Corruption claims dismissed as ‘political rhetoric’
Mr Wright rejected Mr Smith’s charges in a series of speeches 15 years ago, while he led a protest delegation of FF members on Dublin County Council to the minister’s office.
Commenting yesterday on Mr Smith’s outburst, Mr Wright said: “I believed it had more to do with political rhetoric than substance.”
Mr Wright said Michael Smith had raised the issue of corruption by describing the Dublin planning process as a “debased currency”.
As a result of that, he headed a delegation of Fianna Fáil councillors to meet the minister after an intervention by then-Taoiseach Albert Reynolds.
He recalled: “The group was upset at what Mr Smith had said. I did not believe it.”
In his evidence to the tribunal recently, Mr Smith said he had been aiming to “rein in the worst excesses” of planning development in Dublin during the 1990s.
Tribunal lawyer Pat Quinn asked Mr Wright whether he now believed there had been corruption in Dublin planning processes back in the 1990s. The witness referred to evidence that had been presented, adding “I am not sure.”
Mr Wright was making his final appearance at the inquiry after previously giving evidence during eight other investigations.
Earlier his year, Mr Smith made it clear to the tribunal that he reckoned subsequent events — centring on claims by former government press secretary and political lobbyist Frank Dunlop that tens of thousands of pounds were paid in bribes to local councillors for their votes on planning rezoning issues — had “substantiated” his position.
Former North Dublin TD GV Wright admitted receiving a total of £15,000 from both Mr Dunlop and his employer, Owen O’Callaghan, ahead of elections in 1991 and 1992.
But he insisted the money had been accepted as political donation and had nothing to do with his backing for Mr O’Callaghan’s plans to develop land at Quarryvale, Co Dublin, now the location of the Liffey Valley shopping complex and the focus of the current probe.
Asked if he had been suspicious about getting money from Mr Dunlop in cash form he agreed that it had been unusual, but said it was not totally uncommon during the 1980s and 1990s.
He had know Mr O’Callaghan for some time before receiving donations from him, and did not think it was strange for a Dublin politician to get backing from a Cork businessman.
He never gave receipts for the donations to Mr Dunlop or Mr O’Callaghan.
When the two men arrived in his constituency office ten days before the 1992 general election, he suspected they were planning to make a financial contribution to his campaign.
Quarryvale was discussed then, but not in detail.
Mr Wright rejected claims by Mr Dunlop that he had asked for cash in return for supporting the project.
He told the tribunal: “I never received any money in connection with any development. I never solicited payments from either Mr O’Callaghan or Mr Dunlop. I dispute absolutely that suggestion.”
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
