Month: December 2007

The web weaved by Ahern is unweaving.

Some things from evidence did not make it into the newspapers, yet again. This is usually for lack of space, but fortunately there is no limit on space here on the internet, so we can pour of the details here. I can understand why only certain sections of evidence makes it in, but there are other parts that strike me when I read transcripts.

As part of an effort to detail these, and indeed the broader context I have moved the Bertie Ahern wiki, and broadened it into the Mahon Tribunal wiki, at www.mahontribunal.com. Clearly it is still a work in progress, and will take time to get organised, but providing a narrative of events and details of evidence I believe to be crucial.

So, to the two issues that struck me from the evidence of Dermot Carew.

1. His memory. Carew was asked whether Ahern ever contacted him in relation to the digout, after the Tribunal first contacted Ahern about it in June, 2005.

Carew “can’t remember” if Ahern contacted him (Q329). Ahern “could” have contacted him, but he “can’t remember it”. “I’m not sure.”

Counsel then pushed him, repeatedly asking him if Ahern had contacted him. Carew never says no, just that he can’t remember the events of last year.

Q335: What is your first memory of this matter being raised in the context of the Tribunal’s inquiries with you?

A: It was actually when Bert actually giving back the cheques.

Q336: When he gave you back the cheque?

A: Yeah just before that or sometime around then that the —

Q337: Well in fact the Tribunal, as you know, have been in touch with you on the 29th of June of 2006, in correspondence.

A: Yeah.

Q338: The cheque wasn’t sent back for another three and a half months?

A: Yeah.

Q339: So you were contacted by the Tribunal and asked to give an account as to how this money had come to be given to Mr Ahern, isn’t that so?

A: That’s correct, yeah.

Q340: Yes. And we saw how you gave your response in July.

A: That’s correct.

Q342: Did you discuss with Mr Ahern or any of the other contributors in June or July or at any time after that?

A: Discuss which now?

Q343: Discuss the payment of the monies that constitute what’s called the second goodwill loan, or whip-round for Mr Ahern?

A: I would have discussed it with the lads, yeah.

Q344: Fine. And did you discuss it with Mr Ahern?

A: I could have, I’m not a hundred percent sure.

Q345. Yes. We’re now talking about 2006, we’re only talking about last year Mr Carew.

A: That’s — yeah, yeah.

Q346: This is a unique event. It was now the subject of correspondence from the Tribunal with you. I’m asking you to throw your mind back now, as accurately as you can and indicate whether or not you did discuss the matter with Mr Ahern in 2006?

A: And as I said to you before I’m not sure.

Q347: You’re not sure?

A: No

Q348: You’ve no memory at all?

A: Oh I have memory all right but —

Q349: You have no memory of discussing this payment and your involvement —

A: Yeah

Q350: — in the payment with Mr Ahern, is that right?

A: What I’m saying is I can’t recollect actually I’m not sure. I could have and I may have. I’m not sure.

Q351: I see.

A: Now I’m going to help you as much as possible, but if I can’t remember something I can’t remember it.

Why the pushing? The Tribunal wants to know whether Ahern made contact with his friends, because on the face of it, the Tribunal does not believe the story. They seem to believe that Ahern made up the story, and asked his friends to back up the story of the £16,500 digout. The Tribunal seems to believe it is far more likely that there was a £25,000stg lodgment.

Now, the second and even stranger event, that occurred only recently. It actually could be an innocent mistake, or could lead the Tribunal to further believe that the £16,500 loan was fictitious.

Dermot Carew claims he paid £4,500 to Ahern in 1994. After the Dobson interview, Ahern said he was paying back the money with interest. But there seems to have been a fuck up.

Mr Carew acknowledges receipt of €6,349 and €3,917 in interest. He signed this receipt in Ahern’s office, it was a prepared receipt. But that calculation is wrong. That amount equates to Carew getting £5,000 back plus interest, not the £4,500 he says he gave.

Barry English, who says he gave £5,000 to the digout, only received £4,500 plus interest back last year.

Q420: … in addition to making the wrong payment to you, the wrong payment was also made to Mr English. Mr English received back £4,500 though he gave five. You received back £5,000 though you gave four and a half?

Was it a fuck up because of an oversight, or was it a fuck up because there was no £16,500 digout, and they got their lying story mixed up and repaid the wrong amount back to English and Carew last year?

Ahern’s story of being stuck for cash in 1994 continues to crumble. The Tribunal does, I believe, think the £16,500 and the £8,000 payments to be non-existent. The £25,000 stg equivalent is just too much of a coincidence.

