,” he added.