BUSINESS OPINION:Barry Maloney's absence was a reminder of how Denis O'Brien acquired the Esat Digifone licence

IT’S HARD to know what was the real value of the Irish Global Economic Forum which wrapped up in Dublin yesterday. Given that the economy is in effect run by the International Monetary Fund and the European Union, it clearly was not about input into macro economic policy.

What it does seem to have been about – in large part – was spreading the message internationally that Ireland is getting back off its knees and is not some tin-pot republic. The medium for this message is primarily the Irish diaspora and our American friends in particular. You would have to wonder what they made of the decision by one very successful rich and influential Irish businessman not to pitch up to the forum because another very successful, rich and influential businessman had been invited.

Of course, it’s possible they might not have noticed the spat between Barry Maloney and Denis O’Brien. But, assuming they did, what are they to think?

Is it, as some choose to see it, just a continuation of a long-standing squabble between two men who were once very close friends but fell out spectacularly? Or was it a principled stance by someone who cares about standards in public life? Either way, it doesn’t really matter. What does matter is that Maloney has lifted the veil on the vexed issue of how the Government should respond to the findings of the Moriarty tribunal in respect of O’Brien.

On the off-chance you are one of the people in town for the forum and don’t know what I am talking about, I shall recap. Last March, a judicial tribunal found that a former minister for communications, Michael Lowry, “secured the winning” of the 1995 mobile phone licence competition for Denis O’Brien’s Esat Digifone.

The tribunal also found that O’Brien made two payments to Lowry, in 1996 and 1999, totalling approximately £500,000, and supported a loan of Stg£420,000 given to Lowry in 1999.

In his 2,348-page report, Mr Justice Michael Moriarty found that the payments from O’Brien were “demonstrably referable to the acts and conduct of Mr Lowry” during the licence process, acts which benefited Esat Digifone. Maloney, a former colleague of O’Brien’s at Esat, gave evidence to the tribunal that in or around September or October 1996 he had a discussion with O’Brien concerning payments that Maloney, as chief executive of Esat Digifone, was obliged to sanction.

When Maloney commented on the lack of paperwork to enable him to process payments, O’Brien remarked that he himself had to make two payments of £100,000, one of which was to then Fine Gael minister, now Independent TD, Michael Lowry.

Maloney’s evidence was – to say the least – not very helpful to O’Brien, who fought tooth and nail against what he sees as a witch-hunt dressed up as a tribunal. O’Brien has kept a reasonably low profile since the report was published and the ramifications have been quite limited to date.

One suspects a great many people are at best ambivalent about the whole thing. For some, O’Brien’s business achievements, charisma and noted philanthropy balance out what he has described as innuendo on the part of the Moriarty tribunal.

The tribunal’s credibility is also undermined by its astronomical cost and a spectacular own goal when it mistakenly issued a provisional finding about the legality of issuing the licence.

The Government, it would appear, has also taken a rather pragmatic approach to O’Brien.

And why would it not? He is the biggest shareholder in the biggest media organisation in the country and owns a couple of radio stations to boot. Even leaving aside such political calculus, it is well aware of his patriotism and ability to open doors globally, as evidenced this weekend.

There is, of course, the other, more puritan perspective, which is that one of the reasons we find ourselves where we are today is the abandonment of any attempt to adhere to ethical standards in both business and government.

Fixing this deficit is the job of politicians and it requires real leadership. And this is where it gets very tricky indeed.

If – as the Government appears to have done – you take the path of least resistance regarding O’Brien, you are in danger of sending out the signal that the Government considers behaviour described by the Moriarty tribunal to be acceptable. It is hard to square such a stance with the notion the current administration represents a break with the moral ambivalence and double standards of its predecessor.

All in all, it’s a dilemma that any sensible politician would file under “don’t go there”. But Barry Maloney has put paid to that.