Indecision a sign of poor judgement - Banking inquiry

THERE can be absolutely no doubt that an already questionable banking inquiry would have become a laughing stock in the eyes of the public if former Anglo Irish Bank chief executive David Drumm was allowed to tell his account, on his terms, by video link from the US, of its role in the country’s economic crash. As it turns out, both the inquiry’s own legal team and the Director of Public Prosecutions have advised it strongly against hearing his evidence.

This leaves the members with no option at today’s meeting other than to reject Drumm’s self-serving offer to address them by video, an initiative aptly described as wickedly devious and extremely clever. Ironically, this turn of events has effectively prevented the inquiry from interviewing any senior Anglo executive. It also vindicates the stance taken by two members of the inquiry who threatened to walk away from the hearings if the ex-Anglo chief was facilitated in addressing Wednesday’s session of the inquiry.

Their gut instinct was the right one and contrasts starkly with the noncommittal position of other members amid a flurry of political manoeuvring. It means embattled Fianna Fáil can breathe a rare sigh of relief because the former banker will not be seen to contradict ex-taoiseach Brian Cowen’s denial of lobbying by Anglo board members.

With the gardaí engaged in criminal extradition proceedings against him, if his request to address the committee on Wednesday were facilitated, it would have placed both the DPP and Justice Minister Frances Fitzgerald in an invidious position and made a mockery of the garda bid to bring Drumm back to Ireland for questioning. Indeed, the committee was left in no doubt as to the gravity of the unfolding situation when the DPP told them of her deep concerns and informed them that if further action became necessary, she reserved the right to make an application to stop the inquiry proceeding with the ex-banker’s evidence if it came to that.

The very fact that the DPP had to give such a warning reflects the committee’s failure so far to make any decision on the Drumm offer. Furthermore, it also serves to illustrate the sense of ambiguity created by the somewhat evasive and unrevealing attitude of the committee on the vexed issue of the video link. With notable exception of the two potential defectors, this calls into question the collective judgement of members of the banking inquiry.

Independent TD Shane Ross hit the nail on the head yesterday in describing the inquiry as political theatre and a political spat. He also accused Drumm of “putting his two fingers up at the committee”, adding he may yet have the last laugh from his safe sanctuary in the US. That appalling vista makes it imperative that the gardaí leave no stone unturned in their efforts to have him extradited for questioning here in Ireland. Should they succeed — and if there is any justice they will — it will be interesting to hear what he has to say under more forensic questioning in a garda station or in an Irish court of law than has been witnessed thus far at the bank inquiry about his role in Anglo Irish Bank and its role in bringing about Ireland’s crippling economic collapse.