Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
IT SAT FOR over 900 days, heard from 400+ witnesses and might cost the taxpayer up to €250m (and the rest) in the final count: the Mahon Tribunal has been a long and costly time coming.
In case you’ve forgotten how we got here from rumblings that first started almost two decades ago, here’s a helpful timeline which marks some of the noteworthy events during that time:
1995 - Former An Taisce chairman Michael Smith and barrister Colm MacEochaidh offered a £10,000 reward for information relating to what they believed was extensive corruption in the rezoning of tracts of land in Dublin.
Whistleblower James Gogarty – retired from JSME (Joseph Murphy Structural Engineers) construction company which he alleged was among those involved in deals with then-government minister Ray Burke – came forward. Developer brothers Michael and Tom Bailey were also part of these deals in north Dublin, he claimed.
June 1997 - Bertie Ahern had become Taoiseach and made Ray Burke Minister for Foreign Affairs. When some questioned the wisdom of the appointment, Bertie asked Dermot Ahern to make enquiries into the Burke allegations. Bertie Ahern said he himself “had looked up every tree in North Dublin”.
September 1997 - Ray Burke, under increased scrutiny and allegations, resigns as minister.
November 1997 - The now retired judge Feargus Flood is brought in to investigate possible corruption in the planning process in the greater Dublin area.
January 1998 – On opening the tribunal, Mr Justice Flood said it would not be possible to know “until the preliminary private investigation is completed” as to whether a full public hearing would be “warranted”. He said, however, that if it was decided to go ahead with public hearings:
I intend to follow the excellent example of the Finlay and McCracken Tribunals which demonstrated that time spent on investigation can pay considerable dividends in terms of keeping the amount of expensive hearing days to a minimum consistent with the Tribunal fully discharging its terms of reference.
July 1998 – It is decided that those public hearings will also oblige the Tribunal to “inquire into the public life of a named former member of the House, Mr. Raphael Burke”.
December 1998 - The Tribunal issued a warning that it was concerned that “confidential information connected with the Tribunal is being deliberately and systematically drip fed to elements of the media” – and that it had made a formal complaint to the gardai on this matter.
January 1999 - Padraig Flynn gives an astonishing interview to Gay Byrne on The Late Late Show about ‘class act’ daughter Beverly Flynn, the expenses involved in running three households and the Flood Tribunal. Of the latter, referring to claims by developer Tom Gilmartin that he had given Flynn a £50,000 donation for Fianna Fáil when Flynn was Environment Minister, he said:
This is all I’ll say. I never asked or took money from anybody to do favours for anybody in my life.
Gavin Sheridan of GavinsBlog and now TheStory and Storyful managed to get a ‘best/worst’ excerpt of the interview:
(put up on Youtube by AssassinorErrandBoy)
March 1999 - George Redmond, a lifelong employee of local authorities in Dublin, is arrested at Dublin airport by Criminal Assets Bureau – he is found to be carrying £300,000 in cash and drafts. His home had been raided by CAB in February and he was hit for a tax bill of over half a million pounds for undeclared offshore bank accounts.
April 2000 - PR man Frank Dunlop makes several revelations to the Tribunal about money he paid to politicians on behalf of developers in return for favourable rezoning decisions in relations to land at Carrickmines. Developer Owen O’Callaghan – who took over the Quarryvale project from Tom Gilmartin in 1992, denied that he knew of any such payments.
January 2001 - Liam Lawlor is jailed for the first time for contempt of court for not co-operating with the Flood Tribunal. He will be jailed briefly twice more by February 2002 for the same reason.
February 2002 – Lawlor defends his position in the Dáil.
26 September 2002 – Second Interim Report, published by Mr Justice Flood, finds that Ray Burke received bribes from various business people, including property developers during the 1970s and 1980s. It also finds that Burke did not buy his home ‘Briargate’ in Swords in “a normal commerical transaction”. There are also findings in relation to Burke’s bid to stifle advertising revenue to RTÉ.
