Bertie Ahern's studied obfuscation yesterday of questions concerning corruption and Fianna Fáil is merely a continuation of a practised strategy of avoiding obvious questions. Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin touched on the crucial issue. Predictably, he got nowhere, writes Vincent Browne.
But the defiant refusal of Bertie Ahern to meet even an elementary requirement as custodian of his party's interests, imprints on the face of Fianna Fáil the mark of corruption. For at least six years Bertie Ahern has known that monies intended for his party have been withheld and, instead of seeking a return of those monies and an evaluation of the scale of the withholding, he has fudged, prevaricated and dodged, lest dislodging that stone uncover further sleaze.
It is not commentators nor political foes that have branded Fianna Fáil with corruption but Bertie Ahern and those in positions of leadership in the party who collaborated in this dereliction of basic duty of care.
In 1996 Bertie Ahern "discovered" that, seven years previously, the developer Mark Kavanagh had made a contribution to Fianna Fáil that was not receipted, as a consequence of which Mr Kavanagh had been disinclined to make a further contribution. Bertie Ahern was informed that a receipt, acknowledging a donation of £25,000, was forwarded to the then Taoiseach's office (Charlie Haughey was in power then) but never forwarded to Mr Kavanagh.
Instead of making the sort of enquiries a junior accountancy clerk might have made about the size of the contribution, who knew about it at the time, and why the receipt had not been sent, Bertie Ahern asked no questions at all. Had he done so, he would have discovered, if he did not otherwise know, that the size of the contribution was £100,000, and that £75,000 had not been passed over to the party.
When he personally met Mr Kavanagh he still failed, he says, to ask the basic question - what was the size of the contribution? - and we are asked to believe that, in the course of an angry exchange (or so Bertie claimed), Mr Kavanagh never mentioned the scale of the contribution.
Then there were the payments to Ray Burke. The Fianna Fáil head-office knew in 1989 that he had got £30,000 from Tony O'Reilly's Fitzwilton (processed through a subsidiary company, Rennicks, and, incidentally, concealed in the Fitzwilton accounts), of which only £10,000 was passed over to the party.
Then it emerged that Mr Burke had got another £30,000 from JMSE before the June 1989 election, and £35,000 from Oliver Barry, part of which was also intended for the party.
Mr Burke has claimed that he has £100,000-plus in an escrow account, awaiting a final decision (by him) on whether to pass this over to Fianna Fáil. And what does the person with chief responsibility for husbanding the financial resources of the party do, knowing that a former senior member is withholding the payment over to the party of such a significant amount? Nothing.
It has emerged that some of the funds paid to the then party leader (Charles Haughey) over several years were used for purposes that seem to have been incidental to the party's projects. What does he do about this? Does he even ask for the funds to be repaid, or even an evaluation undertaken of the scale of the funds involved? You've guessed.
And with the £50,000 given in 1989 by Tom Gilmartin to Padraig Flynn; £50,000 that Tom Gilmartin says he intended for Fianna Fáil. What was done? A letter by the party general secretary to Mr Flynn and then nothing, awaiting the outcome of the planning tribunal.
It is well known within the party that there were serious concerns during the 1987 and 1989 election campaigns that funds intended for the party were given to senior figures in the party that never reached the party coffers.
The following party figures had and have information concerning this: Pat Farrell, the former party general secretary, Sean Sherwin of head-office, and Paul Kavanagh, the fundraiser for the party during those elections. Has Bertie Ahern ever asked these to do a report on what they know or suspect about missing funds? Has he ever asked anybody to conduct an inquiry on his behalf about such funds? Never.
It is likely that some hundreds of thousands of euro (certainly over half a million) intended for Fianna Fáil, were withheld at one stage or another over those years, and the person responsible for looking after the interests of the party has been scared to lift a finger to find out what has been involved.
He said in the Dáil yesterday they were going to wait until the end of the planning tribunal and then would take appropriate action. Meanwhile the party continues to be denied funds intended for it. Would the treasurer of a tennis club behave in such a cavalier manner?
Surely it's reasonable to speculate the reason for the failure of such inquiry and demand for restitution appears to be an apprehension that more corruption would be uncovered, and that such corruption might involve a person or persons now in senior positions?