Mahon Tribunal Transcripts July 2006

09:42:12

11:34:51

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY,

2

4TH JULY 2006, AT 11.30 AM:

3 4

MR. QUINN: Morning sir, Mr. Sweeney please.

5 6

EDWARD SWEENEY, PREVIOUSLY SWORN, CONTINUED TO BE

7

QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS, BY MR. QUINN:

8 9 11:35:04 10

11

CHAIRMAN:

Morning Mr. Sweeney.

A.

Morning.

Q. 1

Good morning Mr. Sweeney. Mr. Sweeney on Friday we had dealt with Monarch's

12

involvement with Mr. Dunlop or indeed Mr. Dunlop's involvement with Monarch, in

13

1993 and in the lead up to the vote on the 11th November 1993 and I thought

14

this morning that we might start with Monarch's involvement with GRE in the

11:35:29 15

lead up to that vote. If I could have 4493?

16 17

This is a letter, written by you, Mr. Sweeney, to Mr. Baker on the 2nd of

18

September 1993 and as I say, it's in anticipation of the up coming vote. And

19

in that letter you will see that you confirm that the matter -- that a review

11:35:51 20

of the Development Plan would commence in north County Dublin and that the vote

21

in Cherrywood would be taken in November or December '93 and you were

22

absolutely correct, it was taken on the 11th November, 1993.

23 24 11:36:06 25

And you go on in the second paragraph to say, "Throughout the summer the staff have kept in contact with members of the Council with a view to towards holding

26

support and encouraging additional support for the proposal. We have

27

conscientiously reviewed the position of each member of the Council against a

28

number of backgrounds and the possibility of using whatever means, or personnel

29

necessary to ensure sufficient support on the day".

11:36:25 30

Can I just ask you to explain to the tribal what you intended to convey by that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:36:30

11:36:36

2 1

expression Mr. Sweeney?

2

A.

Is that on the first page?

3

Q. 2

Yes, the second paragraph on the first page.

4

A.

By whatever means?

5

Q. 3

Yes.

6

A.

I suppose what I meant was, whatever means. I don't have any further

7 8

explanation for that. Q. 4

9 11:37:00 10

11

Well, were there any other means other than lobbying used by Monarch personnel in relation to ensuring that the Council voting in favour of the proposal?

A.

No.

Q. 5

I think in the letter then you go on to say that, "We had a strategy in place

12

to deal with the Development Plan, had the decision to start in South County

13

Dublin" can I ask you what strategy had you in place had the decision been to

14

start the review in south County Dublin?

11:37:19 15

16

A.

I don't quite understand that.

Q. 6

The middle paragraph and it's, you will see just commencing with the words --

17 18

highlighted now. A.

19

forecast and I suppose as the timing changed, strategies had to change, things

11:37:49 20

21

What I take that to mean really is, that the timing was very difficult to

had to be brought forward. Q. 7

Now I think you were critical of the support you were getting from GRE in

22

relation to the Business Park and the final paragraph on that first page you

23

expressed your disappointment that no one had from GRE had attended a

24

conference in Montpelier, isn't that right?

11:38:12 25

26

A.

Yes.

Q. 8

But you had deemed that conference to be useful and in particular in relation

27

to the relationship of one of the principal councillors, what councillor were

28

you referring to there and how did you feel that the attendance at the

29

conference was of assistance in relation to that councillor?

11:38:30 30

A.

Any of the councillors that I met really, were very interested in the concept Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:38:38

11:39:14

3 1

of a Science and Technology Park, particularly Eamon Gilmore and also Donal

2

Marren were very interested in it. I think that's the ones I mean and I have

3

to say Chairman, I was really flying the flag for the Science and Technology

4

Park and what I am really saying there is that, I didn't feel that my pleas to

5

them or whatever, my description of what was going on, I felt that was boring

6

them when I was talking about the Science and Technology Park and they didn't

7

really take it fully on board until much later, by which time they came on with

8

remarkable enthusiasm.

9

Q. 9

11:39:38 10

Now if I could have 4494, this is the second page of that letter and the final paragraph there you say "I set out on the attached cost projections to the

11

first January 1994, some of which will be critical to the success or otherwise,

12

of Cherrywood." and we see those cost projections if we look at 4209, these are

13

your view as of September 1993, of the likely costs involved throughout the

14

latter part of 1993, isn't that right?

11:40:05 15

16

A.

Yes.

Q. 10

Now the headings as we see here, Mr. Sweeney, who would have provided those

17 18

headings for you? A.

19 11:40:26 20

I believe they would have come up by talking to the various people who were involved in the project.

Q. 11

Within Monarch?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 12

And we see the first one is management fee, between September and December '93

23

you estimated 120,000, which I work-out at about 30,000 a month, were you, was

24

there an agreement that Monarch would be paid a management fee of about 30,000

11:40:40 25

26

per month? A.

I can't recall if there was an agreement, but I have to say Chairman that a lot

27

of expense was being made at the time by Monarch and it was my feeling that it

28

wasn't being adequately met by GRE and I was at pains to try to maximise the

29

recovery from our partner.

11:41:06 30

Q. 13

And I think in fact we can see from a letter, if we can have 4210, this is a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:41:11

11:41:27

4 1

letter dated 28th of September 1993, from GRE to you and it refers to that

2

letter of the 2nd of September and it also refers to a meeting on the 27th

3

September, isn't that right? You had a meeting with Mr. Baker on the 27th

4

September 1993.

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 14

And that letter on screen followed on that meeting, where you clarified a

7

number of issues, including Mr. Dunlop's success fee, isn't that right?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 15

Now if I just go back for a moment to 4209 and you have forwarded the cost

11:41:47 10

projection which we see here at 4209 with your letter of the 2nd September and

11

then there is a meeting on the 27th of September where further clarification

12

and agreement is reached between yourself and GRE, isn't that correct?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 16

And we see there that management fee, then the next one is additional personnel

11:42:05 15

cost, from September to December '93 and if we can have 4347 this is appendix A

16

which would have accompanied that had letter, isn't that right -- sorry 4347,

17

and there is some manuscript writing on that letter which is referred to in the

18

letter of the 28th September, do I take it that writing on the letter is in

19

your hand Mr. Sweeney?

11:42:32 20

A.

No, Chairman.

21

Q. 17

Whose writing is that can I ask, or do you know?

22

A.

I don't know.

23

Q. 18

But we do see that Mr. Lynn is pencilled in there for 15, an additional 15,000,

24

bringing the total to 70, 500, isn't that right? Being the costs, personnel,

11:42:53 25

work programme costs for the Draft Development Plan lobby between September and

26

December 93.

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 19

And he is added to the list of personnel who are presumably are all Monarch

29 11:43:10 30

personnel, Mr. Reilly, Mr. Lafferty, Mr. Murray and the others mentioned there? A.

Yeah, he seems to have been missed out. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:43:14

11:43:30

5 1

Q. 20

2

He had been missed out, was that a bonus payment to Mr. Lynn, or was that a payment to Monarch, in relation to Mr. Lynn's input?

3

A.

I don't know.

4

Q. 21

The letter of the 28th September would suggest that it was a bonus payment, if

5

I can have 4210 please? You see under the heading, item 4 in that letter

6

Mr. Sweeney? Monarch project management fee, as per your appendix A which is

7

the document I had on screen a moment ago "Attached to the letter of the 2nd

8

September with addition of success fee for R Lynn, of 15,000, this will now

9

give a total of 70,500". So Mr. Lynn was to be paid a success fee, isn't that

11:43:58 10

right?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 22

So if we go back to 4347, can the Tribunal take it that it was intended that

13

the personnel on the left would all have expended the times, or the hours, as

14

set out in that letter -- if that could be put around correctly sorry? Were

11:44:21 15

they the hours that it was anticipated the Monarch personnel on the left would

16

spend on the lobbying process between September and December 93?

17

A.

Yeah, I think that was a projection.

18

Q. 23

Yes a projection of what was likely to happen.

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 24

But in addition to that projection and those costs, there was to be 15,000

11:44:39 20

21

success fee, paid to Mr. Lynn, isn't that correct?

22

A.

I'm not quite sure whether that 15,000 relates directly to that but yes.

23

Q. 25

Yes. In fact I think if we could have 7817 please. GRE wrote to you on the 14

24

of September 1994, in relation to bonus arrangement for Mr. Lynn and the fact

11:45:03 25

that he had only received three of the 15,000 that he was due to receive, isn't

26

that right, do you recall receiving that letter?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 26

Can I ask you what was the background to that letter?

29

A.

This really was, as a result of the appointment of Richard Lynn being done

11:45:24 30

really without my precise knowledge at the time and it got a bit mixed up Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:45:29

11:45:51

6 1

between, as far as I can see, bonus payments and salaries and houses and direct

2

relationship with Mr. Monahan and -- various things, I think that is a result

3

of that.

4

Q. 27

5

Of a misunderstanding, on your part, of the circumstances under which Mr. Lynn came to be retained in, relation to the Cherrywood project, is that it?

6

A.

No not a misunderstanding on my part, but really a mixed up situation.

7

Q. 28

A lack of clarification, lack of communication to you of the terms of his

8 9

employment? A.

Yes. And I have to say in a that was resolved at some time.

Q. 29

Yes.

11

A.

But I'm not too sure exactly when.

12

Q. 30

But in any event it would appear that it was anticipated Mr. Lynn would receive

11:46:07 10

13

a bonus payment in September 1993 of 15,000 pounds in relation to the rezoning

14

which was to take place between then and Christmas or January '94?

11:46:22 15

16

A.

Yes.

Q. 31

Now I think if we just continue with that letter for a moment, if we can have

17

4209. This is the schedule, I think the third item there was the planning and

18

environmental impact statement from September to December '93 and that was at

19

schedule B and we see schedule B at 4348 and these were the infrastructural

11:46:48 20

housing projection costs for the experts being retained, isn't that right?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 32

And included in that was a design project management fee of 50,000 pounds for

23

Monarch Properties Services Limited, together with an environmental impact

24

assessment coordination, of 30,000 to the same company, is that correct?

11:47:09 25

26

A.

Yes.

Q. 33

And then I think if we go back to 4209, item number four third party costs

27

related to zoning proposals September to December '93 appendix C. And appendix

28

C is at 4349 and we see there a number of headings, including I think

29

Mr. Dunlop's projected four thousand pound payment, four thousand per month

11:47:35 30

payment, between September and December '93, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:47:38

11:47:54

7 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 34

And then we see Mr. McCabe, Mr. Meehan, Mr. Ryan was involved with the Science

3

and Technology Park, there were legal expenses and then Mr. Mc Parland, Douglas

4

Newman-Good and miscellaneous expenses, bringing it all to 50,000 pounds, isn't

5

that right?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 35

And I think on the meeting of the 27th of September, that figure was revised

8 9 11:48:04 10

down to 24,000 and we see the figure of 24,000 agreed, isn't that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 36

You were at that meeting, who else attended that meeting between yourself and

11

Mr. Baker on the 27th of September, can you recall?

12

A.

I can't recall. I suspect though that it was just him and myself.

13

Q. 37

It's just that the figures, as we see them, that is to say the manuscript

14

amendments, you say are not in your hand, so this document wasn't prepared by

11:48:27 15

you, or wasn't amended by you?

16

A.

No it's not my handwriting.

17

Q. 38

But presumably arising out of the meeting, you would have advised somebody

18 19 11:48:38 20

within Monarch, what you had agreed Mr. Baker. A.

Yes.

Q. 39

And it was reflected in Mr. Baker's letter of the 28 of September, which I

21

referred to a moment ago?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 40

Then if we go back to the schedule again, at 4209 under paragraph five we get

24 11:48:55 25

community and PR costs, isn't that right? And the community and PR costs I think are schedule D and they are at 4350, and I think whilst we see there a

26

figure of 36,000, if we go to the letter of the 28th of September '93 at 4210 I

27

think we see in fact that figure was agreed at 30,000, isn't that right? If we

28

look at item number three "As per your appendix D attached to your letter of

29

2nd September but excluding direct mail drop. This now amounts to a total of

11:49:32 30

30,000". Is that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:49:33

11:49:51

8 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 41

Can I ask you what community cost of 20,000 were anticipated in September 1993

3 4

which were likely to arise for November and December '93. At 10,000 per month? A.

5 6

I really couldn't be specific on that -- it seems to be community and PR costs.

Q. 42

Yes. In a moment we will come to a series of cash payments in November,

7

October, November and December of '93, which appear to be included under that

8

heading of 30,000. Do you know anything about those Mr. Sweeney?

9 11:50:10 10

A.

I don't know which ones you are talking about.

Q. 43

Well I will come to them in a moment and we might revert to this document when

11

I do.

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 44

Just if we revert back then to our schedule again. At 4209 you set out the

14

other marketing and residential at six, 7 revised master plan, 8 industrial

11:50:29 15

layout, 9 science layout and 10 preparation and compilation of valuation data

16

for future sales and that's appendix E. I want to ask you about the next two

17

items 12 and 13. Item 12 is Carrickmines Valley sewage scheme 1994, third

18

party costs to accelerate access to the sewer, and this was to be discussed

19

between yourself and Mr. Baker, 13 is incentive bonus payments for senior staff

11:50:55 20

1994, for achieving zoning and enhanced value of site to be discussed. Taking

21

the first one Mr. Sweeney, that is number 12. what third party costs did you

22

anticipate were likely to arise in September 1993, which would result in

23

accelerating access to the sewer?

24

A.

11:51:18 25

myself putting everything but the kitchen sink in to try and maximise our

26 27

return. Q. 45

28 29 11:51:27 30

I can't be specific on that. But I would say those last three items really

But you were at the meeting with Mr. Baker and this was on the agenda, isn't that right?

A.

Yes.

Q. 46

I am just wondering can you assist the Tribunal in identifying for the Tribunal Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:51:31

11:51:44

9 1

what third party costs you had in mind and what third party costs were

2

discussed at that meeting on the 27th of September 1993, which related to

3

accelerating access to the sewer?

4

A.

I can't recall the actual discussion.

5

Q. 47

And can you give any indication to the Tribunal on what heading, or who was

6

likely to receive payments to facilitate an acceleration of access to the sewer

7

as envisaged in September of 1993?

8

A.

No I can't recall that.

9

Q. 48

Now if we can have 8089 this is a letter of the 20th October 1993 from you to

11:52:14 10

GRE and it relates to costs in relation to the pavilion site, I think you

11

agreed me on Friday that the -- what you were doing in Dun Laoghaire had a

12

beneficial effect on your lobbying campaign for Cherrywood, particularly in

13

relation to those councillors that were concerned about the development of Dun

14

Laoghaire, is that right?

11:52:37 15

A.

That's quite correct Chairman. There were a number of councillors,

16

particularly the local ones in Dun Laoghaire, that didn't want to see anything

17

happening in Cherrywood without corresponding investment in the centre of the

18

town, so Monarch went out of their way at that time to try and placate their

19

problems and Bloomfields was a direct result of that, as was The Pavilion.

11:53:09 20

Q. 49

And I think you were there seeking a contribution of a hundred thousand, which

21

appears from a note dated 20th of October '93 was agreed GRE. Is that correct?

22

They saw the benefit of what you were seeking to achieve there?

23

A.

Yes, they decided to invest money in The Pavilion, but not in Bloomfields.

24

Q. 50

Now if I, a moment ago I referred to a series of payments in October and

11:53:33 25

November 1993 and I just put them on the screen for a moment and then ask you

26

about them Mr. Sweeney. If I can have 4670, this is the cheque payments book

27

for Monarch Property Services Limited. And for the 2nd of November you just

28

see, just about four items down, you see for the 2nd November 1993 a cash

29

payment there of six thousand pounds, do you see that, you see the word cash,

11:54:03 30

just underneath Frank Dunlop and Associates? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:54:05

11:54:19

10 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 51

Then just two items below that you see for the 3rd November 1993, Allied Irish

3

Banks PLC and what appears to be the words -- expression cash, do you see that,

4

a sum of five thousand pounds?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 52

Now if we look at 4676, we see that five thousand pounds cheque dated the 12th

7

November '93, cheque number 8893, and then if we can have 4671, we see a debit

8

for six thousand pounds of the 4th November '93 and if we look at 4673 for the

9

2nd November '93 about midway down, you will see a debit, it's not a cheque

11:54:53 10

it's a debit on the account, of five thousand pounds, which may be a debit for

11

either a cash withdrawal or a bank draft. And then if I could have 4782

12

please, this is another extract from the cheque payments book, it's for 7th

13

December 1993 for a sum of three thousand pounds, the second last entry. Do

14

you see that? Allied Irish Banks PLC and what appears to be cash in the column

11:55:17 15

beside it and we see that being debited on the account at 4783 for the 9th

16

December 1993 and finally, in the books of L&C Properties Limited, at 8787 we

17

see a debit of 2,500 for the 2nd of November '93, do you see that, it's the

18

first debit on that screen?

19 11:55:41 20

A.

Yes.

Q. 53

Those sums appear to have been debited to the accounts of either, L&C

21

properties or Monarch Property Services Limited, in October, November '93. If

22

I could have 4781, they were included in community PR costs, a figure of

23

29152.52, as you will see on that screen. You will see the various debits, you

24

see the six thousand, five thousand, five thousand, then if you go down you see

11:56:18 25

three thousand and then third from the end cheque 50082 L&C 2,500, that makes a

26

total of 25,500 pounds.

27

A.

Do you want --

28

Q. 54

21,500 pounds sorry, apologies.

29

A.

Yes.

Q. 55

Leaving a balance of 7657.52 pence. Now looking at that document on screen

11:56:37 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:56:47

11:57:03

11 1

Mr. Sweeney, do you recognise the handwriting on that document?

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 56

Do you recall any discussion between yourself and representatives of Monarch

4

where the -- those items were discussed?

5

A.

No.

6

Q. 57

At 5022 you will see those items referred to in the ledgers of Monarch Property

7

Services Limited, the general ledger report as you will see in the top and they

8

are in under the heading general promotions and they are given the series

9

reference numbers which relate to Cherrywood, in other words they are being

11:57:27 10

included as part, or posted I should say as Cherrywood costs, do you

11

understand, under the heading general promotions?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 58

Now what, my real question to you Mr. Sweeney is insofar as you can, would you

14

advise the Tribunal of the ultimate destination of the 21,500 that we see there

11:57:52 15

on screen, which appears to have been withdrawn in or around the period

16

October/November '93, from the third vote on Cherrywood was taken place?

17

A.

Yes, I see that. I don't know what the ultimate destination of that money was.

18

Q. 59

Who within Monarch would know the ultimate destination of that money?

19

A.

I would say the accounts department.

Q. 60

That would be Mr. Glennane, is it?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 61

And do you have any recollection or any, of a discussion within Monarch in

11:58:18 20

23 24 11:58:35 25

relation to those withdrawals, or the expenditure of that 21,500 at that time? A.

No that I can recall.

Q. 62

Can you give, or can you speculate for the Tribunal, as the person who lead the

26

Cherrywood project, as to how that sum might have been expended at that time?

27

A.

No, I couldn't speculate on that.

28

Q. 63

Now if we can have 5016, this is a letter of the 24th March 1994, it's from

29 11:59:02 30

Mr. Lynn to Mr. Benge. You may or may not know of this letter -- it's existence Mr. Sweeney and it says, "I refer to a letter of the 28th September Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

11:59:04

11:59:30

12 1

from Martin Baker which is enclosed for ease of reference and in particular to

2

paragraph three. And also refer to fee notes 2181 and 2189. And have pleasure

3

enclosing detailed break down of sums expended under community/PR costs as

4

back-up documentation in relation to these." And we see those invoices at 5020

5

and it refers back to that schedule which we were dealing with a moment ago in

6

relation to the letter of the 2nd September and it's headed community costs,

7

appendix D of Edward Sweeney's letter of 2nd September and paragraph 3 of M D's

8

letter of the 28th September 20,000 -- in other words the 21,500 has been

9

netted to 20,000. Then at 2189 at 5019, you see the public relations cost,

11:59:56 10

appendix D of Eddie Sweeney's letter of 2nd September, paragraph three of Mr.

11

Baker's letter 28th September '93. And then the schedules are included and in

12

a memo to you at 5272 from Mr. Caslan, on the 8th July '94, dealing with the

13

amounts due by GRE re Cabinteely, items C and D are referred to, that is

14

community costs, and you are advised that Richard Lynn supplied back up to this

12:00:22 15

invoice 2181 to Geoff Benge, over two months ago, it's included in my list

16

attached. Public relations, same reference, and you refer to invoice 2189.

17 18

If we can have 5027 please, this is a letter to Mr. Padfield, by Mr. Lynn, on

19

29 July 1994. It refers to a short meeting taking place on 28 of July 1994.

12:00:50 20

Included with that document then is a -- under item 2, fee demand in respect of

21

community and PR costs in sum of 7652.52 plus VAT. This is the net sum having

22

taken out the 21,500, which we discussed, from the previous list. Amended list

23

is also attached. Then at item 3. Fee demand in respect of special management

24

fee, in the sum of 21,500 plus VAT, being the items that we discussed and

12:01:16 25

agreed.

26 27

Now I accept you didn't right that letter Mr. Sweeney, it was written by

28

Mr. Lynn, but it would appear those cash payments of 21,500 pounds, were now

29

being described as a special management fee, do you see that?

12:01:29 30

A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:01:29

12:01:50

13 1

Q. 64

2 3

21,500 pounds? A.

4 5

What can you tell the Tribunal about that special management fee and that

I can't really say anything except that it would appear to me that it was a heading made, or put on at the request of GRE.

Q. 65

And we see the two invoices accompanying that letter at 8759, invoice number

6

2283 dated 28 of July 1994, for 7652.52 and at 8758 we have invoice 2284 again

7

dated 28 July '94, for 21,500 plus VAT at 26015. And if I could have 5029,

8

this is a letter to Mr. Lynn from Guardian on 3rd August 1994 and we are

9

dealing with the sum 21,000 plus VAT. Which had been claimed and if you look

12:02:28 10

at the very last item on that first page it says, "I cannot agree to pay

11

invoice 2284 involving a special management fee of 21,500 plus 4,515 pounds VAT

12

giving a total of 26,015.

13

acknowledges in his letter of 7 July 1994, his agreement to a fee budget of

14

30,000 in respect of community payments, that is 20,000, invoice 2181 and

12:02:58 15

At 5030, whilst Martin Baker of this company

Pembroke PR 10,000 invoice 2189, we made it clear we would not be able to pay

16

this balance until satisfactory invoices had been produced". In other words

17

GRE were looking for satisfactory invoices in relation to that 21,500 cash

18

payment, do you know if such invoices were ever produced Mr. Sweeney?

19

A.

I don't.

Q. 66

Can you help the Tribunal in anyway in relation to those payments?

21

A.

No.

22

Q. 67

Did you know that those payments had been made at that time?

23

A.

The payments had been made by GRE.

24

Q. 68

No by Monarch, in order that 21500 as I have shown on screen in relation to

12:03:17 20

12:03:37 25

those debits and cheques made payable to cash, had been made and withdrawn?

26

A.

No I can see that now but at the time I don't recall seeing them.

27

Q. 69

But it was included in a memo to you at one stage by Mr. Caslin, isn't that

28 29 12:03:59 30

right, I put that memo on screen a moment ago? A.

Yes.

Q. 70

5272, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:04:00

12:04:16

14 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 71

But you can't assist the Tribunal in relation to those payments at all?

3

A.

I'm afraid not.

4

Q. 72

Now if I could have 4606, these are three payments of five thousand pounds each

5

and the cheques appear to be made payable to you, Mr. Sweeney, at 4606 you see

6

the remittance advice for a sum of five thousand pounds and you see cheque

7

number 798 and it appears to have been dated 2nd October '93 and we see the

8

cheque at 4607, it's a cheque of the 21st October '93 made payable to E

9

Sweeney, five thousand pounds and appears to have been negotiated in Dockrell

12:04:43 10

Farrell. There is a subsequent one at 4613, dated again possibly the first of

11

October '93, the cheque is 4608, dated 21st October '93, E Sweeney. And

12

finally at 4612 we see the remittance advice for a further five thousand pound

13

cheque number 799, although we don't seem to have that cheque, that make a

14

total of 15,000 pounds and if, we can have 4784, this is an extract from

12:05:18 15

Monarch Property Services Limited, general ledger report, you will see about

16

two thirds of the way down the screen, item -- under the heading general

17

promotions is a sum of 15,000 pounds. Cheques numbers 798, 799 and 800 and in

18

brackets (E S) 15,000 pounds. In other words that 15,000 pounds payment to you

19

has been included under the heading general promotions and would appear to

12:05:48 20

relate to Cherrywood, can you help, or assist the Tribunal in anyway

21 22 23

Mr. Sweeney in relation to those payments? A.

Yes Chairman I can. Those payments were relating to another job, other than Cherrywood and if you like I'll give you a brief overview of it.

24 12:06:10 25

I was negotiating at that time for this other job and in order to secure the

26

job I required 20,000 pounds and I went to Mr. Glennane and asked him for four

27

cheques of five thousand because I might have been able to secure the

28

negotiation for five, ten, 15 or 20. In the end of it -- and this all happened

29

down on the steps of the High Court -- I only needed 15,000 which I used and I

12:06:50 30

gave the fourth cheque back to Mr. Glennane. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:06:55

12:07:21

15 1

Q. 73

And had that anything to do with the Cherrywood project Mr. Sweeney?

2

A.

Indirectly it was mentioned, I don't really know whether I should bring it into

3

the public arena here. It had been mentioned before in terms of when of the

4

jobs that we were trying to use to encourage GRE to get involved in, in fact

5

GRE did eventually get involved in it.

6

Q. 74

In any event I think, on the 11th November 1993 the vote did take place in

7

relation to the Cherrywood proposals and we have seen that. And you were

8

successful in relation to that motion, isn't that right?

9 12:07:40 10

A.

Yes.

Q. 75

Could I have 2752, this is a handwritten note of -- do you recognise that note

11

Mr. Sweeney?

12

A.

Yes I saw this note.

13

Q. 76

Can you explain the note as far as you can to the Tribunal?

14

A.

Yes. I don't really know how this note came to the attention of the Tribunal

12:08:03 15

but it goes away on to after, way after I left Monarch in the year 2000.

16

Q. 77

Has it anything to do with the Cherrywood proposals at the time?

17

A.

Nothing at all.

18

Q. 78

This is a more recent project that you yourself pre involved in?

19

A.

This?

Q. 79

Yes?

A.

The reason that I have got all these phone numbers of all these councillors

12:08:22 20

21 22

were that under another job I, as principal, had given political donations and

23

for some reason I gave the political donations in 1998, one of them was

24

returned and two years later I think for the benefit of a general election, the

12:08:49 25

fact that I gave these donations was released to the press and a furore came on

26

over it, it ended up believe it or not on the 9 o'clock news and I was really

27

annoyed, so what you are seeing on that sheet, is my getting hold of the phone

28

numbers of the people to whom I had made donations, to establish, for the

29

press, who had been hounding me on it, hounding really I mean hounding, so that

12:09:31 30

I could supply them with accurate information. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:09:35

12:09:56

16 1

Q. 80

Now at 7941, following on the vote Mr. Murray, the marketing director, wrote to

2

Ansbacher in relation to the Cherrywood Properties Limited, isn't that right?

3

And you will have seen this letter in the brief and he is effectively advising

4

Ansbacher of the outcome, isn't that correct?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 81

And he refers to a meeting on the 12th November 1993, which would have been

7

the day following the vote, in that first paragraph, where he says Eddie,

8

presumably you Mr. Sweeney, "Outlined, Monarch's technical strategy for the

9

total site, it is our view that rather than make an outline planning

12:10:16 10

application in respect of the residential lands only it is preferable to

11

prepare an outline planning application for the total site development works

12

and submit same to the new Dun Laoghaire Borough Council, work on this

13

application has commenced and it is envisaged that it will be lodged by January

14

94", isn't that correct?

12:10:32 15

16

A.

Yes.

Q. 82

Would it be fair to say Mr. Sweeney we dealt on Friday with the meetings with

17

the Manager and your strategy at the time, you had hoped to put an industrial

18

zoning on the site, that wasn't possible in the review which had just taken

19

place, but you had this understanding with the Manager in relation to the

12:10:49 20

21

Science and Technology Park, is that correct? A.

22

Yes, this stems way back to the Manager's report of a number of years before which was turned down, it included an area of industrial --

23

Q. 83

That's DP90/123, which had been struck down in December '90?

24

A.

Yes, so I was very aware that this was, I don't know if ambitious is the right

12:11:11 25

word, but it was on their list of things they would like to see on the site and

26

I had started work on the Science and Technology Park and I was trying to

27

encourage everyone to support it, with a view, if I may say, to getting rid of

28

the agricultural zoning that remained on the site.

29 12:11:42 30

Q. 84

If we can have 5211 this is an extract from a report done in June 1994 by Mr. Sweeney -- or Mr. Lynn I should say, under the heading Science and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:11:47

12:12:05

17 1

Technology, it says, "The rezoning of the agricultural land the increasing of

2

the residential density rests on the premise that a Science and Technology Park

3

would be brought to fruition. Without this potential job creating concept the

4

agricultural lands will not be rezoned and no increase in density will occur."

5

under normal circumstances the plan having been confirmed in December '93 it

6

wouldn't come up for review again until 1998, isn't that right, five years on?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 85

But you had seen the prospect of introducing the concept of the Science and

9

Technology Park, you had sold to the Manager the idea of job creation within

12:12:22 10

the new Council, the Science and Technology Park would have necessitated a

11

variation of the plan and in that variation you were going to seek to increase

12

and I think you were successful in increasing, not just -- and introducing

13

sorry, not just an industrial zoning, but increasing the density on the

14

existing zoning, isn't that right?

12:12:42 15

A.

Yes.

16

Q. 86

And all that was in place at this time as well, that is to say late '93?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 87

And at 7942, this is the second page of that letter of the 19th November '93,

19 12:13:04 20

under item number four, Mr. Murray is reminding the bank, Ansbacher Bank, how you had outlined your strategy in relation to the 67 acres of land, which were

21

presently now zoned B, which would have been agricultural zoning. He went on

22

to say "Whilst these lands are zoned agricultural this zoning also allows a

23

wide area of activity to be carried out in the context of it's location. With

24

regard to the value of the particular portion of the site we are of the view

12:13:28 25

that due to the particular strategic location of these lands and particularly

26

it's proximity to the proposed new South East Motorway that there is no doubt

27

that ultimately these lands will be rezoned to either AP zoning or E zoning to

28

permit either residential or industrial development on the portion of the site.

29

In any event we would be of the view that this particular portion of the site

12:13:47 30

is presently worth not less than 7 million". So your strategy at the end of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:13:51

12:14:02

18 1

'93 was to encourage the programme, that you had ongoing with the planners and

2

the Manager and fostering the idea of the Science and Technology Park, isn't

3

that correct?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 88

And I think if we can have 2129, if we revert to your statement just for a

6

moment under the heading 1994 Cabinteely/Cherrywood, you say, "Acceleration of

7

infrastructure and services. As this came within my sphere as development

8

director, I would have attended various meeting with local authority officials

9

on matters such as roads, sewers, access ESB and water. Pavilion, you were

12:14:27 10

seeking planning permission, Then at 2030 you say, Bloomfield shopping centre,

11

Quinnsworth Dunnes negotiation."

12 13

You say, "I attend a Science and Technology conference in Bordeaux attended by

14

Ching Chong, Singapore Science Park. Dermot Drumgoole, Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown

12:14:45 15

County Council principal officer, was also in attendance. You say there were

16

also other Science and Technology conferences, in far away places like, Bejing,

17

Japan, Kyoto, America, Hong Kong, isn't that right? And you attended most of

18

those?

19 12:14:58 20

A.

Yes.

Q. 89

You say, "I will explain below the aspects of Cherrywood became a central focus

21

as part of this -- and you set out a series of very high place people and

22

specialists in relation to the Science and Technology Park, isn't that right?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 90

And I think on the 6 of January 1994, at 4923, there was a meeting between you,

12:15:17 25

Mr. Lafferty, and Mr. Willie Murray, who was the planning officer, isn't that

26

right, you have seen that attendance of that meeting?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 91

And I think at that meeting Mr. Murray advised you that the Action Plan would

29 12:15:35 30

be available within two months, isn't that right? The planners had decided carry out an Action Area Plan on the site? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:15:39

12:15:53

19 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 92

And obviously one of the niggling little difficulties that you had at this time

3

was the zoning of lands for agricultural purposes below a notional line for the

4

motorway?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 93

And this was seen as an anomaly and Mr. Murray was here advising you that this

7

would be recommended to be changed to AP, isn't that right?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 94

And then I think on the 19th May '94, Mr. Murray presented that plan, that

12:16:11 10

Action Area Plan at 5107, to yourself and other representatives of Monarch and

11

GRE, isn't that right? He advised you what was likely to happen in relation to

12

it and what the proposals would be, I think the matter came before the Council

13

in May 1994, and was adjourned to June '94, is that right?

14 12:16:30 15

A.

Yes.

Q. 95

And I think also in May '94 there was a motion by Councillor Gilmore in

16

relation to the Science and Technology Park, isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 96

And that again was adjourned to June '94. And if we return to your statement

19

at 2188, you say in June 1994 the planning committee of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown

12:16:50 20

County Council unanimously passed motion welcome the Science Technology Park

21

and a case to be made to the working group set out by the Department of

22

Enterprise and Employment. You said in parallel discussions were being held

23

between Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council and Monarch to view the

24

possibility of the participates of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in the

12:17:07 25

Science Park development by means of an acquisition of an equity interest in

26

the lands in question, isn't that right? By means of the lands were being

27

considered were 63 acres on the south side of the proposed link road between

28

Wyattville junction and Loughlinstown junction and South Eastern Motorway?

29 12:17:27 30

A.

Yes.

Q. 97

Now in June 1994 and I referred to it a moment ago, at 5167 there was a report Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:17:34

12:17:45

20 1

compiled in relation to the Cherrywood Development, this was to set out the up

2

coming strategy, isn't that right?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 98

And the strategy at this stage was to push ahead with the concept of the

5

Science and Technology Park which, of itself would necessitate a variation of

6

the Development Plan, so that there would be an area set aside or zoned for E1

7

which was the Science and Technology zoning, isn't that correct?

8

A.

Yes E1.

9

Q. 99

And I think that if we look at that strategy, just very briefly, one of the

12:18:08 10

areas identified in that was a progress report, at 5206 and I think that

11

effectively reviewed the situation to date and the meetings with Mr. O'Sullivan

12

and his staff in relation to the Science and Technology Park and it considered

13

the motion of Councillor Gilmore, isn't that right?

14 12:18:28 15

A.

Yes.

Q. 100

And I think at 5207 it set out the action that was to be undertaken, isn't that

16

right?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 101

And it was obvious that the Manager would continue to promote the zoning and

19

the density changes, provided he could see the majority of elected members were

12:18:46 20

in favour of it.

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 102

The Manager didn't have the power himself to alter the zoning, that was a

23 24 12:18:53 25

function for the councillors? A.

Yes.

Q. 103

And presumably he wasn't going to go out on a limb and do something that the

26

councillors weren't supportive of, isn't that correct?

27

A.

I expect so.

28

Q. 104

However if the councillors for their part would be led somewhat by his views on

29 12:19:11 30

things, that is to say by the Manager and his planning staff? A.

I should certainly think so. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:19:14

12:19:33

21 1

Q. 105

Now another, one of the two continuing outstanding issues was the sewage

2

system, Carrickmines valley sewerage system and also the question of access to

3

the site, because you now had zoning which would have enabled you to develop

4

and construct houses, isn't that right?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 106

And 5208, in relation to access, that report reports that agreement had been

7

reached with the County Engineer that agreement had been reached to allow

8

access from the N11 to service circa 20 acres of the residentially zoned lands,

9

subject to an existing access of an adjoining landowner being permanently

12:19:50 10

closed. And that report records that the agreement was reached over the head

11

of the Roads Engineer for the area, do you recall any agreement or discussion

12

which lead to that agreement Mr. Sweeney?

13

A.

I'm not entirely sure what this refers to.

14

Q. 107

This is Mr -- I presume it's Mr. Lynn's report, maybe others had a hand in

12:20:11 15

compiling it and it's in relation to the strategy...

16

A.

For the access?

17

Q. 108

Well strategy generally as of June 1994, at 5212 Mr. Lynn appears to put his

18

name to a date it 15th June 1994. Presumably this was a document that would

19

have been circulated with in Monarch and you would have set out the up coming

12:20:33 20

strategy for the site?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 109

Do you recall any discussion within Monarch in relation to that document or

23 24

that strategy? A.

12:20:47 25

26

I'm getting a little bit lost, I have lost the thread, you were talking about closing an access.

Q. 110

27

Yes one of the issues that has been identified there by Mr. Lynn relates to access to approximately 20 acres of the now residentially zoned lands.

28

A.

Oh, yes.

29

Q. 111

Which has been permitted by the Council?

A.

Now I understand. Yes, on a temporary basis an access was really -- it was

12:21:01 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:21:10

12:21:32

22 1

very difficult to get in through the roads people, because they didn't want any

2

more accesses off the N11 and we came up with a possibility of swapping that

3

access with another one, who happened to be a developer we knew, who was quite

4

happy to close his access, so that meant that it was pushed through and we did

5

get the agreement to open an access for, I may say, a very small area of

6

development.

