Bertie’s political bodyguard gets his timing right for attack on tribunal

THE judicial tribunals came in for some stick this week. There is little doubt that people have been turned off by extravagant costs.

The beef tribunal ended up as little better than a farce in that nobody was held responsible.

The McCracken tribunal did come to some firm conclusions, but nobody has yet been held responsible for the misbehaviour that was exposed. Charlie Haughey was charged with obstructing that tribunal, at which he repeatedly perjured himself, but somehow the courts concluded he could not get a fair trial because he was being investigated for other matters. Thus that courts effectively undermined the work of the tribunal.

Haughey did get caught for a few million in back taxes as a result of what the tribunal had uncovered, but that was only a drop in the ocean of what he should have paid if he had complied with the tax regime that he enforced on the public.

The Moriarty tribunal apportioned responsibility for the wrongs that it uncovered, but the report has been surrounded by a scandalous degree of obfuscation ever since. It came out just before Christmas and the media was stampeded into an instant evaluation, even though it ran to more than 670 pages.

When it suits the authorities they put an embargo on the publication of a document or a speech. If a 24-hour embargo had been put on the release of the report, the media would have been afforded a chance to digest the material before commenting on it.

Of course the evidence had already been published long ago, so all that was really new was Judge Moriarty’s conclusions. But as it was a long time since the evidence was given, it was necessary for reporters and commentators to refresh their memories of the actual evidence.

The judge’s conclusions were worth considering in depth, especially in view of what the report cost the taxpayer. The Dáil should at least have considered the report properly, instead of limiting the debate and preventing questions.

The Government treated the work of the Moriarty tribunal with utter contempt, even though the taxpayer paid a fortune for it. Last week Bertie Ahern announced that he was not answering any more questions about the blank cheques he signed thereby facilitating Haughey’s theft of tens of thousands of pounds, at least. People go to jail every week for stealing less. Haughey was able to launder money through the leader’s fund because Ahern shirked his responsibility to ensure the cheques he signed were for valid purposes. Instead, he signed blank cheques and thereby allowed Haughey to divert money into his own coffers.

Haughey was able to steal money — donated to Fianna Fáil or for Brian Lenihan’s medical expenses — because Ahern did not fulfil his responsibility to find out what he was signing. It was his duty to know, or to find out, but he was guilty of gross dereliction of that duty. “It cost the State a fortune to find me guilty”, he acknowledged dismissively.

He was brazen in stating that he signed “loads” of blank cheques “for all kinds of organisations and clubs for years”.

But he refused to answer any questions about this behaviour. Instead we were presented with grossly understated descriptions of what Judge Moriarty concluded — and the Taoiseach himself agreed — “can only be said to have devalued the quality of a modern democracy”.

For instance, the Taoiseach admitted his own practice of signing blank cheques “was undesirable” while he described the money Haughey stole as “misapplied” by a man who had “failed to live up to high standards”. Could he have downplayed such outrageous behaviour to any greater extent? In fairness to Bertie Ahern, he has not engaged in personal invective during his career, and this has probably served him well.

During this week’s debate, the Progressive Democrats would have been conspicuous by their absence, except that Tánaiste Michael McDowell set about upstaging the Dáil debate by strongly hinting that the Mahon tribunal should be wound up. He thereby diverted the spotlight from the Moriarty report.

NOW there is no doubt people think it is outrageous that lawyers are paid €2,500 for every day, or any part of a day, they serve at the tribunal.

“It seems that over 12,000 orders for discovery have been made by that tribunal against various bodies and institutions and banks”, McDowell told RTÉ on Thursday morning.

“I am aware that one bank has sought in excess of one such order — legal fees amounting to €35,000. Now that puts us in the ballgame of between a third and a half a billion in the discovery process alone”.

This was probably a gross exaggeration. He apparently took the highest figure of which he was aware and multiplied it by 12,000. Indeed, the way he was talking, when all the other costs would be added in, it seemed the ultimate bill of €1 billion might even be an understatement, but therein McDowell overplayed his hand.

When Judge Mahon dismissed the €1 billion figure as a gross exaggeration and said the cost would be only €300 million, this suddenly sounded like a bargain by comparison. Moreover, the tribunal chairman added that the costs would be even lower if those who do not co-operate with the tribunal have to pay their own. It is up to the tribunal to say who pays the costs, so Judge Mahon could become the taxpayers’ hero if he socked it to the prevaricators.

Of course, very few people would disagree with the attempt to cut the daily fees being paid to tribunal lawyers. This is not something the Tánaiste has just discovered. In 2004, Finance Minister Charlie McGreevy introduced a new fee structure scaling fees down from €2,500 a day to €900 a day if the tribunals had not completed their work by set dates, but then, instead of implementing the dates, the Government gave extensions to the lawyers at both the Morris and Moriarty tribunals.

Why were those extensions granted? If the fee cuts came in on schedule at those tribunals, nobody would have been in the least bit suspicious. But the Tánaiste seemed to go out of his way to provoke a confrontation this week. If the lawyers involved had quit over those cuts, they would have had no public sympathy and very, very little political support.

The deadline for the lawyers at the Mahon tribunal, which is approaching, could have been implemented in the same way. But instead the Tánaiste went along with the other extensions and gratuitously provoked a confrontation with members of the Mahon tribunal on the very day that it diverted the spotlight from the report of the Moriarty tribunal.

The whole thing looks not only suspiciously like he was coming to Bertie Ahern’s support when the Taoiseach was under pressure to answer questions not only in relation to the Moriarty tribunal, but also in connection with the upcoming Quarryvale module of the Mahon tribunal at which he is due to testify.

Was this a further naked attempt to ensure the Taoiseach would not have to answer questions?

At the last general election Michael McDowell saved the PDs by persuading voters his party was needed to keep Fianna Fáil honest. But now he seems to have abandoned that election promise; he has sacrificed his own political credibility by acting like a bodyguard instead of the promised watchdog.