news_report1.pdf

The Temerity of the Taoiseach

As a student of the fourth estate it is my responsibility to have my personal and professional motives well aligned within the ethical lines of my vocation. What am I doing, and why. In particular I try to adhere to the National Union of Journalist’s guidelines. For some Solomon reason I must, attempt at least, to view all sides of a story with impartiality; thus my own writings on the Tribunal should reflect this same equivocal neutrality.As this is a blog, however, and bounded only by my imagination, I hereby enact the ‘I’ll Say What I Want Protocol’. I may, herein, rove in whatever fashion I so please.There are times as I sit and watch the Taoiseach, answering questions about his finances in the 90s, when I am enraged. Our glorious leader, our honest John, Our Bertie, blurting out unbelievable blurb. Sometimes I seeth at the temerity of his testimony. His marriage left him broke. Without a farthing. Yet he had 54 grand. He knew nothing about a dig-out before it happened, yet he opened a Special Savings Account two weeks prior, if a forged receipt is any evidence. In such dire financial straights, was it prudent, or indeed ethical, of AIB to lend him an unsecured loan and not charge him interest on it for 18 months. Was it appropriate, that as Taoiseach he was receiving checks from Wildover Ltd. Or that the shelf company, received and distributed, large sums of money, administered by Des Richardson. And a thousand other questions. The real question is how long will Bertie continue to mislead the Tribunal. He misled the Tribunal for one and a half years concerning the sterling sums he received. He misled the country when interviewed by Brian Dobson in September 2006, when he teared-up over his marital separation; a dig-out from friends he blubbed. He misled the electorate when he proclaimed all would be made clear when he appeared in September 2007. In that month, he weaved a

miscellaneous patchwork of memory lapses, half-truths and excuses.Now here I stew. We’ve been hoodwinked. We’ve been bamboozled. We’ve been had. There was no goddamned dig-out. No whip-around. No Goddamned chance.The Times, ‘Dig outs queried’ reported likewiseNone of the Manchester posse, could provide any evidence of having given Bertie the alleged monies. Is it really likely that every single contributor at that fabled dinner had taken a thousand in petty cash from their respective businesses and not a docket, not a receipt, not a tag or a credit note, not a sausage remains? How far does the public’s credulity stretch. In a democracy, is it just to permit the sovereignty of one powerful individual, burdened with the rulership of our state, to reign supreme without censure or recourse. Or is there another reason for his continued erosion of the public’s faith in government. Could it be that you just don’t care anymore? Could it be that you are merely one individual in a nation of millions. One particle in the universe without power or gravitas. One cell in the body politic with no say in where you go. A body weakened with the cancerous cells of corruption. Perhaps there is no such thing as democracy. But forget about all that. Let’s get back to the facts. A Tribunal is a body of state. And if a witness willfully misleads or conceals facts from the Tribunal, it is a crime. Prosecutable by the High Court. Has Mr. Ahern willfully misled the Tribunal? My opinion, is yes, perhaps more, perhaps less than any other before it. All human life is here, Gilmartin, the embittered land developer, a political system undermined by the powerful lobby of private sector land development ,and TDs in our government. Manchester businessmen ‘in the circle’. Public representatives from across the Irish political spectrum implicated in countless double-deals and goings on. And it’s been going on for 10 years. Why aren’t there demonstrations? Oh, that’s easy, Christmas is coming and the goose is getting fat.

Bertie’s Special Savings Account

Today the Taoiseach was presented with a photocopy of a form he signed to open a special savings account in December of 1993.The form was one of many provided to the court by Allied Irish Banks complying with an Order for Discovery from the Mahon Tribunal.The Tribunal’s inquiries then focused on a date which had been altered on the form. Forensic analysis confirmed “There is strong evidence that the original date on the AIB bank form read “14th of December 1993″.The exchanges between the Tribunal’s lawyer, Des O’Neill SC and the Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern became heated with the Taoiseach saying: “it’s none of your damn business.” When quizzed about a myriad of unaccounted for transactions. When confronted with a falsified SSA account containing his signature. Mr. Ahern contested this by calling for his diary entries for the 14th of Decemberr 1993 to be reproduced on-screen (clearly a planned defense on his part). The Taoiseach’s day was full. O’Neill goes through the official diary, created by his secretary, for December 14th 1993. He had a government meeting from 11:30 ’till lunch. He met Paul Tansey, a journalist, for lunch in The Davenport Hotel. 14:30 Taoiseach’s questions. Seamus Brennan, who was the the Chairman of a task force on Small Business. He met, among others that day, Sean Healy at 15:00, Liam Murphy @ 15:45, the Dail, etc. Hardly room for Mr. Burns or Mr. Murphy from AIB. Though O’Neill did stress on several occasions that the Taoiseach need not necessarily attend each occasion throughout. The Taoiseach blustered: “But I can tell you, I wasn’t in the bank, and I wasn’t.Bertie Ahern didn’t sign it on that date because I couldn’t have been.” It seemed a strange lapse, that the Taoiseach refer to himself in the third person. And vaguely facinating.

A Tribunal of Inquiry

It is an arm of state, granted legal status, by an Act of Parliament in 1921. During the war for Independence English legal sovereignty extended to the second city of its empire. The act which consolidated about 30 others on Inquiries provided for a Tribunal to investigate “matters of urgent public importance”.Being a statutory body, equal to the High Court, it has the power to enforce the attendance of witnesses on oath, and to attain documents from any source. The Act could also find a witness guilty of contempt for not complying with its orders. The Tribunal must also be administered in public, except where it judged it necessary to be in private.As was the case when Bertie, made his first appearance at the Tribunal.The maintenance of this privacy was another matter. Certain details from the Irish leader’s statement, were made public in September 2006, they featured his explanations about sums of money that he received in the mid-90s, he was subsequently cross-examined in public. I attended all of those appearances; save 2 hours when I was in college for ‘newsday’.

credit to photograpr

credit to photographer

Mr. Ahern’s comments were dissembling and obstructive, to the Tribunal’s inquiry. We heard how his legal team delayed repeatedly over a long period in replying to the Tribunal’s communications. We heard the Taoiseach give conflicting evidence concerning the money he received in 94 and 95.By the time his sessions had concluded, he had changed his recollections concerning certain monies he had recieved several times.However, as the Tribunal’s terms of referance state, that it can impose no sentence nor administer any punishment, being essentially a fact finding excercise reporting to the government.That said, if revelations continue as thick and fast as they did this week about Bertie’s ‘manchester dig-out’ then the court of public support may continue its deterioration. Bertie’s supposed ‘friends’ seem to be few and far between.