Taoiseach tells of shock at suggestion he dealt in dollars

A suggestion by the Mahon tribunal that Mr Ahern had lodged $45,000 into his accounts came as a total shock, the Taoiseach said yesterday.

Mr Ahern said the suggestion, first made at a private interview with tribunal lawyers last April, was a complete surprise.

"I never dealt in dollars. I didn't exchange any dollars, I received no dollars and there was no dollars," he told his counsel, Conor Maguire, yesterday.

The tribunal believes a lodgement of £28,772.90 in December 1994 equates exactly to $45,000, but Mr Ahern has vehemently denied this.

He pointed out that no documents had been produced to show that the money had been lodged in the form of dollars.

Mr Ahern said the allegation was first made a few weeks before the general election and became a major issue in the campaign for a period.

The transcript of the private hearing had been circulated before the election and there was an implication in it and the opening statement of the current module that the source of the lodgement was dollars.

"At no time did I receive from [Manchester-based businessman] Michael Wall or did I give Celia Larkin dollars. In everything I have read since, I see absolutely no reference to the fact that there is dollars."

Mr Ahern told his counsel he had no banking expertise and had engaged his own expert, Paddy Stronge, to advise on these matters. Like everyone else, he was dependent on the evidence given by his bank, AIB, and its staff in relation to the make-up of the transactions under scrutiny.

He agreed with Mr Maguire that the rate used by the bank to calculate the exchange of dollars into punts would give a figure of $45,011.70, not $45,000, as the tribunal claimed. The extra $11.70 could not have been remitted to the bank's current exchange department.

Mr Maguire continued: "We are left with the situation where if you are to use the multiplier which the tribunal assumes was used, first of all there is no evidence that that was the rate on the day. Secondly, it could only be a special remit rate, isn't that so?"

"That's as I understand," Mr Ahern replied. If there was a special remit rate the customer would get the benefit of it and the branch would take no profit. However, there couldn't have been a special remit rate because the figures didn't match.

Mr Ahern has now finished giving evidence in this phase of the inquiry. However, he is likely to be recalled to give further evidence in other modules.