7

Q. 112

Now one of the other issues then identified by Mr. Lynn in that at appendix A

8

and 5178, under the heading "general promotions", were a series of payments

9

which were envisaged, isn't that right? Do you recall any discussion within

12:21:58 10

Monarch that the parties identified there would be paid both in relation to the

11

up coming general election and the up coming Shannon election, which were

12

identified as being two years hence?

13

A.

14 12:22:20 15

I don't recall any discussion, but that would fall in line with the various payments that were made during or before elections.

Q. 113

And at 5180, under the heading "zoning costs" Mr. Lynn has identified, as of

16

the 20th of June '94, presumably it's Mr. Lynn, costs by way of success bonus

17

for the staff to include Mr. Lynn of a hundred thousand, Mr. Reilly 30,000,

18

Mr. Lafferty 30,000 and others 20,000, do you recall any discussion in relation

19

to those likely charges or costs?

12:22:48 20

A.

What's the date of that.

21

Q. 114

June, the -- that is dated 20th of June 1994?

22

A.

No I can't recall any specific one. But I do know that there was an ongoing

23 24

desire to get GRE to partly fund the bonuses for various people. Q. 115

12:23:14 25

Yes we did Mr. Lynn's bonus of 15,000 up to December '93 a moment ago, now this is following on about three or four months later, he is projecting, I am not

26

saying it's Mr. Lynn although Mr. Lynn does would, appear to have signed some

27

of the other schedules attached to this report, but whoever has compiled this

28

portion of the report is identifying a bonus payment to Mr. Lynn of a hundred

29

thousand?

12:23:33 30

A.

Well it seems very excessive to me and I don't think that actually happened in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:23:37

12:23:53

23 1 2

reality. Q. 116

Yes. It's being linked to a similar payment to a JW, whom I suggest to you is

3

Mr. Jack Whelan. Do you recall a hundred thousand pounds bonus payment to

4

Mr. Jack Whelan in relation to zoning costs up to this period?

5

A.

No.

6

Q. 117

Do you know anything about bonus payments to Mr. Whelan?

7

A.

I don't.

8

Q. 118

Do you know anybody who might have received 100,000 pounds in bonus payments up

9 12:24:05 10

11

to this time? A.

No.

Q. 119

Now I referred a moment ago to the meeting on the 23 of May 1994, and at 5207,

12

again dealing with the progress report for '94 you will see there in the second

13

paragraph "It will be noted however that serious reservations were expressed at

14

the meeting on the 23 of May 1994, regarding the rezoning proposals by some of

12:24:29 15

the members." Do you see that?

16

A.

I am just trying to get the date of this.

17

Q. 120

Again this is, this document is dated June '94, it's somewhere between the 23

18 19 12:24:56 20

of May meeting and the meeting on the 29 of June? A.

I can't understand the context of why serious reservations would be expressed.

Q. 121

Well whoever has compiled that portion of the report is, was of the view that

21

serious reservations had in fact been expressed, and the author of that portion

22

of the report appears to be Mr. Lynn, at 5212 he signs it, dated 15th June '94?

23

A.

24 12:25:22 25

Well I don't recall any reservations in relation to the Science and Technology Park.

Q. 122

So you don't know how Mr. Lynn came to the conclusion, in June '94, that there

26

had been serious reservations expressed at the council meeting on the 23rd of

27

May 1994, at 5207?

28

A.

No, I can't recall that.

29

Q. 123

And the report again identified at Appendix F and compiled by Mr. Lynn on the

12:25:45 30

16th June '94 has a political strategy at 5202. And the political strategy Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:25:57

12:26:26

24 1

advises, at 5203, that the support of a number of identified local councillors

2

be obtained. Do you recall any discussion in relation to that, Mr. Sweeney?

3

A.

I would have seen that, but I don't recall discussing it.

4

Q. 124

Now at 2363 we know that on the 29 of June 1994 the go ahead was given for the

5

Science and Technology Park. There were a number of decisions reached and we

6

see those at 2369, namely that copies of a Draft Action Plan be put on public

7

display, that a delegation be sent to meet with two cabinet ministers for the

8

administrative area and an agreed draft letter would be sent to the chairman of

9

a working group which had been established in relation to science and

12:26:51 10

technology, isn't that right, by the government at that time?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 125

And I think there matters rested throughout the summer, and would it be fair

13

say there were ongoing negotiations between yourself and the Manager and his

14

staff thereafter, that is between June and September '94?

12:27:07 15

16

A.

Yes.

Q. 126

And I think we also see in that report, at 5204, again signed by Mr. Lynn, that

17

the development officer, Mr. Drumgoole had advised you that the government

18

favoured a science and technology park being located on public lands, isn't

19

that right?

12:27:25 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 127

And I think the notion then was introduced that perhaps the council could

22

acquire some of these lands so that they would become a joint venture partner

23

in the lands with Monarch and GRE, is that correct?

24 12:27:40 25

A.

That was a suggestion to overcome that obstacle.

Q. 128

Yes. And I think that the Manager pursued that with you, and you with

26

Guardian, and I think if we look at 5339 we see a letter of the 7th September

27

1994 from Mr. Padfield to Mr. O'Sullivan, advising that "from the outset

28

Guardian had not been as keen on the suggestion as our partners Monarch, but we

29

were prepared to allow you the opportunity to until September of this year to

12:28:09 30

achieve the rezoning provided always that any rezoned from housing to industry Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:28:13

12:28:30

25 1

would be compensated elsewhere on the site by a zoning of an equal amount of

2

new land for residential purposes". In other words the negotiations were now

3

proceedings on the basis that any science and technology park lands would have

4

to be compensated by an upgrade in either the agriculturally zoned lands or

5

increase in density of the residentially zoned land, isn't that right?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 129

And that was reiterated on 6th October '94, at 5380 we see a further letter to

8

Mr. O'Sullivan from the Guardian. We know on the 19th October 1994 at 5392

9

there was a meeting attended by Mr. Reilly, and possibly Mr. Lynn. Sorry

12:28:56 10

Mr. Lafferty and Mr. Reilly, with Mr. Murray, isn't that right?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 130

You will have seen this in the brief. And just if we look at the second

13

paragraph of that for the moment. We are now in the middle of the negotiations

14

Mr. Sweeney between GRE, Monarch and the Manager in relation to the amount of

12:29:14 15

land that would be set aside for the science and technology park and also the

16

cost to the council of acquiring a one third interest in the existing lands,

17

isn't that right?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 131

And we see there that Mr. Murray said that at a meeting of the selected

12:29:31 20

councillors Kevin O'Sullivan and himself decided on a strategy which would be

21

outlined to Eddie Sweeney by Kevin O'Sullivan, isn't that right? And they were

22

unhappy with the attitude of Monarch's partners, in other words with GRE, isn't

23

that correct?

24 12:29:44 25

A.

Yes.

Q. 132

And he advised there that they were prepared to change the zoning on the

26

Monarch lands to the left of the entrance road and include the acreage not

27

presently zoned towards the motorway. They were not prepared to increase the

28

density of the existing houses and were not prepared to deal with the B zoning,

29

isn't that right?

12:30:00 30

A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:30:02

12:30:20

26 1

Q. 133

Now at the bottom of that page, Mr. Sweeney, you will see a handwritten note

2

"glad we didn't listen to Willie Murray" dated 25 of October '94, whose

3

handwriting is that Mr. Sweeney?

4

A.

I'd be guessing, I don't know.

5

Q. 134

It's not yours Mr. Sweeney?

6

A.

No it's not mine.

7

Q. 135

But if we look at Mr. Murray's diary for 17 October, recalling that was on the

8

14th October, at 5398 he has an entry for two o'clock meeting with E Sweeney,

9

do you see that?

12:30:36 10

11

A.

Yes.

Q. 136

Did you have a meeting following on that meeting with Mr. Murray and possibly

12

Mr. O'Sullivan, where Mr. O'Sullivan's strategy was advised to you?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 137

And I think that by the 10th October, at 2371, a motion had been filed or

12:30:55 15

received by the council signed by councillors Conroy, Lydon and Cosgrave, which

16

would effectively be putting pressure on the council to rezone lands for

17

zoning, isn't that right?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 138

And this was part of your, when I say you that is Monarch/GRE strategy to force

12:31:14 20

the manager's hand, isn't that right?

21

A.

I wouldn't put it like that.

22

Q. 139

There was a level of negotiation going on, isn't that correct?

23

A.

There was. I would regard this as evolution of that negotiation.

24

Q. 140

Yes. If we look at 5393 this is a letter of 20 October '94 from you to your

12:31:31 25

partners GRE, aren't you there advising them that since that meeting which was

26

an earlier meeting with us, Mr. O'Sullivan, you had instigated the submission

27

of a motion to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council for -- which is

28

effectively the motion we saw a moment ago?

29 12:31:48 30

A.

Yes.

Q. 141

So those three councillors signed that motion at Monarch's instigation, isn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:31:53

12:32:09

27 1

that right?

2

A.

It looks like that.

3

Q. 142

Now you go on in the last paragraph there Mr. Sweeney to advise -- you are here

4

now selling to GRE the manager's offer to you, isn't that right? And the issue

5

is do you go ahead with the motion which is being put in at the instigation of

6

Monarch or do you negotiate with the Manager, isn't that right?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 143

And the Manager has spoken with you and you say on the final paragraph "Richard

9

and Anthony are confident that the motion will succeed, which is the opposite

12:32:27 10

view held by the county Manager and his officials who are saying that even if

11

it did succeed on the first vote on a marginal basis that it would fall at a

12

further vote after the end of the three month display period due to public

13

pressure and the lack of support from the Manager and his officials"?

14 12:32:45 15

A.

Yes.

Q. 144

In other words, the manager's point of view was you negotiate with him rather

16 17

than proceed by way of the motion? A.

18 19

Certainly. I would repose much more confidence in the manager's view than anyone else's.

Q. 145

Indeed if we go back to Mr. Willie Murray's meeting at 5392, this is a meeting

12:33:04 20

of the 14th October '94, isn't he there telling the Monarch representatives in

21

the very final sentence of that second paragraph he says "they strongly feel

22

that proposals should be lead by the council officials and contacts to date

23

with the councillors have been unhelpful", isn't that right?

24 12:33:27 25

A.

Sorry, this is a note to file.

Q. 146

This is a note to file with copies to you and others, Mr. Sweeney, arising out

26

of the meeting on the 14th October '94 between Monarch representatives and Mr.

27

Murray the planning Manager, and the planning Manager is advising the Monarch

28

representatives that --

29 12:33:44 30

A.

Yes.

Q. 147

That contacts to date between Monarch and councillors had been unhelpful to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:33:48

12:34:06

28 1

the negotiations, isn't that right?

2

A.

Where does it say that?

3

Q. 148

You see the second paragraph starts WM, if you just move to the second last

4

sentence "They strongly feel the proposal should be lead by council officials

5

and contact to date with the councillors have been unhelpful". Do you see

6

that.

7

A.

I see that.

8

Q. 149

Wasn't that the attitude of the Manager and his planners, that contacts between

9

Monarch and the councillors had been unhelpful to negotiations taking place

12:34:17 10

11

between the Manager and GRE and Monarch? A.

12 13

being thrown into the air. Q. 150

14

Yes. In any event I think by November 1994 agreement had been reached between the three parties involved and we see that at 5438 and again at 5439, heads of

12:34:47 15

agreement had been reached, presumably subject to the agreement of GRE, Monarch

16 17

I wouldn't put that connotation on it. This is an example of all the balls

and the councillors, isn't that right, between the Manager and yourselves? A.

Yes. I may say, Chairman, it was very difficult to get GRE on board for that,

18

they were reluctant at first and only at the very end did they become

19

enthusiastic.

12:35:08 20

Q. 151

21 22

the manager's hand, isn't that right? A.

23 24

Q. 152

right? A.

28

12:35:40 30

But this was their only prospect of increasing the residential zoning on the lands in the absence of a successful motion by the councillors, isn't that

26

29

I really felt that GRE didn't fancy the science and technology park too much, that was the main motive.

12:35:28 25

27

Because GRE felt that they had the sufficient number of councillors to force

Yes. Everybody could see that. I could see that but GRE didn't see it immediately.

Q. 153

Now I just want to deal with the actual agreement concluded between yourselves and the Manager. The agreement on screen is the heads of agreement and it Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:35:44

12:35:59

29 1

provides for an area of approximately 60 acres of land south of the link road

2

to be zoned for science and technology, isn't that right?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 154

And then provides that one third of those lands could be acquired by the

5

council on preferential rate, the agricultural land was at 100,000 and the

6

balance residentially zoned land was 25,000 per acre?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 155

Then paragraph three there was to be a recommendation made to the council to

9

initiate a draft variation to the development plan which would provide for

12:36:21 10

resisting the existing C zoned lands to ensure that approximately 7 hectares

11

would be located in one block north of the link road and provide a zoning on

12

the lands north of the link road currently zoned agricultural to a density of

13

16 houses per hectare, isn't that correct?

14 12:36:36 15

A.

Yes.

Q. 156

So effectively what was approved at the meeting on the 14th November 1994 was

16

that land north of the road would now be increased in density, isn't that

17

right? If we look at 7446 we see a map of the proposed variations to map 27,

18

and the area to the right, as we see it on the map, was now to be zoned for a

19

science and technology park, the link road from the Wyattville junction to

12:37:10 20

motorway had changed, and then I think there was an area to the left which had,

21

which we see coloured blue which was now to be zoned agricultural, sorry

22

residential purposes, isn't that right?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 157

And the net effect of the proposals was that lands which had been sold to

12:37:33 25

Nevilles for residential purposes had now increased density, isn't that right?

26

A.

Yes, the density went up to six houses per acre.

27

Q. 158

And in fact if we look at 5450, we see that a memorandum dated 14th November

28

1994, this is an Ansbacher note to file, following a meeting with Mr. Noel

29

Murray of the 10th November '94. And Mr. Murray is advising, I think, the bank

12:38:09 30

of the agreement that has been reached, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:38:12

12:38:26

30 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 159

And I suggest to you that the agreement there is slightly different to the

3

agreement or heads of agreement, that we have seen published in that, under

4

item number 4, he is advising that 94 acres of residential lands, recently sold

5

to Nevilles, would have an increased density, to 7 houses per acre and their

6

value would increase from 6.4 million to an extra 1.2 million, payable to

7

Monarch, isn't that right?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 160

If that's an extra 1.2 million being payable to Monarch, does that mean there

12:38:45 10

is an extra 2.4 million being paid by Nevilles, in other words Monarch were

11

receiving 50 per cent of the take up, in the increased value of the lands?

12

A.

I'm Sorry that's a calculation that just escapes me at the moment.

13

Q. 161

If we look at item four and you see he is advising that residentially zoned

14

lands have recently been sold to William Neville and sons for 6.4 million will

12:39:13 15

16

result in an extra payment of 1.2 million to Monarch? A.

Oh I understand. There was an auction by Neville, for land that wasn't

17

zoned -- wasn't zoned at all, but hoped to be zoned at four houses per acre and

18

consideration for that auction would have resulted in an additional thing if

19

it had gone to six houses per acre.

12:39:32 20

Q. 162

21

And that additional would have been a 2.4 million pay out by Neville of which 50 percent would come to Monarch, which is 1.2 million?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 163

And in fact the residentially zoned land at 5451, had been valued by Mr. Murray

24

at somewhere between 10.5 million and 14 million as we see in that calculation,

12:39:54 25

isn't that right?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 164

And that was the net effect, if successful, of the negotiations between

28 29 12:40:01 30

yourself and the Manager, isn't that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 165

And we know that later that year, sorry earlier the following year, that is the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:40:06

12:40:24

31 1

to say April 1995, the variation which was on screen was confirmed by the --

2

unanimously I think, by the Council, isn't that right?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 166

And at 2130 you deal with the year 1995 and say Science and Technology Parks

5

meeting with the science centre international in Philadelphia USA and other

6

conferences in USA you also say you visited Surrey Science Park and reported on

7

your science to Kevin O'Sullivan the Manager and then you were developing a

8

golf course in Donegal, is that right?

9

A.

12:40:41 10

Yes. And I think on 24 of April '95, at 2422, you see where the review was

11

confirmed, isn't that right? I think there was one abstention, sorry one

12

motion against at 2427 and 23 votes for the proposed variation?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 167

And we see the count of that vote at 5610. I think at 2130 you deal with the

12:41:08 15

year 1996 and I think by the year 1996 you were involved in the Bloomfield

16

development and other developments, isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 168

And I think by 1996 difficulties had arisen internally within Monarch between

19 12:41:23 20

21

yourself and Mr. Monahan and other directors, would that be the case? A.

Yes.

Q. 169

I don't wish to go into those, but there is one matter I just want to cover on

22

3rd May 1996, at 7964, you produced notes of a meeting you had on that day with

23

Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane, isn't that right? I think you were unhappy with

24

the official notes of the meeting and you produced your own notes of the

12:41:43 25

meeting is that correct?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 170

And if I could just deal with two matters if I may, one of the issues that was

28

now arising was the prospect of acquiring additional lands and I think the

29

lands in question were referred to as the Stephenson lands, is that right?

12:41:59 30

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:42:01

12:42:18

32 1

Q. 171

Another issue was in relation to roads. At 7966, under item 8, heading "roads"

2

you were recommending that negotiations should be started with the roads

3

authority for the sale of lands which would be required for the new motorway

4

and link road. You said that will provide a substantial income as the zoning

5

is either Science and Technology or retail. Those zonings of course stemmed

6

directly from the review that we had dealt with a moment ago, isn't that right?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 172

Now in relation to the Stephenson lands, which you were about to acquire, you

9

said under item 7, you said you pointed out again gnat time was right to

12:42:37 10

purchase these land and that you had continued discussions with officials in

11

Dun Laoghaire Rathdown and chief valuer, who was negotiating the sale of the

12

CPO situation, with representatives on behalf of the owners of those lands.

13

You say the lands could be purchased for one million now and the long term

14

profit could be over five million as Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown would cooperate in

12:43:00 15

bringing the lands into a Science and Technology Park, possibly as

16

complementary use as business park which could release 28.5 C zoning lands for

17

use as a modern retail park.

18 19

Would it be fair to say that the Manager or somebody on his staff advised you

12:43:16 20

that if the Stephenson's lands came on line, that they would be upgraded to

21

science -- or they would assist in suggesting that the lands be upgraded to

22

Science and Technology Park?

23

A.

24

that that would have been the position, had the lands been purchased and I have

12:43:37 25

26

No, there was no such offer of assistance, but it was glaringly obvious to me

to say that there were subsequently purchased. Q. 173

And at, on the 13th May 1996, at 5936, there is a meeting between

27

Mr. O'Sullivan, Mr. Drumgoole, Mr. Monahan and Mr. Murray, where they are

28

being, the Manager is being updated in relation to issues and matters within

29

Monarch, but under the heading Stephenson lands, we see at the bottom of that

12:44:02 30

page that P.M. which is presumably Phil Monahan, stated that had he had some Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:44:08

12:44:21

33 1

discussions with Harrington Bannon in respect of the Stephenson lands. He was

2

anxious to canvas the views of the Manager, as to whether or not Dun

3

Laoghaire/Rathdown would be interested in becoming involved in the purchase of

4

these lands. The Manager restated his understanding of the existing legal

5

agreement with Guardian and Monarch in respect of the Stephenson lands. This

6

agreement in fact obligated them to use their reasonable endeavours to acquire

7

these land and to introduce them into the joint venture company at cost.

8 9

And at 5937 it goes on to say, "Phil Murray stated that had he was aware of the

12:44:39 10

fact and advised the total lands of the Stephenson holding, which comprised

11

approximately 63 acres were on offer to him for a sum of between 1.1 and 1.3

12

million. The D D stated he felt that this price was somewhat high bearing in

13

mind that most of the lands were zoned high amenity and also based on the price

14

paid for the Galvin golf course lands. Mr. Monahan stated that had he would --

12:44:55 15

all he wanted to do was establish that if the lands were purchased that both

16

Monarch and the council should be involved on a joint venture basis on these

17

lands. And it was agreed by everybody at the meeting that it was very logical

18

for the Stephenson lands to be added to the Science Park and that this could be

19

a good thing for the Science Park". This was bringing to fruition what you had

12:45:16 20

21

foretold on the 3rd May, isn't that right? A.

22

Yes and in actual fact it was part of the legal agreement between Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown, Monarch and GRE that...

23

Q. 174

Additional lands would be added...

24

A.

Yeah, they could be, provided for that.

Q. 175

Well of course the landowners point of view, they were selling lands zoned high

12:45:31 25

26

amenity whereas the purchasers, which included the Council were -- knew that

27

the lands would be upgraded to Science and Technology, which would presumably

28

reflect a huge difference in value, from the point of view of the owners, isn't

29

that right?

12:45:52 30

A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:45:55

12:46:12

34 1

Q. 176

Now I think you left the Monarch Group in December '96, there was litigation

2

and it was compromised and you dealt with the Pavilion site on your own, I

3

think you will have seen in the brief, you continued to have meetings with the

4

Manager and his staff in relation to that site, is that correct?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 177

Now could I just take you, Mr. Sweeney, just to one or two items just to tidy

7

up. Evidence has been given by Mr. Jim Barry in relation to payments which he

8

said he received from the Monarch Group, you knew Mr. Barry, isn't that right?

9 12:46:33 10

A.

Yes.

Q. 178

And there are a series of payments which Mr. Barry would appear from the

11

records of Monarch to have received either from an L & C properties, or Monarch

12

Property Services Limited. And these include payments on 28 of September '90

13

of 50 pounds, 3rd October '90, 800 pounds, 5 of April '91, 2,000 pound and 9 of

14

August '91, 2,000 pounds.

12:47:01 15

16

If you wish I can produce the cheque payments books to show those payments, do

17

you recall certifying or insuring that Mr. Barry got any of those payments?

18

A.

No I don't recall.

19

Q. 179

Did you ever sanction payments to Mr. Barry, of any monies?

A.

Yes I believe I would have, but they wouldn't have been of any amounts that

12:47:14 20

21

you have just mentioned -- I did -- he was part of a football club.

22

Q. 180

Yes.

23

A.

In Tallaght, in Killinarden and a number of times I organised football jerseys

24

for him. He was very regular visitor to the Tallaght site and a welcome

12:47:46 25

visitor I may say, being a local. And he came in and had cups of tea, if I was

26 27

asked to authorise any money for him I certainly would have. Q. 181

Yes. At 7808 there are minutes of a meeting between Mr. Barry and

28

representatives of his political party, which took place on the 10th May 2000

29

at 2.30 pm, in the final paragraph there you will see where Mr. Barry recalls

12:48:16 30

that he received one thousand pounds from Monarch Properties for an election Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:48:19

12:48:44

35 1

campaign in, probably, 1991, when he lost his seat. And this is the bit I want

2

to bring your attention to Mr. Sweeney, the money was in cash. Do you have any

3

recollection of sanctioning, or do you know if Mr. Barry received, 1,000 pounds

4

in cash, probably in 1991?

5

A.

No.

6

Q. 182

Do you know of any payments of cash to councillors that we have dealt with

7

cheque payments over the last number of days, but do you know of any payments

8

which were by way of cash to councillors, Mr. Sweeney?

9 12:48:51 10

A.

No.

Q. 183

Do you know of any discussion or sanction within Monarch of cash payments to

11

councillors?

12

A.

No.

13

Q. 184

And at 8851 there is a note in a -- an attendance visitors book in Kildare

14

Street, of a visit to Dail Eireann, on the 31st March 1992, of four people

12:49:12 15

which appears to include Mr. Barry on a visit to Minister M Smith, who I

16

understand may have been at the time Minister for the Environment, do you

17

recall a visit to Mr. Smyth organised or in the company of Mr. Barry?

18

A.

19 12:49:46 20

No, I definitely didn't meet Mr. Smyth and I have no recollection of a meeting with any politician, with Mr. Barry.

Q. 185

The Tribunal has included in the circulated documents, at 3781, a letter

21

written on the 22nd or 24th of July 1992, by Mr. Monahan to GRE in relation to

22

costs, an additional claim for over 7 million pounds against GRE in relation to

23

costs associated with Tallaght, you will have seen reference to this

24

Mr. Sweeney, but included in those costs under the heading "additional

12:50:19 25

management costs" is a figure in relation to fees incurred in obtaining tax

26

status of Tallaght. I wonder can you assist the Tribunal in that in --

27

advising the Tribunal how that claim came about and how that claim came to be

28

made?

29 12:50:37 30

A.

That's the very last paragraph.

Q. 186

Yes and in fact if we go to 3782 you will see where the claim is quantified in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:50:43

12:51:03

36 1

the sum of 850,000 pounds?

2

A.

Yes, that's in relation to the tax designation.

3

Q. 187

Yes.

4

A.

And anchors.

5

Q. 188

I am more concerned about the tax designation element of that fee Mr. Sweeney

6 7

how it might have arisen? A.

Yes. I was aware that our Chairman, Mr. Monahan, was involved in doing

8

whatever he could to achieve tax designation, as were we all in the company.

9

Mainly because we had seen it working very well in the Custom House Docks and

12:51:31 10

we recognised Tallaght as being a deprived area, such a deprived area that it

11

merited such a tax designation and I think we would have asked anyone we knew

12

to promote that, and we also did it, I may say, in other jobs, including Dun

13

Laoghaire, including Bloomfields, including the Pavilion and that would have

14

been a fairly important part of Tallaght, because Tallaght would not have gone

12:52:04 15

16

ahead in my opinion without that. Q. 189

But what I am really concerned about Mr. Sweeney is if you can assist the

17

Tribunal in the significant professional fees that were incurred in relation to

18

obtaining the tax status or Tallaght, what professional fees were incurred?

19

A.

12:52:30 20

I believe that the fees would have been related to the entire company trying to talk to everyone they could and also I have a recollection of -- it may have

21

been KPMG or another big firm of accountants, who were to prepare our report

22

that would put the case for tax designation of Tallaght, that was one. There

23

may have been others.

24

Q. 190

Were you involved in compiling this letter of the 22nd of July '92?

A.

This is Mr. Monahan's letter.

26

Q. 191

Yes.

27

A.

I don't think so.

28

Q. 192

Mr. Glennane has given evidence that he certainly involved, I am just wondering

12:53:00 25

29 12:53:10 30

had you any input into it? A.

I may have done, but I just don't have a recollection. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:53:14

12:53:34

37 1

Q. 193

And finally Mr. Sweeney, can I just ask you at 3061, there is a claim for L&C

2

payments, and included in that claim, under the -- is a claim for Phil

3

Reilly/PR work of 300,000 pounds, do you see that?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 194

Can you assist the Tribunal in relation to how that claim came to be made and

6

whether or not it was actually paid?

7

A.

I really don't have a clue about that.

8

Q. 195

Who would be best placed within Monarch to advise the Tribunal in relation to

9 12:53:58 10

that, other than Mr. Reilly, who has already given evidence? A.

I saw Mr. Reilly's evidence and I can't recall what he said.

11

Q. 196

He said he knew nothing about it.

12

A.

That appears to me to be an internal accountancy document, therefore it would

13 14

probably be best answered by the accountancy department. Q. 197

Thank you very much Mr. Sweeney, if you just answer any questions.

12:54:20 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

All right it's nearly one o'clock I think Mr. Sanfey you want to

17

cross examine, how long will you be approximately.

18 19

Mr. Sanfey: 15 or 20 minutes at most Chairman.

12:54:31 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

And Mr. Redmond is due to be about 15 minutes he says.

22 23

MS. DILLON:

I think so, yes.

24 12:54:39 25

CHAIRMAN:

And then Mr. Shipsey, probably --

26 27

MR. SHIPSEY: Currently no questions.

28 29 12:54:56 30

CHAIRMAN:

All right well we'll sit again at two o'clock and hopefully

finish -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:55:03

12:55:07

38 1 2

MS. DILLON:

May it please your Lordship.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you.

5 6

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

7 8 9 12:55:11 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

12:55:12

14:03:39

39 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AFTER LUNCH:

2 3

MR. QUINN: Mr. Sweeney please.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

Afternoon Mr. Sweeney, now Mr. Sanfey.

6 7

MR. SANFEY: Thank you Chairman, before I begin can I just update you in

8

relation to the situation in relation to Paul Monahan, Chairman? Mr. Monahan

9

is considering a statement and in fact he is meeting with us tomorrow to do

14:03:55 10

that, what I think is likely happen is that he will submit a statement by the

11

end of the week and if the Tribunal wishes him to be available for questioning

12

he will be available as soon as may be after that. Thank you.

13 14

CHAIRMAN:

All right thank you.

14:04:08 15

16 17

THE WITNESS WAS THEN EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS

18

BY MR SANFEY:

19 14:04:08 20

Q. 198

MR SANFEY: Mr. Sweeney good afternoon my name is Mark Sanfey and I act for

21

Monarch companies, Dominic Glennane, Phil Reilly, Richard Lynn, Paul Monahan

22

and estate of the late Phil Monahan, I just have a few questions Mr. Sweeney,

23

the first thing I'd like to ask you about is the evidence that you gave last

24

Thursday. I wonder could day 6661 be got up on screen, page 86, question 546.

14:05:11 25

Thank you.

26 27

It was near the start of your examination by Mr. Quinn, Mr. Sweeney and

28

Mr. Quinn was asking you about the statement that you made and if you recall

29

you had given a sort of diagram of the management structure in Monarch and it

14:05:25 30

made reference to Colm Monahan and Paul Monahan in that, I'd just like to go Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:05:30

14:05:43

40 1

over your evidence in relation to that very very briefly, and just ask you to

2

comment on it.

3 4

At question 546 Mr. Quinn asked you, I think you go on to say from 1990 onwards

5

Phillip Monahan operated most of the time at an annexe to his new home in

6

Somerton, Castleknock, where he set up a separate team of people, including

7

personal assistant Ann Gosling, John Sherwood, as well as two of Phillip

8

Monahan's sons, Colm and Paul, is that correct? And you say that's correct

9

from 1990. Now if we go on to question 551, you sea Mr. Quinn asks, But the

14:06:08 10

office he set up in Somerton was an office staffed by himself Ms. Gosling

11

Mr. Sherwood and his two sons Colm and Paul Monahan, if what you have said in

12

that statement is correct answer, well let me put it into context the office

13

was run from Harcourt Street, Mr. Monahan had moved to Somerton and his

14

secretary also moved out with him. John Sherwood that you mentioned was an

14:06:32 15

assistant to Mr. Monahan and the two sons were coming back and forward all the

16

time but I am not very clear at this stage whether they had anything to do with

17

the business. Then at question 556, Mr. Quinn reads an extract your statement

18

and says, now would you agree with me Mr. Sweeney that any reasonable

19

interpretation of that statement would lead one to believe that there was a

14:06:52 20

separate team of people operating out of Somerton headed up by Mr. Monahan and

21

included his two sons Colm and Paul. You start off to say yes and develop that

22

answer, but you are interrupted and you come back to it I think further down in

23

557 after an intervention by the Chairman. And on page 89 there, you see you

24

say -- Okay, I can understand that a bit better now. What you have to do here

14:07:20 25

is split up what the different roles are for Monarch Properties Limited and

26

what Mr. Monahan's other businesses might have been. For example he was

27

involved in vintage cars, which had nothing to do with the property and various

28

other things, so John Sherwood assisted him on that, as did his sons. It had

29

really nothing to do with me in Monarch. I was concentrating on development

14:07:39 30

and it was only in his role as Chief Executive and Chairman of the development Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:07:42

14:07:59

41 1

company that I was talking about.

2 3

And then finally at question 602, Mr. Quinn asked you, Mr. Sweeney was

4

Mr. Monahan surrounded in Somerton by his own advisers independent of the

5

group? And you say well he certainly had advisers in Somerton. Then at 605

6

Mr. Quinn says, Again Mr. Sweeney I am putting on screen extracts from your own

7

statement, do you understand? And you give a schedule of Somerton do you see

8

that? Answer: Yes. Question: And you see you identify Mr. Monahan

9

underneath Mr. Monahan you have John Sherwood personal assistant, underneath

14:08:23 10

Mr. Sherwood you have entered for personal assistant Ms. Gosling and you put in

11

Colm Monahan and Paul Monahan. Answer: They were both his sons they had both

12

a very Junior role. Question: And you've already told us that they were

13

involved in Somerton from the 1990s forward isn't that right?

14

they were living in the house. Question: I was putting to you Mr. Sweeney

14:08:45 15

Answer: Well

what you yourself had told the Tribunal in your statement do you understand?

16

Answer: Yes. Question: 609 I don't wand to be unfair to you. Answer: Yes

17

610 I can bring up that portion of your statement where you dealt with this --

18

with his team. Answer: I don't think Chairman we are in conflict here at all,

19

I just reckoned that those two guys were young and inexperienced at that time.

14:09:07 20

21

Now, Mr. Sweeney, I'd just like to give you an opportunity to perhaps comment

22

on that, Mr. Paul Monahan has given evidence that during the 90s he had no

23

involvement with the Monarch business, do you recall Paul Monahan ever being

24

present at a time when you were present, for a discussion of Monarch business?

14:09:21 25

26

A.

No not Monarch business.

Q. 199

More particularly, was Paul Monahan ever present at any discussion of matters

27

relating to Cherrywood?

28

A.

No.

29

Q. 200

You stated in your answer to question 551 that you were not very clear whether

14:09:43 30

they had anything to do with the business, do you stand over that evidence now? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:09:50

14:10:03

42 1

A.

The business being?

2

Q. 201

Monarch business.

3

A.

I stand over that.

4

Q. 202

All right. Do you recall Mr. Paul Monahan having an involvement with any other

5 6

none Monarch business of his father's? A.

7 8

with his father, of which Monarch had no connection. Q. 203

9 14:10:26 10

11

Well I was loosely aware that he was involved in various business ventures,

Mr. Monahan in his evidence referred to the car business and setting up a car museum, does that ring a bell with you?

A.

Yes.

Q. 204

Thank you Mr. Sweeney.

12 13

Now if I just move on, in relation to the expenses and claiming those expenses

14

from GRE, or 50 per cent of them at any rate, this morning in giving evidence

14:10:46 15

you used a phrase that you were and I think I quote you here, maximising

16

recovery from GRE, and when Mr. Quinn asked you about the Carrickmines Valley

17

sewerage scheme and so on you used the phrase, I was putting everything but the

18

kitchen sink in to maximise our return.

19

A.

14:11:14 20

21

I didn't mean that in terms of the entire discussion, I meant it in relation to the last three items on that list.

Q. 205

Yes, thank you Mr. Sweeney, I accept that.

22 23

Can I just ask you Mr. Sweeney, would it be fair to say that, in general if you

24

or Mr. Glennane, or anyone else from Monarch were putting projected costs to

14:11:29 25

GRE, that obviously in estimating costs into the future you would be more

26 27

likely to overstate those costs, than under state them? A.

28 29 14:11:57 30

Well, I think the answer to that is we should have had the actual costs, but I would have said we'd have overstated them.

Q. 206

Thanks. And would it be fair to say that company policy, on the part of Monarch, was to get as much money as possible back from GRE? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:12:01

14:12:22

43 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 207

And to that end expenses claims were submitted from time to time to GRE and I

3

think it would be fair to say, would it not, Mr. Sweeney, that there would be a

4

lively debate as to whether or not in any given case Monarch would be able to

5

claim 50 per cent back?

6

A.

Sorry could you repeat that.

7

Q. 208

Would it be fair to say that on any given occasion when you would submit a

8

claim there would be a lively debate as to whether or not Monarch should be

9

entitled told get back 50 per cent of what they claimed?

14:12:35 10

11

A.

Yes.

Q. 209

You referred in your evidence to being in constant communication with

12

Mr. Baker, is that right?

13

A.

Well, not constant, regular.

14

Q. 210

So typically you submit a claim, Mr. Baker would get on to you and say you

14:12:51 15

can't be serious in claiming 50 per cent of that or whatever, or I'd have to

16

see invoices in relation to that?

17

A.

There was a level of negotiation.

18

Q. 211

Yes. Would it be fair to say Mr. Sweeney that there were two things,

19

verification and negotiation. Verification in the sense of GRE requesting back

14:13:09 20

up in relation to various items and then an element of negotiation as to what

21 22

they would be prepared to shell out for and what they wouldn't? A.

23 24 14:13:29 25

26

Well I think the answer is that I was trying to get the maximum and he was trying to pay the minimum.

Q. 212

And eventually you would meet somewhere in the middle, isn't that right?

A.

Yes.

Q. 213

Now Mr. Quinn has asked you repeatedly about a sum of 27,850 pounds. Which

27

were contributions to politicians but in fact were described as strategic

28

consultancy fees, now can I ask you whether you call them strategic consultancy

29

fees or anything else, were GRE aware that these were political donations?

14:13:53 30

A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:13:55

14:14:10

44 1

Q. 214

2

And ultimately I think they paid out that sum, isn't that right, it was included in the 550,000 that was ultimately paid out?

3

A.

I believe so.

4

Q. 215

Yes. Now just a few questions about Mr. Dunlop if I may Mr. Sweeney, in March

5

1993, when you met Mr. Dunlop for the first time, whether it was on the 8th

6

March or the 9th March, were you aware that Mr. Dunlop's modus operandi was to

7

bribe councillors?

8

A.

No.

9

Q. 216

Did Mr. Dunlop ever tell you that he had bribed councillors and that that was

14:14:33 10

how he operated?

11

A.

No.

12

Q. 217

Did you authorise him impliedly, or otherwise, to bribe councillors?