30 September 2002 – The Third Interim Report concerned itself with “the activities of Mr George Redmond, a retired Assistant City and County Manager for Dublin, in the context of his dealings with Mr James Gogarty, Mr Joseph Murphy Snr, Mr Joseph Murphy Jnr and Mr Michael Bailey. As well as damning findings against Redmond in terms of corrupt payments, Bailey, Redmond and Murphy Jnr are found to have “hindered and obstructed the Tribunal”.
June 2003 - Mr Justice Feargus Flood resigns as head of the Tribunal (after 75 months there) and recommends his assistant Judge Alan Mahon as his replacement. Circuit court judges Mary Faherty and Gerald Keys assist the new chair.
November 2003 - George Redmond is convicted on two counts of corruption for accepting a bribe in relation to a right-of-way at Lucan, but the conviction is later found unsafe in July 2004. By then, Redmond had served much of his one-year sentence and so a retrial was not ordered.
March 2004 - Former developer Tom Gilmartin gives evidence to Mahon, alleging that Flynn had taken the £50,000 and also that former minister Ray MacSharry had introduced him to several Cabinet members in relation to the development of a shopping centre. He said Bertie Ahern was one of those people – both Ahern and MacSharry have denied Gilmartin’s claims.
It is during this evidence that Gilmartin mkes the startling claim that a man – whose identity was never revealed – cornered him in a corridor at Leinster House and told Gilmartin he could “end up in the Liffey” for refusing to pay £5m to pave the way for the shopping centre.
April 2004 - The then-senator Mary O’Rourke tells the Tribunal that she remembers Gilmartin meeting some members of the Cabinet in early 1989 when she was Education Minister. She said (see p58 of this transcript) that the meeting was not an “arranged meeting as such” but that Padraig Flynn had knocked on her door and asked her to come across to an office “where there was a man, Mr Thomas Gilmartin who was going to provide thousands of jobs for the Dublin area”. She said that as far as she could remember:
…the following people were in the room Mr Padraig Flynn, Mr Ray Burke, Mr Brian Lenihan, Mr Bertie Ahern and the then Taoiseach Mr Charles Haughey, Mr Thomas Gilmartin.
June 2004 - The Fourth Interim report from the Tribunal – this time under Mahon – is published. It outlines all the new avenues of potential corruption it was investigating and estimates that if it didn’t get more staff, it could take up to 11 years to complete its work…
The Tribunal says that the workload at this investigative phase of these new allegations (which we will later find out include those claims made against Bertie Ahern) is “significantly greater” than the workload involved when the Tribunal was sitting in public. Therefore, it appealed for more resources and staff:
November 2004 - Bertie Ahern is ordered to bring forward all documents relating to any accounts he might have in financial institutions either here or abroad. (This later led to the astonishing claim that Ahern had no bank account between 1987 and 1993. He was a government minister, first for Labour and then for Finance in all of this time.)
February 2005 - Ahern’s affidavit to the Tribunal asserts that he didn’t avail of tax amnesty and had no outstanding tax liability. The Tribunal demands more documentation from him.
January 2005 – Ray Burke serves just over four months in prison for not paying tax on undeclared income. The Flood Tribunal had found that he had been paid this money from backers of Century Radio, which had been awarded a number of radio station and one national station licences.
March 2005 - Liam Lawlor admits that he got £350,000 from beef baron Larry Goodman for the purchase of land at Coolamber but denies that he was in any deal for the rezoning of Carrickmines. Lawlor dies in a car crash in Moscow in October of this year.
June 2006 – Bailey brothers and Bovale Developments come to a settlement of tax owed to the Revenue Commissioners. It’s thought to have come to €25m.
April 2006 - The Tribunal hears that money was lodged in Celia Larkin’s accounts in 1994 – for Ahern. A long tussle continues between the Tribunal and Ahern’s lawyers for full disclosure on all documentation.
July 2006 – The Criminal Assets Bureau stops the sale of lands owned by Jackson Way Properties at Carrickmines due to Dunlop allegations that councillors were bribed to rezone the land.
