Punchestown whitewash won’t stick to Walsh and McCreevy

THE very first thing the report of the Public Accounts Committee into the €14.8m handed over to the Punchestown horsy set did was to send in a ringer.

(A ringer, in racing parlance, means racing a horse that looks similar to another, but is in fact much better.) In this case, it was a loser, and was more of a scapegoat than a horse.

The PAC put civil servants, and in particular the departments of Agriculture and Finance, in the frame. Into the sunset rode the Minister for Finance Charlie McCreevy and the Agriculture Minister Joe Walsh.

When they gave the money to Punchestown, McCreevy and Walsh had an each-way docket.

They couldn't lose.

They got the credit from the horsy set for doling out almost €15m of taxpayers' money, and the Sir Humphreys of this world got the blame.

That, as we all know, belongs in the laps of Charlie McCreevy and Joe Walsh.

But the PAC didn't say that.

In doing their Pontius Pilate act, they did so in the knowledge that they were doing what was expected of them, what they were told to do by their terms of reference.

These state quite unequivocally: "The committee shall refrain from enquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or the merits of the objectives of such policies."

Refrain they certainly did, but somebody had to be responsible for wasting €15 million of public money.

So, they targeted the civil servants whose role in life anyway is to take the heat for their political masters, isn't it?

In particular, the PAC criticised the secretary general of the Department of Agriculture, John Malone, because they said he should have ensured the need for the €14.9 million Punchestown centre was properly evaluated under Department of Finance guidelines.

That is why those terms of reference were the first item on their report, in front of the findings.

And in the true spirit of transparency and openness which represent the standards of the Government, both ministers are keeping their mouths shut and letting their departments take the blame. Why wouldn't they, when they get the approbation of such luminaries of the moral code as Tánaiste Mary Harney, who rode to their defence, Annie Oakley-style, in her role as deputy for Taoiseach Bertie Ahern?

No-one, she said, could stand over the findings of the report, but they were not a matter for resignation.

A matter of resignation for whom?

Certainly not the two ministers, as Ms Harney made very clear, and anyway they were not held responsible.

Even if they were, there is nothing that any member of the Government ever did, does now, or might do in the future for which they might be expected to resign.

By contrast, Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny acted swiftly in sacking justice spokesman John Deasy for breaking the smoking ban in the Dáil bar.

The civil servants were merely carrying out a policy not just endorsed by their ministers, but initiated by them.

So, what it boils down to is that two Government ministers decided that the Punchestown agricultural and equestrian eventing centre, in McCreevy's constituency, should get €15 million and they simply gave it to them without any proper evaluation of whether it was worth the money.

It was even simpler than that.

Within the space of six months in 2000, the cost doubled to €13.8 million, and that funding was approved by the Minister for Finance.

In January 2002, the project was given a further €1.5 million, as a kind of a top-off.

For the organisers, it was better than winning the national lottery three or four times without having to buy a ticket. All they needed was to ask the Departments of Agriculture and Finance for the money and there was no problem. Last November, the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), John Purcell, often referred to as the public's watchdog on Government spending, was highly critical of the Punchestown farce.

He said the scale of the development changing so soon after its initial approval lent weight to his concern.

"Normally, this would set alarm bells ringing in both departments, but in this case it was more akin to pushing an open door," he said.

THE Public Accounts Committee came to a number of conclusions, but about the only one it didn't come to was who was truly to blame.

Its chairman, John Perry, made two intriguing observations. "It is very hard to assess whether the taxpayer got value for money," he declared.

Is he for real?

The taxpayer would not have to ask the audience, or phone a friend, on this inane suggestion.

We paid out €15 million for a centre that was hardly ever used in its first year, and only one-third of the events held there last year were of an equestrian or agricultural nature the supposed reason for getting the money.

Mr Perry also said, "this was a closed shop and the project was never put out to tender."

It's a bit much of him to talk about closed shops when the PAC closed ranks around the two ministers.

It's just not good enough for the PAC to point to the terms of reference in laying the blame on civil servants while refraining from criticising the Government and its policies. They know, as we all do, where the blame should lie.

Natural justice demanded that the PAC report would at least contain an obiter dictum an aside to their formal report criticising the roles of Charlie McCreevy and Joe Walsh.

This abject performance from such an important adjunct to the Dáil begs the question whether it should continue to exist. By virtue of its own terms of reference the committee is prevented from commanding ministers to account for themselves in the matter of spending public money.

It cannot query the Government or its policies in that regard yet overspending is one of the responsibilities it is charged with.

In the Punchestown farce, we saw eventually how two ministers contributed €15 million of public money to their favourite charity. That's what it almost amounted to and they did so without impunity.

There are communities all over this country crying out for money to improve services, especially in education and health.

We had the spectacle last December of Education Minister Noel Dempsey warning parents not to protest or highlight the appalling conditions in a national school in Co Donegal which their children had to endure, or it would be put to the bottom of the list for funding.

That arrogance, like that displayed by McCreevy and Walsh, is symptomatic of the contempt to which people are subjected by this Government.