13

A.

Certainly not.

14

Q. 218

To your knowledge were any of the other Monarch operatives aware that

14:14:50 15

Mr. Dunlop's M O was to bribe councillors?

16

A.

No.

17

Q. 219

Mr. Dunlop's phrase in describing his own contribution to the project, was that

18 19 14:15:17 20

he added value to Mr. Lynn's efforts, would you agree with that? A.

Yes.

Q. 220

Can I ask you were you aware of Mr. Dunlop's reputation in March 1993 in

21

relation to lobbying, or what indeed was his reputation at that time?

22

A.

No, I didn't know anything about him.

23

Q. 221

Right. So he wouldn't have been described to you as somebody who is an expert

24

in lobbying and an expert in his ways around local politics -- were you aware

14:15:40 25

of that?

26

A.

No.

27

Q. 222

All right. I think you worked very closely with Richard Lynn on this project,

28 29 14:15:55 30

is that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 223

And Phil Reilly also? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:15:59

14:16:14

45 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 224

Would you accept that in general terms Mr. Reilly was not as involved with the

3

project as Mr. Lynn?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 225

Mr. Reilly has given evidence to the effect that the bulk of his involvement

6

was in relation to participating in the road shows of Mr. Herlihy and

7

canvassing certain Fine Gael councillors in the run-up to the 1993 vote, would

8

that accord with your recollection?

9 14:16:29 10

A.

Yes.

Q. 226

Did Mr. Lynn ever intimate to you that he had authorised Mr. Dunlop to pay

11

councillors?

12

A.

No.

13

Q. 227

Did Mr. Lynn ever intimate to you that Monarch or anybody representing Monarch

14 14:17:00 15

16

was paying money to councillors? A.

No.

Q. 228

Thank you Mr. Sweeney.

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Redmond?

19 14:17:06 20

MR. REDMOND: Mr. Chairman yes, I have a number of questions for this witness.

21 22

THE WITNESS WAS THEN QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS

23

BY MR REDMOND:

24 14:17:12 25

Q. 229

Could I start by asking you to outline as clearly as you can recall the

26

conversation that you had with Mr. Phil Monahan, deceased, about retaining

27

Frank Dunlop.

28 29 14:17:28 30

CHAIRMAN:

Sorry Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Redmond is for Mr. Dunlop.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:17:30

14:17:36

46 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

Sorry.

3 4

Q. 230

5 6

Could I ask you to outline your recollection of the conversation with Mr. Phil Monahan about retaining Frank Dunlop?

A.

Well I can't recall the conversation exactly, but the result of it was that I

7

was instructed by him to meet with Frank Dunlop to agree fees as a PR

8

consultant.

9

Q. 231

14:18:06 10

professional for a specific fee which was not particularly subject to

11 12

negotiation? A.

13 14

Was this the first time that Mr. Monahan had directed to you retain a specific

There was a similar conversation or meeting in relation to the appointment of O'Herlihy.

Q. 232

14:18:29 15

Can I bring you back now for a moment to what appears from your statement to have been a similar scenario, you recall the retaining of Mr. Liam Lawlor in

16

relation to the site at The Square in Tallaght, you recall his involvement?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 233

Yes. And you have already advised the Tribunal, via your statement, which I

19

think ran to 108 pages, that you had no involvement whatsoever in retaining

14:18:53 20

Mr. Lawlor, and you had no involvement whatsoever in paying Mr. Lawlor?

21

A.

That was my recollection, yes.

22

Q. 234

And it is interesting, is it not, that that was precisely your recollection in

23

respect of Mr. Frank Dunlop when you came to make your statement in February

24

2003?

14:19:12 25

26

A.

Yes I have already mentioned that.

Q. 235

Let's not worry about what you had already mentioned let's just deal with the

27

questions we are dealing with. You had precisely the same recall, or should I

28

say, lack of recall in relation to the retaining of Mr. Frank Dunlop?

29 14:19:30 30

A.

Yes do you wish me to try and explain it.

Q. 236

We'll deal with it by way of questions but if you have anything you wish to say Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:19:35

14:19:59

47 1 2

please feel free to say so? A.

Well I would like to make it clear that when I made that statement was in the

3

year 2002/03 and I had been away from Monarch for the guts of six years and I

4

had no paper and I had no contact with people in Monarch, so it was purely

5

based, as you will -- as the actual statement itself was qualified in a letter

6

attached to it, when it was sent to the Tribunal and I have to apologise that I

7

got that wrong.

8

Q. 237

9 14:20:25 10

Let's deal with that. You produced a statement which as I say runs to some 108 pages are you saying that's from oral recollection?

A.

It's a mixture of oral recollection and records that I had in my own diaries.

11

Q. 238

Right, so you did have some records and did you have some diaries?

12

A.

No I didn't --

13

Q. 239

And you have produced to the Tribunal, diaries have you not?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 240

And they recount various meetings with Mr. Frank Dunlop?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 241

How come you couldn't recall them for the purposes of your statement?

18

A.

I have to say I didn't attach any great importance to that at the time.

19

Q. 242

We'll deal with that in a moment, I am asking you a more simple question, you

14:20:39 15

14:20:57 20

are presumably in 108 pages, attempting to give a full and detailed account of

21

everything you were doing in relation to these projects, is that not the case?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 243

Now you had a specific heading, Frank Dunlop and Bill O'Herlihy, so it was

24

significant enough for you to put it in as a subject matter heading and then to

14:21:15 25

describe precisely nothing by way of recall, how is that -- if you recall

26

nothing why did you bother putting in a heading?

27

A.

The heading I believe had been requested by the Tribunal.

28

Q. 244

Could I have page 2200 for a moment please? I just want to draw your attention

29 14:21:47 30

to one thing in respect of this page Mr. Sweeney, the second paragraph, I find it quite utterly extraordinary that you can recall the religion of the family Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:21:52

14:22:07

48 1

that owned a plot of ground in Prague and you can't remember your dealings with

2

Frank Dunlop, on the same page?

3

A.

I don't find that extraordinary at all.

4

Q. 245

So, what you are say something is you have a distinct and clear recollection in

5

relation to minutiae, but you can't see the elephant in the room?

6

A.

I beg your pardon.

7

Q. 246

You can recall minutiae, which are not of any great relevance...

8

A.

Minutiae?

9

Q. 247

Yes.

A.

Well it was of particular interest to me at that time, that such a site should

14:22:20 10

11

have been owned in a very very unusual manner and the ownership of it had been

12

extracted from this family by the invading Russians, or whatever and I found

13

that all very interesting, therefore I recall it.

14 14:22:51 15

16

Q. 248

Would you describe yourself as a competent project manager?

A.

Yes.

Q. 249

Well let's investigate that for a moment. You were in charge of the Cherrywood

17 18

Development, isn't that correct? A.

19

happened when building development actually started and the actual construction

14:23:16 20

and completion of the project and I differentiated that, between what I would

21 22

call my role as a director. Q. 250

23 24

I have to say Mr. Chairman that I qualify project management in terms of what

You were described by Mr. Lynn as the team leader in respect of Cherrywood, is that inaccurate?

A.

14:23:38 25

I think it was a bit inaccurate, I think I was the director in charge of development.

26

Q. 251

Was there anybody in charge of the Cherrywood Development? Any one person?

27

A.

Insofar as the technical aspects were concerned I was in charge and so far as

28

the accountancy was concerned Mr. Glennane was in charge and then in terms of

29

both of us Mr. Monahan took the role of Chief Executive and Chairman.

14:24:08 30

Q. 252

Into that category that you have defined, where do motions fit? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:24:13

14:24:31

49 1

A.

Motions? Motions --

2

Q. 253

Motions before County Council?

3

A.

Well I wasn't very clear on what motions even were at that time. If you look

4

at my expertise it was related to construction and technical stuff, whereas I

5

felt that maybe you want to ask me more.

6

Q. 254

Yes Mr. Sweeney, because in actual fact the questions that I am specifically

7

asking are directed to the presence or absence of expertise. You have given

8

evidence to this Tribunal that in or around the time that you were advised by

9

Mr. Monahan to retain Frank Dunlop you were first and foremost staggered at the

14:24:55 10

failure in May 1992 to get the rezoning that you wanted, you were quite

11

convinced that the planners officials and Manager were completely behind the

12

rezoning of the nature that Monarch wanted, isn't that correct?

13

A.

That's my belief.

14

Q. 255

That's your belief. So in actual fact in or around the time that Mr. Dunlop

14:25:18 15

was retained the only imponderable, the only thing that you couldn't be certain

16

of, was how this development was going to pan out, at the voting stage, when

17

local councillors were come doing vote on this development by way of motion,

18

isn't that correct?

19 14:25:36 20

A.

I didn't fully understand the mechanisms at that time.

Q. 256

So are you telling this Tribunal that you did not understand, in the following

21

circumstances, the importance of the motions. Effectively all that stood

22

between Monarch and the zoning that it required was a vote in Dublin County

23

Council and you did not understand that?

24 14:25:58 25

26

A.

I didn't understand the actual process of the motions, I understood the law.

Q. 257

Right.

A.

That this in effect was the making of a law and that both sides had the

27 28 29 14:26:19 30

opportunity of putting forward their position and that was ultimately voted on. Q. 258

Did you understand at the time of the motions that the only thing that was stopping Monarch from getting what it wanted was a vote in Dublin County Council? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:26:23

14:26:38

50 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 259

You did. Now bearing that in mind, it is absolutely crucial in order to

3

succeed for Monarch to get what it wants, that it gets the vote it wants, isn't

4

that correct?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 260

You have the planners, you have the officials and you have the Manager behind

7

you, the only thing that stands in your way is a vote. As a result, would a

8

competent project manager, or team leader, not have realised that the sole, if

9

not primary focus, was on the vote?

14:27:01 10

11

A.

Certainly the primary focus to make the law was on the vote.

Q. 261

Was on the vote. So you did understand just how important this vote was, as a

12

result of which on simple democratic principles you must have understood how

13

important it was to get members of Council on side, did you understand that

14

much?

14:27:21 15

16

A.

Yes.

Q. 262

And would that explain why Monarch never refused a request from a politician

17

for a political donation?

18

A.

Possibly more reasons to that than --

19

Q. 263

Tell me?

A.

Well generally I would say that a refusal in any form to anyone can often cause

14:27:36 20

21

offence, and offence wasn't a thing that we want to be accredited to the

22

project.

23

Q. 264

24 14:28:01 25

And did it ever cross your mind that giving too small a donation might also be regarded as an offence?

A.

No it didn't cross my mind.

26

Q. 265

So how were the figures chosen?

27

A.

I have no idea.

28

Q. 266

So at this stage you appreciate that the crucial matter is a vote, it is

29 14:28:18 30

crucial to get members of Council on side, it is crucial not to refuse requests for political donations and you have been here before and you failed in May Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:28:23

14:28:31

51 1

1992, isn't that correct?

2

A.

Certainly much to my surprise.

3

Q. 267

Yes, but you'd failed?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 268

And you had had two people doing in house lobbying, whom I believe you

6

described as very effective, is that correct?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 269

So you regarded them as doing a very good job of straightforward lobbying of

9 14:28:48 10

members of Council and they failed, isn't that right? A.

There was an enormous campaign to --

11

Q. 270

And that campaign had failed?

12

A.

That campaign had failed and it had failed by I think one vote.

13

Q. 271

So as a result, we now have a situation where, for the sake of argument,

14

Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly have done everything above board, they have lobbied and

14:29:11 15

16

canvassed in an entirely legitimate manner and they failed, isn't that correct? A.

17 18

I wouldn't say that they failed. The project failed. I would apply no blame to them.

Q. 272

19

I am not talking about blame, I am merely using the dictionary meaning of the word failed, they didn't get the ball across the line, they didn't get the job

14:29:31 20

done, choose whatever terminology you want. What I am suggesting to you is if

21

these people had exercised legitimately the job of lobbying and/or canvassing

22

they had failed to achieve the desired result?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 273

Right. What made you think in a month of Sundays that doing precisely the same

14:29:51 25

thing again with one individual was going to make any difference?

26

A.

What made me think?

27

Q. 274

Yes.

28

A.

Well I didn't particularly think, but I think it stands to reason that another

29 14:30:11 30

person involved in that sort of team would add value to it and would -Q. 275

How? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:30:11

14:30:22

52 1

A.

Well the more the merrier.

2

Q. 276

Right.

3

A.

To be sure to be sure.

4

Q. 277

It was simply a matter of replication, in other words if you wear them down and

5

bore them to death you will get the vote you want?

6

A.

That's not it.

7

Q. 278

What is it then, what precisely did Mr. Dunlop add value?

8

A.

Well my perceptions, then and since, was that he would have been a very good

9

lobbyist, he came across to me as a very very competent person, very capable

14:30:43 10

11

and certainly seemed to me at the time good idea. Q. 279

You have given evidence to this Tribunal that Mr. Monahan described the

12

retaining of Frank Dunlop as a new strategy, if you are merely adding a third

13

lobbyist, how does that qualify as a new strategy?

14

A.

14:31:10 15

16

existing strategy. Q. 280

17 18

A.

Q. 281

And why couldn't Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly do that, without paying enormous sums of money to a third man, who was simply going to do the same job?

A.

23 24

The new one was to go out and find those guys that is voted against it and try to change their mind.

21 22

Okay. Let's deal with supplanting the existing strategy, tell me precisely what the new one was?

19 14:31:24 20

I don't recall him saying it was a new strategy, it was supplanting the

They could have, but the stakes were very high here as you know and I see nothing wrong with bringing in additional help.

Q. 282

14:31:44 25

But that's the point isn't it Mr. Sweeney, the stakes were very high here, you had already failed and you were going to make certain that you weren't going

26

fail this time?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 283

You were going to be certain that you didn't fail this time?

29

A.

Well no one can be certain, Chairman.

Q. 284

Certain within the realms of reason then Mr. Sweeney, but you were going to do

14:31:56 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:32:00

14:32:17

53 1

everything could you possibly do to ensure that this time you got the ball over

2

the line?

3

A.

That was what the company wanted was to get the vote other over the line.

4

Q. 285

So in this context, you discussed with Mr. Monahan, retaining Mr. Dunlop, you

5

can't recall the nature of the conversation?

6

A.

No I can't recall the precise --

7

Q. 286

No, so it is quite possible that in the course of that conversation Mr. Monahan

8

said look, Messrs Lynn and Reilly have failed to do the job, we have got to try

9

another way, we have got to use this man who is a lobbyist, who is well

14:32:36 10

connected, who'll do the job for us?

11

A.

He could.

12

Q. 287

Could he have say that much?

13

A.

He may well have said that.

14

Q. 288

He may well have said that. And despite that, you were given instructions to

14:32:47 15

retain him at 4 to you plus VAT which you clarified in your evidence, four

16

thousand plus VAT per month, isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 289

What if Mr. Dunlop had said, there is no way I am going to accept that job at

19 14:33:01 20

21

four thousand, plus VAT, per month? A.

Well then I'd have to go back and look for further instructions.

Q. 290

Well we are at a situation now where you are going to make as certain as

22

possible that you get the ball over the line, Mr. Monahan is of the view that

23

this is the man who can do it, so surely four thousand, plus VAT, per month

24

wasn't going to stop you getting what you wanted?

14:33:18 25

26

A.

It didn't and four thousand was agreed.

Q. 291

Well interestingly we have already heard evidence that wasn't agreed, and I

27

just want to deal with that aspect now. A proposal, or suggestion, was put

28

forward by your counsel and I presume it was based upon your instructions that

29

effectively Mr. Dunlop was retained for a period of nine months and a success

14:33:40 30

fee of 50,000 was agreed, four nines are 36, 36 plus 50 makes 86 and he got 85 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:33:49

14:34:11

54 1

and that that therefore explains the payment, but it doesn't, does it? Unless

2

you are ignoring VAT. You have given evidence that the deal was four thousand

3

plus VAT, the fee note that went in for the success fee was plus VAT, so that

4

in fact comes to over 104,000. Why haven't you paid him a balancing cheque?

5

A.

6 7

particularly copper fastened. Q. 292

8 9 14:34:28 10

I think the time the four thousand a month was agreed the duration wasn't

That's correct because you couldn't know at that stage when the motion was going to come on for a vote.

A.

Yes.

Q. 293

Right. But I'm asking you a different question, it was put forward on your

11

behalf that the explanation for the payment of 85 was the payment of nine

12

months fees, plus a success fee, both plus VAT. So you are out by a

13

considerable sum of money. Why is that?

14

A.

I don't know.

Q. 294

Did you regard at the end of the process Mr. Dunlop as fully paid?

16

A.

I didn't really think about that until recently.

17

Q. 295

Right. Well when you thought about it recently what conclusions did you reach?

18

A.

That he had been paid a substantial amount of money and it seemed enough to me.

19

Q. 296

Seemed enough to you, so VAT really -- even though you described it in evidence

14:34:47 15

14:35:11 20

as something which would not be of any concern to Monarch, you weren't keen to

21

hand it over, so that he had been paid proper, legitimate, contractual fees,

22

according to your contention?

23

A.

24 14:35:28 25

I think if Mr. Dunlop has any query about the fees he has been paid, he should take up with Monarch.

Q. 297

26

I'm asking you a different question Mr. Sweeney, it's your theory that 85 equates to the fees that were due?

27

A.

It's my theory?

28

Q. 298

It was put forward by your counsel.

29

A.

Right. Well I wouldn't call it my theory.

Q. 299

Right.

14:35:44 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:35:44

14:36:07

55 1

A.

That is in fact my belief of what happened.

2

Q. 300

Okay. So you agree a fee of four thousand, plus VAT, per month, and a success

3

fee of 50,000, in the ordinary course of events, when does a success fee become

4

payable?

5

A.

On success.

6

Q. 301

Yes that's normally my understanding as well, but in this case you had already

7

paid Mr. Dunlop 65,000 pounds before the matter even came up for vote, explain

8

that?

9 14:36:20 10

A.

I can't really explain that except he seems to have been dipping into the well.

Q. 302

Mr. Sweeney you'll have to try harder than that, it has already been put

11

forward that it was the success fee?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 303

Right. Mr. Dunlop had to deal with that in the witness box, now you have to

14

deal with the implausibility of what has been put forward on your behalf, that

14:36:35 15

16

that success fee has been paid, in large part, before any success? A.

Well the only way that I can deal with that Chairman is say that I didn't

17

really know about it at the time and looking back it seems that he had been

18

visiting the well, a number of times.

19

Q. 304

14:36:56 20

He had indeed been visiting the well a number of times. And do you have any comment upon the fact that you signed off on most of those visits?

21

A.

What do you mean signed off.

22

Q. 305

You signed the authorisation for payment on most of them.

23

A.

On some of them. I wouldn't know about most of them.

24

Q. 306

Okay, explain your thinking behind signing off, some of them.

A.

My thinking is that when I agreed the four thousand a month and the 25,000 up

14:37:14 25

26

front, a number of invoices would have been presented to me in the interim

27

between then and the end of the project, which would have been requested by

28

accounts, in my view to clean up the paperwork of the non-provision of invoices

29

at the outset.

14:37:41 30

Q. 307

Okay. Let's deal with that theory, all of the invoices that are produced after Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:37:45

14:38:03

56 1

the payment of the first 25,000 are discharged within a very short period of

2

time of the invoices being put forward, how on Earth can they be used to

3

retrospectively justify a payment of 25,000?

4

A.

Well what I have just said is that some of them were.

5

Q. 308

But I am suggesting to you Mr. Sweeney is that the reality is that no matter

6

what Mr. Dunlop put forward, you were going to pay it, because this was the man

7

to get the job done. And whilst you may not have wanted to know the details

8

Mr. Monahan had assured you that this was the how you got the job done.

9

A.

14:38:23 10

11

Well certainly Chairman, I'd have been very anxious not fall out with him, but I don't remember precisely anything about that time.

Q. 309

Let's do a quick recap then. You have just conceded that you would have been

12

very anxious not to fall out with Mr. Dunlop. You have effectively conceded

13

that Mr. Dunlop was introduced as the man to get the job done, that Messrs Lynn

14

and Reilly had failed to do and lastly, Mr. Dunlop was going to be the person

14:38:47 15

who was going to deliver to Monarch what they wanted, certainty on the basis of

16

their enormous outlay, insofar as certainty can be delivered, and indeed he did

17

deliver, didn't he?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 310

So you wouldn't take away anything from Mr. Dunlop's performance in relation to

14:39:05 20

how the vote transpired?

21

A.

No.

22

Q. 311

So if Mr. Dunlop had done a straightforward normal lobbying job was he not as

23 24 14:39:24 25

likely to have failed as Messrs Lynn and Reilly? A.

In my opinion he did do a straightforward lobbying job.

Q. 312

But how could you possibly know that Mr. Sweeney, you have had a staggering

26

ignorance of precisely what Mr. Dunlop was doing from start to finish, apart

27

from paying him 85,000, he apparently on a number occasions assured you

28

everything was okay and you left it at that, this in a circumstance where you

29

say so much is riding on this vote, it is so important so much money has been

14:39:50 30

laid out, you are absolutely determined not to fail this time and when this man Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:39:56

14:40:16

57 1

on 85,000 comes swanning into the office you ask him how things are going and

2

he says everything is okay and you leave it at that, is that competent team

3

leadership, is that competent project management? Wouldn't you like to know a

4

little bit more detail for the money you were laying out?

5

A.

No.

6

Q. 313

No you wouldn't?

7

A.

No.

8

Q. 314

So would you regularly layout 85,000 and not really expect any reporting, any

9

proper accounting, any detail in relation to what the person is doing for this

14:40:29 10

11

money? A.

I would expect in his competence to be within the realm of his own being and I

12

certainly wouldn't have questioned it, nor would I question the ability of an

13

architect to draw designs, or a quantity survey to do bills of quantities, I

14

would have assumed that they would have done it professionally.

14:40:48 15

Q. 315

16

Let's take it in baby steps then, you wouldn't question an architect about the quality of his drawings, but you might ask him he drawn them.

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 316

You might want to have a look at them?

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 317

You -- you'd want to have some interest or some involvement in relation to what

14:40:59 20

21

he is do for your money, but Mr. Dunlop apparently only has to say, it's all

22

okay and you wouldn't even query what he meant by okay?

23

A.

24 14:41:18 25

There were follow ups to that meeting which I possibly didn't attend where people were going to coordinate among themselves.

Q. 318

Mr. Sweeney you have said in your evidence that you asked him on a number of

26

occasions how things were going and that on a number of occasions he said

27

everything was okay?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 319

Right. I suggest to you that in order to qualify as a competent team leader or

14:41:31 30

competent project manager, you should go a lot further than that and I suggest Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:41:36

14:41:52

58 1

that you didn't get to where you got, by being incompetent. So finally what I

2

am saying to you Mr. Sweeney is you had a lot more detailed conversations with

3

Mr. Dunlop than you are admitting to this Tribunal?

4

A.

Not that I can recall.

5

Q. 320

Would you accept then in theory, that a competent project manager, would have

6

inquired beyond somebody on very large fees simply saying everything's okay?

7

A.

Could you repeat that.

8

Q. 321

I said would you accept that a competent project manager, when addressing a

9 14:42:16 10

person on high fees who says everything is okay, would query beyond that? A.

No I wouldn't, not in the --

11

Q. 322

With all the money that's riding on this development, okay is sufficient?

12

A.

Not in the case of a man whose expertise was such as Mr. Dunlop.

13

Q. 323

But you didn't question Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly in relation to their competence

14 14:42:35 15

when they failed in May 1992, isn't that right? A.

16

I can't understand why they failed and I certainly wouldn't put it down to their competence.

17

Q. 324

You wouldn't put it down to their competence?

18

A.

Or lack of competence.

19

Q. 325

Right. So really you are not concerned, despite the layout in fees, you are

14:42:51 20

not concerned to get regular reports, there is an awful lot of money riding on

21

this and you are not remotely concerned, other than being reassured that had

22

everything is okay?

23

A.

That is correct.

24

Q. 326

That's correct. Well I suggest to you Mr. Sweeney that that is implausible to

14:43:05 25

the extent of beggaring belief, when you are paying somebody this amount of

26

money. Was that a regular habit of yours to spend that amount of money and not

27

to demand progress reports?

28

A.

But I did have progress reports.

29

Q. 327

And you record "okay" as a progress report?

A.

Yes.

14:43:23 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:43:24

14:43:46

59 1

Q. 328

Would you accept that from normal professionals?

2

A.

Well I would be pretty much at a loss to find out how else I could monitor it,

3

apart from trying to test the temperature of his own enthusiasm for the project

4

and his understanding of how it was going, his enthusiasm was there from the

5

outset.

6

Q. 329

You described the May '92 campaign in the following terms, the vote had been

7

preceded by a fairly detailed campaign, there had been a road show and -- which

8

had been designed to address the concerns of objecting and local residents.

9

You were on top of that vote were you? You knew what was going on?

14:44:07 10

A.

Yes.

11

Q. 330

Right. You didn't this time, because you weren't making sufficient inquiries.

12

A.

But I was making sufficient inquiries.

13

Q. 331

So getting a report from Mr. Dunlop to whom you are paying 85,000 pounds in

14

order to ensure certainty, where there has been failure in the past, okay is

14:44:24 15

sufficient?

16

A.

Okay was sufficient because the vote did go through.

17

Q. 332

Oh Mr. Sweeney let's not bother with the benefit of hindsight, I am asking you

18

at the time, when Mr. Dunlop was reporting to you and saying everything is

19

okay, you are telling this Tribunal, without the possibility of knowing that

14:44:40 20

the vote was going to go through, that you were satisfied with that?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 333

Right. Well there is a very plausible explanation as to why you might have

23

adopted that approach and I am going to put it to you and I want you to think

24

about it, and that is he may well have been up to no good, I don't know, but I

14:45:00 25

don't want to know, I just want the result, as little information as possible

26

from Mr. Dunlop and the more I can hermetically seal myself from anything

27

that's going on, would you regard that as a logical interpretation of your

28

actions?

29 14:45:15 30

A.

No.

Q. 334

It's an illogical interpretation of your actions? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:45:18

14:45:32

60 1

A.

It's completely false interpretation.

2

Q. 335

Is it logical?

3

A.

Well I don't think it's logical not in my case.

4

Q. 336

Explain to me how it's not logical?

5

A.

I can't see any logic in it.

6

Q. 337

Very good. Now in your first statement or the lengthy 108 page statement, in

7

respect of Liam Lawlor you said, I had no knowledge of any details of such an

8

agreement or even if such an agreement existed for his occasional input, now

9

you described Mr. Lawlor in the following terms -- I can't find the exact quote

14:46:15 10

but you described Mr. Lawlor as an expert in the red tape of local authorities

11

and local government, a man with good connections with Dail Eireann and a man

12

who basically added value to The Square development, isn't that right?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 338

Right. So you describe him as a man who was instrumental in The square

14:46:37 15

development?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 339

Yes. And again he had been recommended to you by Mr. Phil Monahan?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 340

And again he had delivered the goods?

A.

Yes.

Q. 341

And again you have no idea of what the agreement was and you have no idea if he

14:46:48 20

21 22

was even paid?

23

A.

Yes, I'm pretty sure he would have been paid now but --

24

Q. 342

Well your statement in 2003 was to the effect that you couldn't be sure if he

14:47:04 25

26

was ever paid? A.

Well the only way I can say that Mr. Chairman, if anyone had come to me and

27

said Mr. Lawlor has, wants payment for X, Y and Z in relation to The Square,

28

then I would have had no difficulty at all with that.

29 14:47:24 30

Q. 343

Did he tell you everything he was doing, or did he just tell you everything was okay? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:47:24

14:47:50

61 1

A.

2 3

He wasn't doing anything, he was advising on, as you put it the red tape and the -- overcoming the difficulties that I had as project manager on Tallaght.

Q. 344

You see I see some curious parallels between Mr. Lawlor's position and

4

Mr. Dunlop's position in relation to your statement. You describe Mr. Lawlor

5

as someone who adds value, who is a very good person to have on your side and

6

you have no idea about the terms of his retainer and you have no idea if he was

7

ever paid. You then go on to say of Mr. Dunlop, I can recall no part in any

8

agreement with either Bill O'Herlihy or Frank Dunlop for the services that they

9

provided to Monarch, but I believe that such consultancy agreements would

14:48:12 10

probably have been formalised in writing. And then the next sentence is the

11

one I want to concentrate upon, I personally however at no time negotiated any

12

agreement, agreed any payments, or certified, or recommended any payments to

13

Frank Dunlop or Bill O'Herlihy whatsoever. Do you have that statement in your

14

mind?

14:48:35 15

A.

Yes I have already explain that had before Chairman.

16

Q. 345

Let's...

17

A.

And I was wrong.

18

Q. 346

Let's just park the theory of being wrong for a moment. I will ask the

19

question. I say to you that the wording of that statement makes it is patently

14:48:49 20

clear that you are not saying, I can't recall, it's a very positive statement.

21

You had nothing to do with Frank Dunlop whatsoever. It's a very emphatic word

22

Mr. Sweeney and you were attempting to convey to the Tribunal that you had

23

absolutely nothing to do with Mr. Dunlop, it's not just a failure of

24

recollection.

14:49:13 25

A.

I don't agree with that.

26

Q. 347

Putting as much distance between him and you as you can?

27

A.

I don't agree with that.

28

Q. 348

Really. So the word whatsoever is the kind of word you wouldn't use for

29 14:49:27 30

emphasis, you would just throw it in at the end of an ordinary statement to emphasise that you can't recall something? Is that what you wish the Tribunal Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:49:30

14:49:43

62 1

to believe?

2

A.

Sorry could you repeat that.

3

Q. 349

I said are you the kind of person who would use the epithet whatsoever, simply

4

to finish off a sentence to emphasis the fact that you can't recall something?

5

A.

I'm not sure whether I would do that or not.

6

Q. 350

Right. Well I'm suggesting to you --

7

A.

As a general rule I have no idea what kind of language I would use.

8

Q. 351

Well the word whatsoever is very emphatic and what you were doing in that

9

statement was you were putting as much distance between you and Mr. Dunlop as

14:50:02 10

you possibly could and this was 2003, now wasn't there good reason for you to

11 12

put distance between yourself and Mr. Dunlop in 2003? A.

13 14

As I found out six or seven weeks ago, yes there was, but I didn't know anything before that.

Q. 352

14:50:22 15

No you didn't even know about the Mahon Tribunal or Flood Tribunal as it was then known in 2003?

16

A.

I didn't know that Mr. Dunlop had made such statements concerning myself.

17

Q. 353

But you knew that Mr. Dunlop had had a torrid time in the Tribunal as a result

18

of which he had withdrawn to consider his position and had come back and had

19

effectively said that I will now tell precisely what went on in the course of

14:50:46 20

21

the Dublin Development Plan, you remember all of that presumably? A.

22 23

didn't follow the Tribunal until six or seven weeks ago. Q. 354

24 14:51:05 25

26

I think in common with many people, I read the reports in the newspaper, I

You were aware of the fact that Mr. Dunlop was damaged goods by the time you came to do your statement, were you not?

A.

I wouldn't use the term damaged goods.

Q. 355

You were aware, were you not, that Mr. Dunlop was now admitting to corrupt

27

activities involving councillors in order to secure rezoning, by the time you

28

came to make your statement, were you not?

29 14:51:23 30

A.

Yes.

Q. 356

You were. So that would explain why you would try to put as much distance Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:51:26

14:51:44

63 1

between yourself and Mr. Dunlop would it not?

2

A.

That's not the explanation.

3

Q. 357

Well I will put it to you that it is the explanation and I will explain to you

4

why it's the explanation. You put in the statement putting as much distance as

5

you possibly could between you and Mr. Lawlor, put in this statement makes as

6

much possible distance as you could between you planned Dunlop, however the

7

plan fell apart, to a certain extent, because when statements came from

8

Mr. Monahan and Messrs Lynn and Reilly guess what? Oh Mr. Sweeney was the one

9

dealing with Mr. Dunlop, so if you stuck to your statement you'd get blown

14:52:06 10

clean out of the water, wouldn't you, if you had stuck toe that statement from

11

February 2003?

12

A.

If you say so.

13

Q. 358

Right. You don't think so?

14

A.

No.

Q. 359

No. So you think that if you had stuck to your statement which is now patently

14:52:14 15

16

untrue, that you wouldn't have any difficulty?

17

A.

It wasn't patently untrue.

18

Q. 360

Is it not patently untrue now?

19

A.

If you say so, I don't believe -- I believe as I have already explained I did

14:52:34 20

that without attaching any import to it, without any information at hand and

21

without any contact from any of the personnel involved. Had I done that then

22

my statement might have been different, and my statement was qualified by

23

William Fry's and they qualified in the way I have just described, that it was

24

done under those conditions and I am sorry about that, but that's the way it

14:53:03 25

26

was. Q. 361

Let's go back to the language then and let's not try to blame any lawyers.

27

This is your statement signed off by you and presumably read by you before it

28

went out?

29 14:53:12 30

A.

Yes.

Q. 362

I personally however at no time negotiates any agreement, agreed any payment or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:53:18

14:53:26

64 1

certified or recommended any payment to Frank Dunlop or Bill O'Herlihy

2

whatsoever, that's what you said?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 363

Is that untrue?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 364

Right. So when I said to you that if you had stuck to this statement you would

7

have been blown clean out of the water I am suggesting that you would have been

8

blown out of the water because it is patently untrue, now will you accept that

9

it's patently untrue on the basis of the evidence you have given to the

14:53:45 10

Tribunal?

11

A.

I wouldn't use those terms I would say at that time I was mistaken.

12

Q. 365

Oh.

13

A.

I don't think Mr. Chairman it was in anyway deliberate.

14

Q. 366

It was very emphatic Mr. Sweeney, whatsoever, nothing do with him?

A.

An unfortunate use of a word.

Q. 367

An unfortunate use of the word Mr. Sweeney, or perhaps a very clever use of

14:54:00 15

16 17

the word, that's a matter for the Tribunal to decide. I'm simply asking you to

18

deal with the fact that the statement is patently untrue. Do you accept that?

19 14:54:19 20

A.

I have already said that.

Q. 368

Right. So in conclusion in relation to your statement, you also dealt with the

21

issue of payments and you made it very clear that in respect of payments, it

22

was only on foot of invoices, which were signed off by way of authorisation for

23

payment which lead to a certificate for payment, which ultimately then lead to

24

a cheque being issued and you always did this in the context of building

14:54:46 25

contracts and nearly always the requests for payment came from QSs, whom you

26

would understand, because that was your qualification, isn't that correct?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 369

That's also not correct because now we have a situation where you were involved

29 14:55:04 30

in the authorisation of payments to lobbyists? A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:55:05

14:55:16

65 1

Q. 370

Did you authorise payments to Bill O'Herlihy?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 371

So that statement is equally incorrect and untrue in respect of Bill O'Herlihy?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 372

Now you also denied having anything to do with the agreement to retain

6

Mr. Dunlop, that's also untrue?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 373

Now when you did come to retain Mr. Dunlop you can't remember what your riding

9

instructions were from Mr. Monahan, you remember going in though, that you had

14:55:37 10

and will explain it in a moment, hopefully parameter for negotiation in respect

11

of fees subject to a Maximum of four thousand, plus VAT, per month, were you

12

hoping to negotiate for less?

13

A.

14 14:55:54 15

It would have been possible to negotiate for less, but that's what final figure was.

Q. 374

Right. So a negotiation took place with Mr. Dunlop, it wasn't simply a matter

16

of saying if you want the gig it's four thousand plus VAT, negotiation took

17

place in relation to fees?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 375

Tell us what the negotiation was?

A.

I can't remember the precise detail, but it ended up at four thousand a month,

14:56:06 20

21

my way of dealing that in similar ways would have been to start off with a

22

suggestion to agree the fee on a time occupied basis on an hourly rate, with a

23

maximum, that sort of thing, that sort of thing would have been what -- if I

24

was speculating might have happened. If we would have had the foundation on a

14:56:45 25

26

time occupied basis and translated itself possibly into a fixed amount. Q. 376

27

The payments as we know go no way to matching up this concept of four thousand plus VAT, when did you first agree four thousand plus VAT with GRE?

28

A.

Some weeks afterwards.

29

Q. 377

So you had done the deal with Mr. Dunlop before you even discussed it with your

14:57:10 30

partner in the joint venture? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:57:12

14:57:26

66 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 378

And I suggest that what you were effectively going to do was on the basis of

3

what whatever Mr. Monahan said to you which now we'll never know you had

4

determined to retain Frank Dunlop no matter what?

5

A.

Despite what?

6

Q. 379

You were determined to retain Mr. Dunlop, no matter what GRE thought, even if

7

they weren't willing to put up 50 per cent, you were going to get Mr. Dunlop

8

because he was the man to get the job done?

9

A.

14:57:44 10

11

I would have had no difficulty in going ahead and being totally confident that GRE would have supported me in their 50 per cent.

Q. 380

Why wouldn't you put in a phone call then to GRE and say look we have got this

12

grand new strategy, a new man who is almost certain to get the job done,

13

wouldn't that be good news to share with Mr. Baker in GRE?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 381

Why didn't do you it?

16

A.

I don't know.

17

Q. 382

So if we can just recap again, here's the crucial moment arriving for Monarch,

14:58:01 15

18

they have spent a lot of money, they have failed through legitimate means to

19

get their goal, they are adopting a new strategy, you have been told by

14:58:20 20

Mr. Monahan to retain Mr. Dunlop, he is the man who is going to get the job

21

done. That's a reasonable scenario?