September 2006 - The Irish Times publishes leaked claims from the Tribunal about ‘digouts’ Ahern allegedly received. Six days later, Ahern told Bryan Dobson in an RTÉ interview that the money had been a loan – although he hadn’t made repayments at the time. Here too, he remembered getting £8,000 from a group of Irish businessmen, collected for him at a dinner in Manchester.
Again, gavinsblog got a grab of the Ahern/Dobson interview up on Youtube – he recalls the “contributions” to help him in his financial situation because of his separation from wife Miriam…
(via gavinsblog/Youtube) If you want to watch Part 2 of the interview (where ‘Paddy the Plasterer’ is mentioned. He appears to get upset just before 3:00.) click here. Part 3 is here.
October 2006 – Ahern makes a statement in the Dáil on the ‘digouts’, apologising to the Irish people for “the bewilderment” caused to them by the payments but insisting he had breached no laws nor code of conduct. In this month, it also emerged that Ahern had bought his house from Micheál Wall, one of his Manchester benefactors. In May 2007, details of a £30,000 payment to Celia Larkin came out – this money was to renovate this house owned by Wall in which Ahern lived and later bought, it was heard.
September-December 2007 - Ahern appears at the Mahon Tribunal where Mr Justice Mahon appears frustrated by “significant gaps” in Ahern’s explanations for his finances.
March 2008 - Grainne Carruth, Bertie Ahern’s former secretary at St Luke’s in Drumcondra, breaks down while giving evidence (click here for the transcript) at the Tribunal and admits that she made sterling lodgements into Irish Permanent Building Society accounts in his names and those of his daughters in 1994.
April 2008 – Padraig Flynn denies that he used part of a £50,000 political donation from Tom Gilmartin to Fianna Fáil in 1990 for personal investments.
May 2008 - Bertie Ahern officially resigns as Taoiseach. He had made the announcement the previous month that he would step down as leader of the country and of the Fianna Fáil party:
It is a matter of real concern to me that the important work of government and party is now being over shadowed by issues relating to me at the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments.The constant barrage of commentary on Tribunal related matters has and I believe will continue to dominate the political agenda at an important point for our country. We face uncertain economic times and challenges and we are soon to cast our vote on the Lisbon Treaty. The vital interests of Ireland demand that the national dialogue of our political system address these fundamental issues and not be constantly deflected by the minutiae of my life, my lifestyle, and my finances.
The decision I am announcing today – like all other decisions that I have taken in a lifetime in politics – is solely motivated by what is best for the people. I have been reflecting on pursuing this course of action for some time. This is solely a personal decision. I have no doubt that a simplistic analysis will suggest that my decision has been influenced by most recent events at the Tribunal. What I announce today is completely inspired by the desire to refocus the political dynamic in Ireland.
June 2008 - On the question of £15,000 sterling lodgements made for him by Gráinne Carruth , Ahern said he won the money on the horses.
October 2008 - Public hearings concluded at the Tribunal.
December 2008 - A Government-published report on tribunals of inquiry in Ireland delves into the cost of the Mahon (alleged planning irregularities and payments); Morris (complaints about certain gardai in Donegal) and Moriarty (alleged payments to politicians and related matters) Tribunals.
The financial cost of the Mahon Tribunal is the responsibility of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The report – using figures up to end December 2007 – figured that while the Tribunal legal teams had so far cost up to €90m in costs excluding future third party costs (the cost of representation for witnesses), those latter costs could be much more significant. It estimated that further third party costs of over €100m were to come.
May 2009 – Frank Dunlop is sentenced to two years in prison for corruption, with the final six months suspended. He is released in July 2010.
March 2012 - Four years on, the Public Accounts Committee said that the cost of the Tribunal could reach up to €250m.
July 2013 - The final chapter of the final report from the Tribunal is published following the collapse of a corruption trial against four former politicians. The chapter had been held back in case it would interfere with the prosecution but after star prosecution witness Frank Dunlop fell ill, the case could not continue.
