Haughey can't recall how island deal was funded

The early 1970s were, as Mr Charles Haughey has put it himself, his years in the political wilderness

The early 1970s were, as Mr Charles Haughey has put it himself, his years in the political wilderness. He was living on a large estate, his only income was that of a TD, and he was building up a huge overdraft with AIB.

Yet, in 1973, he chose to buy the island of Inishvickillane, Co Kerry, for £20,000. He could not remember yesterday how the purchase was funded, although he thought a cheque was probably involved.

At the time £20,000 was a lot of money. In The Irish Times in May 1973 a house in Sutton, Co Dublin, with four bedrooms, was advertised for sale at £8,500 and a four-bedroom house in Sandymout for £17,000.

Later in the 1970s Mr Haughey had a house constructed on Inishvickillane, despite the expense of building in such a location.

READ MORE

An account was opened in Guinness & Mahon bank (G&M) in July 1976 and payments were made from it to builders' providers and the builder who constructed the holiday home, Mr Dan Brick.

Details from statements on this account indicate that during the period to January 1978 at least £38,000 was paid from the account towards the construction of the house. Other drawings were made but it is not clear what they were for.

So Mr Haughey is likely to have spent substantially in excess of £60,000 on his holiday retreat.

In the years 1976 and 1977 approximately £90,000 was lodged to the G&M account. Mr Haughey said yesterday he had not known of the account's existence at the time, and does not know where the money came from.

He said that at the time he was buying Inishvickillane and building a house on it he gave very little thought to how he would fund the project.

"I didn't think of it in those terms," he said "I just decided to go ahead with the building leaving it up to Mr (Des) Traynor to fund the operation."

By the mid-1970s Mr Haughey's political rehabilitation had begun, and by 1977 he was back in ministerial office.

Mr Haughey was asked yesterday how frequently he would meet his close friend and financial adviser, Mr Traynor. Ms Catherine Butler, his former private secretary, has given evidence that the two men would meet frequently in Mr Haughey's home at the weekend, as often as twice a month.

Mr Haughey has said he never discussed politics with his friend and rarely discussed his personal finances, so what the two men talked about is something of a mystery.

Mr Haughey seemed to surprise Mr John Coughlan SC, for the tribunal, yesterday when he said he met Mr Traynor only five or six times a year.

"Catherine Butler would be a super-competent person but she would be mistaken in that regard," Mr Haughey said of her evidence.

The topic arose because of a cheque for £50,000, made out to cash, which Mr Haughey was given in February 1985. The cheque was dated February 18th and was lodged to an account controlled by Mr Traynor on February 19th, yet Mr Haughey resisted agreeing with Mr Coughlan that it was likely he passed the cheque to Mr Traynor. His evidence is that he cannot ever remember cash or cheques passing between himself and Mr Traynor.

In this instance the money came, via Dr John O'Connell, from an extremely wealthy Saudi diplomat, Mr Mahmoud Fustok. Mr Haughey said the money was payment for a yearling sold to Mr Fustok from the Abbeville stud, but he cannot explain how the money came to be lodged in G&M.

He said he had no further dealings with Mr Fustok after 1985. Mr Fustok, for his part, has been sent a number of letters by the tribunal but, following brief replies to the first few, has seemingly given up responding.

In one response in June 1999, Mr Fustok wrote, from the US, that he could "confirm" that he bought a horse from Mr Haughey in 1985 for £50,000, but that he had no record of the transaction.

Further letters received a response sent on Mr Fustok's behalf in which he said he would be unable to attend the tribunal, and felt his evidence would be of no value. This letter did not contain a response to a question in the tribunal's letter as to whether he had any other commercial or financial dealings with Mr Haughey. Four subsequent letters from the tribunal have had no response.