The tribal nature of tribunal culture was manifest in the contents of a recent interview in this newspaper with the Fine Gael leader, John Bruton. Mr Bruton gave his views on two subjects which, although separated in the text of the interview, might be seen as connected. One set of questions related to the implications for the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, of alleged wrongdoing by Charles Haughey; the other was concerned with the possibility of Micheal Lowry rejoining Fine Gael.
Mr Bruton said the party door would be open to Mr Lowry, once he had paid whatever debt he owed to society for any wrongdoing in which he may have been involved. To suggest otherwise, said Mr Bruton, would be unchristian. But these sentiments differed significantly from his comments about Mr Haughey, and the present Taoiseach's alleged complicity in Mr Haughey's alleged wrongdoing.
Mr Bruton pointed out that Mr Ahern was among those who supported Mr Haughey in his bid for the Fianna Fail leadership in 1979 and said that he had "no doubt" that "whatever about the specifics of Mr Haughey's finances", Mr Ahern knew about Mr Haughey's way of doing business. Mr Ahern, he added, was a member of Fianna Fail governments of which several leading members had been in receipt of "unexplained donations of vast proportions". The fact that he had never apologised for his past support of Mr Haughey disqualified Mr Ahern from being Taoiseach, Mr Bruton argued.
Let us leave aside that Fine Gael has also been in receipt of "unexplained donations of vast proportions" and ignore the fact that, as he made clear in the interview, Mr Bruton does not wish to have anything done about politics being placed in hock to the rich by dependence on corporate funding. Let us pass over, too, the inference that the Fine Gael brand of Christianity appears not to extend much beyond party lines, and concentrate on adapting Mr Bruton's logic about Mr Ahern's relationship with Mr Haughey to his own with Michael Lowry.
On November 29th, 1996, the Irish Independent reported that, three years previously, Mr Lowry had had an extension added to his house courtesy of Dunnes Stores. There was no record of planning permission for the extension, and Dunnes Stores' accounts showed the payment made in respect of work on one of the company's own stores. By now minister for transport, energy and communications, Mr Lowry had at the time of the payment been chairman of the Fine Gael parliamentary party and director of party fund-raising.
It was widely speculated that Mr Lowry's refrigeration company, Streamline Enterprises, had had a business relationship with Dunnes, and that the building work - at a cost of £207,820, it was reported - was a payment-in-kind for services supplied.
While the nation awaited Mr Lowry's version, Mr Bruton, as Taoiseach and Fine Gael leader, issued a statement saying that he was "confident" the minister would give a full explanation for everything. He stressed that the events in question appeared to have occurred before Mr Lowry became a minister, which placed the matter in "a different category".
At first Mr Lowry said he had no intention of resigning, and would give an explanation in his own time. On the day after the revelations, however, Mr Lowry abruptly resigned, but without offering a comprehensive explanation.
There was no impropriety on his part, he stated, and he was leaving office with integrity and honour intact. There followed a bizarre episode in which the former minister posed for photographs with the Taoiseach, Mr Bruton, whom he called his "best friend forever", before leaving Government Buildings. Back home in Tipperary, Mr Lowry declared that he had "no problem with the Revenue Commissioners".
In a statement to the Dail on December 19th, 1996, Mr Lowry revealed that the building extension had indeed been a payment-in-kind for services supplied to Dunnes. Dunnes was now saying that the work on Mr Lowry's house had cost £395,188, and this disagreement was the reason he had not yet declared the matter to the Revenue Commissioners. He also revealed that he had, some years previously, availed of a tax amnesty. He had told Mr Bruton this shortly after his appointment as minister, but withheld other details of his incomplete taxation affairs.
He had not, he confirmed, sought planning permission for the extension, but there was no attempt by him to evade tax and he would meet his liabilities once the value of the work on his house was established. If someone was trying to hide income, he demanded rhetorically, "would they not be more likely to put it in, say, an offshore account?" The problem was - as emerged later at the Moriarty tribunal - Mr Lowry did have an offshore account.
According to Ben Dunne's evidence to the tribunal on April 21st, 1997, Dunnes Stores made three payments to Streamline Enterprises into a bank account in the Isle of Man: £25,000 in 1990, £40,000 in 1991, and £40,000 in 1992.
It was only after Mr Lowry's Dail statement that Mr Bruton distanced himself from his former minister, saying he would be given "no hiding place". Failure to disclose business dealings to the Revenue Commissioners for tax purposes was wrong, said Mr Bruton. Mr Lowry later resigned from the Fine Gael parliamentary party.
As Mr Bruton has never offered a full explanation or apology for his handling of the Lowry affair, it is a bit rich for him to be nibbling at Mr Ahern's bum about supporting Mr Haughey. If anything, Mr Bruton is the more culpable, because whereas he was Taoiseach at the time of the Lowry business, Bertie Ahern, during the years of Mr Haughey's alleged wrongdoing, was a mere cabinet minister without any particular role in policing his colleagues.