First published 22 March 2012; Updated 31 July 2013
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Here we go again…if at first they say know…bate it down them til we get our way….assholes! Respect the peoples wishes for once and for all you facists…….
If it is a no vote, they are more than entitled to come back with a better wording. Nothing undemocratic about that and i would hope people had the political maturity to recognise that it would be a different proposal. Their excuse of blaming the presidential election doesn’t make sense, as surely lack of interest would have led to a yes vote.
Different wording, same effect.
The people have spoken!
There’s too much hysteria here. This isn’t Lisbon. This was rejected (by me for one) because it was poorly explained with some potentially worrying things in it. The alternative here is long drawn out tribunals which are just a gravy train for the barristers and never seem to provide What is wrong with improving the legislation and returning to the people? There IS a need for reform.
Des this mean Divorce should still be illegal in Ireland?
Of course that should be ‘no’
A better wording with better safeguards and I’d be happy to change my vote to yes. I’m not against Oireachtas inquiries. I’m simply against the amendment as proposed.
Correct it properly and I’ll happily vote yes and encourage others to do so in the same manner in which I encouraged others to vote no to the amendment rejected on Thursday,
Just like Lisbon. Can’t they for once respect the citizens and democracy
And Nice
When will they learn that not informing the Irish people properly n the face of referenda will blow up in their faces time and time again. Surely a chimpanzee would have learned by now, that the Irish electorate will not be told how to vote, we must be spoken to with clear and logical arguments for and against the referenda and then we will make OUR decision. The failure of this referendum to pass is purely the fault of the ministers arrogance and I think they should have to reimburse the tax payer for the cost of this referendum and it’s sequel out of their own pockets.
When FF sent Nice and Lisbon referendums (a) back to the people for a second time, Brendan Howlin freaked out!!!! Labour have really changed their spots since getting into Government. I feel really let down by them!!!!
Howlin’s turned blueshirt!
Actually Mr Howlin, I think you’ll we’ll be telling you when it’s the end of it
So much for the referendum answer. Seems they will ignore it and force us to vote and vote agian till we say waht they want.
Brendan, maybe we voted no because when we look at the collective calibre of the Oireachtas, past as well as present, we’d rather not entrust such serious responsibilities to a body that leaves a lot to be desired in terms of perceived honesty, integrity and doing what’s right. When you guys start behaving like responsible parliamentarians as opposed to showboating for the preservation of your seats, then we might reconsider. However, you’ve still a long way to go, so don’t be coming back to us anytime soon.
Who elects them? You and me. It’s very easy to blame others for the faults of the system, much harder to look at our own motivations and the effects these have on the system. We had 15 years of ‘what’s in it for me?’ and ‘I’m alright Jack’ – pretty much the same attitude politicians and lawyers get accused of. We get what we deserve.
@donnacha
There are always those for whom the democratic system is only working when their party wins.
@Neil How true! It reminds me of something I read recently.
“When votes are distributed among several candidates.. the sum of the votes received by those who recieved fewer votes might well constitute an overwhelming majority. The candidate with fewer votes wins and his success is regarded as legitimate and democratic. In actual fact, dictatorship is established under the cover of false democracy. This is the reality of the political systems prevailing in the world today. They are dictatorial systems and it is evident that they falsify genuine democracy.” M.Al-Qaddafi
We need the power back in the hands of the people.
@kitalpa That’s the reason we use a PR voting system
Excellent result if this potentially dangerous ammendment is defeated.
Even if it is only an initial skirmish.
