Banking inquiry - Video-link issue could be final nail

THERE are growing perceptions that the banking inquiry is a dead duck. From its inception, the probe by politicians, most of whom lack financial expertise, has been viewed by the public with jaundiced eyes. 

Almost without exception, the star performers, including former political leaders, greedy bankers, financial regulators, and civil servants, have wrung their hands in an exasperating blend of guilt-cum-apology, then walked into the sunset with gold-bar pensions intact.

In no way have they been subjected to the kind of forensic grilling that might be expected to unearth the form of evidence that might justify a probe.

Yet another nail has been driven in the coffin by the refusal of economist Morgan Kelly to attend its hearings because he believes it would be a waste of time. Coming from one of the few commentators who predicted the country was on course for a financial crisis of potentially disastrous proportions, these views ought to carry some weight. They should certainly not be ignored now, as they were then.

Meanwhile, a key issue to be resolved is whether the inquiry should take evidence by video link from former Anglo Irish boss David Drumm in the US. His brand of management contributed in no small way to landing the country — especially the hapless taxpayer — in a mess which resulted in personal suffering on an appalling scale.

However, according to a leaked version of his written submission to the inquiry, while the ex-chief executive is prepared to accept responsibility for his role as boss of the ill-fated bank and to acknowledge the difficulties suffered as a result of the banking crisis by both Anglo staff and the public, he apparently believes the bank has come in for an unfair share of blame for the economic crash.

Crucially, the video question will probably turn on the revelation that his evidence would contradict what the former Fianna Fáil taoiseach Brian Cowen told the committee earlier this month. The alleged contradiction goes to the heart of the veracity or otherwise of Mr Cowen’s evidence, regarding a dinner he attended with board members of the bank on April 24, 2008. According to Cowen, no business was discussed, as the occasion was purely social.

Opinion is deeply divided on the matter of Drumm giving evidence by video. For obvious reasons, many would like to hear what he has to say, most of all perhaps the Fine Gael- Labour coalition government, which belatedly launched the probe, which from the outset had the trappings of a highly politicised inquiry timed to boost their electoral prospects.

On the other hand, many feel there should be no facilitation of Drumm, who is the subject of extradition proceedings from the US for questioning by the gardaí on Anglo Irish.

A pro-video-link decision threatens to bring down the inquiry, as some members have threatened to walk away if that occurred. Following an appeal by inquiry chairman Ciaran Lynch for members to leave their club jerseys at the door, it will be interesting to see what happens. One way or another, tomorrow will show the true political colours of this inquiry.