Charlie left centre stage as tribunals bring the curtains down

As the committees in here wind up until September, it seems appropriate that Charles J

As the committees in here wind up until September, it seems appropriate that Charles J. Haughey should be left to dominate the public stage.

Like the ghost of Banquo, his legend and legacy have haunted this Government. The man first made a minister 40 years ago was now to take his final bow in the witness-box before a tribunal established to examine his financial affairs.

Drapier became convinced for the first time that our most famous senior citizen was finally in a tight corner when Vin cent Browne, fresh from Jerusalem, began to evince admiration for the man and his unorthodox banking techniques. Mr Browne is also wrong in claiming that this is Mr Haughey's second tribunal - it is his third. He made what can only be described as a celebrity appearance before the beef tribunal.

Having strutted his stuff in the courtyard for the photographers, he swaggered into the chamber to exchange banter with Mr Justice Liam Hamilton; if only he had pursued the law he might well be in the learned judge's position and the learned judge thought that if only he had persisted in the political arena he might well have been in Mr Haughey's position.

READ MORE

His government had conferred enormous advantages on Goodman International but there was no intrusive or undignified questioning to establish if Mr Haughey ever got anything in return. There were certainly no orders for discovery into bank accounts, instruments used to such effect by subsequent tribunals.

In so far as financial contributions to political parties were examined the tribunal found them to be "normal". This was a piece of jurisprudence that must have been a comfort to Frank Dunlop and others at the time.

One of the more remarkable developments of the week is the manner in which the business of today's two tribunals at Dublin Castle seemed to overlap as the dramatis personae for both so resemble each other.

Indeed, there was an intriguing little epiphany of the common cast at a wedding hosted by the Boss at the manor. Stars of both tribunals dutifully answered the summons to Kinsealy where networking and nuptials went hand in glove.

Drapier can't help recalling what happened in the Dail after Ray Burke's initial defenestration. The Opposition demanded that the Burke allegations be added to the preliminary stage of the Moriarty terms of reference. Mary Harney, who knew then more about the Burke affair than she admitted, made common cause with Bertie Ahern - who knew more than he admitted to even Dermot Ahern - in voting down the Opposition demand.

Why did they so determinedly resist such a restrained demand from the Opposition but subsequently agreed to a separate tribunal to examine the Burke allegations and related matters?

Was it an attempt to disconnect Burke, a serving member of the Ahern Cabinet, from the Haughey era? The PDs could sleep more easily in their beds and hopefully no connection would be made between Haughey and Burke and by extension to Bertie?

The naming of former government press secretary and Haughey confidante P.J. Mara in connection with allegations he may yet rebut is especially discomfiting. Mara was not just a Haughey confidante but he is a Bertie confidante and the 1997 director of elections.

Mary Harney has sought to ring-fence the tribunals to Fianna Fail of yesteryear. Mara has sounder claims than most to being the architect of the present Government, and Burke was a member of Ahern's Cabinet.

After the tribunals are up and running, it emerges that someone sitting at the Cabinet table with Mary Harney deliberately leaks a Cabinet decision before it is even recorded about superstores to a client of another former government press secretary, Frank Dunlop.

As a result the decision is changed following lobbying by a major donor to Fianna Fail.

Vincent Browne will surely point out to Mary Harney that Mr Haughey is not to blame for this disgraceful abuse of Cabinet office. This is the present Government using the time-honoured Fianna Fail inside track and the sometimes impetuous Tanaiste has nothing to say.

Impetuosity would also seem to be a common characteristic of our more famous business tycoons. Ben Dunne, struck by Haughey's low spirits, happens to find three bank drafts in his pocket and impulsively thrusts them at the great man to cheer him up. Michael Smurfit is similarly moved "on the spur of the moment" to present Haughey as President of all the Europeans with a Jack B. Yeats picture then worth £55,000.

Why was Mr Haughey singled out for such recognition? Was Liam Cosgrave or Jack Lynch or John Bruton ever similarly honoured? Meanwhile, Dr Smurfit is saddened that £60,000 intended for Fianna Fail never got to Mount Street but he can't recall why it was dispatched by so circuitous a route.

Memory of the last McCreevy Budget is not likely to desert Peter Cassells or his trade union comrades. While all the rhetoric is about reviewing the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness, the real agenda is about the next Budget.

Inflation now palpable in the supermarkets, petrol stations and pubs has caught out the trade union bosses. They don't want to unravel the agreement and the Budget is their only chance of holding the line. If Charlie McCreevy gets off the leash again, the Government can wave the PPF farewell.

Dermot Quigley, chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, is also fighting to hold the line. Notwithstanding the unprecedented tax yield, Mr Quigley conceded that public confidence in the fairness of the Revenue has been diminished given the backdrop of tribunals and other investigations, including DIRT.

This is a more credible position than his earlier response to the DIRT report where he seemed to cherry-pick the findings and acknowledge no lapse on the part of Revenue.