22

A.

I kind of got lost there, you were going on a bit.

23

Q. 383

Okay. We'll start again. You were in a situation where you had retained

24 14:58:42 25

Mr. Dunlop because Mr. Dunlop was the man to get the job done? A.

Yes.

26

Q. 384

Monarch had an awful lot of money riding on this?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 385

They were shocked and stunned by the failure in May 1992, when all legitimate

29 14:58:52 30

means had been exercised and failed? A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

14:58:54

14:59:09

67 1

Q. 386

2

And this time it was going to be different, this time you were going to get the return on your money, this time you were going do what it took?

3

A.

By legitimate means.

4

Q. 387

Ah, so if a conversation for instance had taken place and you had for instance

5

said to Mr. Dunlop you have to do what you have to do, you presumably would

6

have finished with the phrase, by legitimate means?

7

A.

I have to say Mr. Chairman I have no control over the perception of Mr. Dunlop

8

then and now. And at no time did I ever suspect that he was doing anything

9

other than legitimate means.

14:59:41 10

Q. 388

You had put distance between yourself and Mr. Dunlop in your statement, you are

11

putting distance between yourself and Mr. Dunlop now and you were attempting to

12

portray your engagement of Mr. Dunlop as if it was a normal, work a day

13

engagement, it wasn't a normal work a day engagement was it, you failed?

14 15:00:07 15

A.

As far as I was concerned it was a normal work a day arrangement.

Q. 389

Right. So you were ready to fail again were you? Had you considered that

16 17

possibility? A.

Of course, one has to consider all possibilities. I actually believe that the

18

land would eventually come good anyway, because of it's location, because of

19

it's zoning, because of the support of the local authority officials and

15:00:37 20

Manager, because of all of that I had great confidence in the ultimate success

21

of the land which has been borne out by fact. And at that time we were trying

22

to do our very best and our very best included employment of Mr. Dunlop to

23

supplement our own lobbying exercise under Mr. Lynn.

24 15:01:08 25

Q. 390

How was he going to supplement?

A.

Supplement means add to and he was going to add to the existing lobbying

26 27

exercise. Q. 391

Mr. Monahan, in a draft statement, has submitted to the Tribunal the engagement

28

of Mr. Dunlop was to assist in the effort of getting the vision of our proposal

29

out to the County Council, the elected members and other interested bodies in

15:01:41 30

aren't of the development for the lands at Cherrywood and to assist the group Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:01:44

15:02:02

68 1

with regard to getting some common sense into the ascertaining of the line of

2

the Southern Cross motorway at Cherrywood based on proper planning and proper

3

use of the land resources in the area, the payments to my knowledge made to

4

frank Dunlop were on foot of his original proposals to the company for which

5

services he invoiced the company and was paid. Do you agree with that?

6

A.

Yeah, it was quite long I can't really...

7

Q. 392

Well I will focus on the bit I am particularly concerned with. The payments

8

to my knowledge made to Frank Dunlop were on foot of his original proposals to

9

the company for which services he invoiced the company and was paid.

15:02:23 10

A.

Yes.

11

Q. 393

You agree with that? Because you see if you do, well do you?

12

A.

I can't see what there is to disagree with.

13

Q. 394

That's fine I simply want a yes or no, do you agree with that statement?

14

A.

Again could you say it again.

Q. 395

The payment to my knowledge were made to Frank Dunlop on foot of proposals to

15:02:38 15

16

the company for which services he invoiced the company and was paid?

17

A.

There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with that.

18

Q. 396

Right, the invoices Mr. Dunlop put in were proper invoices according to the

19 15:02:55 20

terms of his engagement? A.

We are talking about Mr. Monahan's statement at the moment?

21

Q. 397

Yes.

22

A.

I really don't understand where that's going.

23

Q. 398

I'm not asking you to understand where it's going?

24

A.

Sorry could you ask the question again?

Q. 399

The question is that statement make it is quite clear that the invoices put if

15:03:08 25

26

in by Mr. Dunlop were pursuant to the original proposals he made Monarch.

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 400

Which means his invoices were legitimate and there is absolutely no way to

29 15:03:30 30

square this concept of four thousand plus VAT per month with those invoices is there Mr. Sweeney? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:03:31

15:03:50

69 1

A.

I don't understand where that's coming from.

2

Q. 401

Mr. Sweeney Mr. Monahan made a statement with which you agree that the invoices

3

raised by Mr. Dunlop were pursuant to the agreement that he had reached, or the

4

proposals that Mr. Dunlop had made to Monarch, that means the invoices were

5

legitimate. Do you follow me that far?

6

A.

I'm afraid I am lost there I don't --

7

Q. 402

Okay we'll try again?

8

A.

Yeah.

9

Q. 403

Invoices raised by Mr. Dunlop, according to Mr. Monahan, were raised in the

15:04:03 10

ordinary course of business, properly, pursuant to agreement?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 404

That makes a complete nonsense of the suggestion that you had agreed four

13 14 15:04:20 15

thousand, plus VAT, per month, with Mr. Dunlop? A.

I don't understand that why, it would make a nonsense.

Q. 405

Can you point to a single invoice...

16 17

CHAIRMAN:

Well Mr. Sweeney the -- if as you say there was an agreement to pay

18

four thousand a month, plus VAT, that's one scenario and then we have the

19

situation where a number of invoices are submitted by Mr. Dunlop to Monarch

15:04:42 20

which you also agree is in line with what was agreed, but clearly that is based

21

on something different because the -- none of the invoices mention four

22

thousand a month.

23

A.

24

Yes, yes I can understand that now. The four thousand a month and the success fee became an umbrella agreement and he had been paid substantial money up

15:05:08 25

front as a retainer and as far as I can see and I have said this before, the

26

invoices got completely all mixed up and I can't understand a lot of them, but

27

they all -- once they fell within the umbrella of that agreement then I don't

28

think there was any problem.

29 15:05:34 30

Q. 406

Did anybody come at the end of year from the accounts department, or did anybody come from an outside auditor to say what in the name of all that's good Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:05:39

15:05:57

70 1 2

and holy are these invoices and how do they core late with these payments? A.

3

At the end of the year I suppose when the company auditors were brought in to do the audit, then these things may have been mentioned.

4

Q. 407

But they were never mentioned to you?

5

A.

Not that I recall, what I am trying to explain to you is that at the end of the

6

year that would have happened and had there been anything which would require

7

them to clarify or ask a question then it would have been done at the time,

8

before they had signed off the accounts.

9

Q. 408

15:06:18 10

I suggest to you that the reason that you weren't asked anything before they signed off the accounts was what was put in front of them was invoices in,

11

payments out, nothing else, no references to agreements of four thousand plus

12

VAT, balancing payments, absence of VAT, because on your theory it should have

13

been 104,000 it, should in fact have been 104,000 and 60 pounds?

14 15:06:44 15

A.

Well I can't recall exactly what went on at that time with the auditors.

Q. 409

I appreciate that Mr. Sweeney but what I am saying to you is that your theory

16

that it was nine months at four thousand plus VAT and 50 plus VAT success fee

17

is a nonsense?

18

A.

19

historical thing and the accounts would have presented in some way or other, I

15:07:04 20

have no idea, but I have no recollection of it posing a problem for the

21 22

I suggested at that time when the auditors got involved it would have been an

auditors. Q. 410

Finally Mr. Sweeney, in relation to the activities of Mr. Dunlop and in

23

relation to the rezoning of Cherrywood, do you have any recall of any facts

24

with which you feel uncomfortable?

15:07:24 25

A.

26

No. Thank you.

27 28 29 15:07:46 30

Q. 411

CHAIRMAN:

Mr -- could I just ask you just on that same subject really, given

that you were intimately involved with the agreement to pay four thousand a month to Mr. Dunlop and if you like that was your agreement, it was only Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:07:52

15:08:17

71 1

between you, the only witnesses to it would have been yourself and Mr. Dunlop,

2

then you see these additional or these quite different payments much more

3

substantial payments coming through by way of invoice from Mr. Dunlop or

4

payment to Mr. Dunlop, and surely at some stage you said to yourself this looks

5

very different to what I agreed, do you remember addressing that issue? Would

6

you have gone to Mr. Monahan and said "look I had a deal with Mr. Dunlop and we

7

are now paying him on a very different basis, a much more substantial one than

8

we envisaged"?

9

A.

15:08:46 10

The way that I see that having happened is almost retrospective in that I agreed the four thousand, at some stage the 50,000 was agreed between

11

Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Monahan, and I was informed of that sometime in September,

12

but I believe that agreement might have been made earlier and that payments

13

might have been authorised on foot of that, that's the only explanation I can

14

think.

15:09:12 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

17

have no recollection of yourself of raising this issue. It must have caused

18

you to question the level of payments to Mr. Dunlop, before you realised that

19

there was a success fee involved, did you ever question the basis for the

15:09:32 20

payments to Mr. Dunlop or wonder what these additional sums over and above what

21 22

Yes, well that may well be an explanation I am just wondering you

was agreed were in relation to? A.

I don't recall bringing it to anyone's attention.

23 24

CHAIRMAN: Is it likely you would have raised the issue, given your intimate

15:09:50 25

26

knowledge of what the agreement was? A.

In thinking back I am not entirely sure even when it would have come to my

27

attention. It's something I wondered about but I can't get to the bottom of

28

that either.

29 15:10:06 30

CHAIRMAN:

The other thing which is a little puzzling is the fact that you

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:10:10

15:10:40

72 1

don't appear to have requested in anyway the large cash payments that were

2

being attributed to Cherrywood, presumably as sort of project leader, or

3

whatever title you might have given yourself in relation to Cherrywood, you

4

would have been kept generally aware of the level of outgoings without

5

necessarily having to deal with the specifics?

6

A.

I didn't become aware of those, Chairman.

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

9

as to the level of outgoings without necessarily being concerned about the

15:11:01 10

11

But was it the case that you would have been kept generally aware

precise amount? A.

No Chairman, I didn't receive a monthly statement of outgoings.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

14

been meetings and the finance and the availability of finance and the extent to

15:11:20 15

16

No, but, yes -- but in relation to, presumably there would have

which borrowings were being used up? A.

Yes.

17 18 19

CHAIRMAN: A.

15:11:36 20

Would surely have been a feature in the management of the project?

Yes. Certainly there were regular meetings with the bank, that was mainly related to the bank and keeping them happy.

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

23

you like, the monthly outgoings or the level of outgoings?

24

A.

So are you saying you wouldn't really have any idea as to the, if

On a day to day basis, on a month to month basis, no Chairman.

15:11:55 25

26 27 28

CHAIRMAN: A.

Even where the payments were very substantial?

I did indicate they were presented to me. They would have come up at the end of the year when I would have had the opportunity to make a comment.

29 15:12:11 30

CHAIRMAN:

Well did that happen in relation to those?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:12:14

15:12:28

73 1

A.

It didn't happen in relation to those specific payments, in my recollection.

2 3 4

CHAIRMAN: A.

And is that unusual that you wouldn't have questioned them or --

I didn't see them coming up.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

7

recently?

8

A.

Does that mean that they weren't presented to you at all until very

Yes, that's right. In the form that I see them now, I didn't see them.

9 15:12:39 10

CHAIRMAN:

All right. Do you want to ask anything?

11 12

JUDGE FAHERTY:

13

you say was the agreement between Mr. Dunlop and the late Mr. Monahan about

14

Mr. Dunlop's success fee?

15:12:54 15

A.

Just to follow up what the Chairman was asking you about what

Yes.

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY:

18

of '93, with GRE, there is a reference by you to, or GRE agreeing that

19

Mr. Dunlop be retained from April of 1993?

15:13:09 20

A.

In some correspondence, I think sometime I think in September

Yes.

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY:

23

pounds has been paid to Mr. Dunlop, isn't that correct?

24

A.

Now we know by November 1993, Mr. Sweeney, that some 65,000

Yes.

15:13:26 25

26

JUDGE FAHERTY:

27

four thousand a month?

28

A.

And if you take, on your evidence of you say having agreed

Yes.

29 15:13:30 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

With Mr. Dunlop, even accounting for VAT -- that's nine

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:13:39

15:13:47

74 1 2

months, if you take March to November is nine months, isn't that correct? A.

Yes.

3 4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

That's 36,000?

Yes.

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

8

November, by the 2nd November some 65,000 has been paid?

9

A.

Even accounting for VAT, we know that in actual fact by

Yes.

15:13:57 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

Mr. Monahan and Mr. Dunlop agreed a success fee?

13

A.

Now you have said that you believe that Mr. Monahan, the late

Yes.

14 15:14:04 15

JUDGE FAHERTY:

And you have agreed with Mr, I think with counsel earlier this

16

afternoon, that a success fee is normally paid, obviously if a result has been

17

achieved?

18

A.

Yes.

19 15:14:15 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Whatever about agreeing a success fee, there is logic in one

21

would agree a success fee before the horse has bolted or whatever, one can

22

understand that argument. But why would monies be paid to Mr. Dunlop over and

23

above what had been agreed to, what you say was his monthly rate, until Monarch

24

had achieved that result, can you account for that Mr. Sweeney?

15:14:37 25

A.

26

No, except for only to speculate, Chairman, that he must have been authorised for those payments out of the success fee, by somebody.

27 28 29

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

But where is there any agreement to that effect Mr. Sweeney?

There is none that I can see, that's my speculation.

15:14:58 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:14:58

15:15:04

75 1

JUDGE FAHERTY:

2

will, you were the project manager?

3

A.

You have given evidence over the last number of days and you

Yes.

4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY:

6

form of writing at the time Mr. Sweeney?

7

A.

Why didn't you commit the agreement with Mr. Dunlop to some

Well I would have, Chairman, I would have taken a note of the meeting.

8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY:

15:15:21 10

11

Yes, you have said that. And where are those notes? Where

would those notes end up normally, Mr. Sweeney? A.

They would end up in my file and circulated it.

12 13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

In?

They would end up in a file.

15:15:31 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

Monarch?

18

A.

And would that be a file on Mr. Dunlop's being retained by

Yes.

19 15:15:37 20

21

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

22

Did you compile such a file?

I haven't got a direct recollection of doing it, but that would have been the way I would have done it.

23 24 15:15:49 25

26

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

What would have been on that document?

It would have been a record, a note to file of the meeting and what happened at the meeting.

27 28

JUDGE FAHERTY:

29

have met your colleagues and you have discussed different plans and strategies,

15:16:05 30

We have seen plenty of references to notes to file when you

but that doesn't seem, as far as I understand, we don't have any records of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:16:10

15:16:18

76 1 2

what you say? A.

No, I didn't see any, I saw nothing in the brief.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

this in any detail because we have gone through it with Mr. Quinn, you have

6

agreed that headings like "strategy/consultancy fee", they covered the payments

7

or the what you say were donations to politicians, isn't that correct,

8

Mr. Sweeney?

9

A.

I see. And can I just ask you and I don't want to go over

Yes.

15:16:36 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

heading from May to October 1991?

13

A.

And we know there was a sum of 27,850 attributed to that

Yes.

14 15:16:44 15

JUDGE FAHERTY:

And we have seen all the documents in relation to that and how

16

it was treated in the books. Can I just ask you, perhaps maybe the document

17

could go up, it's number 3992 I think it is, reference 3992? Yes, you see that

18

document, Mr. Sweeney? That's a document I think at the end, certainly dated

19

28 of April, a schedule and there is a reference to 10,000 and 50,000 from

15:17:14 20

May -- am I looking at the right one? I want to find it -- May and June, hold

21 22

on? A.

I see the 10,000 and 50,000.

23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY:

15:17:34 25

consultancy fees 10,000 and 50,000. You see that? I think they are projected,

26 27

Yes, exactly, it's there down at the bottom, strategy

isn't that right? A.

I think that's a projection.

28 29 15:17:44 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

You have already agreed, by the time you gave this evidence,

Mr. Sweeney, you have agreed with Mr. Quinn that that refers to political Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:17:49

15:18:02

77 1 2

donations? A.

That the 22 -- yes, it does, yes.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

and 50,000 in June?

6

A.

But there is a projection for something like -- 10,000 in May

Yes.

7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY:

9

project those sums, that you thought perhaps Mr. Lynn had. But why would some

15:18:13 10

11

Under the same heading. Now you you have said you didn't

sums be projected in the first instance, Mr. Sweeney, for May and June of 1992? A.

I really have no answer to that.

12 13

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14

are on the left-hand side of the column where you had expended 27 -- I think it

15:18:38 15

16

Well there had been a local election, the historical matters

says there 22,000 but 27,850? A.

Yes.

17 18 19

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Isn't that right? In respect of the local elections?

Yes.

15:18:49 20

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Between May and October, isn't that right?

Yes.

23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY:

15:18:53 25

26

Because, why do you think 60,000 was being projected in May or

June of 1992? A.

Because there were no elections then, were there?

27 28

JUDGE FAHERTY:

29

document, or later document, a letter in October where you are actually

15:19:11 30

No. In fact in fairness to yourself, there is an earlier

anticipating there might be an election in 1993? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:19:13

15:19:22

78 1

A.

Oh, right.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

4

November '92 but this is back in April '92, Mr. Sweeney?

5

A.

6

It doesn't seem to be, in fact we know an election occurred in

Yes, I can only assume that there must have been some reason to give political donations at the time.

7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY:

9

letter to Mr. Baker, referring to future costs again of 63 or 65,300 -- 63500?

15:19:56 10

A.

And again the very same thing I think on page 3789, there is a

Yes.

11 12

JUDGE FAHERTY:

13

about?

14

A.

And again you have said you don't know what those costs were

I can see that that is an estimate.

15:20:05 15

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

18

Yes?

I can't say now how that actually materialised, but at that time that must have been an estimate which was provided to me.

19 15:20:18 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

But going back to the earlier one, Mr. Sweeney, can I ask you,

21

you say you think the sum might have come up, Mr. Lynn might have come up with

22

the actual amounts, I think that was your answer as I understand it?

23

A.

Yes.

24 15:20:30 25

JUDGE FAHERTY:

26 27

But you worked closely with Mr. Lynn on this project, isn't

that correct? A.

Yes.

28 29 15:20:38 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Would you not have had an input into what all these sums were,

what these projections were for, they were very large sums of money Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:20:43

15:20:47

79 1 2

Mr. Sweeney? A.

Yes, they were.

3 4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Mr. Sweeney, isn't that correct?

So I may have had an input.

6 7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

But you don't know what it is now?

No, I don't.

9 15:20:52 10

JUDGE FAHERTY:

I see. And just on the last question I have, you mentioned a

11

little while ago to Mr. Redmond that, he was asking you about the late

12

Mr. Lawlor, and I think Mr. Redmond put it to you that you referred to

13

Mr. Lawlor's occasional input to the Tallaght project?

14

A.

Yes.

15:21:16 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY: And I think in response to him you said he didn't do anything,

17

he was advising about red tape. I think --

18

A.

I didn't mean he didn't do anything.

19 15:21:24 20

21

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

22

Yes?

But his advice was over a long period of time and it did relate to dealings with the local authority.

23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY:

15:21:35 25

isn't that correct?

26

A.

Yes. And obviously we know Tallaght opened in October 1990,

Yes.

27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

record shows he lost his seat in '91, but he was a councillor?

29

A.

And Mr. Lawlor was a councillor at the time, I think the

Yes.

15:21:48 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:21:48

15:22:02

80 1

JUDGE FAHERTY:

2

Mr. Lawlor at all?

3

A.

4

And can you account for the amount of money that was paid to

It seems a lot to me, but he did do a lot of advisory work for me personally and I don't know what other work he did with Mr. Monahan.

5 6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Did he produce reports for you?

No.

8 9 15:22:08 10

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

What was the nature of the advisory work he did then?

There would be meetings with myself and other members of the project management

11

team. There would be difficulties in identifying who to meet about particular

12

problems, there were four or five different departments, ranging from the

13

development department, which within itself it had a number of different

14

aspects that had to be ironed out in order for Tallaght to get the go ahead.

15:22:45 15

Then there was the infrastructural --

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY:

18

politician?

19

A.

I can understand that, Mr. Sweeney, but Mr. Lawlor was a local

Yes.

15:22:58 20

21

JUDGE FAHERTY:

22

to have given the assistance, or in his capacity as a politician, Mr. Sweeney?

23

A.

24

Would you not have expected Mr. Lawlor, as a local politician,

I didn't see anything wrong in that. It was his knowledge of search, of how to get through all the red tape that really I appreciated very much.

15:23:20 25

26

JUDGE FAHERTY:

27

isn't that correct, with officials presumably, Mr. Sweeney?

28

A.

But you had pursued this yourself in a number of meetings,

I wonder if you could repeat that?

29 15:23:34 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

You had pursued meetings with officials yourself in your

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:23:37

15:23:47

81 1 2

capacity? A.

Oh, yes, oh, yes.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

you know why he was paid 56,300 in October 1990?

6

A.

But you have told the Tribunal that, or as I understand it, do

I can only speculate, Chairman, that part of it was monies that had been earned

7

by him in some way over the number of years which he helped over Tallaght, and

8

what other things did he with Mr. Monahan, I am not entirely sure.

9 15:24:12 10

JUDGE FAHERTY: Okay, I see.

11 12

JUDGE KEYS:

13

any businessman in his right mind would pay out part of a success fee

14

prematurely?

15:24:31 15

A.

I have just one question if I may put to you, can you explain why

It did happen.

16 17 18

JUDGE KEYS: A.

19

Yes.

And it seems that whatever the reason, it must have been related to a request from Mr. Dunlop for additional funds. It was --

15:24:53 20

21 22

JUDGE KEYS: A.

A request to who though?

Not to myself, Chairman, I would only assume that it would be to Mr. Monahan.

23 24

JUDGE KEYS:

15:25:09 25

26

But were you not the person who was to sanction the payments to

Mr. Dunlop? A.

Yes.

27 28

JUDGE KEYS:

29

his employment?

15:25:16 30

A.

On the basis that you were the one who negotiated the terms of

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:25:19

15:25:28

82 1 2

JUDGE KEYS:

3

Mr. Dunlop unknown to you then?

4

A.

What you are saying then is that monies were paid out to

I believe in some cases, yes.

5 6

JUDGE KEYS:

7

relation to reaching an agreement as to the terms of employment in fact, could

8

be entirely different if what has happened, which did happen?

9

A.

15:25:53 10

So therefore the meetings of the 8th or 9th of March '93, in

Yes. It appear that parts of that were superseded in terms of earlier payments.

11 12

JUDGE KEYS:

13

fee was paid out prior to November of '93, when eventually success was

14

achieved?

15:26:09 15

A.

When did it first come to your attention that part of the success

I would have said sometime in September.

16 17 18

JUDGE KEYS: A.

Of?

'93.

19 15:26:17 20

21

JUDGE KEYS: A.

Did you not follow that up?

I apparently didn't.

22 23

JUDGE KEYS:

24

care, or it was no longer part of your brief?

15:26:35 25

A.

Well is that because you didn't want to know why, or you didn't

The fact was that I didn't and I don't really know why.

26 27

JUDGE KEYS:

Just one other matter. In relation to discussing with

28

Mr. Dunlop, and I think again Mr. Redmond has really fully dealt with that, as

29

to what in fact he was doing, your evidence suggests that you are hesitant, if

15:27:04 30

not hesitant certainly not inquisitive enough to find out exactly what progress Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:27:09

15:27:32

83 1

he had been making during the months of March to leading up to the vote in

2

November of '93?

3

A.

4

I was certainly inquisitive but I was met with positive responses. Had there been negative responses then I may have been become more inquisitive.

5 6

JUDGE KEYS:

7

to what progress had been made? After all you hadn't employed him before, you

8

didn't know him?

9

A.

Yes, but did you not require sort of concrete proof before you as

There was no concrete proof sought or provided. There was no --

15:27:50 10

11

JUDGE KEYS:

12

professional people of this nature, such as lobbyists, would be employed by

13

companies, Monarch being one. They went off and did their job and no questions

14

were asked, for whatever reason they had themselves not to ask them?

15:28:08 15

A.

16

Well could there be an atmosphere existing at the time that

Well I did ask the questions, Chairman, and I was given positive responses, as it was in the case of Mr. O'Herlihy.

17 18

JUDGE KEYS:

I see. No further questions.

19 15:28:23 20

21

CHAIRMAN: A.

Right, thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

So the Tribunal will sit again on Tuesday of next week at 10.30.

MS. DILLON:

That's correct, with the resumption of, I think, Mr. Glennane.

24 15:28:33 25

26 27

CHAIRMAN:

Next week, Tuesday at 10.30.

28 29

MS. DILLON:

Thank you sir.

15:28:40 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

15:28:41

84 1

CHAIRMAN:

All right. Thank you.

2 3

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL

4

TUESDAY 11TH JULY 2006 AT 10.30 AM.

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 663

10:07:28

10:33:04

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY,

2

11TH JULY, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Good morning, Ms. Dillon.

5 6

MS. DILLON:

Good morning, Sir.

7 8

Mr. Dominic Glennane, please.

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:33:07

10:33:28

2 1

CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. DOMINIC GLENNANE AS FOLLOWS:

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

Good morning, Mr. Glennane.

CHAIRMAN:

You are already sworn

4 5 6

A.

Thank you, yes.

7 8

MS. DILLON:

9

recollect that we had looked at the --

10:33:38 10

A.

11 12

Sorry.

Mr. Glennane, when you were last giving evidence you will

It's actually a little bit loud that.

way of reducing the sound on this side. Q. 1

I don't know if there's any Go ahead.

When you last gave evidence, Mr. Glennane, the -- we had looked at political

13

payments that had been made by Monarch in 1991 and the treatment of those

14

payments in the accounts; isn't that right?

10:34:00 15

16

A.

That's correct, yes, that's right, yes.

Q. 2

And we had seen that these payments had been transferred into an account called

17

'general promotion'?

18

A.

That's right, yes.

19

Q. 3

And that that was an account that was designated a Cherrywood account; isn't

10:34:13 20

that right?

21

A.

That's right, yes.

22

Q. 4

And I think you had agreed that the Cherrywood accounts recorded costs that had

23 24 10:34:31 25

been paid by Monarch Properties Services Limited on behalf of Cherrywood? A.

Well which were regarded as being on behalf of Cherrywood.

Q. 5

Yes, they were recorded in the books of Monarch Properties Services Limited as

26

being expenses or costs paid by Monarch Properties Services Limited on behalf

27

of Cherrywood limited?

28

A.

Well, allocated to Cherrywood Properties Limited, yes.

29

Q. 6

What distinction are you trying to make by using the words "allocated?"

A.

Well I think they were allocated by the person at the time.

10:34:50 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:34:53

10:35:02

3 1

Q. 7

Yes?

2

A.

I'm not sure what adjustments were made at the end of the year or that.

3

don't think it was a very informed decision if you know what I mean at the

4

time.

5

Q. 8

6

Yes.

So I

But be that as it may, Mr. Glennane, and using your own words, they were

allocated to Cherrywood Properties.

7

A.

That's right, yes.

8

Q. 9

In accounting terms what does that mean?

9

A.

Well it means that they were -- they were included in this account, which was

10:35:20 10

called 'General Promotions'.

11 12

general promotions account they were put in as 'General Promotions Cherrywood'. Q. 10

13 14

As an alternative of putting them in an ordinary

Were they regarded as a cost or an expense associated with Monarch Properties Services Limited or with Cherrywood?

A.

With costs incurred by Monarch Services at that stage on behalf of Cherrywood.

Q. 11

On behalf of Cherrywood?

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 12

In allocating them to Cherrywood the person who allocates them to Cherrywood is

10:35:46 15

18

in effect saying it's my opinion that this was an expense or a cost associated

19

with Cherrywood; isn't that right?

10:36:00 20

A.

Yes, the person actually doing it at that stage.

21

Q. 13

Yes?

22

A.

They could be relatively junior, I suppose that's the point I'm trying to make.

23

Q. 14

Yes.

24

And we will see what happens with those as we go through the various

accounts but to try and get the general principles clear at the beginning,

10:36:17 25

Mr. Glennane, if we can. Therefore, when somebody allocates a payment or a

26

debit or an invoice to Cherrywood, in effect what's happening is at that point

27

in time, that payment is being treated as an expense incurred in connection

28

with Cherrywood?

29 10:36:35 30

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 15

So that where a political donation, which is regarded now as a political Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:36:41

10:37:01

4 1

donation or is disclosed to the Tribunal as a political donation, was in 1991

2

treated in the accounts of MPSL as a Cherrywood expense.

3

that allocation was made, what was being said was that this expense was

4

incurred in connection with Cherrywood; is that right?

5

A.

Yeah, I think just to get back.

Not labouring the point.

At that time when

You have to

6

differentiate between the person, the actual person who was allocating it at

7

that particular time.

The decision really was made at the end of the year.

8

Q. 16

Yes?

9

A.

Regarding how it was treated.

10:37:25 10

Like, what you have there is a relatively

junior person going through all the list of payments.

Having to post it to

11

somewhere and either then making the decision or asking somebody more senior

12

what will I do with that and somebody saying if you like stick it into

13

Cherrywood.

14

There was no great scientific study at that particular stage.

Q. 17

Stick it into Cherrywood General Promotion?

A.

All right.

16

Q. 18

What's the purpose of Cherrywood General Promotion? What's its function?

17

A.

What do you mean what's its function?

18

Q. 19

What do you put in --

19

A.

It's just a heading, it's just a heading, 'General Promotions'.

10:37:44 15

10:37:58 20

promotions is anything that is regarded as promoting the development of the

21 22

site of it or whatever. Q. 20

23 24

General

And how would a political donation be regarded as helping to promote the development of the site?

A.

10:38:15 25

I don't know.

I presume it would be interpreted as it was in connection with

the site and in connection with promoting our plans for the site.

26

Q. 21

And at the year end --

27

A.

I don't know, I don't know where else it could have gone to, you know, unless

28 29 10:38:37 30

you just had a heading 'political donations' or heading 'sundries', you know. Q. 22

Or it could have stayed in 'general promotion' in Monarch properties services limited? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:38:37

10:38:45

5 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 23

We know it didn't; isn't that right?

3

A.

That's right.

4

Q. 24

When it had been originally assigned to general promotions in Monarch

5

Properties Services Limited in April '92 it was taken out of that and put into

6

Cherrywood General Promotions; isn't that right?

7

A.

That's right, yes.

8

Q. 25

Now, while you tell the Tribunal that the initial allocation of these political

9

payments to Cherrywood General Promotions may have been done by somebody quite

10:39:03 10

junior.

Are you suggesting to the Tribunal that there was an adjustment made

11

and that they were ultimately taken out of Cherrywood General Promotions at any

12

stage?

13

A.

14 10:39:15 15

No, it's my opinion that they were carried forward in stock at the end of the year.

Q. 26

16

Yes.

And they were carried forward indeed ultimately as Cherrywood stock

until 1997 when they were written out?

17

A.

They were written out of Monarch Properties Services Limited.

18

Q. 27

At no stage from the time that these payments were allocated to Cherrywood

19

promotion, to general promotion in Cherrywood was the designation ever changed;

10:39:39 20

isn't that right?

21

A.

Not as far as I know, yeah.

22

Q. 28

And indeed, for the other payments we're going to come on to look at in 1992,

23

1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996, Mr. Glennane, the position is also the same; isn't

24

that right?

10:39:56 25

26

A.

If they are included in general promotions, yes.

Q. 29

Insofar as they were allocated to general promotions.

They were allocated to

27

general promotions in Cherrywood and were treated or accumulated as Cherrywood

28

stock and their designation was never changed; isn't that right?

29 10:40:13 30

A.

As far as I know, yes.

Q. 30

Now, what is the purpose of general promotion and advertising, that particular Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:40:17

10:40:37

6 1 2

account? A.

3 4

I don't know to be honest with you. promotion advertising.

Q. 31

5

Maybe it's just a heading.

General

It's sort of very self explanatory but ...

If I can just give you an explanation that was apparently provided to KPMG, your auditors.

At 7378.

6 7

And this is dated the 9th of January 1996.

8

general promotion and advertising.

9

isn't that right.

10:40:53 10

11

And it's headed MPSL.

And then

Which is the account we're talking about;

A.

That's right, yes, yeah

Q. 32

"Items booked by the client under this heading relate to costs incurred which

12

relate to particular properties under development e.g. Monarch will spend money

13

in an area on various forms of promotional activities if they are developing

14

there.

10:41:14 15

The reasoning behind this is to try and sway or influence local

opinion on the worthiness or good of their project to the area.

And then

16

these costs by virtue of being booked into stock and creditors bank had no

17

effect on the profit and loss account?"

18

A.

That's right, yes.

19

Q. 33

Okay.

A.

Yes, yeah.

Q. 34

So that the purpose of a payment that's allocated to general promotions has as

10:41:28 20

21 22

And do you agree with that?

its object the swaying or influencing of local opinion?

23

A.

Yes, I suppose so, yes.

24

Q. 35

It would follow from that, Mr. Glennane, that any political payments which are

10:41:44 25

booked into general promotion had also as their object the purpose of swaying

26

local opinion; isn't that right.

27

A.

I would put that interpretation on it, yes.

28

Q. 36

And insofar as there may, as we will come on to look at now, the large round

29 10:42:05 30

figure sums which are attributed to Cherrywood promotion.

They also would

have been sums that were expended for the purpose of swaying local opinion; Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:42:09

10:42:21

7 1

isn't that right?

2

A.

Well, if they are related to Cherrywood, yes.

3

Q. 37

If they are booked into Cherrywood General Promotions?

4

A.

If they are related to Cherrywood.

5

Q. 38

I want to be clear about this.

If they are booked by your accounting

6

department into the account headed Cherrywood general promotion, they have as

7

their object, according to this document, the purpose of trying to sway or

8

influence local opinion; isn't that right?

9 10:42:47 10

A.

Yeah, well the whole purpose of advertising is to sway or influence something.

Q. 39

And if there are large round figure sums which are booked into the Cherrywood

11

general promotion account, those large round figure sums have as their object

12

the swaying or influencing of local opinion; isn't that right?

13

A.

Only if it was correct to book them in there.

14

Q. 40

In the first place?

A.

In the first place or in the final place.

Q. 41

Yes.

10:42:59 15

16

And if it was incorrect that any of those sums were booked into

17

Cherrywood general promotions, clearly, we will see an adjustment; isn't that

18

right? If they were wrongly booked?

19 10:43:13 20

A.

I hope so, yes.

Q. 42

Right.

If we can turn to look at the political payments in 1992.

We had

21

looked on the last occasion when you were here, Mr. Glennane, at the political

22

payments in 1991.

23

payments to Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Bruton; do you recollect that?

24 10:43:33 25

And we had also looked at two payments in 1992.

Being the

A.

I do, yes.

Q. 43

And you will remember that they were also ultimately booked into Cherrywood

26

General Promotions?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 44

And you will remember on the last occasion we were here we looked at two

29 10:43:49 30

payments in November '92. in cash.

A payment of 10,000 and a payment of 5,000 pounds

Do you remember that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:43:51

10:44:03

8 1

A.

I do, yes.

2

Q. 45

And they were also booked into Cherrywood promotions; isn't that right?

3

A.

I believe so, yes.

4

Q. 46

And were you able to assist the Tribunal as to the destination of those funds,

5

can you remember, Mr. Glennane?

6

A.

Not specifically, no.

7

Q. 47

Yes.

But if we look at page 3877.

8 9

And we've looked at this on the last occasion you were here.

10:44:18 10

approximately half way down the page.

And you'll see

AIB 10,000 pounds cash.

Then beneath

11

that Mr. Barrett and then beneath that AIB 5,000 pounds cash.

And that

12

account is the Cherrywood General Promotions account; isn't that right?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 48

It follows, does it not, from the accounting document we have just looked at

10:44:39 15

that, that both of those payments had as their object the swaying or

16

influencing of local opinion?

17

A.

Well I -- not necessarily.

18

Q. 49

Yes?

19

A.

The person who decided to allocate them to this account may have been working

10:44:58 20

I have to keep going back to that.

off wrong information at the time.

21

Q. 50

And was that ever corrected, Mr. Glennane? You've seen all of the documents?

22

A.

I don't know.

I haven't been able to trace the entries from these accounts on

23

to the accounts of Monarch Services.

24

really don't know.

10:45:17 25

26

They weren't included in the brief so I

Q. 51

You don't think that they were included in --

A.

I don't know I'm saying.

They may have been adjusted at the end of the year.

27

There was a major adjustment procedure gone through each year at the end of the

28

year, which would have been normally in January of the following year.

29 10:45:39 30

Q. 52

Uh-huh?

A.

And any payments which couldn't be explained or were queried by the auditors, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:45:44

10:46:07

9 1

they were investigated insofar as it was possible to investigate them.

2

they were either -- they could have been adjusted to some other expense or

3

adjusted to, for instance, Mr. Monahan's loan account.

4

haven't been able to trace these accounts through a trial balance into the

5

accounts because I haven't accessed that information.

6

Q. 53

Yes.

There is no evidence.

And

So I don't know.

And if there was any it would be in the brief,

7

of any adjustment being made in relation to any of the cash sums that are

8

attributed to the general promotion and sponsorship accounts.

9

I

A.

I don't know.

Q. 54

Well --

11

A.

I don't know that.

12

Q. 55

I think you will be satisfied by the time we go through all of the documents,

10:46:24 10

13

Mr. Glennane, that that in fact appears to be the position.

