Ahern payments - Explanations: a lot done, more to do

IF ever the launch of a party political manifesto was blitzed by a time bomb lobbed from the sideline, it was yesterday’s unveiling of Fianna Fáil’s bid to make it three in a row in government.

Instead of focusing on such issues as the policy U-turn to immediately abolish stamp duty for all first-time buyers, the event was dominated by the thorny question of the Taoiseach’s finances in the mid-1990s. And depending on what side of the political fence the listeners were on, the question has either been resolved or is more confusing than ever.

Under robust questioning from broadcaster Vincent Browne, concerning the stg£30,000 which the Taoiseach received from Manchester-based businessman Michael Wall in 1994, Mr Ahern claimed the money was Mr Wall’s and that it was administered by Celia Larkin, the Taoiseach’s former partner. It was used to refurbish Mr Wall’s house.

The Taoiseach went on to say that it was none of his (Mr Ahern’s) business what an individual did with the money to be spent on his house. He added that questions concerning Mr Wall or Ms Larkin had nothing to do with the Mahon Tribunal.

Pressed on the credibility of an undertaking on his part, to invest a further £50,000 in a three-year-old house, which he planned to rent, and subsequently purchased from Mr Wall, the Taoiseach said the money was not used for refurbishment. Details of his finances had been provided to the tribunal.

While there are inconsistencies in the story-line, at least the Taoiseach has confronted the issue. Having evaded the media for the past week, this is to be welcomed.

It has taken vigorous cross-examination to put a modicum of additional information into the public arena, bringing some degree of clarity to questions which, up to now, have gone unanswered.

Significantly, attempts by Fianna Fáil PR man, PJ Mara, to curtail the Browne line of questioning misfired. Neatly reminding him that the party had stonewalled similar questions about former Taoiseach Charles J Haughey’s finances for years, Mr Browne voiced the hope that the party might have changed.

Surrounded by party political supporters, the Taoiseach was sympathetically applauded at every turn. To date, however, his reaction to questions about his finances has left much to be desired. What the public want, and deserve, is openness and transparency. Not obfuscation.

Yet, confusion continues to surround his earlier reference to ‘stamp duty issues’ in relation to money which he received. Ironically, the only reference to stamp duty in a further outbreak of auction politics was Fianna Fáil’s promise to abolish this iniquitous tax for first time buyers.

Pledges were also given to increase mortgage interest relief for first-time buyers and those who purchased their homes in the last seven years.

On a day when the Labour Party also launched its manifesto for a fair society, the media spotlight was firmly focused on Mr Ahern’s problems. No doubt, yesterday’s performance will bring a measure of relief to worried candidates being grilled on the doorstep about the murky issue of his finances.

Until all the facts have come to light, this controversy will not go away. Mr Ahern is the only person who can make the full and definitive statement that is needed to clear up this matter once and for all.

With the Taoiseach’s protective teflon layer wearing thin, any fresh revelations would be severely damaging to Fianna Fáil’s electoral prospects. When voters go to the polls in three weeks’ time, only then will Mr Ahern learn if he has done enough to rally the party’s flagging fortunes.