OPINION/Vincent Browne: Tony O'Reilly has wielded more power in Irish society since he bought control of Independent Newspapers almost 30 years ago than anybody, bar a few politicians. Never in that time has he been held accountable for the power he exercises, not by the media and certainly not by the media he controls, nor by any other agency. Until now.
Now in the coming months, Mr O'Reilly will be required to answer questions about his operations. The manner in which his media report on these inquiries will tell us a lot about the exercise of this corporate power.
Mr O'Reilly will not be the only rich guy held to account. Mr Dermot Desmond, who has made spectacular riches, will have some (more) questions to answer, as will Mr Denis O'Brien and maybe (again) Mr Ben Dunne. But it will be the insights these inquiries give us into the modus operandi of Mr O'Reilly which will most intrigue.
The Flood tribunal will get around in time to inquiring into the payment by Fitzwilton, one of Mr O'Reilly's corporate arms, of £30,000 to Ray Burke in June 1989. The tribunal will want to know what the purpose of this payment was, why it was made through a subsidiary company, Rennicks, why it was made by way of a cheque made payable to cash, and why it was not represented in the Fitzwilton accounts as a political donation.
The tribunal will also be interested in who authorised the payment, who knew about it, who authorised the payment's concealment in the company accounts and the manner in which the company and its management and directors have co-operated with the tribunal. It will also be interested to know if any taxes were evaded by the method of accounting and if so, who was responsible for that.
The Moriarty tribunal has a host of questions to put to Mr O'Reilly and his associates. These include representations he may or may not have made to Mr Michael Lowry, when he (Lowry) was minister for transport and communications, about the awarding of the phone licence and about cable television.
Questions arise also about Mr O'Reilly's representations to the then Taoiseach, Mr John Bruton, and the pressures he may have attempted to exercise on the Bruton government. There will be questions on that extraordinary front-page editorial in the Irish Independent two days before the 1997 general election, "It's Payback Time", advocating support for Fianna Fáil and the rejection of a government that may have appeared insufficiently sympathetic to Mr O'Reilly's corporate designs.
Now all these questions are themselves fascinating but what will be more fascinating will be how the newspapers controlled by Mr O'Reilly report and comment on them, and how they treat others who report and comment on them.
Mr O'Reilly controls the following newspapers in this State: the Irish Independent, the Evening Herald, the Sunday Independent, the Star, the Sunday World and the Sunday Tribune. The latter is not formally in the O'Reilly fold but is controlled through and through by Mr O'Reilly, notwithstanding pretences to the contrary.
The appointment of a new editor for the Sunday Tribune in itself will tell a lot about who controls the shots there.
I know and admire the editor of the Irish Independent, Vincent Doyle. He is not one of O'Reilly's vast array of valets. He would seek to be objective in his newspaper's reportage of O'Reilly's goings-on. But there are a small few among his reporting staff who are apprentice valets, eager for an upgrade.
Gerry O'Regan editor of the Evening Herald is no natural valet either but the Herald doesn't matter in these stakes and the same is true of the Star and the Sunday World (much into crime but not into accountancy).
The Sunday Tribune matters a bit and it will play ball. It is the Sunday Independent which will be the most interesting.
The valets and aspiring valets in the Sunday Independent most "fawn on the powerful hand". It will not be just that they will seek to discredit material suspected of being anti-O'Reilly but will attack anybody who has the temerity to challenge the great man and his doings. They are the "republican guard" of the O'Reilly regime, however grotesque they might regard the designation. They are not the only ones who fawn upon the powerful hand. Just observe how uncritically the other media have deferred to the brazen conceit which surrounded the award of a British knighthood. But the valets in the Sunday Independent are the guards on the gate of accountability, there to frighten off others who challenge and hold to account.
There are indeed some fine journalists in the Sunday Independent, Gene Kerrigan and Jody Corcoran being among them. But others are allies of unaccountable power.