Reilly denies lying over Ahern dig-out

FORMER plasterer Paddy Reilly warned the Mahon Tribunal legal team yesterday not to accuse him of lying over a £16,500 cash “dig-out” he and other friends gave Taoiseach Bertie Ahern in September 1994.

“You are making it up,” tribunal lawyer Henry Murphy SC suggested after Mr Reilly said he and the three other donors had decided, after a discussion in Beaumont House pub on Dublin’s northside, to give the money in cash as they felt Mr Ahern would not accept a cheque.

“No, that is not true,” said Mr Reilly.

“Do not accuse me of lying, please. I did not come in here to be accused of lying. Do not attempt to do that, Mr Murphy. I will defend myself.”

In a statement to the tribunal in June 2006, Mr Reilly had made no reference to a discussion to make cash contributions. His statement said: “I gave my £3,500 because I had cash available through an active plastering business that I ran at this time.”

He denied it was “an orchestrated thing” that he and seven other donors had endorsed Mr Ahern’s repayment cheques in favour of children’s charity CARI because of Miriam Ahern’s involvement with it.

After getting a phone call from Mr Ahern’s secretary he had gone down to St Luke’s constituency office, endorsed the Taoiseach’s 7,984 cheque to CARI.

He didn’t want to take the cheque, “but because of the situation the Taoiseach was in I had to do something about it”.

Mr Reilly said he got “a surprise and a very unpleasant one”, when Mr Ahern named him and the other donors in an RTÉ television interview.

He had not been aware until an hour before the broadcast in September 2006. Mr Ahern had apologised to him for “being put in the position of naming us”.

When the tribunal asked the Taoiseach to give details of payments he had received, Mr Ahern advised Mr Reilly he would be forwarding his name.

“It may well have been a surprise; I did not think that everybody would be hauled in [to the tribunal].”

Mr Ahern had offered to repay the money a number of times, but it was a matter of total indifference to him whether he repaid or not.

Initially he had intended to give Mr Ahern the money as a gift.

“As far as I was concerned it was to be a present and not a loan.”

Asked why Mr Ahern paid back the money in 2006, Mr Reilly said: “I would have thought that was obvious: It was causing him [Mr Ahern] serious embarrassment.”