14

were here on the last occasion, you will obviously have considered those two

10:46:37 15

payments that were made at that point in time.

But since you

And since then in November

16

'92, can you assist the Tribunal as to what requirement Cherrywood Properties

17

would have had to make payments in cash in November 1992?

18

A.

I can't think of any requirement.

19

Q. 56

And in 1993 -- sorry, if I just finish with the 1992.

10:47:15 20

21

If I could have page 3658, please.

22 23

This is the document prepared by Monarch Properties relating to political

24

donations between 1991 and 1997 and I want to draw to your attention the second

10:47:25 25

figure which relates to 1992, with political donations in the sum of 33,850

26

pounds.

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 57

And the breakdown of that list is at page 1582.

29 10:47:36 30

And you will see scheduled there on that list a number of payments mainly Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:47:54

10:47:54

10 1

relating to November and December 1992, when there was a General Election.

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 58

Followed by a Senate election?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 59

And there are some earlier payments at the top of the list that relate to other

6

periods in '92; isn't that right?

7

A.

That's right, yes.

8

Q. 60

Now, the payments to Mr. Bruton and Mr. Reynolds which are included there we've

9 10:48:04 10

11

already dealt with; isn't that right? A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 61

So out of that figure of 33,850.

12

If one de deducts the 7,500 pounds that was

paid to Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Bruton.

The balance is 26,350; isn't that right?

13

A.

Yes, if you say so.

14

Q. 62

And if I could just show you a document at 8920, please.

10:48:25 15

16

And you will have seen this document.

17

And what this document analysed was where those political payments had been

18

posted by Monarch Properties Services Limited in its books and accounts.

19 10:48:47 20

The document prepared by the Tribunal.

A.

Yes.

Q. 63

And you will see that the first series of payments numbered one through to 11,

21

starting with Fianna Fail unknown and concluding with Fine Gael Golf Classic,

22

M. Flaherty are with one exception all posted to an account called Promotions

23

66801201.?

24 10:49:06 25

A.

Right, yes.

Q. 64

And that's Monarch Properties services Limited promotion account; isn't that

26

right?

27

A.

Yes, yes, it appears so, yes.

28

Q. 65

You will see then commencing at item 12 through to 39, which relate to all of

29 10:49:24 30

the November 1992 general and Senate Elections, that they have all been posted to Cherrywood Properties general promotions or sponsorship; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:49:28

10:49:45

11 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 66

It would follow from that, Mr. Glennane, that a decision had to be made when

3

one is dealing with political donations as to whether one is going to post them

4

to Monarch Properties Services Limited or to Cherrywood Properties; isn't that

5

right?

6

A.

Um, yes or post them to different people or whatever, yes.

7

Q. 67

Well, what it would appear from that analysis is that all of the November 1992

8 9 10:50:02 10

senate and General Election donations? A.

Yeah.

Q. 68

The decision that was made in connection with those was to post them to

11

Cherrywood?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 69

General promotions; isn't that right?

14

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 70

Are you saying that that's a decision that was made by a number of different

10:50:10 15

16 17

people working to you in the accounts department? A.

No, well I assume they're all around the same time so I assume the same person

18

would have posted them all at the time or within a short period afterwards.

19

The earlier ones are all different dates.

10:50:29 20

Q. 71

Yes.

But they are all posted with one exception, which is the payment to the

21

Progressive Democrats in January '92.

They are all posted to Monarch

22

Properties Services Limited promotion; isn't that right?

23

A.

Sorry, they're not.

24

Q. 72

With the exception of the third one, item three.?

A.

Sorry, yes.

26

Q. 73

Yes.

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 74

Amounting to approximately 23,250 pounds are all posted to Cherrywood; isn't

10:50:46 25

29 10:51:03 30

Yeah.

But they were different amounts at different times.

But all of the General Election and Senate Election expenses?

that right? A.

Yes, that's right, yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:51:05

10:51:21

12 1

Q. 75

2

It would follow, would it not, that somebody made a decision that that was the proper place to allocate them?

3

A.

Yes, I would think so, yes.

4

Q. 76

In order to make the decision to allocate them to Cherrywood, it had to be an

5 6

expense in connection with Cherrywood; is that right? A.

Well, I think -- I mean, it's a matter of opinion at the time of somebody where

7

would we charge these into.

8

it would might have been the only job that was on.

9

been to made to charge them into that.

10:51:43 10

But the biggest job that was on was Cherrywood, So the decision would have

I don't think it's necessarily saying

that they are in connection with Cherrywood.

There was no attempt to analyse

11

them in any detail and say that 50% of them is in connection with Cherrywood

12

and 10 percent is in connection with something else.

13

convenient home for them I assume.

14

Monarch Services they would have been written off in that year.

10:52:05 15

16

I mean, it was just a

The alternative was if they were left in

Q. 77

And what would have been the problem with that?

A.

Obviously it would have -- I presume reduced the profit in the company.

17

would have felt it was more convenient to carry them forward.

18

the auditors acquiesced with that.

19

Q. 78

10:52:26 20

I

And obviously

Well we'll come to look at what the auditors said about these payments in later years.

But certainly at 4903.

21 22

And this is the listing from the Cherrywood General Promotions accounts. The

23

majority of the expenses incurred in that account at that time related to these

24

political expenses; isn't that right?

10:52:48 25

A.

26 27

Um, well I don't know, I can't remember the amount, yes, but there's a good few in there, yes.

Q. 79

Well the total amount was 65,000.

28

25,000 or thereabouts.

29

that right?

10:53:09 30

A.

I think these expenses come to around

But they've all been allocated to that account; isn't

Yes, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:53:09

10:53:24

13 1

Q. 80

And we've seen from the accountant's audit working paper that the client,

2

which was Monarch, told the auditors that the purpose of this account was to

3

sway or influence local opinion; isn't that right?

4

A.

Well the purpose of general promotions account, yeah.

5

Q. 81

So somebody in Monarch had a view when they were posting these payments to this

6

account that those payments had been made for the purpose of swaying or

7

influencing local opinion.

8

A.

9

Doesn't that follow?

Well I don't think anybody sat down and said what's the purpose of this payment and somebody else said it's to sway local opinion.

10:53:45 10

post them to that account at the time.

11

Q. 82

And were they ever taken out of that account?

12

A.

Not as far as I know.

13 14

It was just a decision to

There are a number of items in that account I can see

from here that shouldn't be in that account as well. Q. 83

10:54:03 15

But anyway ....

But you were the person with ultimate responsibility for the accounting; isn't that right?

16

A.

Well, yes as Financial Director, yes.

17

Q. 84

You will see that the total on that page at 4903 is 65,696.71; do you see that?

18

A.

Sorry?

19

Q. 85

The total on the page on screen, at 4903 is 65,696.71 being the account total?

A.

65,696.71, Yes.

Q. 86

And if you turn to 4896.

10:54:22 20

21 22 23

And if we look at the bottom half of that page.

24

730 -- 73146 Building Materials General, do you see that account?

10:54:42 25

26

And you will see commencing

A.

Yes I do, yeah.

Q. 87

And if you go down as far as Kelly Temp Services.

At 73996201, all of those

27

accounts within that listing are the accounts relating Cherrywood; isn't that

28

right?

29 10:55:00 30

A.

Yes.

I see that.

I see the Frank Dunlop payment and the invoice for 10,000

is there as well, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:55:01

10:55:08

14 1

Q. 88

Yes.?

2

A.

That's the one for the 12,100 presumably.

3

Q. 89

Isn't that right?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 90

And you will see that the biggest expense that has been incurred relates to

6

general promotion; isn't that right?

7

A.

That's right, yes.

8

Q. 91

And the next biggest expense is Mr. Dunlop?

9

A.

No, there's one there for 30,000 Cherrywood write off, I don't quite understand

10:55:26 10

what that is.

11

Q. 92

That's a write off for 1991?

12

A.

Brian Cooling, 10,900 and also a credit for Whelan, the late Jack Whelan.

13

Q. 93

That's a credit?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 94

In fact what happens here is one adds up the debits and the credits and

10:55:40 15

16

subtracts them to see what the movement on the account is at the end of the

17

year?

18

A.

That's right.

19

Q. 95

The movement on the account which is the Cherrywood write off '91, I think, is

10:55:53 20

is 30,908.83.

Do you see that?

21

A.

No, I don't see that.

22

Q. 96

You mentioned it a moment ago.?

23

A.

Actually 26 or 29, is it on that sheet or?

24

Q. 97

Yes it is.

A.

Oh, yes, Cherrywood write-off, sorry.

26

Q. 98

30,908.83?

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 99

If you go to page 7347. There's an audit working paper; isn't that right?

29

A.

Yeah.

Q. 100

Headed Cherrywood Stock?

10:56:12 25

10:56:24 30

Immediately beneath the heading Temp Services?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:56:25

10:56:35

15 1

A.

And yeah.

2

Q. 101

And you will see that the movement for the year is 30,908.83.

3

Do you see

that?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 102

And that's the figure that you saw on the preceding page at 4896.

And that's

6

the difference between adding the credits and the debits and subtracting them;

7

isn't that right? To look at the movement in the year?

8

A.

Sorry, would you go back to the sheet.

9

Q. 103

4896, please.?

A.

That's the balance on the sheet? In between those two accounts.

10:56:57 10

11

Is that what

you're saying?

12

Q. 104

Yes.

13

A.

Yeah I'm not sure if that 30,908 is the balance between those two accounts.

14 10:57:20 15

What is moved out there is the 147,000 attributed to Mr. Whelan?

If you could run it up to the end I don't know whether there's a ... Q. 105

16

You are then moving on, if you look Mr. Glennane to the account series beginning' 74?

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 106

So they are no longer the Cherrywood accounts.

19 10:57:35 20

Cherrywood accounts is 30,908.83? A.

Yeah.

21

Q. 107

If you move to the audit working paper at 7347.?

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 108

And you look at movements for the year.

24 10:57:55 25

And it says 'Accumulated in' I think

that's codes 73,000 to 73,998, 30,908.83, do you see that? A.

That's right.

26

Q. 109

Yes.?

27

A.

It's a credit, yes.

28

Q. 110

Yes.

29 10:58:06 30

The last entry relating to the

Credit.

Which was the figure we've just seen the on the previous page; isn't

that right? A.

That's right, yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:58:07

10:58:16

16 1

Q. 111

2

Okay.

So the closing balance on Cherrywood stock on this audit working paper

is 403,160.39?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 112

Do you see that?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 113

And that includes within it the figures in relation to Cherrywood general

7

promotion?

8

A.

Right, yes.

9

Q. 114

Isn't that right?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 115

And that figure if you go on to the trial balance at 4889.

10:58:26 10

11 12 13

If you look half way down that page, under the heading Stock Cherrywood.

14

figure is 403,160.39

10:58:44 15

The

A.

What number is it?

16

Q. 116

Almost immediately half way down the page?

17

A.

I see it at the top actually, yeah.

18

Q. 117

Included in that figure are all of the expenses that have been paid by MPSL in

19 10:59:00 20

21

connection with Cherrywood; isn't that right? A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 118

Including what is contained in Cherrywood General Promotions and including

22

Mr. Frank Dunlop's fees that have been paid to that point in time?

23

A.

That's right, yes.

24

Q. 119

So all of these are costs in connection with Cherrywood?

A.

They are all allocated against Cherrywood, yes.

26

Q. 120

They are all now included in Cherrywood stock?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 121

Because what we've seen is taking from the time that the political donations

10:59:13 25

29 10:59:28 30

are written up or attributed to Cherrywood general promotion, they have been carried forward into Cherrywood stock; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

10:59:32

10:59:43

17 1

A.

Yes, so it seems, yeah.

2

Q. 122

Okay.

3

So there has been no adjustment or writing out or alteration of the

alteration of these expenses; isn't that right?

4

A.

So it seems, yes.

5

Q. 123

Now, that would mean that when you suggested earlier that there might have been

6

some adjustment or some reallocation of these costs.

7

not happen, Mr. Glennane, isn't that right?

That that in fact did

8

A.

It would appear that, yes, yeah.

9

Q. 124

Now, what that sequence of documentation appears to indicate is the following.

11:00:02 10

And correct me if I am wrong.

The political expenses paid by MPSL for the

11

General Election and Senate Election in November 1992 were attributed to

12

Cherrywood General Promotion?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 125

They were regarded by the person who made that entry as a cost or expense in

11:00:21 15

connection with Cherrywood?

16

A.

Well, yeah, they were written in against Cherrywood, yes.

17

Q. 126

And they were written in against Cherrywood in an account, which according to

18

the explanation you provided to your auditors, has as its object swaying or

19

influencing opinion.

11:00:40 20

21

Is that right?

A.

Part of it, yes.

Q. 127

Well actually I think the auditor records the explanation that's provided by

22

That's the auditor's comment, that's not our comment.

the client.?

23

A.

Yeah but .... he might have put his own wording on it.

24

Q. 128

Right.

A.

The general interpretation of promotion is to promote something.

Q. 129

In what circumstances can political donations amount to a cost against a

11:01:00 25

26 27 28 29 11:01:26 30

But you don't dispute, I think, the interpretation?

development, Mr. Glennane? A.

Well I presume in so much as they are a cost and they have to be a cost against something.

It's a matter of really finding the most convenient home for them

at the time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:01:28

11:01:44

18 1

Q. 130

How are they a cost?

2

A.

Well they're -- if you pay out something it's a cost.

3

Q. 131

Why weren't they attributed --

4

A.

They weren't treated as a cost at that stage.

5

is -- the opposite to trading is a cost.

6

a cost.

7

Q. 132

8 9 11:01:54 10

They were capitalised, which

They were eventually written off as

Eventually because the Cherrywood stock was written off by Monarch Properties Services Limited?

A.

That's right, yeah.

Q. 133

And thereby reducing, I suggest to you, the profit level of Monarch Properties

11

Services Limited; isn't that right?

12

A.

At that time, yes.

13

Q. 134

Was there any add back made, Mr. Glennane, can you tell the Tribunal for any

14

taxable liability that may have arisen by virtue of the fact that these

11:02:11 15

16

particular costs and expenses were not deductible? A.

I don't know.

Certainly SKC, the auditors had all of the information, as you

17

can see, they did the tax computation.

18

concealing what they were.

19

they formed the judgement.

11:02:31 20

There's no question of anybody

They were very familiar with them.

So I'm sure

Q. 135

Let's talk about your judgement?

21

A.

I don't know, I didn't do the tax computation.

22

Q. 136

Do you know whether or not when Cherrywood stock was written out in the books

23

and services of Monarch Limited whether any add back was made for the fact that

24

these political donations were not tax deductible?

11:02:50 25

A.

26 27

I'm sure it was but I can't say.

I wouldn't have done the tax computation.

But very senior people in Stokes Kennedy Crowley would have done it. Q. 137

You would have known, would you not, as the most senior financial person in

28

Monarch, that all these expenses that had been attributed to Cherrywood and

29

Cherrywood stock were in fact political donations?

11:03:12 30

A.

Not all of them, no. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:03:13

11:03:22

19 1

Q. 138

2

You would have known, for example, would you not, because it was within your department.

At page 4903.

3 4 5

A.

6

Yeah but sorry all of this -- all of the Cherrywood stock wasn't political donation.

That's what we're saying.

7

Q. 139

No, but this particular part of it was; isn't that right?

8

A.

Yeah, there was an amount included in it, yeah, whatever it was.

9

Q. 140

You would have known wouldn't you, within your department, that included in the

11:03:42 10

Cherrywood stock was general promotions; isn't that right?

11

A.

Yeah.

12

Q. 141

And you would have known because you've written most of the cheques and you

13

have signed most of the cheques that any of the political donations in general

14

promotions were political donations?

11:03:55 15

16

A.

Yes.

Q. 142

You didn't seek to allocate them to under a heading political donations; isn't

17

that right?

18

A.

That's right, yes.

19

Q. 143

You elected instead, as your accounting treatment, to treat them as expenses in

11:04:07 20

21

connection with Cherrywood and attribute them to Cherrywood; isn't that right? A.

22

Well I wouldn't -- as I said, they were expenses.

They were allocated to

Cherrywood, yes.

23

Q. 144

As a cost?

24

A.

As a cost, yes.

Q. 145

And they were accumulated in MPSL as Cherrywood stock?

26

A.

That's right, yes.

27

Q. 146

And no attempt was ever made with any of the expenses recorded and any of the

11:04:19 25

28

payments made that are recorded in Cherrywood General Promotion to take them

29

out of that categorisation; isn't that right?

11:04:40 30

A.

Yes, so it would seem, yes.

But they were carried forward as stock and they

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:04:44

11:04:55

20 1

were eventually written off in Monarch services.

2

Q. 147

But you're not --

3

A.

Which is what you're saying we should have done in '92.

4 5

done in '96. Q. 148

6 7

It was eventually

I asked you Mr. Glennane, you believe that in fact what might have happened was that there may have been an add back.

A.

I know Stokes Kennedy Crowley had all of the information.

8

what they are.

9

on it over the various years.

11:05:15 10

You don't know whether or not? It's crystal clear

As you've already pointed out, the auditors had written notes So I didn't do the tax computation.

But

knowing them, they were very meticulous.

11

Q. 149

Uh-huh?

12

A.

So I would certainly be strongly of the opinion that they were, that they were

13 14 11:05:27 15

added back. Q. 150

Indeed --

A.

There might have been a loss anyway in which case there would have been no tax

16

paid.

They would have reduced the loss forward, I don't know for that year.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

from KPMG.

Ms. Dillon, could we just go back to the note 7378 I think,

11:05:43 20

21

MS. DILLON:

The handwritten note?

22 23

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Yes.

24 11:05:48 25

MS. DILLON:

7378.

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

would have known that they were political donations

29

A.

Mr. Glennane, I wanted to ask you.

Yes.

11:06:16 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

You just said that KPMG

11:06:16

11:06:31

21 1

JUDGE FAHERTY:

2

including -- we know they were as a reality.

3

activities; isn't that right?

4

A.

I don't see any reference in that explanation to it They talk about promotional

Well what they say is:

5

"Items booked by the client under this heading relate to costs incurred which

6

relate to particular properties under development e.g. Monarch would spend on

7

various promotional activities.

8

reading to himself)

The reason behind this is to ....." (Witness

9 11:06:57 10

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Yes, I understand all of that, yes.

That's an accounting

11

explanation and that's on its face understandable.

12

Ms. Dillon a moment ago that in fact KPMG would have known that they were

13

political donations.

14

A.

But you had said to

Well, it was written ...

11:07:15 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

political donation in that explanation to the auditors. Would you agree with

18

that?

19

A.

11:07:30 20

Yes.

There's no specific reference as far as I see to the words

But they would have a schedule of it from year to year.

They would

have done their own analysis of what they were.

21 22

MR SANFEY:

23

provenance of this document.

24

somebody of the auditors.

11:07:49 25

Nothing has been said by about the

It appears to be a KPMG working paper.

I just see that the date is January 1996.

Done by

I

wonder could Mr. Glennane hazard a guess what accounting period that would have

26 27

Chairman, I wonder.

been in respect of? A.

The year 30th of April '95.

28 29 11:08:00 30

MS. DILLON:

I will be dealing with -- the principle I understand to be the

same regardless of the year.

I am going to deal with the period 1995 and the

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:08:06

11:08:11

22 1

audit trail in relation to the matters booked into Cherrywood General

2

Promotions.

3 4 5

Q. 151

6

If we could turn to look now at 1993, Mr. Glennane.

And if I could show you

1638, please.

7 8

And you will see that in 1993 Monarch Properties paid 5,520 pounds by way of a

9

political donation.

11:08:36 10

At 1583 that is broken down.

And I just want to draw to

your attention there that there's a payment to Senator Ormonde, Councillor Fox

11

and Councillor Devitt as the first three payments

12

A.

Yeah.

13

Q. 152

And then if we could have 8921.

14

And this again is the analysis done by the

Tribunal of the allocation of these payments.

11:09:00 15

And you will note that the

first three payments being the payments to Councillors Ormonde, Fox and Devitt,

16

are allocated to Cherrywood General Promotion.?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 153

The next three payments being Fianna Fail Golf Fundraiser, Fianna Fail

19

Fundraiser and County Louth Fundraiser are allocated to MPSL promotion

11:09:19 20

66801201.

You see that?

21

A.

Yes, yeah.

22

Q. 154

And you will see the next two payments being Fine Gael Dublin West and Fine

23

Gael Dublin Southwest are allocated to Cherrywood General Promotion.

24

last payment to Ms. Helen Keogh is allocated to a sponsorship account which is

11:09:38 25

And the

not a Cherrywood account.?

26

A.

Right, yes.

27

Q. 155

Now, if it follows from that, and I think you may accept for the moment,

28

Mr. Glennane, that that analysis is correct.

29

decision that certain payments would be allocated against Cherrywood and other

11:09:54 30

It appears that somebody made a

payments allocated against MPSL; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:09:58

11:10:13

23 1

A.

Yes, that appears so, yes.

2

Q. 156

Who was that person?

3

A.

Well, whoever again was allocating it at at the time.

It would appear that

4

the first three were for some reason, they were to do with the elections but

5

were actually only paid in early '93.

6

previous sheet.

7

Maybe the likes of Colm Hilliard, whom I assume was in County Meath.

8

assume that would have been regarded as nothing to do with Cherrywood.

9

Certainly a County Louth fundraiser would be regarded as nothing to do with

11:10:39 10

Cherrywood.

So they would have been treated as the

The other ones, I don't know.

I suppose it would depend. So I

So as each one was paid or came up to be posted there had would

11

have been some inquiry made re what was this about and if somebody said stick

12

it in Cherrywood they would have put it into Cherrywood.

13

obviously nothing to do with Cherrywood or Dublin really, I don't know.

14

Q. 157

11:11:01 15

If they said no it's

So somebody would have decided that the payments to Councillors Ormonde, Fox and Devitt, that it was appropriate to attribute them to Cherrywood?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 158

And that would have been, they were being put into Cherrywood General Promotion

18

because those payments in some way assisted in the promotion of the Cherrywood

19

lands; is that right?

11:11:18 20

A.

Well they were political contributions made.

21

somewhere.

22

in Cherrywood or something.

23

really they had to get posted somewhere.

24

Q. 159

11:11:42 25

Really they had to be posted

So I don't know that anybody is coldly saying this has helped us It's payments that were made by request and

And they were ultimately part of the Cherrywood stock or work in progress; isn't that right?

26

A.

I assume so, yes.

27

Q. 160

They were also, as we have seen with the 1992 payments and the 1991 payments,

28 29 11:11:55 30

they were moved into Cherrywood stock; isn't that right? A.

Well I'm -- I assume so, yes.

Q. 161

And there was no adjustment made again on the allocation of these expenses Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:12:01

11:12:12

24 1

against Cherrywood; isn't that right?

2

A.

Well insofar, yes.

3

Q. 162

And from what you've seen in the documentation that's the position; isn't it?

4

A.

Well I don't know.

5

Q. 163

And I want to draw to your attention now a series of payments that you will

I'm taking your word for that.

6

have seen in the brief, Mr. Glennane, that were made in October and November

7

1993.

8

General Promotion.

9

right?

11:12:33 10

Which amount to 41,885 pounds.

And which are attributed to Cherrywood

And you will have seen those in the brief; isn't that

A.

Well I ... I'm not sure.

11

Q. 164

I'm going to go through them one by one?

12

A.

Yeah.

13

Q. 165

Again, can the Tribunal take it that the position is that once the decision was

14

made to allocate them to Cherrywood stock, it was because they were being

11:12:42 15

regarded as an expense in connection or a cost in connection with Cherrywood?

16

A.

Oh, well I have already explained. At the time ...

17

Q. 166

At the time?

18

A.

At the time, whoever was coding the payments would have put them into

19

Cherrywood.

11:13:04 20

21

I don't think there was any Board decision around what is this

for or what's that for. Q. 167

22

If there was an error that would have been picked up and appropriate adjustment made, Mr. Glennane?

23

A.

There should have been, yes.

24

Q. 168

If one fails to find any adjustment for any of these payments or withdrawals

11:13:17 25

that are made it follows that there was no adjustment made and they continue to

26

remain in Cherrywood General Promotions; isn't that right?

27

A.

In Cherrywood stock, yes.

28

Q. 169

They ended up in Cherrywood stock but insofar as they are allocated to this

29 11:13:31 30

account? A.

If they weren't adjusted, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:13:33

11:13:49

25 1

Q. 170

We look at the payments then in sequence.

4585 first, please.

2 3

There are two payments on this that I want to draw to your attention,

4

Mr. Glennane.

5

page.

6

pounds.

7

Allied Irish Bank

And they are the payments that are in the bottom half of the

The first is dated the 11th of October 1993.

In the sum of 1,985

And the second is dated 12th of October 1993.

Both payable to

8

A.

Yeah.

9

Q. 171

The second is in the sum of 3,000 pounds and the designation "cash" beside the

11:14:09 10

3,000 pounds payment.

Do you see that?

11

A.

I do, yes.

12

Q. 172

That would suggest that the extract from the cash payments Book record two

13

cheques drawn in favour of Allied Irish Bank, one of which was attributed to

14

cash; isn't that right?

11:14:23 15

16

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 173

At 8462 there is a copy of the cheque for 3,000 pounds.

17

The 1,985 seems a very specific amount.

to the Tribunal that's your signature, Mr. Glennane.

18

A.

Yes, it is, yeah.

19

Q. 174

What was the purpose of that cheque?

A.

I have no idea at this stage.

Q. 175

And you will see at page 4580.

11:14:41 20

21

And you can confirm

The bank account of Monarch Properties

22

Services Limited a debit on the 13th of October of 1,985 and a debit of the

23

4th of October of 3,000 pounds.

24

right?

11:15:05 25

26

A.

That's the 8489 is it?

Q. 176

8772 and cheque 8773.

Both referable to the two cheques; isn't that

27 28

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Ms. Dillon you just said the 4th of October.

29

must have been a later date.

11:15:18 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

I'd say that

11:15:18

11:15:30

26 1

MS. DILLON:

14th of October. Sorry, on the bank statement it's covered.

2

the 14th of October.

On

3 4

Do you see those are debited from the Monarch Properties account

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 177

These are then attributed at 4584 to Cherrywood sponsorship.

And that is the

7

designation in the centre of the page and half way down that you will see 3,000

8

and beneath that 1,985.

9 11:15:51 10

Do you see that?

A.

I do, yes.

Q. 178

You will see the total amount attributable to Cherrywood sponsorship was

11

7,952.00, do you see that?

12

A.

That's right, yeah.

13

Q. 179

And within that there are a number of matters such as Fine Gael Dublin West,

14

Loughlinstown Summer Project, Mystique Productions.

11:16:08 15

And there is then two

payments, one of 3,000 pounds and one of 1,985 pounds, do you see that?

16

A.

I do, yeah.

17

Q. 180

And on the total of 7952.

18

A.

There is something written after it but I can't make it out.

19

Q. 181

I beg your pardon?

A.

There's something written after the 7952, it seems to say not something or

11:16:24 20

21 22

If you go to the trial balance at 7355 --

other but I don't know what the word is. Q. 182

I think there's no alteration on the document ...

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

Cash

11:16:36 25

26

MS. DILLON:

On the document.

If you look at the trial balance at 7355

27

A.

That might be Cherrywood.

28

Q. 183

I don't think so.?

29

A.

Okay.

Q. 184

I don't think it can be, Mr. Glennane.

11:16:46 30

I don't know.

I'm not trying to mislead you.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

This

11:16:50

11:17:04

27 1

is the trial balance.

These are all of the accounts that are attributable to

2

Cherrywood; isn't that right?

3

A.

That's right, yes.

4

Q. 185

And you will see half way down the page 73519201, Sponsorship?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 186

7952. And you will see that the total comes to 183,017.19?

7

A.

Yes, that's right, yes.

8

Q. 187

Yes.

9

That's again all of Frank Dunlop's invoices.

And all of Mr. Dunlop's invoices are there also.

deal with Mr. Dunlop's invoices separately.

11:17:32 10

I'll be coming to

And what is happening here,

Mr. Glennane is that this is the following year's audit of the payments we have

11

just been looking at; isn't that right?

12

A.

That's right, yes.

13

Q. 188

And you can see that the two payments which I've drawn to your attention are

14

contained in the 7952.

11:17:46 15

And that the 7952 is itself contained in the

183,017.19; isn't that right?

16

A.

That's right, yes.

17

Q. 189

And therefore there has been no writing out or adjustment or removal or re

18 19 11:18:02 20

allocation of the original posting of these two payments; isn't that right? A.

So it would seem, at this stage, yes.

Q. 190

And then if one turns to the Cherrywood work in progress as of April '95.

21

7354.

22

183,017.

At

You will see that the costs '94 '95 under the heading 1994 are Do you see that?

23

A.

I do, yes, yeah.

24

Q. 191

And that means that when that audit working paper adjustment is made, that the

11:18:27 25

figure of 183,017 contains the figure for Cherrywood sponsorship of 7,952 which

26

contains the two payments we're looking at; isn't that right?

27

A.

Yes so it seems, yes.

28

Q. 192

They haven't been taken out, posted to any other account or adjusted for in any

29 11:18:47 30

way; isn't that right? A.

Insofar as I can see, yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:18:49

11:19:04

28 1

Q. 193

And therefore, they remain in Cherrywood stock; isn't that right?

2

A.

I'm not sure where that 27,000, it seems to be progress payments or something.

3

I don't know where that went to, yes.

4

Q. 194

Which figure are you talking about?

5

A.

The figure that ...

6

Q. 195

They are the payments received from GRE?

7

A.

Okay, yeah.

8

Q. 196

So what that means, Mr. Glennane is that the two payments that we're presently

9

looking at which were paid in October of 1993 were allocated to Cherrywood

11:19:20 10

stock, they were allocated to Cherrywood sponsorship so they are a payment

11

that's made to sway or influence local opinion.

12

fashion in the books of Monarch Property Services Limited and their designation

13

is never altered or changed; isn't that right?

14 11:19:36 15

They are recorded in that

A.

At that stage, yes.

Q. 197

Now, you are the person with ultimate financial responsibility.

16

fact have signed one of the cheques?

17

A.

That's right, yes.

18

Q. 198

Will you tell the Tribunal where that money went?

19

A.

I've no idea.

Q. 199

If I could have page 4695.

11:19:58 20

And you in

I don't know. This is the next series of payments in 1993.

21

Attributed to the Cherrywood General Promotion Account.

22

draw to your attention approximately half way down the page payment of 900

23

pounds.

24

that the words CHS and cash and what appears to be the initials RL.

11:20:27 25

Allied -- the payee is designated Allied Irish Bank.

A.

Yes, I do, yeah.

27

Q. 200

That probably means cash and Richard Lynn I suggest.

28

11:20:35 30

And I want to

And beside Do you

see that?

26

29

4695.

reasonable? A.

Yeah.

Q. 201

And at 4697 -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

Would that appear to be

11:20:38

11:20:48

29 1

A.

It would look like some sort of sum.

2

Q. 202

On the fifth transaction down you will see the sum of 900 pounds is debited to

3

the account of Monarch Properties Services Limited?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 203

And you will see at 5022.

That this payment is allocated or posted to

6

Cherrywood General Promotions account being approximately at the bottom

7

third -- the top third of the page, I beg your pardon.

Do you see that?

8

A.

I do, yes.

9

Q. 204

Immediately beneath flowers and above lunches?

A.

Right okay, yeah.

11

Q. 205

Do you see that?

12

A.

Yeah.

13

Q. 206

Do you know what that payment was in connection with?

14

A.

No, I would assume it was some sort of sum for .... I couldn't say.

Q. 207

If I could show you 4670.

11:21:11 10

11:21:23 15

This is an extract from the Monarch Properties

16

Services Limited cheque payments book.

17

fourth transaction down.

18

designation is cash.

19 11:21:43 20

Which is dated the 2nd of November 1993.

And the amount is 6,000 pounds.

A.

I do, yes.

Q. 208

And you see two beneath that.

21

I want to draw to your attention the

the 3rd of November 1993? A.

Yeah, I do, yeah.

23

Q. 209

And I want to draw to your attention at 4671.

24

26

You will see the debit of 6,000

pounds on the bank account of Monarch Properties Services Limited? A.

Yeah.

Q. 210

And at 4676.

27

You will see the debit of 5,000 pounds.

Monarch Properties Services Limited.

28

A.

Yes, I do, yeah.

29

Q. 211

And then can I show you 5022.

11:22:26 30

Do you see that?

Allied Irish Banks cash 5,000 pounds also on

22

11:22:04 25

The

On the account of

Do you see that?

And show you that both of these amounts have

been posted to the Cherrywood General Promotion Account 73510201 approximately Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:22:30

11:22:42

30 1

at the start of the bottom half of the page, do you see a sum of 6,000 pounds

2

and beneath that a sum of 5,000 pounds?

3

A.

I do, yes.

4

Q. 212

Now, can you explain to the Tribunal what those payments were in connection

5

with, Mr. Glennane?

6

A.

No, I can't do that at this remove, no.

7

Q. 213

Can you can you think of anything that was happening in the like of Cherrywood

8

or the Cherrywood development on the 3rd of November 1993 that would have

9

created a requirement for 11,000 pounds in cash?

11:22:56 10

11

A.

No, I can't, no.

Q. 214

Were you aware that the original meeting for the decision to be made on the

12

rezoning of the Cherrywood lands was first scheduled for the 3rd of November

13

1993?

14 11:23:11 15

A.

I heard that last week, yeah.

Q. 215

Does it surprise you now looking back on it that the -- that they would have

16

been drawing cheques made out to cash in the sum of 11,000 pounds on the very

17

day that the vote was to take place on the rezoning of the Cherrywood lands?

18

A.

I wouldn't see any connection with between the two, no.

19

Q. 216

Can I show you a debit at 4673.

11:23:39 20

On the 2nd of November 1993 of 5,000 pounds

on the account of Monarch Properties Services Limited.

21

not a cheque.

22

debit 5,000 pounds?

And you will see it's just there where you see 2 November '95,

23

A.

Yes, I see that, yes.

24

Q. 217

And you will see at page 5022.

11:23:59 25

This is a debit now,

That that debit of 5,000 pounds as on the 2nd

of November is allocated to Cherrywood General Promotion, isn't that right?

26

A.

Sorry, where is it?

27

Q. 218

Do you see the 6,000 and the 5,000 immediately beneath that there's the other

28 29 11:24:15 30

5,000? A.

Yeah.

Q. 219

That would suggest between the 2nd and the 3rd of November 1993 Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:24:19

11:24:39

31 1 2

Properties had a requirement for 16,000 pounds in cash; isn't that right? A.

3

No, well I'm not sure of the reference there to debit. reference in a bank.

That's a peculiar

It would sound like a transfer to me.

4

Q. 220

That would usually be C/T credit transfer?

5

A.

It's a funny wording debit.

6

Q. 221

Certainly whatever it was for, it was being allocated by your financial

7

department to Cherrywood General Promotions?

8

A.

So it would seem, yes.

9

Q. 222

Would also appear to be the position that for whatever purpose between the 2nd

11:24:54 10

and 3rd of November 1993, Monarch Properties services Limited had had a need to

11

spend 16,000 pounds on behalf of Cherrywood; is that right?

12

A.

Well I wouldn't say it had a need to spend.

13

Q. 223

Spent it?

14

A.

Yes, it certainly did.

Q. 224

Well according to your records.

11:25:11 15

16

But it certainly --

Withdrew it anyway, yes. 16,000 pounds was spent between the 2nd and

3rd of November 1993?

17

A.

Was taken out of the company.

18

Q. 225

Now, Mr. Glennane, you are going to have to do a bit better than that about

19

this.

11:25:31 20

I don't know what happened to it after that.

This is a critical time for Cherrywood.

The meeting was supposed to

have taken place on the 3rd of November 1993.

Are you going to seriously

21

suggest to this Tribunal that you have no idea as the Chief Financial Officer

22

of this company what happened to that money?

23

A.

I certainly have no idea, yes, at this remove, certainly.

24

Q. 226

But your the person writing the cheques, isn't that right?

A.

No.

26

Q. 227

You didn't write these cheques?

27

A.

No, no.

28

Q. 228

How do you know that?

29

A.

I saw the handwriting on them.

Q. 229

On the cheques?

11:25:46 25

11:25:53 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:25:54

11:26:10

32 1

A.

Well on the cheques payments book, which is the same as the cheque.

2

Q. 230

We don't have a copy of the cheques?

3

A.

No, but the carbon, they were written on carbon, our cheques were written on

4

carbon.

So it had the same writing as you had in the cheques payments book.

5

Q. 231

And who signed for these cheques?

6

A.

I may have signed for some or all of them, I don't know.

7

But I didn't write

them.

8 9 11:26:17 10

CHAIRMAN: A.

Well who --

It's the question you're asking.

11 12

MS. DILLON:

13

the body of the cheque and who signed the cheque

14 11:26:26 15

You are a creating a distinction between who actually wrote out

A.

You are.

Q. 232

I'll correct myself.

16

Are you telling the Tribunal that you signed these

cheques but you didn't fill out the payee?

17

A.

I don't know if I signed them or not.

18

Q. 233

You don't know if you signed the cheques?

19

A.

If you have the cheques and they're there and I signed them, I'll certainly

11:26:40 20

admit it.

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

Sorry.

23 24

MS. DILLON:

Sorry, Sir.

11:26:45 25

26 27 28

CHAIRMAN: A.

