It was not a typical Christmas week. By this time colleagues are usually back in their constituencies, the public is distracted by what passes for Christmas festivities, and political controversy is of the manufactured rather than the authentic variety.
Not so this year, and it's due to one man, Liam Lawlor.
What we have heard over the past few weeks has been shocking but, in all honesty, not surprising. The detail and the extent of what we are learning may be but, for as long as anyone can remember, Lawlor has been an accident waiting to happen, described by one colleague as "unsafe at any speed". Lawlor's wealth was never hidden or explained. He has acknowledged that he saw no contradiction between being a TD and a highly paid lobbyist.
It's not Drapier's job to do the work of the tribunals but what we now see - and have seen in other tribunal revelations - is the best answer to those who doubted the need for strong ethical rules, clear guidelines and effective enforcement.
Both the Flood and Moriarty tribunals have now got to the heart of the matter. Drapier has said in the past that tribunals are always unpredictable, that once established they take on a life of their own, and so, in a spectacular way, it has transpired. The new year will be sensational, with Flood moving into Dunlop phase two, Gilmartin, and, of course, Liam Lawlor's own evidence; and Moriarty moving relentlessly towards his conclusions. How it will all end nobody knows.
But it will not end well. There will be casualties, and the slow-burning fuse of public anger may well ignite with a ferocity few can anticipate.
In spite of all the signs and omens there are many who have yet to fully appreciate what is happening. As Fintan O'Toole pointed out in this paper last Tuesday, Bertie Ahern, that most astute reader of the public mood, seems oblivious to the real implications of what is happening, and he is far from being the only one.
So, on this eve of Christmas, in spite of bonanza Budgets, spending sprees and endless partying, there is an underlying sense of apprehension, of impending events which will not be easily controlled.
However, to other matters. It has become something of an article of faith in here that the PDs are not for shifting, and that whatever else may ultimately destabilise this government it will not be Mary Harney and her colleagues. Where have they to go? Will they ever again have such influence out of all proportion to their size? Forget it, they are in for the long haul.
So, at least, the smart money says. Of late Drapier is less and less sure. Of course the PDs are hard-headed realists. Of course they love power, and are dab hands at enjoying all that goes with power. But there has always been more to the PDs than that. If there hadn't, the party would not exist.
Of late Drapier has noticed some stirrings - and not without good reason. The Lawlor saga is deeply disturbing, not least, as already noted, Bertie Ahern's reluctance to deal unequivocally with the matter. Liam Lawlor still holds a Fianna Fail vice-chairmanship of an important Oireachtas committee, without a word of demur from his former party. Neither of these facts gives comfort to the PDs, as John Dardis made very clear this week.
Nor was there any comfort in the handling of the Ned O'Keeffe affair. To the PDs the issue was simple - a serious conflict of interest which, apart from anything else, was seriously damaging the national interest in ensuring confidence in safe food. In the PD mind-set, no mercy should have been shown. Liz O'Donnell made her point. Maybe she should have been more open and upfront but at least the point was made.
Again, while Willie O'Dea may have scored some personal points in his Dail reply on the taxi issue, the basic point remained - he had sought to undermine a PD colleague and apologised only when he was caught, not because he was wrong.
On the positive side, the PDs discovered a new warmth among their natural supporters when Bobby Molloy put the boot in to the taxi-men. Never mind that this happened only when Bobby's own legislation was turfed out by Mr Justice Murphy, and after years of inaction.
Such details are always lost on the punters, who look to results. The standing ovation Bobby got at a recent Chamber of Commerce lunch persuaded some PD people that more rather than less independence was the answer to their sagging poll figures.
Drapier does not see a crisis, however. On balance, the PDs prefer to be in rather than out. But with time running out anyway, they are letting their partners know that they will not be taken for granted, as so many of the commentators and so many in Fianna Fail have taken to doing.
It is a high-risk game. So far, accommodation and compromise have been found and, in some cases - most especially the O'Flaherty affair - the PDs were as involved as their partners. But there is no guarantee the safety net will always be there. While Drapier believes the PD game plan is to go all the way to 2002, there are more and more landmines to be negotiated. One will be enough.
Drapier could hardly believe his ears when he heard Noel Dempsey tell the listeners to RTE's FiveSeven Live the other day that we would be voting and having our votes counted by machine. Honest. That's what Noel said. Yes, Drapier has read Noel's Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 2000. And, for the most part, a good technical Bill it is, making it easier for people to register and vote, providing better information, removing some anomalies. But machine voting, after what we have seen in Florida these past six weeks?
Drapier may be old-fashioned but he believes our electoral system works well. PR is here to stay, and no amount of talk about list systems is going to change that, but as for machine voting and counting - Drapier says forget it. Why do we need it? What's wrong with the tallymen, the hawk-eyed scrutiny, the ultra-conscientious and knowledgeable returning officers?
It all promises to be an interesting debate, but surely Noel Dempsey did not think he could get away with doubling the amount of money which can be spent at election time by a bit of sleight-of-hand. If we are going to raise the limits let's be upfront about it, but we can hardly do it without also looking at corporate donations as well. Even on Christmas week that would be too much to ask.
Happy Christmas.