The Irish Times seems to have got their sums wrong too, or at least they are forgetting some of the cash. Colm Keena writes:

The Taoiseach Bertie Ahern had £70,000 on deposit when he accepted a cash contribution of £16,500 from four supporters in September 1994, the Mahon tribunal heard yesterday.

Technically correct. But as far as I can tell there was the other £20,000 in the name of his daughters, which was from his alleged cash savings. So to be clear the lodgments and savings as far as I can gather were:

December 1993, £22,500 lodged to SSA
April 1994, SSA topped with £30,000, remainder going to current
August 1994, Daughter lodgment, £20,000
PTSB account, £20,000

Addition of the 16,500 + 8,000 (£24,838.49) or 25,000 stg

Total: £117,338.49.

And still he couldn’t afford a house, despite being able to get an unsecured loan from AIB for almost £20,000 just nine months earlier. Why did the bank not need security? “He was the Minister for Finance,” said AIB.

It has probably been forgotten that during his tenure as Minister for Labour, Bertie Ahern introduced the following Bill:

PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1991

The Act, it appears, was badly needed as a replacement to the Truck Acts. But what the Minister for Labour said is very interesting. Especially for a man who says he was cashing all his cheques and who appears to have only dealt in cash between 1986 and 1993 at least, and saved £50,000 cash in those years. On May 23, 1991, Ahern said:

My own interest in the Truck Acts is of more recent origin, prompted by a variety of modern-day concerns about effective and cost-efficient methods of wage payments. Throughout Europe, there has been a clear move away from cash wages. Of the countries where figures are available, Denmark appears to have the highest level of non-cash wage payment, with 95 per cent of employees paid otherwise than in cash. Some other European countries, including Spain, Belgium, and the former West Germany, all report levels of non-cash wage payment in the range 75 per cent to 90 per cent. In the United Kingdom, the percentage of employees paid wages, otherwise than in cash, is around 65 per cent. Ireland is at the bottom of the league. An FIE survey some years ago showed that just under half of all employees in this country were paid by a mode other than cash.

Or:

The Bill will facilitate the movement from cash to cashless pay which has advantages for employers and employees alike. For employees there are advantages in being paid through a bank account, through having less cash at risk of theft or loss and in having access to other services, such as a facility to pay bills by cheque or standing order, etc. For employers there are considerable savings arising from administrative efficiencies. Staff are not longer needed to make up [79] pay packets and security and insurance requirements are diminished.

Some employee interests have suggested that the Bill should include a right for employees to time-off for the cashing of cheques. I think this is an issue best left for discussion and arrangement between employer and employees at local level, depending on the circumstances, like the location of individual firms the distance to travel and local services. The prospective savings of a move to cashless pay may encourage some employers to offer other incentives to their employees to opt for a change-over to some form of cashless pay. Initiatives by employers, in co-operation perhaps with banks and other financial institutions and in consultation with their employees and their unions, could in my view go a long way towards providing the necessary momentum for change.

But Ahern never did what he lauds in the Bill, which was enacted in July 1991. No, he would cash his cheques. Every one. For seven years at least. What on earth was he doing that for?

Or this gem from 1999, Bruton versus Ahern concerning the Gilmartin allegations:

Mr. J. Bruton: The Taoiseach said last night he regarded some contributions made to parties and politicians as appropriate and others as inappropriate. From what he knows about it, does the Taoiseach think the contribution made by Mr. Gilmartin to Mr. Flynn was appropriate or inappropriate?

The Taoiseach Bertie Ahern

The Taoiseach: I have no information on whether the contribution was actually given but as I have said previously in this House if people take contributions of £30,000, £40,000 or £50,000 it is very hard to explain and for that reason I do not think people should do that. Contributions of that order cannot ever be explained to the ordinary man or woman in the street. For that reason I do not think they are appropriate.

Mr. J. Bruton Mr. J. Bruton

Mr. J. Bruton: Was the Taoiseach shocked when he heard of this allegation?

The Taoiseach Bertie Ahern

The Taoiseach: Yes.

Shocked? No way. Ahern was well used to contributions of this scale.

I established a group on Facebook calling for Bertie Ahern to resign. Much to my surprise, membership has increased quickly, rising to nearly 200 in two days. 1,000 members now looks entirely possible. Go join, if you agree.

Does anyone have a copy of Pee Flynn and his infamous Late Late interview? I’d love to see it up on YouTube…