Mr. Glennane, do you recognise the writing on the cheque payments?

If you could go back to them.

There is certainly a different one on the

6,000, I noticed that.

29 11:26:58 30

MS. DILLON:

Mr. Sweeney told the Tribunal that there were only three

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:27:00

11:27:05

33 1

authorised signatories on the cheque book.

2

A.

That's not correct.

3

Q. 234

That's not correct?

4

A.

No.

5

Q. 235

And that he himself rarely signed cheques.

I think you have said in your

6

statement to the Tribunal that you in the main nearly signed all of the

7

cheques?

8

A.

Well, if I said that I got it wrong.

9

Q. 236

Yes?

A.

Like, we were running several different businesses, several different shopping

11:27:16 10

11

centres.

There was cheques coming through all of the time.

12

enormous amount of cheques being drawn.

So there was an

13 14

CHAIRMAN:

11:27:35 15

16

Mr. Glennane, do you think this money was paid, this 11, 000 or

possibly 16,000 was paid to politicians? A.

I don't, Chairman, no.

17 18 19

CHAIRMAN: A.

You don't think it was?

I know it wasn't because I know there was never money paid to politicians.

11:27:48 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

22

them, who authorised them, what they were paid for.

23

one hand that you don't know what they were for but you're certain they weren't

24

for politicians?

11:28:05 25

A.

26

How if you don't know anything about these cash payments, who wrote How can you say on the

I know there was no payments made to politicians same way as I would know they weren't paid to me.

But I don't necessarily know ....

27 28 29

CHAIRMAN: A.

Yes, but I'm not suggesting that you personally.

I'm just saying, you're asking me.

11:28:19 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:28:19

11:28:29

34 1

CHAIRMAN:

2

don't know anything about the money whatsoever?

3

A.

How do you know they weren't.

How do you know this money if you

I'm sure I must have known about it at the time.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

6

terms of --

7

A.

Well, can you provide us with an explanation as to what it was in

I would have thought generally cash payments were withdrawals made by

8

Mr. Monahan in, the main, I would have thought, to buy cars or to buy

9

furniture. He was into antique furniture or other items.

11:28:52 10

I'm sure I would

have known at the time, they may very well have been queried by the auditors, I

11

don't know.

So I'm happy that they were satisfactorily explained at the time,

12

well both to me and to anybody else who asked.

13 14 11:29:09 15

CHAIRMAN: A.

16

But you still can't remember?

No, I can't recall.

As I said, it was quite common for Mr. Monahan to draw

cash to buy cars.

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

19

to buy antique furniture and to have it attributed to this? I mean, isn't

11:29:26 20

21

Wouldn't that have been quite wrong for a drawdown by Mr. Monahan

that -A.

22

Well I'm saying.

The procedure was.

Like, the attribution of it wouldn't

have taken place for four or six eight weeks afterwards.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

11:29:43 25

26

Surely if it was inappropriately posted to Cherrywood, that's

something that would have come to your attention? A.

27

Well not necessarily, no.

It wouldn't have arisen until the end of the year

and until the auditors ...

28 29 11:29:56 30

CHAIRMAN: A.

They are very substantial sums so --

Well all respects, Chairman, they're not.

In the context of Monarch and all

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:30:02

11:30:13

35 1

of the business we were doing and shopping centres and that, they weren't

2

substantial sums of money.

I'm not knocking 5,000.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

5

and were allocated in the way that they were without any reference to you.

6

A.

Do you think it's possible that these sums went through the system

Yeah.

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

9

to politicians.

11:30:23 10

A.

So, then how can you then say with certainty that they weren't paid

I know in my heart and soul that no payments were made to politicians.

11 12 13

CHAIRMAN: A.

14

So the largest sums in a five month period on the promotion --

The promotions would be a fairly small amount. We weren't just running Monarch Services.

11:30:46 15

The fact I'm trying to make.

We were running a square in

Tallaght, Nutgrove Shopping Centre, a large number of other shopping centres.

16

There was a lot of cheques being drawn every day or every week certainly ....

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

19

were for ...

11:31:02 20

A.

21

So, is it your position while you have no idea what these payments

My opinion would be that they would have been something to do with Mr. Monahan and cars.

I can't hand on heart say that.

22 23 24

CHAIRMAN: A.

You are certain that they weren't used to pay politicians?

Certainly, yes.

11:31:13 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

27 28

MS. DILLON:

29

5022.

11:31:24 30

Can I draw to your attention about the document on screen at

The general promotions account.

I just want to draw this to your

attention so that you can comment on it. For example, there at the very first Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:31:29

11:31:35

36 1

there is gift vouchers £95.10.

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 237

The order of St John of God 25 pounds?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 238

So you have an actual recipient of the sum of 25 pounds recorded on the

6

document? Do you see that?

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q. 239

And immediately beneath that you have the Grey Door £589.35

9

A.

Yes.

Q. 240

The Goat Grill £981.05?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 241

Flowers £130 pounds?

13

A.

Just as a matter of interest.

11:31:52 10

14 11:32:04 15

16

John was to influence people.

It's hard to see how the Order of Malta or St. Sorry.

Q. 242

What I'm drawing to your attention --

A.

If the cheques were drawn obviously it showed the amount on the cheque and it

17

showed the name on it.

18

payments book and gone through the name, the amount, if the amount said cash as

19

it has there or 6,000 as it has there, it doesn't even have cash.

11:32:27 20

The person making it would have picked up the cheques

Q. 243

For example Conways Public House, which is the sum of £1,134?

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 244

On the -- and you will also see a donation to the blind, £5.00?

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 245

And you will see the Grey Door again and then there is Conways Pub again in the

11:32:45 25

sum of 232 pounds.

Do you see all of that?

26

A.

Yes, I do, yeah.

27

Q. 246

Now, you have sums as small as 5 pounds on that list.

And you have the

28

recipient of the funds identified.

29

are on that list do not have the recipient of the funds identified; isn't that

11:33:05 30

But the three single biggest payments that

right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:33:05

11:33:19

37 1

A.

That's right, yes.

2

Q. 247

Can you explain how that could be?

3

A.

Well, it's obviously because the cheques were drawn to cash.

They were there

4

but the person posting the books or whatever would have just recorded what was

5

written in the cheques payments sheet.

6

sheet I'm sure you'll see all of those references on it.

7

Q. 248

8 9 11:33:36 10

If you go back to the cheques payments

Well I don't know that that can be actually correct, Mr. Glennane.

4670,

because one of the cheques was payable to Allied Irish Bank? A.

Yeah.

Q. 249

And it's not recorded in the designation under general promotions that that was

11

a payment to Allied Irish Bank; isn't that right?

12

A.

Yeah, well probably.

I think it's just that the amount is recorded.

13

Q. 250

If you look at 4670.

And you look at the second payment down.

14

You see that?

Under cash and then immediately beneath that you see Allied Irish Bank and the

11:34:02 15

words "cash" beside it?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 251

That payment is record in the general promotions account?

18

A.

I think it's cash.

19

Q. 252

As cash, isn't that right?

A.

I think it just shows 5,000 if I remember rightly.

21

Q. 253

Pardon?

22

A.

I think it just shows the amount 5,000.

23

Q. 254

It doesn't show the actual payee because of the fact and I suggest to you

11:34:10 20

24

because the words "cash" are written on the cash payments book the person

11:34:27 25

writing up or making the assignment to general promotion doesn't know who is

26

the ultimate recipient and therefore can't identify it; isn't that right?

27

A.

That's right.

28

Q. 255

So what has happened here is in early November 1993, significant and large sums

29 11:34:45 30

of cash are withdrawn from Monarch Properties Services Limited.

They are

posted or attributed as being in connection with the Cherrywood lands. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

And

11:34:49

11:35:05

38 1 2

you have no idea who got those monies. A.

Well I've already given my opinion.

Is that right?

And my belief would be that they would

3

have been Mr. Monahan.

4

would have got cash of that sort of order.

5

Q. 256

6 7

I don't know, I'm almost sure it was.

But somebody was told to post those to Cherrywood properties.

Nobody else

And in

particular to Cherrywood promotion and sponsorship; isn't that right? A.

Well you say "told".

Those amounts would have been analysed to the fourth

8

column out beyond creditors, to sundries.

9

have asked somebody where will we post these and I assume that the answer would

11:35:33 10

have been stick it in Cherrywood.

11

time.

12

somewhere.

When they came to post them they'd

They would have had to post them at the

So they didn't particularly care where they went as long as they went

13

Q. 257

Mr. Monahan buying cars would have nothing to do with Cherrywood, would it?

14

A.

No.

Q. 258

So if this money had been used by Mr Monahan for the purpose of buying cars its

11:35:50 15

16

proper allocation was a director's loan account; isn't that right?

17

A.

Or actually the car account, yeah, if it had been known at the time, yes.

18

Q. 259

It didn't go into either of those two accounts?

19

A.

Yeah.

Q. 260

It would follow from that either it wasn't known within Monarch that the money

11:36:03 20

21

was spent on scars if it's the true case.

22

within Monarch that these expenses had only to do with Cherrywood and they are

23

being properly posted by being put into this account; isn't that right?

24

A.

11:36:24 25

Or alternatively, it was well known

Well my belief is whoever was posting this which would or could have been between four or six or eight weeks after the 3rd November would have come

26

across this entry, they would have wondered what to do with it, may well have

27

asked somebody or may not and posted it to Cherrywood.

28

Q. 261

29 11:36:48 30

5022 please. To be clear about this. There was in existence a separate car account?

A.

There was actually several, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:36:49

11:37:05

39 1

Q. 262

Also in existence a directors loan account?

2

A.

Yes.

Sorry it should have been written I agree at the time.

3

Directors loan, PM loan or something like that.

4

at the time it would have been easy to do.

5

Q. 263

If somebody

If that was written after it

So when this junior in the office comes to allocate these three payments

6

against an account.

7

somebody senior to that person, these should be allocated to Cherrywood General

8

Promotion?

9

A.

11:37:26 10

That person makes an inquiry and is told presumably by

No, well I would say they would say just stick it into Cherrywood, I don't think that they would have said general promotion.

11

I wasn't aware that there

was a general promotion account.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

14

figures of this nature would have been if a junior was dealing with them they

11:37:42 15

16

But Mr. Glennane, I understood you to say earlier that I mean, that

would have sought some direction. A.

I imagine that they would have, yes.

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

19

substantial unusual sums, because they were cash, into just willy-nilly into

11:38:01 20

Cherrywood.

Isn't it unbelievable that a junior accounts clerk would make

I mean, wouldn't he have sought direction and be given a specific

21

direction to put them into or to post them in this way and isn't it likely that

22

that direction would have been given because it was believed and accepted that

23

they had been so used in the manner suggested by the accounts?

24

A.

Um.

11:38:24 25

26 27

CHAIRMAN: A.

Isn't that the likelihood?

With all due respects, Chairman.

No, I don't agree with that.

28 29 11:38:32 30

CHAIRMAN: A.

Well you're saying --

A more senior person.

There was different sorts of strands of people in the

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:38:37

11:38:54

40 1

accounts department.

All their concern at the time would have been to finish

2

off the postings for the month.

3

posted somewhere.

4

concerned about it at all, they would have taken the view that well somebody

5

else can sort it out at the end of the year if it's wrong.

6

problem, you know.

They would have posted -- they had to get

So they would have been posted there.

And if they were

That's not my

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

9

they could have been posted as sundries or something like that.

11:39:13 10

But couldn't they have been left in PSL. They were left in MSL, I think there

was a mentality at the time that Cherrywood was by far the biggest job on.

11

The same way as three or four years earlier was Tallaght.

If anybody asked

12

what's an unusual payment in connection with the normal answer would have been

13

something to do with Cherrywood.

14 11:39:31 15

16

CHAIRMAN: A.

You would accept that they were highly unusual entries?

They weren't that unusual.

17 18 19

CHAIRMAN: A.

11:39:44 20

Yes.

In the sense that they were substantial cash round figures?

Well I've said Mr. Monahan would often A come in and draw cash for

himself.

B, come in and he could be on his way to try and negotiate to buy a

21

secondhand car and he would have, if they were looking for 5,000, he would have

22

hoped to get it for 4,700 or something.

Or indeed, he was in the habit of

23

buying antique furniture for the house.

And again, the same sort of principle

24

would apply.

11:40:07 25

26

MS. DILLON:

27

been known by somebody within Monarch when these cheques were written that if

28

they were being given to Mr. Monahan for the purchase of a car or antique

29

furniture, somebody like yourself, somebody inside, would have known --

11:40:23 30

A.

Just so that the Tribunal is clear about this.

I didn't write them.

I keep saying that to you.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

It would have

11:40:26

11:40:40

41 1

Q. 264

Did you sign them?

2

A.

I don't know.

I may or may not have.

3

have asked.

4

and said give me a cheque for 5,000 ...

If I signed them I certainly would

If you went into a junior or into the person writing the cheques

5

Q. 265

Who had authority to sign cheques?

6

A.

Well, there was a combination of Pat Cooling, Pat Caslin, Mr. Monaghan, myself

7 8

and probably Mr. Sweeney. Q. 266

9

companies unless I was not available in an emergency situation".? A.

13 Q. 267

A.

Mr. Sweeney agrees that you are the person who would in the normal course of

Well he's incorrect if you show up all the pay cheques I think you'll find that I signed less than 10% of them.

Q. 268

19 11:41:41 20

Particularly at that

events have signed most cheques?

17 18

Yeah, well I think that's probably a bad exaggeration. page, yeah.

11:41:17 15

16

In the normal course of events

would have counter signed most of the cheques being issued being by the various

11

14

In your statement to the Tribunal you say "I was one of the

cheque signatories for all of the companies.

11:40:59 10

12

At page 876.

Yes, I think it is fair to say that all of the returned pay cheques we have looked at to day, you in fact have signed them all insofar as we have them?

A.

They're the ones that you have looked at.

The point I was making, we were

21

running effectively running several different businesses at the same time.

22

And there were literally hundreds of cheques rolling out probably.

23

certainly didn't sign them all, that would have been a full-time job.

24

Q. 269

11:41:58 25

You know, do you not, Mr. Glennane, that Monarch sought the return of these payments from GRE?

26

A.

That's right, yes.

27

Q. 270

So if they're looking for these payments back.

28

again, please.

29

six, five and five?

11:42:20 30

So I

A.

If I could have page 5022

And just focussing for a moment on those three payments of

Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:42:20

11:42:30

42 1

Q. 271

You suggested to the Tribunal that that was possibly Mr. Monarch buying cars?

2

A.

Mr. Monahan, yeah.

3

Q. 272

Yeah, Mr. Monahan buying cars?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 273

If Mr. Monahan had spent that money on cars.

There could be no justification

6

for Monarch seeking the return of that money from GRE under the heading

7

community or PR costs; isn't that right?

8

A.

Well if it was known at the time what they were for, yes, I agree with you.

9

Q. 274

If you just look at the next payment.

11:42:51 10

And we can come to look at that

application to GRE in relation to these funds:

At 4782, please.

11 12

This I would like you to look at the second last entry on this extract from the

13

cheque payments book.

14

amount of 3,000 pounds.

11:43:12 15

Again, it's a payment to Allied Irish Banks in the You will note the word "cash" is also written; isn't

that right ?

16

A.

That's right, yes.

17

Q. 275

And at 4783.

18 19 11:43:22 20

21

You see in December 1993 payment of that cheque in the sum of 3,000 pounds. A.

That's right, yeah.

Q. 276

And at 5022.

Which again is the general promotions account at the bottom of

22

the page you will see 3,000 pounds in cash under 'P cash lunches', do you see

23

that?

24 11:43:38 25

A.

I do yes.

Q. 277

And that sum of 3,000 pounds has also been attributed to Cherrywood General

26

Promotions?

27

A.

So it seems, yes.

28

Q. 278

Do you know what that payment was for?

29

A.

No. Though believe it may have been to do with -- there's a reference to us

11:43:55 30

having paid 3,000 pounds to Richard Lynn, that we got from GRE. I'm not sure Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:44:00

11:44:13

43 1 2

that mightn't be it. Q. 279

3

It was around about that time.

If it was then you sought it back under the heading community and PR costs and not under the heading of staff costs, Mr. Glennane?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 280

And can I show you an extract from L&C Properties bank statement.

8787.

6

I want to draw to your attention a debit on the 2nd of November 1993.

7

2,500 pounds, do you see that?

8

A.

I do, yes.

9

Q. 281

And again at 5022.

11:44:44 10

Of

You will see some seven from the bottom, cheque 5082, L&C

Properties, 2nd November 1993, 2,500 attributed to Cherrywood General

11 12

And

Promotions. A.

Do you see that?

I do, yeah. It seems strange that -- L&C was to do with Tallaght.

It

13

certainly seems strange to me why a cheque drawn with L&C would have anything

14

to do with Cherrywood.

11:45:04 15

Q. 282

16

That's a cheque drawn on the 2nd of November. 8787.

Debit on the 2nd of November.

Do you see there it's debited on the 2nd of November?

17

A.

Where is that account, is that AIB?

18

Q. 283

That's L&C Properties.

19

A.

The main L&C account was an Ansbacher bank.

Q. 284

Yes.

21

A.

That appears to be a cheque No. 500 --

22

Q. 285

Yes, and that's the same cheque number that's recorded in the general

11:45:31 20

23 24

That I can't assist you with.?

If you just look for the moment.

Leaving aside the bank --

promotions account at 5022.? A.

11:45:50 25

It looks like Ansbacher bank to me.

It doesn't look like an AIB bank

statement.

26

Q. 286

Leaving that aside, it's not really relevant, Mr. Glennane --

27

A.

It is.

28 29 11:46:06 30

I don't think it would have gone to Ansbacher bank to draw cash

because I don't think they carried cash. Q. 287

The cheque is attributed to Cherrywood General Promotions; isn't that right?

A.

Yes, I accept that.

It has been brought in by journal entry here.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:46:11

11:46:29

44 1

Q. 288

2

And at 5022.

I want to draw to your attention particularly to those three

payments the six, the five, the five making 16,000?

3

A.

Yeah.

4

Q. 289

The 3,000 making 19,000 and the 2,500 making 21,500?

5

A.

Sorry, six, five, five.

6

Q. 290

6,000, 5,000, 5,000, 3,000?

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q. 291

And 2,500.

9

A.

Yeah.

Q. 292

Right?

11

A.

That's 21,500, yeah.

12

Q. 293

And in -- 5016.

11:46:46 10

All of which we have' looked at?

March 1994.

Mr. Lynn wrote a letter to Mr. Beng of GRE

13

properties enclosing a detailed breakdown of sums expended under the community

14

or PR costs as back up documentation in relation to those items.

11:47:07 15

Do you see

that?

16

A.

Yes, yeah.

17

Q. 294

And he had put -- two invoices had been put in.

18

5020 and 2189 and 5019.

19

GRE is at 5021.

11:47:39 20

These were invoices 2181 at

The back up documentation furnished by Mr. Lynn to

And I want to draw to your attention that those five figures

are included, the 6,000, the 5,000, 5,000 3,000 and 2,500 cheque from L&C; do

21

you see that?

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 295

It would appear at 4781.

24

That these were struck out and deducted because GRE

wouldn't agree them; do you see that? Do you see those five payments have been

11:48:02 25

struck out?

26

A.

Yeah, I thought it was something to do with the management fee or something.

27

Q. 296

We'll come to that in a moment.?

28

A.

You just said that GRE wouldn't agree with them.

29

Q. 297

Yes.

A.

Yeah.

11:48:17 30

And you will see that the sum of 21,500 has been deducted?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:48:17

11:48:27

45 1

Q. 298

And you will see that the five figures I have mentioned have been struck out?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 299

And leaving a balance of 7,657.52?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 300

If those expenses were incurred by Mr. Monahan in buying antiques or cars, what

6

basis had Monarch for seeking the return of that money from GRE?

7

A.

Obviously we had no basis, obviously.

8

Q. 301

Right.

9

And it would follow from that, would it not, Mr. Glennane, that there

was never any question of these monies being expended for cars or antiques or

11:48:49 10

anything else of that sort?

11

A.

No, I don't agree.

12

Q. 302

Are you saying that in the sure and certain knowledge within Monarch that those

13 14

monies had been expended by the late Mr. Monahan on cars or antiques -A.

11:49:10 15

There wouldn't be sure and certain knowledge. very little knowledge.

16 17

Because they were actually taken out later on.

In fact, there would have been

That's the reason why I'm saying that they ended up

here. Q. 303

And certainly insofar as Mr. Lynn was concerned, when he is making his

18

application for repayment in March of 1994 in respect of these payments, he is

19

saying that these were community or PR costs incurred in connection with

11:49:28 20

Cherrywood?

21

A.

So he would seem to be, yeah.

22

Q. 304

And the balance that is left, at 7,657.52.

23 24 11:49:45 25

If you look at the letter at 5027.

Which is a letter to Mr. Pat Field from Mr. Lynn? A.

Yeah.

Q. 305

You will see at paragraph two.

That there is a fee demand in respect of

26

community and PR costs in the sum of 7,652.52.

27

taken out the 21,500 pounds which we discussed from the previous list and an

28

amended list is attached and then item three "fee demand in respect of special

29

management fee in the sum of 21,500 pounds being the items we discussed and

11:50:09 30

agreed", do you see that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

This is the net sum having

11:50:11

11:50:23

46 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 306

That would suggest, if Mr. Lynn is correct, in what he is saying in that

3

letter.

That he had agreed with GRE to take out the 21,500 pounds worth of

4

items and include them in a special management fee?

5

A.

So it would seem, yes.

6

Q. 307

And at 8759, please.

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q. 308

And at 8758 there is a copy of the invoice in the sum of 21,500; isn't that

9 11:50:45 10

At their request. There is a copy of the invoice in the sum of 7,652.52?

right? A.

That's right, yes.

11

Q. 309

And Mr. Pat Field, I think, replies to Mr. Lynn at 5029.?

12

A.

Yeah.

13

Q. 310

And he says in relation to the first invoice for 7952.

14

He says In relation to

the first invoice for 7,952, I have passed invoice 2283 for payment on the

11:51:04 15

following basis and the fee is 7,952". That Is the fee less the 21,500, isn't

16

that right?

17

A.

That's right, yes.

18

Q. 311

Then he says "I cannot agree to pay invoice 2284 involving a special management

19 11:51:25 20

21

fee of 21,500 and 4,515 VAT give a total amount of 26,015"? A.

Yes.

Q. 312

He goes on to say at page 5030.

"While Martin Baker of this company

22

acknowledged in his letter 27th of July 1994, his agreement to a fee budget of

23

30,000 pounds in respect of community payment 20,000, invoice 2181, and

24

Pembroke PR 10,000, invoice 2189, he made it clear that we would not be able to

11:51:47 25

pay this balance until satisfactory invoices have been produced"?

26

A.

Yeah, right.

27

Q. 313

It would follow I suggest to you, Mr. Glennane from that, that when the

28

special management fee of 21,500 pounds was claimed and prior to that when the

29

community and PR costs were claimed including the 21,500 pounds, Monarch did

11:52:05 30

not have available to it any invoices in connection with those payments; isn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:52:11

11:52:21

47 1

that right?

2

A.

So it would seem, yes.

3

Q. 314

Right that.

That would mean that while the claim was being made against GRE,

4

that these were costs incurred in relation to Cherrywood.

There was no

5

invoices, no documentation within Monarch as to what these funds were truly

6

used for; isn't that right?

7

A.

So it would seem, yes.

8

Q. 315

So that it is pure speculation on your part that these monies might have been

9 11:52:38 10

used for cars or diamonds or antiques of any sort; isn't that right? A.

I don't think --

11

Q. 316

It is absolutely speculation?

12

A.

That invoice was cancelled.

13

Q. 317

Leave aside that now?

14

A.

You can't leave it aside.

11:52:50 15

That invoice was cancelled.

You'll have to ask

Mr. Lynn.

16

Q. 318

I intend to ask Mr Lynn all about it.

17

A.

If you put up 5273, you'll see that.

18

Q. 319

We'll deal with that in a moment.

19

We will just deal with for the moment your

assertion to the Tribunal that it is your belief that these sums were expended

11:53:02 20

by the late Mr. Monahan on cars or antiques.

21

That's what we're dealing with

now, Mr. Glennane --

22

A.

In my opinion, yes.

23

Q. 320

In the light of this documentation which clearly establishes that there were no

24

invoices or documents backing these payments within Monarch, will you please

11:53:19 25

outline to the Tribunal the basis for your belief that these payments were for

26 27

cars or antiques? A.

28 29 11:53:35 30

Because it was the only reason, as far as I can recall, that cash would have been drawn in that manner.

Q. 321

Unless you were paying bribes to councillors at this time.?

A.

Well -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:53:36

11:53:47

48 1

Q. 322

Mr. Glennane.?

2

A.

We were never paying bribes to councillors at any time.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

5

they were not for payments to councillors, is there anything else that they

6

might have been for?

7

A.

Well, Mr. Glennane, if they were not for cars or antiques, and

Well Mr. Monahan, I know it's been widely exaggerated in some of the papers,

8

I've seen or some of the documents concerned, that he liked to carry a large

9

amount of cash.

11:54:11 10

But he certainly always would have liked to have five or

6,000 in cash with him.

He would often come in and get cash.

It should have

11

been and would have been if the facts were available, it would have been sorted

12

out through his loan account at the end of the year.

13 14

CHAIRMAN: But then we're back to the same thing, there was clearly a concerted

11:54:28 15

effort here by Monarch, by the accounts end, which was your responsibility, to

16 17

put these down to Cherrywood. A.

Well I wouldn't say concerted effort, Chairman.

Anyway, go on.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

11:54:50 20

21

Well it appears to be.

Because they were given a new heading

special management fee -A.

I suggest that was at GRE's request.

22 23 24

CHAIRMAN: A.

Yes.

But this was after they were -- I mean --

Obviously, sorry to interrupt.

11:55:02 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

27

were -- because they had been -- they were items of personal expenditure on the

28

part of Mr. Monahan.

29

up long before the matter was pursued with GRE to the extent that clearly it

11:55:24 30

If they had been wrongly placed into this account because they

I would suggest to you that that would have been picked

was pursued. Eventually GRE put the foot down and said we're not paying them. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:55:31

11:55:54

49 1 2

I mean, that was long after the push to recover them had been pursued. A.

Well, I would assume what happened, Chairman, is that Mr. Lynn would have asked

3

somebody in the accounts department to go through the Cherrywood items.

4

would have picked these up.

5

budget of 30,000 for community costs.

6

that they were going to pay them.

7

special management fee.

They

He presumably tried to relate them to the agreed GRE obviously said without disagreeing

They obviously said we want them shown as a

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

11:56:14 10

GRE at the time.

11 12

But they were by far the biggest items on the accounts submitted to So that would suggest that they couldn't have been there

otherwise than by design. A.

It wasn't a mistake that they ended up there.

I would say it was a mistake that they ended up being charged to GRE in the

13

account in the first place.

I'd say it was a mistake that they were in the

14

account in the first place.

If we had any opportunity to recover 50 percent

11:56:39 15

of them no matter what they were for, from GRE, we'd certainly have tried it.

16

But they were actually cancelled.

Which would leave me to suggest that Mr.

17

Lynn discovered that they had nothing to do with Cherrywood.

18 19 11:56:54 20

CHAIRMAN: A.

All right.

In the final document, there 5273.

I think that should be shown up.

21 22 23

CHAIRMAN: A.

What's that?

The document.

5273.

24 11:57:03 25

26

CHAIRMAN: A.

5273.

You will see there in Mr. Lynn's handwriting invoice No. 2284 is cancelled.

27

It is a memo to Mr. Pat Caslin.

So obviously at that stage he made the

28

decision to cancel them.

29

didn't have anything to do with Cherrywood.

And I would suggest because he discovered that they

11:57:24 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

11:57:24

11:57:36

50 1 2

CHAIRMAN: A.

Exactly.

But this was after the special management fee allocation?

This was after the letter of Mr. Pat Field of the 3rd of August.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

5

minutes.

All right.

We better -- we should take a break now for about ten

6 7

MS. DILLON:

All right.

May it please you, Sir.

8 9 11:57:59 10

11 12

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:

13 14 11:58:03 15

16 17

MS. DILLON:

Good afternoon.

18 19

Mr. Glennane, please.

12:16:12 20

21 22

Q. 323

Can I show you another payment in 1993, which is also attributed to Cherrywood

23

promotions.

24

in fact for Monarch Properties Limited.

12:16:43 25

And that is at 4627.

4,500 pounds.

26

And there's a cheque in the sum of

that right? A.

Yes, so I see, yes.

28

Q. 324

And again you will see at 4628.

12:17:02 30

I think

There's no designation shown other than Bank of Ireland; isn't

27

29

And this is a remittance slip.

Drawn on the current account of Monarch

Properties Limited at Bank of Ireland Dundalk, a cheque with the words cash in the sum of 4,500 pounds.

Can you see that, Mr. Glennane? It's the second

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:17:07

12:17:09

51 1

entry?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 325

Do you see that?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 326

On the 2nd of November.

Again if you turn to page 4629, please.

6

it's quite faint it's some seven or eight from the bottom.

7

the Cherrywood General Promotions account again.

8

allocated; do you see that? Under the 15,000 pounds?

9

And while

That account is

You will see that cheque is

A.

Yes, sorry, I do, yeah.

Q. 327

Do you see that?

11

A.

Yeah.

12

Q. 328

And you will see it says the cheque and the date being the, I think, the 3rd of

12:17:36 10

13 14

November 1993.

Do you see that?

A.

It says I think 30th of April '94.

Q. 329

If you start at the very beginning cheque 806 and beside that 311?

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 330

Do you see that?

18

A.

Yeah.

19

Q. 331

That cheque was debited on I think the 2nd of November 1993 per se the bank

12:17:49 15

12:18:04 20

statement?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 332

It's also being allocated to Cherrywood General Promotions?

23

A.

That was drawn on the Bank of Ireland Dundalk was it.

24

Q. 333

Yes.?

A.

Thank would certainly have been Mr. Monahan.

26

Q. 334

Sorry?

27

A.

That would certainly have been by Mr. Monahan withdrawn on the Bank of Ireland

12:18:16 25

28 29 12:18:28 30

Dundalk. Q. 335

Why do you say that Mr. Glennane?

A.

At that stage the office, its accounts, everything was based in Dublin so I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:18:33

12:18:48

52 1

don't think anybody would have gone from Dublin to Dundalk to collect cash or

2

cash a cheque.

3

Q. 336

4 5

But certainly insofar as it's allocated within Monarch Properties Services Limited it's been allocated to Cherrywood General Promotions?

A.

6

Well, first of all it has been allocated from Monarch Properties Limited to Monarch Properties Services Limited and from there to general promotions, yes.

7

Q. 337

So that --

8

A.

Again, if I may say so.

9 12:19:08 10

It supports my view it was like a dumping ground.

Everything went into it, if you like. Q. 338

And there are three other transactions immediately following that cheque on

11

that same document at 4629:

12

4784.

13

And immediately beneath the cheque for 4,500 pounds.

14

cheques.

12:19:40 15

If we could just have the bottom part of the page again increased. There are three further

And if you just look at the dates on those cheques, it's the 1st of

November 1993.

16

In fact, I think it might be somewhat clearer on

2nd of November 1993.

And the 3rd of November 1993.

see that, Mr. Glennane?

17

A.

I think two of them are the 2nd.

18

Q. 339

Two of them are the 2nd of November, yes.

19

of 2,000 pounds.

12:20:01 20

And one is, the first is in the sum

The second in the sum of 5,000 pounds and the third is in

the sum of 3,000 pounds I think.?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 340

And they are also allocated to Cherrywood promotions; isn't that right?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 341

No.?

A.

Sorry.

26

Q. 342

No, I can't tell you, that Mr. Glennane, because I don't know.?

27

A.

Yeah, all right.

28

Q. 343

But what is clear is that they also are three -- if the dates are correct,

12:20:14 25

29 12:20:33 30

Do you

Do we know where they were drawn from?

Okay.

They'll come in here as a journal entry.

they are three cheques that have been drawn on the 1st and 2nd of November '93 and they amount to 10,000 pounds it would appear. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:20:37

12:20:48

53 1

A.

Yeah.

2

Q. 344

Isn't that right? In addition --

3

A.

They're not necessarily for cash or anything like that.

4

Q. 345

I can tell you nothing further about them other than the document that's on

5

screen, Mr. Glennane.

6

identifying what those payments would have been for?

7

A.

8 9 12:21:13 10

11

I was going to ask you to assist the Tribunal in

Sorry, I'm afraid I have no idea.

The references don't mean anything to me.

But obviously they were drawn somewhere and brought in here by journal entry. Q. 346

Yes.

A.

Yeah.

Q. 347

If you turn to 7355.

12

And you see the final figure that's there at 44,042.44

I think we've seen this document already today.

And

you will see there 44,042.44. Do you see that's the handwritten amendment?

13

A.

Yeah.

14

Q. 348

And that again is transferring all of those into Cherrywood stock, isn't that

12:21:33 15

right?

16

A.

That's right, yeah.

17

Q. 349

So in November --

18

A.

There's an awful lot of notes in that.

19 12:21:45 20

I don't know if any relevance is from

them. Q. 350

Well I mean?

21

A.

Damien Clarke.

22

Q. 351

We'll record -- the note says "I spoke to Damien Clarke and he also informed me

23

he does not keep a separate file of cost charged to stocks.

24

keep a copy of all certs issued for fees and building work and occasionally

12:22:02 25

cross checks the accounts to see if all costs are booked.

However, he does

Percentages of

26

expenses incurred vouched to invoices, material items considered to be greater

27

less than 2,000 pounds" and then note "Damien Clarke relies on the accounting

28

system to generate all of his costings and does not keep a separate file of

29

costings on any of his properties per PC, " which I presume is either

12:22:22 30

Mr. Coolly or Mr. Caslin? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:22:25

12:22:39

54 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 352

All costs are included in the accounts and nominal ledger.

3

separate file.

4

that all debits I think chargers are included?

No necessity for a

Creditors reconciliations, complimentary evidence demonstrate

5

A.

Actually I think it's probably certs there.

6

Q. 353

Certs are properly included?

7

A.

And costs appear correctly stated?

8

Q. 354

And?

9

A.

There is a reference there to what the auditors consider as material items such

12:22:58 10

as ...

11

Q. 355

Uh-huh.

Insofar as these payments --

12

A.

Sorry, if I can just go back on that paint.

The material items it says there

13

which is a concept that the auditors use of whether something is material or

14

not.

12:23:19 15

items considered to be below 2,000.

16 17

He seems to be saying that here there that there may have been material It would seem to me that the auditors did

some verification on anything above 2,000. Q. 356

Insofar as these expenses were incurred and were paid in October and November

18

and on one occasion in December 1993.

19

looked at, Mr. Glennane, amount to 41,885 pounds.?

12:23:49 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 357

Okay.

And all of the amounts that we have

That's starting with on the 11th of November '93, 1,985 pounds.

12th

22

of October '93, 3,000 pounds.

10th of November '93, 900 pounds.

2nd of

23

November '93, 6,000 pounds.

3rd of November '93, 5,000 pounds.

2nd of

24

November '93, 5,000 pounds.

7th of December '93, 3,000 pounds.

2nd of

12:24:13 25

November '93, 2,500 pounds.

3rd of October, '93, 4,500 pounds.

26

November '93, 2,000 pounds.

2nd of November '93, 5,000 pounds.

27

November '93, 3,000 pounds.

They all amount to 41,885 pounds; isn't that

28

right?

29 12:24:36 30

The 1st of 2nd of

A.

Yes.

Q. 358

They are all posted or attributed to Cherrywood general promotion account; Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:24:41

12:24:47

55 1

isn't that right?

2

A.

That's right.

3

Q. 359

They are therefore being posted as an expense in connection with Cherrywood;

4

isn't that right?

5

A.

Well, yeah, they were posted again as a Cherrywood cost, yes.

6

Q. 360

As a Cherrywood cost.

7

They ultimately find their way in Cherrywood stock;

isn't that right?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 361

And you do not know who was the ultimate recipient of any of those funds; is

12:25:03 10

that right?

11

A.

Well it's my opinion that it was Mr. Monahan, yes.

12

Q. 362

Is it your opinion that Mr. Monahan was the recipient of these funds?

13

A.

Yes, it would be, yeah.

14

Q. 363

But you do not know what Mr. Monahan did with any of these funds if he was the

12:25:22 15

16

recipient? A.

No, I couldn't say so, no.

Just to go back to that point.

I think it's

17

important to point out to the Tribunal.

18

expenses incurred vouched to invoice, 166,000 over 183 which is 91% and he says

19

material items considered to be above 2,000.

12:25:38 20

through this with a fine tooth comb.

In this reference, percentages of

So obviously the auditors went

And anything about the 2,000 they sought

21

an explanation for at the time.

So I think if there's any suggestion of

22

impropriety I think they would have picked it up.

23

Q. 364

And --

24

A.

I just think it's important to put these things in context.

Q. 365

Yes.

12:25:59 25

And the other context of all of these payments.

Do you see now any

26

significance in Mr. Monahan having a requirement for 41,885 pounds in cash or

27

cash equivalent in October, November '93?

28 29 12:26:28 30

A.

No, not particularly.

But I think if you look through the other years you'll

find he had, you'll find similar ones.

I mean, at various times of the year.

