Taoiseach and the Mahon tribunal

A Chara, - The majority of your correspondents and columnists have been highly critical of the Taoiseach for the manner in which…

A Chara, - The majority of your correspondents and columnists have been highly critical of the Taoiseach for the manner in which he has defended himself at the Mahon tribunal, and for some of the steps he took to limit the extent of the tribunal's inquiries.

It should be restated, however, that Bertie Ahern actually set up the inquiry in the first place and, in contrast to many of his international peers, he has taken no steps to render himself immune from questioning or prosecution. Indeed, he has given freely of his time several times to assist the work of a tribunal that has become markedly hostile towards him.

Given that the initial suggestion of an £80,000 bribe from Owen O'Callaghan has been denied by all concerned parties and has not a shred of evidence to support it, is it not entirely reasonable that the Taoiseach, or anyone in his situation, would seek to dismiss further auxiliary inquiries which have nothing to do with the original allegation? Is there anyone who would happily publicise the confidential details of their marriage separation agreement, or the specifics of the rental, renovation and subsequent purchase of the modest property in which they still live?

Would anyone not be furious if the details of their private correspondence appeared on the front pages of the national press a few weeks before an election, and be highly anxious for an opportunity to defend themselves and rebut the allegations which they clearly believe to be untrue?

READ MORE

The election result suggests that the public has a human and balanced approach to this situation, yet the media appear trapped in a Pavlovian cycle where the mere smell of a tribunal triggers an irresistible need for political blood, and the more senior the politician the better.

The longer we promote the notion that all politicians are the same and they are all "still at it", the harder it will be for us all to move on from that grubby era, and the poorer Irish politics, and by extension, Irish life, will be.

It really is time to move on. - Is mise,

DAVID CARROLL,

Castle Gate,

Dublin 2.

Madam, - Noel Whelan suggests that "most people took the view that for [ the Taoiseach] to be forced out of office because of these payments would have been disproportionate" ("Media flogging a dead horse over payments to Ahern", Opinion & Analysis, September 15th).

It would be completely proportionate to remove the Taoiseach from office if he was judged to have accepted political bribes. It is instead the uncertain nature of these transactions combined with public trust in the Taoiseach's account of the donations that makes it currently premature to require such a step.

However, this could change very quickly. Much of this money was drawn from highly suspicious sources, the manner in which the money was transferred suggests that conscious attempts were made to conceal it and much depends on Judge Mahon's final report stating whether the Taoiseach did or did not adequately assist the investigation.

I suggest that most people are allowing Mr Ahern the benefit of lingering doubt. At this stage it would be a great but unexpected relief if he was found to be completely innocent.

I still hope this might happen, because after decades of controversy it is too depressing to think that Irish politics might still be plagued by corruption. - Is mise,

PAUL TIGHE,

Grove Park,

Dublin 6.

Madam, - At last, from Noel Whelan, some evidence of common sense and some acknowledgment of the public's lack of interest in the whole saga of Bertie's finances of more than 10 years ago. Surely the result of the general election demonstrated that.

Could we now, please, leave blanket coverage of the Mahon tribunal aside and look to the media to inform us on matters of vital importance in our daily living? - Yours, etc,

MARY STEWART,

Ardeskin,

Donegal Town.

Madam, - Has the distinguished Irish Times forgotten that the electorate spoke only last May and elected Bertie Ahern to a third term as Taoiseach with details of his personal finances already in the public domain?

It seems that the media hounding of Mr Ahern continues unabated, led by your newspaper. I have given up reading Miriam Lord's snide and sarcastic articles because they have long since stepped over the mark into unacceptable personal dislike. Whatever happened to a journalist's objectivity? I am tired of the continued media hysteria over Mr Ahern's finances and I imagine I am not the only one.

Noel Whelan's column captured the electorate's lack of interest in this story perfectly, but I have no doubt it will not stop your gleeful pursuit of Mr Ahern, in the hope, one suspects, of damaging his historical legacy.

It must truly annoy you that you failed in your bid to have Mr Ahern ousted from office in the recent election which is what I believe drives your continued attempts to undermine his reputation. What's more, I suggest that it was the media hounding of Mr Ahern that contributed to his election victory, the electorate seeing through the media agenda in the aftermath of the reporting of the leaders' debate on RTÉ, a debate clearly won by Mr Ahern but reported as a draw in the next day's media, your newspaper included. The electorate swung back to Fianna Fáil immediately, the media's blatant dishonesty finally exposed.

I have no doubt you will not publish this letter. I notice even your Letters page is conveniently edited to reflect more snide comments directed at Mr Ahern, such as Frank Schnittger's letter last Saturday. Mr Ahern's historical legacy will, I believe, be overwhelmingly positive and the media hounding of him will be seen as unfair and dishonest, much like that suffered by Bill Clinton. - Yours, etc,

MARK TYNAN,

Upper Cross Road,

Rialto,

Dublin 8.

Madam, - Perhaps a DNA test might throw some light on the geno-political links between Bertie Ahern and Charlie Haughey. When Charlie described Bertie as the "most cunning, the most devious of them all", he recognised that genotype.

In my view, Bertie should have held on to his anorak and taken up membership of Irish Equity, the actors' union. It would be funny if it wasn't so tragic. He continues to lead Fianna Fail, not because of his astute political acumen, but because he (and others such as Eoghan Harris) appealed to the decency of the Irish people to take pity on the plight of a separated man.

As the rest of the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party are all part of the same gene pool, they are not likely to see anything especially deviant about Bertie's financial maelstrom. Therefore, I feel it is incumbent on John Gormley and the Green Party to tell Bertie to go.

Failing this, they should pull out of their commitment to coalesce with Fianna Fáil in the interests of the country.

The Greens fought the recent general election on the basis of honesty in politics. If they continue to support Fianna Fáil with Bertie at the helm, they are giving a clear message to the people of Ireland that "wheeling and dealing" is the order of the day and that ethics in politics is gone forever. - Yours, etc,

ANNE O'REILLY,

Dundrum Gate,

Dublin 16.

Madam, - There is no doubting that Bertie Ahern gives nearly 100 per cent of his time to politics, but does this excuse him from records of his income and expenditure to make tax returns? Is he, or is he not, a qualified chartered accountant?

If, as he maintains, donations received by him in cash were for himself personally and not political, were these, or were they not, declared by him for income tax? Who will answer these straightforward questions, or are we living in cloud-cuckoo-land? Yours, etc,

RICHARD REID,

Rathgar Avenue,

Dublin, 6.

Madam, - One of the so-called key quotes from Des O'Neill SC at the Mahon tribunal, as featured in your report of September 14th, is as follows:

"Mr Ahern, it may assist with the conduct of the inquiry if, insofar as it's possible to do so, you can address the questions which are being put to you and answer the questions. I don't want to cut you short in your delivery, but if you are being asked a specific question, if it's capable of a specific response, the questioning of you will certainly be advanced or will certainly take a lesser time than if we have to canvass side issues."

I realise that there is a certain formality in these tribunals, but if all remarks by barristers are as mealy-mouthed as this, is it any wonder that the tribunals drag on so long?

A succinct "Please answer the question directly" would do the job just fine - and there would be less chance of the import of the remark being diluted by a load of pompous, tautologous nonsense. - Yours, etc,

MARTIN RYAN,

Blanchardstown, Dublin 15