The Bord na Mona affair has become an embarrassing political headache for the Government. What should have been an issue quickly dealt with by the company board and the Minister for Energy, Mr Lowry, has turned into a three-month debacle from which there will be no winners. The managing director, Dr Eddie O'Connor, has suffered from a succession of leaks to the media, the board is deeply divided and the Government has been left to deal with a very difficult situation. Only time will tell whether last night's decision to suspend Dr O'Connor was a correct one, but it is unclear on what grounds the move was taken, or what is now the Government's ultimate objective.
There is no doubt that a majority of Cabinet-members would have preferred to sanction a settlement package with Dr O'Connor. He was approached about such a deal, although we don't know how much progress was made. Dr O'Connor has categorically denied that he was made an offer by the Department of Energy, or that any substantive negotiations have taken place.
With no settlement package on the horizon as the Cabinet met late on Tuesday night, it appears that a recommendation from Mr Lowry to suspend Dr O'Connor was finally agreed. Yet another investigation is now to take place, with a senior accountant expected to be appointed to hear representations from both sides and to examine the reports drawn up by Price Waterhouse.
The affair has already dragged on for far too long. Initially, the board was, asked to consider issues concerning the remuneration of the managing director and related aspects of the corporate governance of the company. After a succession of meetings, the board could only conclude that Dr O'Connor's package breached Government guidelines. It could not agree what to do about it.
There was, a concerted leaking of much, of what was discussed in the boardroom over the period. It is, of course, the role of the media to, seek to get behind such episodes and bring information into the open. However in this case many of the leaks appear to have been designed to damage Dr O'Connor.
If his opponents had wanted to provide evidence of a campaign to undermine the managing director, they could hardly have made a better job of it. The company's unions now allege a "hidden agenda" on the part of Mr Lowry relating to opposition to Dr O'Connor's plans for Bord na Mona. The Minister denies the charge.
There were legitimate questions into which the board had to inquire, particularly the way in which the managing director claimed unvouched expenses totalling £66,000. Dr O'Connor has pointed to an agreement with the former chairman, Mr Halligan, on all aspects of his remuneration. Both say the unvouched expenses were not for Mr O'Connor's personal use but formed, part of a public affairs budget to promote Bord na Mona. But, whatever the full background the taxpayer will have been surprised at this aspect of Dr O'Connor's package.
The affair has now moved beyond this initial focus. If it comes to court the whole sorry saga will be run again, with further damaging details possibly emerging. Every effort must be made to avoid this. An agreed settlement under which Dr O'Connor leaves Bord na Mona would now appear to be the only way to avoid a debilitating court action. If further investigation is needed, it is not into Dr O'Connor's remuneration, but into the way the whole affair has been mishandled by the board and by Mr Lowry.