And obviously that was coming up to Christmas, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

I'm not surprised by the

12:26:36

12:26:51

56 1 2

total if that's, to put it in summary. Q. 366

3 4

When you say it's coming up to Christmas. attaching to that, Mr. Glennane?

A.

He would have been very generous to people.

5

people.

6

fair supply of cash, to put it that way.

7

Q. 367

9

Cherrywood; is that right?

A sum amounting to 41,885 pounds is paid out attributable to

A.

Well, shown as Cherrywood, yes.

Q. 368

Shown as Cherrywood.

12

Outside

Would this be a fair summary of the cash payments in October and November of 1993.

11

I don't mean staff.

At Christmas, there was a time when he would have liked to have a

8

12:27:10 10

What significance are you you

It's posted Cherrywood within Monarch Properties

Services Limited; is that fair?

13

A.

Yes, that's fair.

14

Q. 369

You can't, as the Chief Financial Officer of Monarch, account to the Tribunal

12:27:25 15

for what actually happened to this money; is that right?

16

A.

Well not in any detail, no.

17

Q. 370

But it is your belief --

18

A.

They are all individual amounts, as you know.

19

Q. 371

Yes.

12:27:39 20

21

But it is your belief that the person who would have received this money

was Mr. Philip Monahan? A.

22

In the main, yes.

I can't think of anybody else now unless somebody was going

away somewhere for a long period.

23

Q. 372

And there's no evidence of that?

24

A.

I don't have any, no.

Q. 373

So it's your belief that these funds when they were paid they were paid to Mr

12:27:52 25

26

Monahan.

You suspect that Mr. Monahan would have used them to purchase cars

27

or antiques but that is your personal belief?

28

A.

Yeah or just would have kept the money in some cases, yes.

29

Q. 374

You have no documentary evidence to support you in that belief; is that

12:28:09 30

correct, Mr. Glennane? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:28:11

12:28:23

57 1

A.

2

Well, I just have reference in the trial balances for those years to the balances shown in various companies.

3

Q. 375

Yes?

4

A.

Which dealt with cars, which vary significantly.

5

Q. 376

Yes.

6

A.

No.

7

Q. 377

So even if an error had been made by posting to Cherrywood stock, an amount of

But you don't have these funds being allocated? They seem to have ended up in Cherrywood stock.

8

money given to Mr. Monahan for the purchase of cars, that error would have been

9

picked up and they would have been then posted to the cars account or the

12:28:44 10

directors loan account?

11

A.

If discovered, yes, that's right.

12

Q. 378

And so it follows from that either the error wasn't discovered or there was

13

never an error and these were properly posted to Cherrywood stock in connection

14

with Cherrywood in the first place; isn't that right?

12:28:58 15

A.

As a cost.

16

Q. 379

As a cost; isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 380

If we could turn to look at 1994, please, Mr. Glennane.

19 12:29:08 20

And at 1638, please.

21 22

You will see political donations in the amount of 24,820 pounds recorded.

23

the breakdown of that can be found at 1584.

And

24 12:29:20 25

Sorry.

I should say that the breakdown can be recorded at 1641.

And

26

included in that is a sum of 3,000 pounds which is the third payment from the

27

end, paid to A and L Lawlor; isn't that right?

28

A.

That's right, yes.

29

Q. 381

And I think it's the belief within Monarch, at page 1581, that that was a

12:29:47 30

payment to Mr. Liam Lawlor? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:29:49

12:30:16

58 1

A.

Yes, so I believe, yes.

2

Q. 382

And that other than that, that extract from the cheque payments book, no

3

supporting documentation has been found.

Sorry.

1580, please.

And in

4

respect what's set out there in your solicitor's letter at the second paragraph

5

is "in respect of the 1994 list, a similar position would arise and in addition

6

on the 28th of July of that year a cheque was written to A and L Lawlor in the

7

amount of 3,000 pounds.

8

contribution to Liam Lawlor.

9

been located". At 5279.

Our clients believe this may have been a political No documentation supporting this payment has

12:30:29 10

11

There's an extract from the cheque payments book and approximately eight down.

12

There is a payment to A and L Lawlor

13

A.

Yes, I see that, yes.

14

Q. 383

Now, this was not posted to Cherrywood stock, Mr. Glennane.?

A.

I see, right, yeah, yeah.

Q. 384

And if I could show you.

A.

Where was it posted, sorry?

Q. 385

I'm just looking for that for the moment for you.

12:30:43 15

16

At 8922.

17 18 19 12:30:52 20

But it wasn't posted to --

21

the only political donations that were posted to Cherrywood stock in 1994 are a

22

Dun Laoghaire Fianna Fail fundraiser and Dun Laoghaire Fine Gael fundraiser.

23

Items five on the list.

24

item, Fine Gael Dublin North, golf Nora Owen and Fine Gael Swords.

12:31:27 25

And also the second last item and the third last You'll see

that?

26

A.

Sorry, yes, yeah.

27

Q. 386

And the balance of the political donations are either it is unknown where they

28 29 12:31:42 30

were allocated or they are allocated to promotions or sponsorship in MPSL? A.

I see.

Q. 387

And again, I suggest to you, that somebody had to make a decision about Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:31:46

12:32:07

59 1 2

allocating these political payments; isn't that right? A.

3 4

Well, again, if somebody in the accounts department made a decision at the time, yes.

Q. 388

Now, in 1994, in June of 1994 a report was prepared on the Cherrywood

5

development which was being furnished to GRE in relation to costs going

6

forward, Mr. Glennane.

7

And I want to ask you what you know about them.

And included in that was just a number of documents.

8 9

5178.

12:32:19 10

11 12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 389

This document is dated the 20th of June 1994.

14 12:32:30 15

And it's dealing with future

political expenses.? A.

Yes, I see that, yes.

16

Q. 390

Did you contribute to that document in any way?

17

A.

I wouldn't think to this page anyway, whatever about anything else on it.

18

Q. 391

And who --

19

A.

There seems to be some forecasts for General Elections two years hence.

Q. 392

Yes?

21

A.

I wouldn't have forecasts when the General Elections was going to take place.

22

Q. 393

Making an indication 56,000 pounds would be the amount for the General

12:32:48 20

23 24

Election? A.

Yeah.

Q. 394

And 31,000 pounds for the Senate Election?

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 395

That's 87,000 pounds?

28

A.

Yeah.

29

Q. 396

Is what it's forecasting; isn't that right?

A.

So it seems, yes.

12:32:58 25

12:33:09 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:33:10

12:33:24

60 1

Q. 397

Did you contribute to that document?

2

A.

Not as far as -- is that the only page or is that?

3

Q. 398

It's part of a very large document.

4

A.

I don't think I would have contributed to that page anyway, whatever else.

5

Q. 399

And there is also a document dealing with zoning costs at 5180.

6

And you will

have seen this document where it talks about a success bonus for staff.?

7

A.

I do, yeah.

8

Q. 400

Mr. Lynn similar to JW.

9 12:33:46 10

And this is one part of it.?

Can you assist as to what arrangement had been made

with Mr. Whelan or Mr. Lynn about a success fee? A.

No, Well obviously this was about -- this proposal was being put forward by us

11

to GRE suggesting a success fee for Mr. Lynn.

12

I presume that's based on the Dwyer Nolan.

13

money out of GRE or more money out of them. They're refusing as far as I know.

14

Q. 401

12:34:22 15

It says similar to Jack Whelan. I presume it's us trying to get

Ultimately, Mr. Glennane, in August of 1994, there was a second agreement made; isn't that right? Effectively between Monarch on the one part and Guardian and

16

Asquith Estates on the other part, isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 402

And there was a final payment made?

19

A.

Yeah.

Q. 403

Which was to include all outstanding payments, isn't that right?

21

A.

Sorry, if you say so, I mean, I don't know, yeah.

22

Q. 404

Do you remember this agreement?

23

A.

Well I remember an agreement, yes, they were very keen to get a new agreement.

12:34:32 20

24

I just know in connection with that document there is a reference to it on page

12:34:50 25

26

8764, which I assume you're coming to. Q. 405

There was the response from GRE.

What I was concerned about Mr Glennane was whether or not you had any input

27

into assessing these figures and putting these figures together.

28

all interested in GRE's response?

29 12:35:19 30

I'm not at

A.

I'm surprised you're not.

Q. 406

What I'm trying to find out from you, Mr. Glennane, is who is the person in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:35:19

12:35:37

61 1

Monarch who would have made the assessment that these are the sort of monies

2

that would have to be paid by Monarch in connection with zoning costs?

3

A.

4

I'd assume Mr. Sweeney. Probably Mr. Sweeney rather than Mr. Lynn.

Mr. Lynn would have been very happy to see 100,000 pounds in it for himself.

5

Q. 407

I think subject to correction --

6

A.

It says per ES on the top of it actually.

7

Q. 408

Yeah, that's other per E S.

8

about that, Mr. Glennane.

9

that?

12:35:53 10

I'm sure

That's the 10,000.

I haven't been asking you

I've been asking you about the other figure beneath

A.

I have the hard copy of the report here.

11

Q. 409

The full report?

12

A.

I'm not sure who prepared it.

13

Q. 410

That what I'm asking you.

14

A.

No, certainly.

Q. 411

That deals with the matter in relation to the other question about the General

12:36:04 15

16

Election.

There's actually no reference on it.

Did you prepare it?

Did you prepare that document at 85178?

17

A.

No, certainly not.

18

Q. 412

You can't assist the Tribunal as to who would have made the assessment that

19

you'd have to spend 56,000 pounds on political donations for the General

12:36:22 20

Election in the 1996 and 31,000 pounds for the Senate Election in 1996.

21

A.

No, I can't.

22

Q. 413

But certainly the author of the document doesn't appear to suggest that that's

23 24 12:36:37 25

26

an unreasonable amount; isn't that right? A.

Well ...

Q. 414

5178, please.?

A.

I think in general any figures being submitted for two or three years ahead

27

would be a maximum, a puffed up certainly in order -- GRE were very strong on

28

budgets forward.

29 12:36:52 30

Q. 415

Uh-huh?

A.

So if you were going to give a budget for two years you'd want to be sure to be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:36:56

12:37:11

62 1

on the right side, if you know what I mean.

2

Q. 416

And who -- did you make any contribution to the report at all?

3

A.

I don't recognise any contribution I would have made.

4

Q. 417

And did Mr. Lynn make any contribution to the report?

5

A.

I would assume he did, yes.

6

Q. 418

It's fairly detailed about master plan and transport.

7

A.

I would imagine Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lynn would have done the report.

8

Q. 419

And in 1994, included in the schedule of payments that were made in 1994 there

9 12:37:41 10

was a payment of 15,000 pounds to Saatchi and Saatchi? A.

Yes.

11

Q. 420

Were you aware of that payment at the time that it was made?

12

A.

I was, yes.

13

Q. 421

And would you outline the circumstances in which you became aware of it?

14

A.

Well from recollection, I think an invoice arrived into the office for I think

12:37:58 15

30,000 odd from Saatchi & Saatchi.

It certainly caught everybody in the

16

office by surprise, including me.

17

they're a big UK advertising company.

18

to do with Ireland, or whatever.

19

anybody know anything it and it sort of transpired that I think Mr. Monahan

12:38:27 20

Because I know of Saatchi & Saastchi, I didn't realise that they had anything

So I think we investigated around to see did

knew about it.

21

Q. 422

5350.

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 423

So are you telling the Tribunal then that Mr. Monahan had made an arrangement

24

I think this is the invoice you're talking about, Mr. Glennane.?

to make this contribution or payment to Saatchi & Saatchi without any reference

12:38:43 25

to any of his co- directors?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 424

And was that the late Mr. Monahan's habit in conducting his business?

28

A.

Well in some cases, yes.

29

Q. 425

And I think this cheque was at 5353.

12:39:03 30

It would certainly be well within his capacity, yes. It Is not signed by you I think,

subject to correction? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:39:04

12:39:11

63 1

A.

That's right, yes.

2

Q. 426

The first signature, is that Mr. McCarthy?

3

A.

No, Pat Coolly.

4

Q. 427

And Mr. Monahan?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 428

And that was the payment in full and final settlement?

7

A.

Yes, I think so, yes.

8

Q. 429

Were you aware when that was being made that that in fact was a political

9 12:39:21 10

donation? A.

11

I think I knew of it, it was to Fianna Fail, yes.

I remember having quite an

argument with Mr. Monahan over it to be honest with you.

12

Q. 430

And why did you --

13

A.

I was very unhappy of the idea of making the payment and I think I actually

14

refused to sign it, which is why I haven't signed it.

12:39:42 15

And actually I think

the letter accompanying it came from Noel Murray, so I was ...

16

Q. 431

That's correct.

17

A.

Washing my hands of it for want of a better expression.

However, Mr. Monahan

18

certainly convinced us that he had committed to it and I think he went away and

19

spoke to whoever he was dealing with and he came back and said if you like

12:40:04 20

they've settled for 15,000 or we'll settle for 15,000.

21

Q. 432

Do you know who he was dealing with in Fianna Fail, Mr. Glennane?

22

A.

I think the letter from Noel Murray mentioned somebody, was it Frank Wall or

23 24

something? I'm mixed up. Q. 433

I think the letter from Mr. Murray is to Saatchi & Saatchi?

A.

I'm mixing it up with the earlier one, sorry.

26

Q. 434

At 5356?

27

A.

I don't know.

28

Q. 435

The letter was addressed to Saatchi & Saatchi?

29

A.

I wouldn't even have known that they had an office in Ireland.

12:40:22 25

12:40:37 30

come across them in Ireland. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

I'd never even

12:40:39

12:40:56

64 1

Q. 436

Why were you unhappy with the payment?

2

A.

I suppose I felt it was a waste of money, to be honest with you.

3 4

I couldn't

see any reason for making it. Q. 437

5

For making the payment to Saatchi & Saatchi or for making the payment to Fianna Fail?

6

A.

Well either, yeah.

7

Q. 438

Were you still with Monarch in 1998 when the Revenue conducted an inquiry in

8 9

relation to this payment? A.

No.

Q. 439

You were not in Monarch?

11

A.

No, I wasn't, no.

12

Q. 440

Did you have any contact or communication with Des Richardson in connection

12:41:03 10

13 14 12:41:12 15

with this payment? A.

No, no.

Q. 441

Were you contacted by Ms. Gosling in connection with any inquiry being

16

conducted by the Revenue in connection with that payment?

17

A.

I believe I was, yes.

18

Q. 442

Were you able to give her any assistance in relation to?

19

A.

I think what I said was contact Stokes Kennedy Crowley.

12:41:32 20

21

Let them deal with

it. Q. 443

22

And in June of 1989, Mr. Glennane, Mr. Monahan made a donation of 16,000 pounds to Fianna Fail; isn't that right?

23

A.

That's right, yes.

24

Q. 444

And he made a personal donation by way of a personal cheque to Mr. Charles

12:41:45 25

Haughey also of 25,000 pounds?

26

A.

That's right, yes.

27

Q. 445

Did you know about the donation of 16,000 pounds?

28

A.

I can't recall knowing about it but I think it was drawn on L&C Properties

29 12:42:02 30

Limited so I would imagine I must have known about it, yes. Q. 446

Were any of these payments discussed with you in advance of them being made -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:42:07

12:42:20

65 1

sorry.

In advance of the agreement to make them being made?

2

A.

No, I don't think so no.

3

Q. 447

So would it follow from that, that certainly on at least three occasions

4

Mr. Monahan, the late Mr. Monahan made arrangements to make substantial

5

political donations one of 16,000 pounds, one of 25,000 pounds, and one

6

originally of 30,000, which was reduced to 15,000 pounds, without reference to

7

you?

8

A.

9

Certainly in the case of the 25,000 which was a personal

donation, the first I heard of that was when he appeared at the Moriarty

12:42:44 10

11

That's right, yeah.

Tribunal. Q. 448

And certainly the initial agreement at 5350, please.

12 13

Certainly it would appear that Saatchi & Saatchi felt or were of the opinion

14

that the sum that they were entitled to was 30,250 pounds

12:43:00 15

16

A.

That's right, 25,000 plus VAT.

Q. 449

Yes.

You disputed it with Mr. Monahan. He went off to talk to somebody and

17

came back with the figure of 15,000 pounds in full and final settlement, if I

18

understand what you're saying correctly?

19

A.

That's correct.

Q. 450

Mr. Monahan had promised to pay before he had his discussion with you?

21

A.

I'm not sure.

22

Q. 451

That was his agreement?

23

A.

Whatever, I don't know whether it was an agreement or what discussions he had.

12:43:15 20

24 12:43:30 25

But obviously they raised an invoice for that amount. Q. 452

26

Yes.

And Mr. Monahan had done all of this without reference to you or

discussion with you; is that right?

27

A.

Absolutely.

28

Q. 453

And would that be a fair description of how Mr. Monahan was minded when he so

29 12:43:43 30

chose to conduct his business? A.

Well, I think he was fairly secretive yes, certainly. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:43:48

12:44:05

66 1

Q. 454

Insofar as the payments in October, November and December of '93 are concerned,

2

would the same apply? That Mr. Monahan was capable of taking funds from the

3

company and applying them for his own uses as and when he saw fit?

4

A.

Well within reason, yes.

5

Q. 455

And can I take you now through a series of cash payments in 1994.

6 7

And again, this is similar to the last series of payments that we looked at,

8

Mr. Glennane.

9 12:44:17 10

And the first is at 7389.

11

And again, these are all payments which are

attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion.

But these are occurring in 1994.

12 13

And at 7389 there are two payments I want to draw it your attention.

14

are the payments to Ansbacher Bankers Limited in the sum of 10,000 pounds and

12:44:39 15

the second payment to Ansbacher in a sum of 10,000 pounds, one dated 27th of

16

May' 94, the second dated 15th of June '94; do you see that?

17

A.

I do, yes.

18

Q. 456

And at 7390.

19 12:45:02 20

These

The first of these is debited from the account of Monarch

Properties Services Limited on 31st of May '94.

Do you see that?

A.

I do, yes.

21

Q. 457

And the second is debited on the 16th of June '94.

22

A.

Yes, I see that, yes.

23

Q. 458

And they are both posted to Cherrywood General Promotions.

At 4392.?

7365, please.

24 12:45:22 25

And almost exactly half way down that page you will see 20K and ANB, Ansbacher.

26

If we could increase the centre.

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 459

Do you see 20K?

29

A.

I do, yes.

Q. 460

ANB, 20,000 pounds?

12:45:40 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:45:42

12:45:53

67 1

A.

Yeah.

2

Q. 461

And that I suggest to you are the two cheques for 10,000 pounds made payable to

3

Ansbacher which have been attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion?

4

A.

Yes, yeah.

5

Q. 462

Isn't that right?

6

A.

So it seems, yes.

7

I would be surprised.

I would just assume that they were

interest payments.

8

Q. 463

But certainly that's where they've been posted; isn't that right?

9

A.

Yeah, at that stage, yeah.

Q. 464

And at -- if we look at the third payment at 7383.

12:46:05 10

11

half way down the page.

12

Bank in the sum of 7,000 pounds.

And again almost exactly

You will see a cheque made payable to Allied Irish Do you see that?

13

A.

I do, yes.

14

Q. 465

And if you see at 8714. The remittance slip for this, which is dated 16th of

12:46:33 15

the June '94.

16

You will note above the word description, the word "CSH"

appears?"

17

A.

That's correct.

18

Q. 466

That would suggest that's a cash payment of 7,000 pounds in June of 1994?

19

A.

It looks like that, yes.

Q. 467

Can you assist the Tribunal.

12:46:49 20

21

I just show you that again, that is also

allocated to -- 7365, please.

22 23 24

A.

12:47:04 25

The unfortunate thing there is that there's no code.

There's no code put in

on the remittance advice at the time.

26

Q. 468

Yes?

27

A.

If there was people would have known where to post it.

28

Q. 469

Well where it was in fact posted, Mr. Glennane.

29 12:47:20 30

entry under Cherrywood General Promotion? A.

Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

At 7365, it is the second

12:47:20

12:47:31

68 1

Q. 470

Do you see that?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 471

Now, can you assist the Tribunal as to what requirement Cherrywood would have

4

had in June of 1994 for 7,000 pounds in cash?

5

A.

No, I can't, no, no.

6

Q. 472

And if I could show you --

7

A.

I can only assume it would be in the same category as the ones before.

8

There's something written beside it but I don't know.

9

or J something.

12:47:45 10

Q. 473

11

It looks like a journal

No, I think the little X at the side says agree to authorise remittance advices, if you look at the bottom?

12

A.

Sorry.

13

Q. 474

Yes.?

14

A.

And again they obviously they went through them.

Q. 475

Well with respect, if you just look at that for a moment.

12:47:59 15

Note by the auditors, sorry.

16

we could increase the bottom half of that document.

17

authorise remittance advices.?

7365, please.

If

What it says is agreed to

18

A.

Yeah.

19

Q. 476

It's not saying agreed to invoices; isn't that right?

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 477

It's what the auditor is referring to there is the internal Monarch remittance

12:48:15 20

21 22 23

advice.? A.

24 12:48:28 25

Yeah but what he's saying is that he queried it and presumably he got a satisfactory answer.

Q. 478

26

Yes, but the internal remittance advice in respect of this is at 8724. all that tells us is that it's a payment to cash; isn't that right?

27

A.

That's right, I assume so.

28

Q. 479

So that --

29

A.

Sorry, there was no code for that.

12:48:47 30

And

Well obviously he checked it if he wanted

to but sure that wouldn't have given him any information. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:48:50

12:49:06

69 1

Q. 480

No, no, that's exactly the point.

Is that the auditor in saying that it's

2

agreed to authorise remittance advices is putting the matter no further than

3

the document we're looking at on screen.

4

A.

Isn't that right?

It's up to the auditor at the time to go through it or not.

It's not -- I'm

5

not criticising their auditor standards but it's not a very good check by not

6

seeing into that.

7

Q. 481

8 9 12:49:19 10

He or she is not saying that it's checked or it's agreed to an invoice; isn't that right.

A.

That's right.

Q. 482

So that all that the person has checked or seen whether that is good or bad

11

accounting or good or bad auditing is irrelevant.

12

that's on screen; isn't that right?

Is the remittance advice

13

A.

That's right, yes.

14

Q. 483

And at that time can you think of any event that was current in the life of

12:49:48 15

Cherrywood that would have required or that payment might have been in

16

connection with?

17

A.

June '94?

18

Q. 484

Uh-huh.?

19

A.

No, I don't, no.

Q. 485

Were you aware at that time it was around the time of the initiation and the

12:49:49 20

21

decision in relation to the variation of the Dublin County Development Plan for

22

the science and technology park?

23

A.

I'm sure I was aware of it at the time.

24

Q. 486

That that came up for decision on the 29th of June 1994.

12:50:13 25

I'm not aware now. There was a motion

brought before Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council for the science and

26

technology park?

27

A.

Right.

28

Q. 487

Do you think again that there might be any connection between these two

29 12:50:25 30

matters? A.

No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:50:26

12:50:38

70 1

Q. 488

But you do not know and cannot say what that sum was used for of 7,000 pounds?

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 489

Or why it's allocated to Cherrywood?

4

A.

Know.

Just again as unfortunately I said to you, there's no code put in

5

there, which would have -- if there had been a code put in it would have --

6

there should have been a code put in at the time.

7

indicated where to post it.

8

information where to post it.

9

Q. 490

12:50:58 10

Then that would have

So whenever somebody came to post it they had no

And certainly what we do know if the remittance advice is correct, is that it was cash?

11

A.

Yes, so it would seem, yes.

12

Q. 491

So somebody had a requirement for 7,000 pounds in cash in early June, mid June

13 14 12:51:09 15

1994? A.

Yes, well, yeah, yeah.

Q. 492

And on the 16th of June 1994.

I believe Mr. Lynn created a document.

16

5202, please.

17

talking about the planning meeting at which Cherrywood may be debated is on

18

next Wednesday 28th of June at which Eamonn Gilmore's motion is to be clarified

19

as regard the sitting of the Science and Technology Park.

12:51:37 20

In which he is discussing political strategy.

At

And he's

And under 'Action'

at the bottom he says "specific members should be approached on the basis of

21

moving and supporting such a motion from the floor.

22

members of Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Progressive Democrats and individuals,

23

including Eamonn Gilmore, should be approached and their support obtained well

24

prior to the 29th of June 1994 for this line of action". And on the following

12:51:55 25

page.

26

At 5203.

In particular senior

He details the support of the councillors whose support must

be obtained; isn't that right?

27

A.

So it seems, yes.

28

Q. 493

That's on the 16th of June 1994, you will see that it's dated there?

29

A.

Yes, yeah.

Q. 494

And this cheque?

12:52:10 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:52:11

12:52:21

71 1

A.

There's actually 13 names down there.

2

Q. 495

Yes.

3

A.

Yeah.

4

Q. 496

16th of June 1994?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 497

And that's the same date as the cheque for 7,000 pounds in cash is drawn; isn't

7

What I'm drawing to you is the date of the document?

that right?

8

A.

So it seems, yes.

9

Q. 498

Do you now see any connection between those two matters, Mr. Glennane?

A.

Not really.

12:52:34 10

11

In fact I see less connection than any.

If he was going to

divide 7,000 among 13 people, it wasn't exactly much use to anybody.

12

Q. 499

Why do you think they would have needed much more than that, Mr. Glennane?

13

A.

No, I don't think it's -- I don't see any connection.

14

Q. 500

Are you aware of anything that was happening within Cherrywood which required a

12:52:56 15

sum of 7,000 pounds in cash to be spent on the 16th of June 1994?

16

A.

No I'm not.

17

Q. 501

Do you know who actually got that money in Monarch when the cheque was cashed?

18

A.

No, I don't.

19

Q. 502

Who is the person whose likely to have got that money?

A.

Well, in my opinion Mr. Monaghan.

21

Q. 503

And not anybody else; isn't that right?

22

A.

That's right.

23

Q. 504

Because if anybody else had got it they'd have had to account to you, isn't

12:53:10 20

24 12:53:22 25

that right, Mr. Glennane? A.

26

Yeah, certainly -- nobody other than Mr. Monahan could walk into the accounts department and look for ...

27

Q. 505

You couldn't have done it?

28

A.

Well, I possibly could have.

29

Q. 506

But you didn't do it?

A.

No.

12:53:32 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:53:33

12:53:45

72 1

Q. 507

2

And you're not suggesting that anybody else would have done it except Mr. Monahan?

3

A.

I'm saying nobody else would have been able to do it.

4

Q. 508

Does it follow from that that Mr. Monahan had a requirement for 7,000 pounds in

5

cash in June of 1994?

6

A.

Well, it would seem he wanted 7,000 in cash, yes.

7

Q. 509

And if I can show you the fourth payment in 1994.

8

Which is attributable to

Cherrywood promotion.

9 12:53:57 10

At 7387.

11

And if you look at the fifth payment down.

Allied Irish Banks plc.

In the sum of 1,000 pounds

12

A.

Yeah.

13

Q. 510

And you will see at 7388.

14 12:54:30 15

16

That that's debited on 16th of August 1994.

Do

you see that? It's the fifth entry down.? A.

I do, yes.

Q. 511

And then if you look at 7365.

17

account.

18

'94.

19

Which is a cheque to

Which is the 1994 Cherrywood General Promotion

And almost half way down you will see cheque 10279, 12th of August

1,000 pounds.

A.

Yeah, I see it yes.

Q. 512

Do you see that?

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 513

So that again is being attributed to Cherrywood General Promotions; isn't that

12:54:40 20

23 24

right? A.

That's right.

Q. 514

Do you know who was the beneficiary or who received that money?

26

A.

No, I don't.

27

Q. 515

Does the same situation apply as you've explained in relation to the payments

12:54:47 25

28 29 12:54:59 30

in '93 that it's likely to have been Mr. Monahan? A.

I would think so, yeah.

Q. 516

Yes? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:54:59

12:55:19

73 1

A.

It seems a small amount I have to say.

2

Q. 517

Can I show you a payment on 6th of October 1994.

3

entry on this page.

4

Irish Bank in the sum of 10,000 pounds.

5

A.

Sorry, I do yes.

6

Q. 518

Yes.

7

At 7385 again, it's the last

Which is a payment, a cheque drawn in favour of Allied Do you see that?

And the cheque remittance advice is at 8725.

In the sum of 10,000

pounds?

8

A.

That's right, yes.

9

Q. 519

And it's debited to the account at 7386 on 10th of October 1994.?

A.

Yeah. I see it now, yes.

Q. 520

It's attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion, being approximately the eight

12:55:42 10

11 12

entry down.

Do you see that?

13

A.

I do, yes.

14

Q. 521

It's cheque 061094.

A.

Yeah.

16

Q. 522

Do you know who got that cheque or the benefit of it?

17

A.

No, I don't, no.

18

Q. 523

Do you know anything that was happening in the life of Cherrywood in October

12:55:58 15

19 12:56:12 20

21

1994 that might have required payment of money? A.

No, no, no.

Q. 524

Were you aware that there was a motion in October 1994 signed by Councillors

22

Lydon, Cosgrave and Conroy in connection with the Science and Technology Park,

23

2371?

24 12:56:28 25

A.

No, I might have been aware at the time but I don't know.

Q. 525

This is a copy.

26

I'm not suggesting that there is any connection.

But I'm

asking you, Mr. Glennane?

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 526

Whether there was any connection but I am asking you, Mr Glennane, whether

29 12:56:42 30

there was any connection between the withdrawal or the payment of 10,000 pounds on the 6th of October 1994 and the motion on the 10th of October 1994.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:56:49

12:57:02

74 1

A.

I don't believe there was.

2

Q. 527

If we go back to 7365.

3 4

This payment of 10,000 pounds, Mr. Glennane.

5

relation to this payment.

6

money was the late Mr. Philip Monahan

7

A.

8 9

I would think so, yes.

Is it the same position in

That the person who is likely to have received that

It's also one of the ones queried by the auditors,

yes. Q. 528

Again it's noted at the bottom as agreed to authorise remittance advices?

A.

I would be amazed if that was the only query they did on it but yeah.

11

Q. 529

That appears to be the notation; isn't that right?

12

A.

So it says, yeah.

13

Q. 530

If I could ask you to look at the bottom of that document.

12:57:20 10

14

document.

12:57:38 15

pounds.

Still on the same

There's a cheque on the 20th of December 1994 in the sum of 4,500

Do you see that?

16

A.

Sorry, where is it?

17

Q. 531

It's the fourth from the bottom.?

18

A.

Yeah.

19

Q. 532

Do you have any idea what that was about?

A.

SCON?

21

Q. 533

No, no, no.

22

A.

I see it, sorry, yes.

23

Q. 534

Do you see 4,500 pounds and it simply says cheque 20th of the 12th '94?

24

A.

Yeah.

Q. 535

Do you have any idea what that cheque was in connection with?

A.

No, no, no. No.

12:57:47 20

12:58:03 25

26 27

Lynn.

28

that.

29 12:58:28 30

Q. 536

If you come up from the very bottom?

I'm just wondering was it the balance of the 7,500 to Mr.

But that's only a wild guess.

And I think that was a long time before

Anyway.

I think it was.

And can I draw to your attention, Mr. Glennane, that the

total on that account, the general promotion account is 64,471.55? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

12:58:34

12:58:52

75 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 537

And if you look at 7364.

3

You will see in the trial balance that that figure

of 64,471.55 is included under general promotion?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 538

Do you see that?

6

A.

I do.

7

Q. 539

That would mean that there was no alteration, deduction or adjustment for any

8 9 12:59:05 10

of the payments we've just looked at it; isn't that rile right? A.

If that was the final trial balance.

If it was, yeah.

Q. 540

It would mean, would it not, that on all of the cash payments or unknown

11

payments that we've just looked at, they weren't adjusted into any other

12

account; isn't that right?

13

A.

So it would seem, yes.

14

Q. 541

They remained in Cherrywood General Promotion.

12:59:22 15

And from there they went into

Cherrywood general stock; isn't that right?

16

A.

Yes, I'm sorry. Just looking.

17

Q. 542

Uh-huh.?

18

A.

Just demonstrating I suppose all sorts of things went in there.

19

Q. 543

Yes.

12:59:41 20

What I want to draw to your attention is the auditor's notation on this

document.

21

That wasn't to do with Cherrywood.

And you more than anybody else, Mr. Glennane, will be familiar with

this notation.

You see there are little ticks beside each of those accounts?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 544

And you see there's kind of a little circle with a squiggle on it, if I can

24 12:59:58 25

call it that? A.

On the right-hand side of amounts?

26

Q. 545

Yes.?

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 546

If you go down to the bottom of the page.

29 13:00:09 30

invoice. Do you see that? A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

The little ticks mean vouched to

13:00:09

13:00:18

76 1

Q. 547

2

And beneath that it says, little squiggle again, percentage of costs vouched to invoice 40 percent?

3

A.

Yeah.

4

Q. 548

Do you see that?

5

A.

Yeah.

6

Q. 549

Now correct me if I'm wrong.

7

Now, as I understand it, that means that 40

percent of 150,917.18 was vouched to an invoice; is that right?

8

A.

I would assume so, yes.

9

Q. 550

And beside the general promotion in this document, there's no little tick

13:00:39 10

indicating it was vouched to an invoice; isn't that right?

11

A.

So it seems.

12

Q. 551

From that the following would appear to be the position from the auditor's

13

point of view.

14

account of 64,471.55 are concerned, none of them were vouched to an invoice; is

13:00:59 15

Insofar as the expenses contained in the general promotion

that right?

16

A.

Yes, certainly or all of them, I don't know whether none of them were.

17

Q. 552

And of the total amount that's being attributed to Cherrywood stock for the

18

fiscal year, for this particular fiscal year, '95, in the sum of 150,917.18.

19

Only 40 percent of those costs have been vouched to an invoice; isn't that

13:01:23 20

right?

21

A.

So it would seem, yes.

22

Q. 553

That would mean that 60 percent of those costs when the auditor came to look at

23 24

them had no invoice; isn't that right? A.

13:01:41 25

26

Well no it would mean that the they vouched 40 percent. every invoice.

Q. 554

Well let's just --

27 28 29 13:01:47 30

CHAIRMAN:

Well

Q. 555

What does that mean for the balance?

A.

Well it means it's not vouched. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

They wouldn't vouch

13:01:49

13:02:03

77 1

Q. 556

All right.

So --

2

A.

They would do a sample.

3

Q. 557

So that means, Mr. Glennane, that 60 percent of the costs that are attributed

4

to Cherrywood stock did not have any independent invoice attached to them;

5

isn't that right?

6

A.

No, no.

7

Q. 558

Oh, I see.

8 9 13:02:21 10

13

So 40 percent of them were vouched to an invoice and the rest of

them, the auditor didn't ask to see them; is that it? A.

So it would appear, yes.

Q. 559

Insofar as the 64,000 concerned with general promotion, you agree that there's

11 12

It means that the auditors didn't ask to see the invoice.

no invoices in connection with those recorded by the auditor? A.

No.

I think if you went back to that list.

There were items that would have

the invoices for 64,000.

14 13:02:37 15

CHAIRMAN:

Ms. Dillon, it's one o'clock.

16 17

MS. DILLON:

May it please you, Sir.

CHAIRMAN:

So we'll adjourn to two.

18 19 13:02:43 20

21 22

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

13:03:08

14:03:46

78 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:

2 3

MS. DILLON:

Mr. Glennane, please.

4 5 6

Q. 560

Good afternoon, Mr. Glennane.

If we could turn now to look at 1995.

7 8

We had just concluded reviewing 1994 and the cash payments which amounted to

9

42,500 pounds in 1994.

14:04:13 10

And I think to summarise your position.

Is that you

believe that these were monies that would have been paid to the late

11

Mr. Monahan and other than that, you cannot account for them being recorded as

12

being attributed to Cherrywood or you can't say who was the ultimate recipient

13

of the funds; is that correct?

14 14:04:28 15

A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 561

And if we look at 1995.

16 17

And at 1640.

18 19

The total amount of the political donations recorded by Monarch Properties in

14:04:46 20

1995 is 4,690 pounds.

21

of those funds.

And on the analysis of the allocation of the postings

At page 8923.

22 23

It will seem that insofar as any postings are known, Mr. Glennane, the last

24

four which are recorded on that document being 1,000 pounds, Fine Gael

14:05:13 25

fundraiser S Barrett and then 400 and 250 and 200 are attributed to Cherrywood.

26

1,850, I think in total

27

A.

Right.

28

Q. 562

And it would follow from that again that a decision would have to be made as to

29 14:05:32 30

why some of these were posted to Cherrywood and others were not; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:05:32

14:05:51

79 1

A.

Yes, yes.

2

Q. 563

Right.

Now, I think also included in that year was a payment of 2,500 pounds

3

to Mr. Liam Lawlor at page 5523.

4

correct, Mr. Glennane?

That I think is signed by you; is that

5

A.

Yes, it is.

6

Q. 564

And can I just draw to your attention that it appears to say in the top corner

7

post dated; is that right?

8

A.

Yes, yeah.

9

Q. 565

Do you see? Can you assist at all as to why a cheque to Mr. Lawlor might have

14:06:07 10

been post dated?

11

A.

Unless we didn't have the funds to meet it the day we gave it to him.

12

Q. 566

That's unlikely to be the case, isn't it, Mr. ....?

13

A.

Well other than that I can't think why.

14 14:06:24 15

Do we know what date, how long was it

post dated for? Q. 567

16

I can tell you that it was debited to the account on the 5th of January 1995. On the same date as it's written.?

