Analysis: Some justice done, much delayed and now we are to have justice deflected, writes Paul Cullen.
The headlines will talk of another 11 years' work, but Judge Alan Mahon's first interim report actually marks the beginning of the end of the planning tribunal.
The inquiry isn't going to disappear today or tomorrow, but this report represents a preliminary settling of its affairs and recognition of its mortality. For the first time, a realistic estimate of its lifespan has been set, as well as a means for winding up affairs at any time.
Yet on top of the lingering questions about the cost and duration of the tribunal, it now has to be accepted that the inquiry will not - indeed, can not - investigate all the serious allegations of planning corruption that have been sent its way.
The can of worms was simply too deep and too full for the bottom ever to be reached, or at least not in the cumbersome manner followed by this kind of tribunal-style, lawyer-driven public inquiry. We have had some justice done, much justice delayed and now, it seems, we are to have justice deflected.
We'll have a bit more of Tom Gilmartin, a lot more of Frank Dunlop, while Liam Lawlor will always be with us in this corner of tribunal-land. But that, more or less, will probably be it. The rest of the papers will likely be left to gather dust.
Even if the tribunal ventures an investigation of Sir Anthony O'Reilly, for example, it can't now happen until 2009 - 20 years after a £30,000 payment to Ray Burke was funnelled through the O'Reilly investment vehicle, Fitzwilton. What chance then a reliable paper trail, let alone a full list of compos mentis witnesses? It remains to be seen what the Oireachtas will make of Judge Mahon's request for amended terms of reference, and more staff, although the Taoiseach yesterday told the Dail the issue would have to be examined. Hitherto, the Government has acceded to previous requests from Mr Justice Feargus Flood, mostly out of a fear of political embarrassment. These days, though, even Opposition deputies are querying the resource-eating monster that is the tribunal.
After all, what was the tribunal given three judges for two years ago but to speed up its work? Now Judge Mahon says parallel inquiries won't happen for some time and, only then, if more resources are provided.
Yesterday's hearing saw one judge, one senior counsel, one junior and one solicitor present for the tribunal. That leaves another two judges, three senior counsel, one junior, two solicitors and four researchers presumably labouring hard in their offices. Nowhere in Judge Mahon's 18-page report does he talk directly about the delicate subject of money. The chairman's plea for yet more resources in the form of highly-paid lawyers sits awkwardly with competing pleas for funding in health and education.
Given the choice, the electorate would have no problem deciding between a home help service or a dialysis machine over yet another barrister on €2,400 a day.
To understand the anger that drove this week's election results you only have to look at yesterday's hearing on legal costs, where the barristers lined up to claim their share of public funds for their clients.
Never mind that a number of these clients variously gave, took and/or lied about corrupt payments, that they used their immense resources to prevent the truth coming out, that they suffered unexplained lapses of memory about the bribes they paid and that they could easily afford to take the "hit" arising from legal costs at the tribunal.
The tribunal's own costs already come to €34 million, but the total bill is closer to €100 million and rising.
Yet the tribunal is now asking for more money in order, it says, to spend less in the long run. Now the politicians have to go figure.