THE Taoiseach strongly denied, amid noisy and heated exchanges that he had given contradictory evidence to two tribunals about Fine Gael funding.
Mr Bruton was replying to the Fianna Fail leader, Mr Bertie Ahern, who urged him to admit that there was a "blatant contradiction" in what he had stated at the beef tribunal and at the Dunnes payments tribunal. "Both tribunals were set up by the Oireachtas, and I think you owe it to this House to clear up this matter, rather than continuing to attempt to explain it away, which you have been doing.
Mr Bruton said that his party and himself had co-operated fully with both tribunals, providing details of every relevant donation, and were open to be asked questions from anybody at the tribunal about them.
He added that he had been answering questions at the beef tribunal relating to practices which had occurred prior to his becoming Fine Gael leader. "I was answering about a different period from the one about which I was answering in the more recent tribunal. In the more recent tribunal, I was answering questions about the practices that occurred after I became leader of the party.
"I answered fully on both occasions. There were, in my understanding, differences in terms of the situations that applied at particular times in the two periods, but in both cases my answers were full and frank."
Mr Des O'Malley (PD, Limerick East) said that in describing the period 1987 to 1989, the Taoiseach gave two quite distinct and different accounts, first in June 1992, and secondly at the Dunnes payments tribunal. Correspondence published recently had made it clear that the Taoiseach was personally involved in fund raising in a period when he said he was not.
The Ceann Comhairle, Mr Sean Treacy, said that if serious allegations were being made against a member of the House, especially the Taoiseach or a Minister, it could not be done by way of cross examination or innuendo across the floor of the House. It must be done by way of substantive motion, and he had conveyed his strong views to members of the House, only within recent hours, on the matter.
Mr O'Malley asked if he or any other deputy could ask the Taoiseach "to account for diametrically opposite sworn evidence ..."
When Mr Treacy repeated that the matter could not be dealt with by way of innuendo, Mr O'Malley replied: "I am saying it out quite straight. He contradicted himself on oath. There is no innuendo. He said A on oath one day and he said B on oath the next day."
Mr Bruton said that he had confirmed, as had the two people referred to in a newspaper report, that he had not approached them for funds for Fine Gael at the relevant time. He was not involved in any significant way in fundraising for Fine Gael at national level until he became party leader. But in his answers to the beef tribunal, he had indicated that if it had any further questions about what had happened in that period, the party would get the answers.
He repeated that both Fine Gael and he himself had cooperated fully with both tribunals. "I have appeared before both tribunals voluntarily and answered truthfully in regard to the situations that applied in terms of the relevant period covered by both tribunals, to the fullest knowledge I had at the time. Now I think it would be appropriate if others had cooperated in the same way.
Pressed farther by Mr Ahern, Mr Bruton referred to the beef tribunal, adding that he had been the only deputy in the House who had condemned the "sweetheart deal" put in place by Mr Charles Haughey as Taoiseach relating to the beef industry. "And I was attacked by Mr [Larry] Goodman for the stance I took on that matter. So any suggestion that I could have been influenced in any way is absolutely without foundation and is shown to be so on the basis of the record."
Mr Bruton said he welcomed Fianna Fail's interest in the beef tribunal at this stage. When the tribunal report had been presented to the House, Mr Ahern had voted against allowing any questions being asked about it.