This is another government now desperately trying to force its own will on the people… The defeat in this referendum, the anihilation in the presidential election and defeat in Dublin West by election must be a crushing blow to Enda Kennys ego. This Govt gives me the same impression as the last bunch… “We’ll do what we want regardless of what the people want…”
do the ministers not realise the are crap at the jobs they are doing, without turning them into bar room judges too. we have courts to prosecute the guilty. there is no need for ministers to cost the tax payer more by organising nice jobs for those in the big boys club. these tribunals are costing us billions
I voted no because there were insufficient safegaurds in place to prevent abuse of the new powers members of the oireachtas would have gained. If they come back with a better piece of legislation, I will probably vote yes. This is all about lack of quality of the legislation and not about the aim of the legislation. Put some checks and balances in place, and the problem is removed for most people.
Best post I’ve read so far, no hysteria or tabloid style dumbing down! Many people, including the former AG’s, felt this amendment gave too much power to the Oireachtas.
If the Government come back with a differently worded proposal, which contains a provision for appeal to the courts and the checks and balances that Dave refers to, then that is a fundamentally different proposition to put before the people. It’s not the same as Lisbon or Nice because the same proposition was more or less put to the people twice.
I wish they’d get their own house in order before they start telling us where we need reforming. Like they promised during all their election spiel!!
we shouldnt have bothered voting when they wont listen to us. Lisbon all over again
Agree with much of the above. I voted NO to this amendment, would probably vote YES if wording was better. Fully agree that they can ask us again if they re-word it more carefully, but like many others are getting sick of lazy Oireachtas bastards firing out any old shite and getting indignant when we say NO. Will they ever learn….No. They’re politicians. They never, ever learn from anything. I’m reminded of the late Dáihi Ó Conaill’s view on the Dáil…”It’s like a banana. You go in green, turn yellow and end up rotten!”
What give more power to the Healy Rae/Lowrey cartel?, I think not
Even those who opposed this referendum accepted the need for a referendum – just not this particular wording.
All the political parties supported this.
This has absolutely nothing to do with party politics.
I and lots of others I know do not want a referendum and we were against it and glad it was voted down. I wish people would not take it upon themselves to speak for others without their permission but then again they are just the same as the arrogant politicians who think some of those against them are against them because they are somehow incapable of making an intelligent decision.
No they don’t.
You want the Oireachtas to hold the Executive to account? Abolish the damn whip system, let TDs vote as they feel is right, and enhance the separation of powers rather than undermining it.
No means No………….
So Mary then divorce should still be illegal
Given the lack of promotion, discussion and debate regarding the referendum The government cannot be surprised by a no vote, should that be the final result. If nothing else this result will hopefully lead to some positive discussion on the topic. If a viable, effective and just proposal is put on the table and then, crucially, if it is communicated clearly to the Irish public it will be welcomed with open arms. There is an appetite for positive reform not for haphazard change the risks of which are not fully understood
Howlin is an arrogant bollix. LISTEN to the people that put you where you are for once. Enda grow a pair and sort these clowns out.
Here we go again Nice 1 , Lisbon 1 , Dail Kangaroo Courts 1 Stand tall People of Ireland hold the line we won’t let this go to a 2nd referendum vote we have been hood winked to many times Fool me once shame on you fool me twice & believe me with Nice & Lisbon we have! Wake up people
Would it not be more correct to say Mr Shatter that you were planning on the extensive presidential coverage and therefore lack of referendum coverage to slip said referendum into being passed? Very smart move and sly. Politicians are not to be trusted and it is extremely dangerous and frightening to think that you would be given such powers.
‘Politicians are not to be trusted.’ I’m sorry but I have some difficulty with this statement. We should be encouraging our children to see politics and political science as a worthwhile, necessary and essential endeavour. We need to except and insist that the politicians are the duly elected spokespeople of the people. If we feel we cannot trust them, than we need to question our own involvement in the democratic political process and our choices in elections.
Excellent point, Marian. There should be more people interested in politics, not fewer. There should be more people *involved* with politics and informed political discussion, not fewer.
Can’t see a yes vote resulting in ordinary people being hauled before the oireachtas. Thought it
was intended to do away with pricey tribunals and to go after bad bankers not a ruse to launch a modern-day Spanish Inquisition.
Perhaps that is the intentions of this government… but I don’t think I would like to give that sort of power to the several governments that have yet to come.
