Dunlop tells Flood tribunal of bribes for land rezoning

The Flood tribunal has heard that Mr Liam Lawlor provided the wording for a motion submitted to Dublin County Council to rezone land in which he had an interest.

Former Government press secretary Mr Frank Dunlop also told the tribunal that Mr Lawlor tacitly approved of two separate bribes of £3,000 he made to councillors to secure their signatures for the motion.

The motion in question was submitted to Dublin County Council in May 1992. It called for 108 acres of land in Carrickmines, owned by Paisley Park Investments, to be rezoned "to provide high-quality job creation use for South County Dublin".

Mr Dunlop said he personally drafted the motion - but did so in conjunction with Mr Lawlor.

Mr Dunlop earlier told the tribunal he had been informed by businessman Mr Jim Kennedy - who held the main interest in Paisley Park - that Mr Lawlor had a stake in the lands. He said Mr Kennedy told him he had advised Mr Lawlor to register this stake offshore, and that this was subsequently done in Liechtenstein.

Mr Dunlop said he never discussed this interest with Mr Lawlor. "It was none of my business," he said.

The motion was then signed and seconded by Fianna Fáil Senator Don Lydon and the late Fine Gael councillor Mr Tom Hand.

Mr Dunlop told the tribunal he paid these two men £3,000 each from money given to him by Mr Kennedy to secure councillors' support for the rezoning.

He said Mr Hand had initially demanded £10,000. "I told him 'no way'", Mr Dunlop said, and they eventually settled on £3,000. This was handed over in cash in the lobby of the Dublin County Council offices. It was not even in an envelope, Mr Dunlop said.

Mr Lydon had asked for £5,000, but he eventually paid him "a bundle of money" totalling £3,000, Mr Dunlop told the inquiry.

When asked by Mr John Gallagher, SC for the tribunal, if he would consider the payments to be bribes, Mr Dunlop said: "There are no words other than those used to describe it".

Mr Dunlop claimed he told Mr Lawlor of these payments, and that Mr Lawlor had "an ongoing appreciation" that they were bribes. "He wasn't surprised . . . he was just happy that the motion had been signed".