Mr Michael Bailey said at a meeting in 1989 that he could get lands rezoned by procuring a majority of Dublin County Council through the help of politicians or councillors who could be influenced by Mr Ray Burke, the tribunal heard.
Mr James Gogarty said Mr Bailey also stated at a meeting with Murphy executives that there were five or six councillors who could organise or maximise votes of Dublin County Council and that he was also in a position to cross the political divide.
Mr Bailey said he could rely on close liaison with people in the council, including Mr George Redmond, the former assistant city and county manager.
In late May, early June 1989 Mr Bailey was the main party interested in six plots owned by Murphy companies. Mr Joe Murphy wanted to sell these.
At one meeting with Mr Bailey, they came up with two proposals. The first was the outright sale of the lands and the second that there would be shared equity. It was attended by Mr Frank Reynolds, Mr Joe Murphy, Mr Bailey and himself.
Mr Bailey said what he could do with these lands and summarised it in a letter, dated June 8th, 1989, which he wrote to Mr Gogarty a couple of days after the meeting. "He said he could get them rezoned by procuring a majority of Dublin County Council to get them rezoned," Mr Gogarty said.
Mr John Gallagher SC, for the tribunal, asked if he said how that could be achieved.
Mr Gogarty replied: "Through the help of politicians or councillors who could be influenced by Mr Ray Burke. That's what he told us at that time. The letter summarises everything that was said except the letter doesn't name the people that he named at the meeting a couple of days earlier.
"He went into great detail about how he would go about it, that there was five or six councillors that could organise or maximise the votes of Dublin County Council and that he was also in a position to cross the political divide; they were the words he says, `political divide', and that he could rely on close liaison with people in the county council, including Mr [George] Redmond."
Mr Gogarty read the letter from Mr Bailey. The letter firstly gave the purchase proposal, with the names of the lands and acreage. It then gave purchase price proposals on the six lots and the completion dates.
The letter then gave the second proposal, which was the participation proposal. It stated: "As an alternative to the outright purchase proposal above, I'm prepared to deal with lots 1-5 (inclusive) above on the basis that I would be given a 50 per cent share in the ownership of the said lands in exchange for procuring planning permission and building bye-law approval."
The letter then gave the time he would require to obtain permission and his anticipated expenditure. Mr Bailey also outlined the shortcomings of the lands for obtaining planning permission.
"We face a very severe uphill battle to arrange for the availability of services and for the ultimate procurement of planning permission.
"The steps to be taken on the way to procuring a build-able planning permission and building bye-laws approval are notoriously difficult, time-consuming and expensive. Material contravention orders must be obtained, and this involves their procurement of a majority vote at two full council meetings at which 78 council members must be present, and it also involves satisfactory compliance with extensive requirements and preconditions of the planning authority and the inevitable dealing with protracted appeals to An Bord Pleanala.
"It is essential that the planning application should be brought in the name of an active house-building company which enjoys good standing and good working relationship with the planners and the council members and in this regard I confirm that in the event of our reaching agreement regarding the within proposals all planning applications would be made by one of my companies which meets the said requirements.
"In the case of all of the lands the applications will be highly sensitive and controversial, and we can realistically expect strenuous opposition from private, political and planning sectors. One of my active companies will have to take the limelight in such applications and withstand the objections and protests which will inevitably confront it.
"Apart from the anticipated financial expenditure as outlined above, it should be borne in mind that I will personally have to give extensively of my time and efforts over the entire period of the applications, including the necessary preliminary negotiations in regard to services and zoning.
"It must be borne in mind that I will have to abandon other projects which would be open to myself and my companies in order to give proper attention to this project. If I am successful in changing your lands from their present status of agricultural lands, with very limited potential even for agricultural use, into highly valuable building lands I would have to be rewarded with a minimum 50 per cent stake in the ownership of the lands. Our advisers would have to work out the details as to how this can be effected in the most tax-efficient manner."
Mr Bailey concluded the letter by saying that, in the case of the first proposal, he would not be averse to a proposal which would involve the vendors retaining a participation stake of up to 20 per cent in the purchasing company.