Please remember that as soon as this piece is passed, it is very unlikely that it will be touched on again for the lifetime of this republic.
The very fact that Brendan Howlin even thinks of sending this back to the people after they have given their answer should ring alarm bells! Do we want democracy or dictatorship? We need badly to stand up to this carry on and stick to our guns. What is the point of having a referendum otherwise? This carry on really annoys me and some people’s attitude really bother me as well. We are not all amadans – we knew exactly what we were doing. The arrogance of these people is frightening and guess what? We can’t trust then not to bring whoever they like before the oireachtas.
Tell us this Donal…if it was passed…would Bren have asked us to vote again…just to be absolutely sure??? I doubt i…
Given the almost complete absense of information and debate on this prior to the referendum, if the government now intend to do a “Lisbon” and say “Oh no you didn’t”, can we now expect a huge amount of debate on the subject in the media, on radio, tv and in the papers? Now wouldn’t it be odd if that were to happen?
By the way Donal – WE GOT IT RIGHT ; Suck It Up!!!!!!
I opposed this as the PAC had lost the run of themselves and had to correct the record of the PAC last week but that was to late for me the result is great news for all of us who had to battle the government on this the people are wise
I WILL never TRUST a POLITICIAN with legal matters or health or education or justice or finance or or or or or or or or or and any referendum they ask us about I WILL ALWAYS VOTE AGAINST IT UNTILL WE CAN GET AN HONEST GOVERNMENT IN TO CARETAKE OUR COUNTRY AND I HAVE YET TO MEET ONE
THEY CAN BRING THIS BACK AGAIN AND AGAIN AND MY VOTE WILL ALWAYS BE NO
anyone can go for election and call themselves politicians the Irish need to take a stand
If the judges have to take a cut in wages why not leave their wages but put in place that they ( the educated) handle the investigations just a thought here at this hour of morning
Whats the point of a Referendum if the Government are going to ignore it. And this is not the first time. So much for your democratic voice.
Howlin is a scumbag – we voted NO, now suck it up and f**k off with your amendment.
@Tony that’s my point we made a balls of Lisbon and nice so we had to do it again so when the people speak in Ireland it doesn’t matter unless they give the right answer, the last Lisbon was passed with the assurance that 12% tax would not change yet we see Enda still trying to protect it (Why’s that) ” fool me once”
The Irish people are thick and that’s why we will have to do it again till we get it right. And we deserve it
Rubbish. People rightly sensed the dangers inherent in writing members of the Oireachtas a blank cheque of power. They have said “back to the drawing board”. A very wise choice in my view.
Speak for yourself Dave and no one else. I don’t remember casting my NO vote as saying ‘go back to the drawing board’. In fact I seem to remember making a very definitive statement that I don’t agree with this amendment, therefore I am voting NO and should the outcome be NO across the rest of the country, that I expect my wishes to be respected in the same way as I would have respected a YES vote had it been the outcome.
I think the ‘Yes’ side substantially benefited from the lack of debate (or lack of coverage), and the distraction of having a presidential election at the same time (and I think they know that).
Shatter seems to be trying to give the impression that this actually worked to their disadvantage.
Next time, there won’t be the distraction of the presidential election, and people will be better informed because of what they’ve learned on this campaign.
So I don’t think they’ll get away with just running the same referendum again.
It then becomes a question of how much they try to get away with (i.e. how little they’ll chance changing it).
People should make their views known – that they will reject anything which only partly addresses the problem. (Otherwise, the ‘Yes’ side may deliberately give us another bad referendum, and use the argument that people should vote for it to save the state the cost of another referendum and the delay involved).
I voted no but would vote yes with an improved wording. All the naysayers obviously still want divorce banned in Ireland.
If this poorly worded rubbish is stuffed back in our faces the whole country should march on the dáil and give these deaf wasters our answer! Bertie told us we got it wrong and we had but only by voting in thieves and political scum like fianna fail.
have your say