17

A.

I can't think why it would be post dated then.

18

Q. 568

I can only tell you.

19 14:06:49 20

It's 5522.

It is the cheque payments book.

And you

will see half way down the page, 5th of January '95, L Lawlor.? A.

Yeah.

21

Q. 569

At 5524.

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 570

On the account.

24

A.

Yeah.

Q. 571

And you will note at page 5523 that the cheque appears to have been negotiated

14:07:02 25

26

It certainly wasn't post dated anyway. You will see the debit?

On also the 5th of January '95.?

through Mr. Murphy's lounge bar at Inchicore?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 572

What can you tell the Tribunal of the circumstances in which this cheque came

29 14:07:19 30

to be written, Mr. Glennane? A.

I don't know.

I don't recall it.

Unless it was something to do with Prague

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:07:24

14:07:38

80 1 2

but I don't really know. Q. 573

3

January '95 ... I don't know now.

I'm going to take you through a series of payments, cash payments or queries in 1995.

4 5

And there are 12 of these, Mr. Glennane.

6 7

And the first two payments in 1995.

8

previous fiscal year.

9

in 1995 came to be dealt with by the auditors altogether.

14:08:02 10

Just to explain it to you, fell into the

So effectively in the 1994 and the first two payments So I'm going to

have to break after the first two payments and look at some audit working

11

papers and then go on to deal with the balance of the payments.

12

understand?

13

A.

I do, yes.

14

Q. 574

So the first payment is at page 7393, please.

Do you

14:08:14 15

16

And you will see half way down that page.

17

Bank in the sum of 8,000 pounds.

18

A.

I do, yes.

19

Q. 575

Yes.

14:08:36 20

A cheque payable to Allied Irish

Do you see that?

And you will see that at page 7394 that that is debited to the account

of Monarch Properties Services Limited on the 21st of April '95.?

21

A.

Yes, that's correct.

22

Q. 576

And you will see that it is -- the remittance slip is at 8726.

8726.

23

Yes.

24

sum of 8,000 pounds attributed to general promotions Cherrywood; isn't that

14:09:10 25

And at 7365.

Sorry.

Some seven from the bottom you see cheque 11.2.98 in the

right?

26

A.

Yes, I see that, yes.

27

Q. 577

And if I can show you the second payment, which is at page 7395.

28 29 14:09:25 30

And it's just slightly below half way down the page. Allied Irish Bank in the sum of 2,000 pounds Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

Again it's payable to

14:09:26

14:09:36

81 1

A.

I see that, yes.

2

Q. 578

It's debited from the bank account on the 28th of April, '95.

3 4

At 7396.

5 6

Do you see that? It's the third debit down.

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q. 579

It is at 8727.

9 14:09:45 10

Described on the remittance advice as cash.

11

A.

Right, yes.

12

Q. 580

Do you see that? It says "CSH" in the centre under the word "description".

13 14

At page 7365.

14:10:05 15

It is attributed to Cherrywood General Promotions and it's two

beneath the 8,000 we looked at a minute ago.

16

A.

Yes, I see that, yes.

17

Q. 581

So --

18

A.

These are all the ones that the auditor seems to have checked them against the

19 14:10:17 20

remittance advice. Q. 582

Yes.

21

A.

No, that's right.

22

Q. 583

It's just entirely an internal Monarch document.

23 24 14:10:32 25

Which as we've seen, Mr. Glennane, doesn't identify any invoice?

In most or many cases it

seems to record the payments as cash; isn't that right? A.

That's right.

Q. 584

If I could.

26

At 7365.

If I could just point out to you a number of payments

that are dealt with.

27 28

At this particular point in time.

29

pounds?

14:10:47 30

A.

Do you see the first payment of 7,000

Um. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:10:47

14:10:56

82 1

Q. 585

It's second payment down.

2

A.

Yes, I do, sorry, yes.

3

Q. 586

That was one of the payments in 1994 we looked at previously.

4

Transaction down.?

Isn't that

right?

5

A.

Yeah.

6

Q. 587

If you come down to look at the 10,000 pounds which is the next large payment.?

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q. 588

That was the second payment in 1994 that we looked at; isn't that right?

9

A.

Yeah.

Q. 589

If you look at the payment of 1,000 pounds some five beneath that?

11

A.

Uh-huh.

12

Q. 590

That was the third payment in '94.

14:11:06 10

13 14

And you will remember the 20,000

Ansbacher payment? A.

Yes, yeah.

Q. 591

And then if you look --

16

A.

Sorry, is that on the sheet?

17

Q. 592

Yes.

18

A.

Yes, sorry.

19

Q. 593

And ANB?

A.

Yes.

21

Q. 594

If you move down to the 8, 000, which is the cheque we've just looked at?

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 595

And if you look at the 2,000.

14:11:19 15

14:11:32 20

24 14:11:43 25

If you see 20,000.

Which is the one we've just looked at also;

isn't that right? A.

Yes.

26

Q. 596

And the 4,500.

27

A.

Um.

28

Q. 597

Immediately below --

29

A.

Yes, yeah, sorry.

Q. 598

Below the 2,000.

14:11:52 30

And if you go across you will see 20K?

We had looked at it previously.

Isn't that right?

They total 52,500 pounds, Mr. Glennane, you may take it from

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:11:59

14:12:07

83 1

me?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 599

And the total amount of costs attributed to general promotion is 64,471?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 600

So the greater proportion of the costs are attributed to these six payments.

6

Do you understand?

7

A.

I do, yes.

8

Q. 601

And insofar as these payments have been agreed to anything.

9 14:12:25 10

agreed to internal Monarch remittance advices; isn't that right? A.

So it would appear, yes.

11

Q. 602

According to the note made by the auditor; isn't that right?

12

A.

Well he's only referring there to four of them.

13

Q. 603

Insofar as --

14

A.

He's written on the top total costs charged.

Q. 604

Yes?

16

A.

I assume that's the auditor's writing.

17

Q. 605

Yes?

18

A.

Sorry.

19

Q. 606

That's correct.

14:12:38 15

They've only been

14:12:49 20

But because the 40 percent total costs charged is the

percentage of which there are invoices and we've seen that already:

21

figure, the total of --

22

A.

Sorry.

23

Q. 607

No, that relates to?

24

A.

That's the one above it.

Q. 608

Yes.

26

A.

Sorry.

27

Q. 609

There's no conclusion that insofar as the general promotion account is

14:13:00 25

But the

Conclusion.

I think so, Mr. Glennane.

It doesn't relate?

28

concerned that the auditor has concluded that what's occurred is reasonable,

29

although there is such a conclusion on the preceding one?

14:13:15 30

A.

I understand. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:13:16

14:13:26

84 1

Q. 610

If you look at the full document to see what the auditor has been doing.

2

will see his note or her note in relation to the first is conclusion

3

satisfactory?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 611

The second one is conclusion immaterial under the heading Dun

6

Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.

7

appears reasonable.

8

authorise remittance advices, do you see that?

9

Then under general legal fees, conclusion

And under general promotion, the conclusion is agreed to

A.

Yeah.

Q. 612

There's no other conclusion recorded; isn't that right?

11

A.

Well on the sheet, yes.

12

Q. 613

On this sheet?

13

A.

I assume if he wasn't happy he'd have investigated it further.

14

Q. 614

Right.

14:13:44 10

14:13:59 15

16

Of those amounts, the total amount that we've just looked at, which

are all payments that you can't explain other than -A.

17

Sorry, I think the Ansbacher.

Q. 615

It was an interest payment?

19

A.

I have no doubt.

14:14:14 20

20,000.

It's by far the biggest amount on it.

would certainly have queried it if he didn't know what it was.

21

So he

It's certainly

been posted to the wrong account. Q. 616

23 24

I have no doubt that that was an interest

payment.

18

22

But of these payments that we've just identified, Mr. Glennane. to 52,500 pounds.

They amount

Out of a total amount of --

A.

Including the 20.

Q. 617

Including the 20.

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 618

And there are no invoices available, isn't that the position, in relation to

14:14:33 25

28 29 14:14:46 30

You

Out of a total account of 64,471.55, isn't that right?

any of those payments other than the remittance advices that we've seen? A.

As far as I can see, yes.

Q. 619

And on the -- at page 7364.

And this is the trial balance.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

And what is

14:15:00

14:15:16

85 1

being recorded on the left-hand side of the page are all of the Cherrywood

2

promotion accounts; isn't that right?

3

A.

All of the Cherrywood accounts, yes.

4

Q. 620

Yes.

5

A.

Yes, sorry, yes.

6

Q. 621

And the amount in general promotion is 64,471.55?

7

A.

That's right, yes, yeah.

8

Q. 622

And that's the amount we had seen previously; isn't that right?

9

A.

That's right, yeah.

Q. 623

And out of that we had seen that the major component of that sum of 64,471 was

14:15:26 10

And included in that is general promotion?

11

the 52,500 we had been looking at just before lunch and immediately after

12

lunch; isn't that right?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 624

The auditor records that some of these are vouched to invoices; isn't that

14:15:51 15

right?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 625

And some are not; isn't that right?

18

A.

Yeah.

19 14:16:00 20

Well, you said the percentage of costs vouched to invoice was 40

percent. Q. 626

No, we start with the very first notation by the auditor, which is the tick.?

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 627

And that tick means that those accounts are vouched to invoices; isn't that

23 24 14:16:14 25

26

right? A.

Well that's what it says at the bottom, yeah.

Q. 628

He talks about the balance of costs vouched to invoice being 40 percent?

A.

Well, I don't know where you get the balance.

27

I think that's percentage of

costs.

28

Q. 629

That's what I mean.

29

A.

Costs vouched to invoice.

Q. 630

What the auditor is saying what he has vouched is 40 percent of the 150,979?

14:16:28 30

The percentage?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:16:34

14:16:47

86 1

A.

2

Well so it would seem, yes.

Unless it's just the ones that have, you see

there's a whole lot grouped together.

3

Q. 631

I beg your pardon?

4

A.

There's a whole lot grouped together you see from the general insurance Muires,

5

he has about six or eight that are grouped together.

6

percent of those, because he has 40 percent written on the general promotions

7

account that we had a minute ago.

8

Q. 632

Yes.?

9

A.

So you see between the 1830 and the 20,000.

Q. 633

Yes?

A.

He's got -- he has those grouped together.

14:17:06 10

11 12

Unless he means 40

I'd assume that he means the 40

percent of those, but I don't know.

13

Q. 634

But that's your interpretation of the document?

14

A.

Exactly.

Q. 635

If you look at the --

A.

You see there is also, as you mentioned beforehand, a payment for Burke Kennedy

14:17:19 15

16 17

Doyle of 20,000 fees re planning application.

18

Again that's posted to the wrong account.

19

Q. 636

14:17:40 20

That was to do with Bloomfield.

So I'm afraid we were fallible.

Insofar as these expenses are being posted.

All you can see, Mr. Glennane, is

that they were posted to the Cherrywood General Promotions account and there

21

they stayed?

22

A.

You're talking about the 64,000?

23

Q. 637

Yes?

24

A.

Yeah.

Q. 638

And included in that was the 52,500 we've just been looking at?

26

A.

Yes, including the interest, yeah.

27

Q. 639

Uh-huh. What that suggests, Mr. Glennane, be it right or be it wrong, that

14:17:49 25

28

there was no proper accounting system in operation insofar as the Cherrywood

29

promotions account was concerned.

14:18:34 30

There's no proper invoices available for

any of these payments; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:18:35

14:18:50

87 1

A.

Well only for some of the ones.

2

Q. 640

They are remittance advices they're not invoices?

3

A.

Well I don't know whether you checked any of the invoices.

4

Q. 641

No, no, we're talking about the general promotion account only.

5

You've referred to for those ones.

Just that

account?

6

A.

Yeah.

7

Q. 642

Not anything else?

8

A.

Okay, go back to then that there then will you please.

9

Q. 643

Out of that, which is 64,471.55, we know, because we've gone through the

14:19:03 10

documents this morning and this afternoon, that there are no invoices in

11

respect of 52,500 of those.?

12

A.

Well, I'm not sure about that.

13

Q. 644

Well, if they are do you know where they might be, Mr. Glennane?

14

A.

Yes, they would have been with the general -- where all the invoices were.

14:19:18 15

16

Could you show up that account again? Q. 645

7365, please.

And what I am talking about, Mr. Glennane, so that there is no

17

ambiguity about it.

18

first two payments we looked at immediately after lunch which total 52,500.?

19

A.

14:19:46 20

There would probably have been a

It wouldn't have been an invoice. Q. 646

23 24

Yes, but I mean for instance the Ansbacher.

And if there was such a letter one would expect it to have been discovered with the rest of the documents?

A.

14:20:04 25

Well presumably, yes. know, yeah.

Yeah, 95 yeah.

Well, there may have been, I don't

I don't know what was discovered.

26

Q. 647

Well, have you ever seen any such letter, Mr. Glennane?

27

A.

Well, I don't recall it in that particular case.

28 29 14:20:23 30

And the

letter to Ansbacher saying 'here's a cheque for 20,000 interest on account'.

21 22

Is the payments we looked at just before lunch.

But certainly I know it

would be quite common for us to pay interest on account. Q. 648

And if it was an interest payment?

A.

Otherwise I can't think of any other reason. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:20:23

14:20:34

88 1

Q. 649

2 3

If it was an interest payment to Ansbacher, Mr. Glennane, where should it have been posted?

A.

4

It should have been posted to -- well it actually should have been transferred into the Cherrywood accounts itself.

5

Q. 650

But it shouldn't have been in this account, isn't that right?

6

A.

No, no.

7

Q. 651

And it was never changed out of this account; isn't that right?

8

A.

Well not as far as I can see, no.

9

Q. 652

Because as you see from the next page that 64,471.

14:20:53 10

At 3674, please.

It

becomes part of a greater figure of 150,979.18; isn't that right?

11

A.

Yeah.

12

Q. 653

Which goes into Cherrywood stock?

13

A.

Well, I think the figure 159,433 actually.

14

Q. 654

That's right, because of the adjustment that's made immediately beneath that;

14:21:09 15

isn't that right?

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 655

At 7363.?

18

A.

He has written on the bottom, sorry.

19

Q. 656

At the second entry under that is the costs assigned to 495159433?

A.

Sorry.

21

Q. 657

The one before that?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 658

At 7364?

24

A.

You see the auditor has written there, 'should be included as part of Dun

14:21:24 20

14:21:38 25

If you just go back to that last sheet for a second.

Laoghaire project costs'.

(witness reading to himself).

26

Q. 659

Yes, so they have picked up on one error?

27

A.

Yeah, but they have decided to leave it there.

28

Q. 660

Uh-huh?

29

A.

Even though it was Dun Laoghaire.

Q. 661

Well according to PC, who is your employee; isn't that right?

14:21:56 30

A completely different project.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:22:01

14:22:10

89 1

A.

Yeah.

2

Q. 662

It's either Mr. Cooling or Mr. Caslin?

3

A.

I would think Mr. Caslin.

4

Q. 663

So the auditor is relying on the information that has been provided by

5

Mr. Caslin?

6

A.

Yes, but the auditor is making a decision there.

7

Q. 664

So it's a misclassified error only?

8

A.

Yeah.

9

Q. 665

So that would suggest that the only error picked up or drawn to the auditor's

14:22:18 10

attention was the one in relation to the brochure for the Dun Laoghaire

11

project?

12

A.

Yes, I'm not sure which one that is.

13

Q. 666

There is no indication that there was discovery of 20,000 error in relation to

14 14:22:33 15

the Ansbacher payment for example; isn't that right? A.

Um, no I'm sorry.

16

Q. 667

Isn't that right?

17

A.

I'm trying to think where it is.

18

Q. 668

The 20,000 is in the --?

19

A.

Yeah, general promotions, I see that.

Q. 669

And it says there?

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 670

And if there was an error of the payment to Ansbacher they would have picked it

14:22:46 20

23 24

It's not on that sheet.

up and taken it out and posted it correctly; isn't that right? A.

Well, I don't know that.

Q. 671

Well certainly if one looks at?

26

A.

They should have.

27

Q. 672

They should have if there was a mistake.

14:22:55 25

28 29 14:23:06 30

JUDGE FAHERTY: 20,000.

Ms. Dillon, can I ask you.

Just in relation to the Ansbacher

I know you dealt with them before lunch. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:23:08

14:23:15

90 1 2

MS. DILLON:

Two cheques of 10,000.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

On which account were they drawn?

5 6 7

MS. DILLON: A.

Monarch Properties Services.

I'll just check it

One or two cheques?

8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Two cheques of 10.

14:23:21 10

11

MS. DILLON:

12

and it's Monarch Properties Services Limited.

13

It's 7389, please.

And sorry 7390 is the actual bank account The 10,000 debit on 31st of May

'94 is the first.

14 14:23:50 15

16

Q. 673

So even if there was an error in relation to Ansbacher, Mr. Glennane, it's not

17

an error that was picked up either by Mr. Caslin or by you or by anybody else

18

in Monarch or indeed by the auditors?

19 14:24:12 20

A.

Yeah, well I wouldn't have seen those accounts but yeah, yeah.

Q. 674

And I assume, Mr. Glennane, you'd expect if there was an error of that

21

magnitude made you'd expect that your employees in Monarch would have picked it

22

up when you were preparing the books for the auditor?

23

A.

24

Well, I suppose you'd hope to pick up errors.

up and decided to leave it there. It didn't matter much as long as it was

14:24:34 25

included in Cherrywood.

26

Dun Laoghaire one.

27

Cherrywood.

28 29

They might well have picked it

Q. 675

If it was the right home.

I'm more intrigued by the

Which certainly shouldn't have been included in

I'd regard it as a bigger error, to put it that way.

And if I could show you in 1995 the third payment. in the next audit period which I think is fiscal '96.

14:24:57 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

Which will be dealt with

14:24:57

14:25:19

91 1

Which is at 7402.

2 3

And this is a payment of the 25th of May 1995, it's fifth from the bottom.

4

And it's 5,000 pounds cash.

5

of the cheque is 5,407.92 do you see that?

You will see at the bottom that the total amount

6

A.

I do, yes.

7

Q. 676

And you will see handwritten in very small letters.

8

A.

I think it's actually sterling cash.

9

Q. 677

It's 400 sterling and 5,000 pounds cash, I think you will see.

14:25:27 10

And we might increase it?

Do you see

that? 400 sterling and 5,000 cash?

11

A.

Sorry, I can't see.

12

Q. 678

You can see it now I think.

13

A.

No, I can't.

14

Q. 679

It could be, yes?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 680

And that sum of 5,407.92 is debited from the accounts of Monarch Properties

14:25:42 15

16 17

Services Limited of May '95.

18

second debit transaction?

19 14:26:04 20

A.

Yes, sorry, yeah.

Q. 681

And at 7370.

At 7403.

You see it's the third, it's the

The seventh transaction down on the Cherrywood general promotion

21

account for the fiscal year '96.

22

you see that?

Is a cash transaction of 5,000 pounds.

Do

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 682

And you will see the designation CSH, cash?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 683

Can you assist the Tribunal as to what that was in connection with or what that

14:26:28 25

26 27

payment was for?

28

A.

No, I don't think so.

29

Q. 684

Yes.

A.

Where's the 479 gone, I wonder?

14:26:46 30

It's when, it is in May '95 -- no, I don't.

It was the 25th of May 1995.?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:26:48

14:27:04

92 1

Q. 685

It's not recorded.

The 479 doesn't appear to be attributed to Cherrywood

2

promotion out of the cheque. Only, 5,000 cash out of the cheque was attributed

3

to Cherrywood Promotions, Mr. Glennane; isn't that right?

4

A.

Well I can't see that.

5

Q. 686

Yeah.

6

So that would mean that the cash element out of that cheque is being

attributed to Cherrywood promotions?

7

A.

So it would seem, yeah.

8

Q. 687

Can you explain at all why there would have been a requirement for 5,000 pounds

9 14:27:27 10

11

in cash around this time? A.

No, no more than any other time no.

Q. 688

Right.

And can I just draw to your attention -- we'll be coming back to deal

12

with the auditor's comment in relation to the balance.

13

account is 62,767.64, do you see that?

14 14:27:42 15

A.

I do, yes.

Q. 689

And you will see the auditor's note.

16

The balance on the

No physical back up documentation on

this balance?

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 690

What does that mean?

19

A.

I assume it means that there was no physical back up documentation.

14:27:53 20

know if he means for every item.

21

He seems to suggest it.

if there wasn't for some of the items on it.

I don't

I'd be surprised

PC will discuss with RG.

22

Q. 691

Who is RG?

23

A.

Roger Gillespie.

24

Q. 692

Certainly the auditor's comment, insofar as the analysis of what's contained in

14:28:14 25

He was the partner in SKC.

the Cherrywood general promotion for the payments that are made in 1995 and

26

which are being dealt with in the fiscal year '96, is recording that there's no

27

physical back up documentation.

28

means that there's no invoices.

29

sums were paid for.?

14:28:33 30

A.

And I suggest to you, Mr. Glennane, that There's no paper trail showing what these

Well, I'd be surprised if there wasn't for some of the items on it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

I accept

14:28:38

14:28:59

93 1

there doesn't seem to be for the cash ones.

I would have thought for the

2

first one or membership of PCI conference.

There would be a load of

3

documentation for that.

4

62,000.

5

he was satisfied that the accounts were signed off with no qualification.

6

Q. 693

7

It's wrong if he said there's no backup for the whole

Obviously, then it was discussed with Roger Gillespie and presumably

And the next payment at page 7404.

The payment on the 1st of June' 95. It's

the very first entry, Allied Irish Bank 5,000 pounds.

Do you see that?

8

A.

I do, yes.

9

Q. 694

And that, Mr. Glennane, is debited to the account at 7405 on 6th of June '95.?

A.

Yes.

Q. 695

And that is posted at 7370.

14:29:24 10

11 12

To the Cherrywood promotions account being the

eight entry approximately down, ninth entry down.

Do you see that?

13

A.

I do, yes, yeah.

14

Q. 696

And again this is treated as cash?

A.

So it seems, yeah.

16

Q. 697

Do you see that?

17

A.

Sorry.

18

Q. 698

It's entered as cash?

19

A.

Yes, yes.

Q. 699

You will see immediately above it Restaurant Na Mara and above that the first

14:29:49 15

14:29:55 20

21

cash payment of 5,000 we looked at?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 700

Now, this is a second cash payment of 5,000 pounds?

24

A.

Yeah.

Q. 701

The next payment is in July '95.

14:30:06 25

At 7406.

26 27

It's the second cheque down in the sum of 2,000 pounds.

28

Irish Bank.

29 14:30:30 30

It's --

A.

I see, that yes.

Q. 702

It's debited from the bank account on 25th of July '95.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

Written to Allied

14:30:30

14:30:39

94 1

A.

Yeah.

2

Q. 703

And it's posted at 7370.

3

To the Cherrywood Promotions General Promotions

account?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 704

And it's five below the last entry we looked at?

6

A.

Yeah, I see it, yes, yeah.

7

Q. 705

The next cash payment is at 7408.

It's eight from the bottom, Mr. Glennane.

8

It's a payment to Allied Irish Bank in the sum of 1,000 pounds.

9

that?

14:31:07 10

11

Do you see

A.

I do, yes.

Q. 706

And that is debited from the account of Monarch Properties Services Limited at

12

page 7409.

On the 28th of July '95.?

13

A.

Yeah.

14

Q. 707

And it is posted to the Cherrywood General Promotion account at 7370?

A.

Yes.

Q. 708

And it's immediately beneath the last one that we looked at, the cheque for

14:31:28 15

16 17

2,000.

Then there's the cheque 11,659 in the sum of 1,000?

18

A.

Yeah.

19

Q. 709

Do you have any idea what that was in connection with, Mr. Glennane?

A.

No, I don't, no, sorry, no.

Q. 710

The next payment which I think is No. 7.

14:31:42 20

21

Is at 7410.

22 23

It's the last entry on the cheque payments book.

24

it's to Allied Irish Bank in the sum of 1,500 pounds at page 7411, it's debited

14:32:04 25

to the account on the 14th of August.

26

A.

Sorry, yes, yeah.

27

Q. 711

And at 7370.

28 29 14:32:26 30

It's 10th of August '95.

If you can confirm that.

It is posted as cash to the Cherrywood General Promotion

Account, immediately beneath the last cheque that we looked at.? A.

Yes, I so see that, yeah.

Q. 712

Could you go back to that cheques payments sheet again? In relation to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:32:32

14:32:46

95 1

last payment?

2

A.

The full page, yeah.

3

Q. 713

7410. Yes, the full page, please.?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 714

In relation to the 1,500, yes.

6

Sorry, there was something caught my eye.

That's the very last one on that page.

A.

Sorry, maybe the one before that then.

8

Q. 715

The one before that relates to a payment at 7408.

9

In the sum of 1,000

pounds.? A.

Yeah.

11

Q. 716

And it's eight from the bottom?

12

A.

I'm intrigued there's 6,000 pounds.

13

Q. 717

That's not attributed to general promotions.

14 14:33:19 15

So it isn't being treated as a

Cherrywood cost? A.

16

Yeah, but it's the same principle presumably as the ones before, the rest of them.

17

Q. 718

Yes.

18

A.

There was cash drawn by somebody to do something with.

19

Q. 719

Yes but it's not being attributed as an expense of Cherrywood?

A.

Yes.

21

Q. 720

So it's being attributed somewhere else?

22

A.

So it appears.

23

Q. 721

So you have two expenses. One of 6,000 and one of 2,000.

14:33:35 20

24 14:33:47 25

The

10th of August '95?

7

14:33:04 10

Is that the right page?

The point --

One of which is

being allocated to Cherrywood properties and one which is not? A.

So it would seem.

26

Q. 722

Attributable to Cherrywood and others are not.

27

A.

Yeah, so it seems.

28

Q. 723

Well somebody is making a decision that some expenses of this sort are

29 14:33:54 30

Is that right?

attributable to Cherrywood and others are not, isn't that right? A.

Yes, well somebody at the time, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:33:54

14:34:03

96 1

Q. 724

Would that have been you by any chance?

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 725

Who would it have been?

4

A.

Originally it would have been whoever was posting up these things.

5

Q. 726

Who would that have been?

6

A.

It would be somebody fairly junior in the accounts department.

They might

7

have asked somebody if they didn't know.

8

it in Cherrywood, it seems to be where everything was put that people didn't

9

now what it was for, including architects' fees and other things.

14:34:22 10

Q. 727

And are you happy to move on from?

11

A.

Yes, I was intrigued by that 6,000.

12

Q. 728

If we look at the eight payment at 7412.

They might have been told just put

And there are two payments.

And

13

you will see approximately half way down the page there's a cheque to Allied

14

Irish Bank in the sum of 4,000 pounds.

14:34:43 15

the sum of 5,500 pounds.

And a cheque to Allied Irish Bank in

Do you see that?

16

A.

I do, yes.

17

Q. 729

There are two cheques.

18

A.

Yeah.

19

Q. 730

One on the 26th of September '95 and one on the 27th of September '95?

A.

I can see that, yes.

Q. 731

And they are debited to the bank accounts of Monarch Properties Services

14:34:55 20

21 22

That totals 9,500.?

Limited at 7413 and 7415, there's no need to put them up?

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 732

And they are both attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion.

14:35:11 25

At 7370.

And

you will see there the next large sums on this attribution are the sum of 4,000

26

and 5,500?

27

A.

Yes, I see that, yes.

28

Q. 733

And again, can you assist the Tribunal as to where are the ultimate destination

29 14:35:33 30

of those funds? A.

No, I can't, no. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:35:33

14:35:53

97 1

Q. 734

And the ninth payment, I think, in 1995 is at 7416.

And it's dated 4th of

2

December '95, it's approximately half way down the page.

3

5,000 pounds on the 4th of December '95.

4

Bank.?

And it's a sum of

And I think it's to Allied Irish

5

A.

Sorry?

6

Q. 735

It's quite hard to see.

7

A.

Yeah, I do, yes.

8

Q. 736

It's immediately beneath that in the sum of 5,000 pounds.

9

A.

Oh, right, yes, yeah.

Q. 737

That is debited from the bank account at 7417 on the 6th of December '95. Do

14:36:04 10

11

Do you see Old Grange Holdings?

you see that?

12

A.

Yes, sorry, yeah.

13

Q. 738

And it is posted to Cherrywood General Promotions at 7370.

14 14:36:30 15

16

three beneath the 5,500 we looked at there is a sum of 5,000 pounds? A.

I see that, yeah.

Q. 739

And transaction No. 10 on the Cherrywood Promotion Account.

17

It is dated the 4th of December '95.

18

to Allied Irish Bank.

19

And you will see

At 7418, please.

And it's a sum of 2,500 pounds payable

Do you see a cash payment --

A.

I do, yes, 2,500.

Q. 740

And it's immediately above that?

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 741

And that's debited to the bank account at 7419 on the 6th of December, '95.

14:36:56 20

23 24 14:37:14 25

And posted at 7370 to the Cherrywood General Promotions account.? A.

Yeah.

Q. 742

You will see that's immediately beneath the 5,000 that we looked at a moment

26

ago?

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 743

It wasn't posted to that account?

29

A.

Yeah.

Q. 744

It wasn't posted to any Cherrywood account?

14:37:26 30

And the 4,000 hasn't gone here.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:37:28

14:37:43

98 1

A.

Yeah well ....

2

Q. 745

Which means that somebody is making or made a decision that some cash payments

3

were being posted to Cherrywood and some were being posted to other accounts?

4

A.

Yeah, well we don't have the remittance advices for those by any chance?

5

Q. 746

No, if we had them?

6

A.

There might be information on that.

7

Q. 747

The next transaction in '95 is the 11th of December '95 at 7420.

8

cheque payments book it's almost exactly half way down the page.

9

Irish Banks Plc, 11th of December '95.

14:38:06 10

11

A.

Yes, I see that, yeah.

Q. 748

That is debited to the bank account on the 13th of December. posted to the Cherrywood promotions account at 7370.

13

2,500?

14:38:20 15

It's Allied

7,500 pounds.?

12

14

And on the

At 7421.

And

Immediately beneath the

A.

I see it, yeah.

Q. 749

And -- now, if we stop there for a moment and we just look at 7370 for the

16

moment.

And if we could just increase it for a little.

17 18

The account total for 1996, which we have -- for 1995 which we've looked at in

19

the fiscal year of '96.

14:38:54 20

Commencing with the sum of 1,000 comes to 40,000

pounds

21

A.

Okay.

22

Q. 750

So, if we start at the top?

23

A.

That's over a period of 8 months.

24

Q. 751

1,000 being the first major payment?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 752

The second is 5,000.

14:39:04 25

26 27

1500.

4, 000.

The third is 5,000.

5, 500.

5,000.

Then there's 2,000.

2,500.

1,000.

And 7,500.?

28

A.

Yeah.

29

Q. 753

Now, the other payments that come after that, Mr. Glennane, are payments that

14:39:22 30

are made in '96? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:39:23

14:39:41

99 1

A.

Yeah, okay, right.

2

Q. 754

So, in the particular financial year at which we're looking at.

Out of the

3

total that's attributed to the Cherrywood General Promotions Account of 62 767,

4

40,000 pounds is attributable to those round figure payments.

5

that?

6

A.

I do, yes.

7

Q. 755

Okay.

8

A.

There's some adjustment there of 6,000.

9

Q. 756

Yes but that relates to a sum I haven't dealt with?

A.

Does it, sorry.

11

Q. 757

There's a payment in 1996 we haven't come to yet?

12

A.

It seems to be 31st of December '95.

13

Q. 758

No, that's the year end isn't it? Sorry.

14:39:53 10

14

Now, can you tell the Tribunal --

back to look at that.

14:40:12 15

I don't know what that is.

The adjustment.

Well I can come

Leaving that aside for the moment it doesn't seem to be

adjusting any figure?

16

A.

Sorry, the last item seemed to relate to it, yeah.

17

Q. 759

It doesn't relate to that?

18

A.

Yeah.

19

Q. 760

Of the figure of 40,000 pounds that we've just looked at.

14:40:27 20

Can you tell the

Tribunal where any of that money went?

21

A.

I can't at this remove, no.

22

Q. 761

At the time --

23

A.

I've already given my opinion where all of these monies went.

24

Q. 762

So are you saying that this sum?

A.

I reiterate that, yes.

26

Q. 763

Do you think this money would have gone to Philip Monahan?

27

A.

I'm not so sure of the small amounts like 1,000.

14:40:44 25

28 29 14:41:00 30

Do you see

Anything over 3,000 would

certainly have gone to him, yes. Q. 764

And you see the notation at the bottom.

There is no physical back up

documentation on this balance, PC will discuss with RG? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:41:04

14:41:20

100 1

A.

Yeah.

2

Q. 765

What discussion took place, do you know?

3

A.

I don't know.

'Cos as you can see, I wasn't party to it.

Or not at that

4

stage anyway.

Obviously they discussed it and they decided well there was a

5

satisfactory explanation or not or if there wasn't for some of them, they

6

decided whether they were material or not.

7

they went ahead and signed off the accounts with a clean certificate.

And if they weren't material then

8

Q. 766

At 7377.

9

A.

Yeah.

Q. 767

Do you see that?

11

A.

This is September '96 now.

12

Q. 768

Yes.

13

A.

Yeah.

14

Q. 769

Is a sum of 63,000 pounds for general promotion for which there is no back up

14:41:43 10

14:42:01 15

There is a note by the auditor entitled "MPSL Stock Highlights"?

Included in Cherrywood stock cost of 130,233?

documentation?

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 770

That would appear to be the sum that we're looking at in general promotion?

18

A.

Yeah.

19

Q. 771

"PC has said that he will discuss this with RG if necessary"?

A.

Yeah.

21

Q. 772

That's Pat Caslin will discuss this with KPMG if necessary?

22

A.

Yeah, yeah.

23

Q. 773

And there appears to be a note from the auditor saying, yes it is?

24

A.

Yes.

Q. 774

Yes?

A.

This was in September '96, so the audit wouldn't have been finalised until

14:42:12 20

14:42:22 25

26 27

January '97.

28

Q. 775

Yes.

29

A.

Well, in fact all these figures were written off in '96, if I recall.

Q. 776

Then what happened?

14:42:39 30

And what happened --

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:42:39

14:42:53

101 1

A.

2 3

Yes.

But, I mean, I'm sure it was still discussed.

I'm sure it was still

discussed. Q. 777

4

If we just stop there for a second on the audit trail in relation to it.

The

Cherrywood promotion amounts to 63,000 pounds approximately?

5

A.

Yeah.

6

Q. 778

The auditor says there's no physical back up documentation for this figure;

7

isn't that right?

8

A.

Yeah.

9

Q. 779

A lot of these figures that we've look at from there and indeed going back over

14:43:03 10

earlier years are round figure payments aren't they; isn't that right?

11

A.

Yes, that's right, yeah.

12

Q. 780

The auditor raises a query; isn't that right? There's no back up documentation

13 14

for these costs? A.

14:43:20 15

Sorry, I'm just reading the rest of this note.

If it's anything to do with it

or not.

16

Q. 781

I don't think it assists does it?

17

A.

Through the error schedule, whatever that means.

18

Q. 782

But the auditor picks up on the fact that there's no back up documentation;

19 14:43:31 20

isn't that right? A.

Yes, that's right, yes.

21

Q. 783

And the auditor has a query?

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 784

The decision is taken in '96; isn't that right? To write off Cherrywood

24 14:43:44 25

stock.? A.

Yes, yeah, January '97.

26

Q. 785

In January '97?

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 786

What effect would that have on those queries if they hadn't been answered by

29 14:43:56 30

that stage? A.

I don't think it would have had any effect. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

Whether they were written off or

14:43:59

14:44:11

102 1

carried forward they would have been entitled to the same scrutiny.

2

Q. 787

Uh-huh?

3

A.

From the auditors.

4

Q. 788

And where in the documentation will one find the explanation that was provided

5

to the auditor by Mr. Caslin or anybody else in your department for these

6

payments?

7

A.

Well I presume it would be in the auditor's working papers.

8

Q. 789

And if they were in the auditor's working papers the Tribunal would have them?

9

A.

Yeah.

Q. 790

Well, I think you can take it from me that they're not?

A.

Yeah, well I'm sure they still scrutinised them.

14:44:26 10

11

I don't think the fact that

12

it was being written off, I don't think would have removed the query.

13

Certainly if the auditors were concerned that there was any improper

14

payments -- the fact that they were written off wouldn't make any difference.

14:44:50 15

Q. 791

16

And in 1996 there were three further payments in 1996. January and March '96.

17

A.

Yes certainly.

18

Q. 792

Mr. Glennane.

In early '96.

That I'll go through with you just for completeness?

And the first of these is at 7422.

19 14:45:11 20

And it's the second payment down in the sum of 5,000 pounds to Allied Irish

21

Bank

22

A.

Yeah, I see that, yes.

23

Q. 793

And that at page 7370.

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 794

Is sixth from the bottom.

28

A.

I do, yes.

29

Q. 795

Sixth from the bottom.

24 14:45:20 25

14:45:41 30

Do you see that?

And the second payment is also in January '96.

Almost exactly half way down the page.

7274, please.?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

7274.

14:45:49

14:46:05

103 1

A.

That's the wrong page.

2

Q. 796

7424, I beg your pardon.

3

Do you see half way down the page a payment of 5,000

pounds to Allied Irish Bank? Which is debited to the bank account?

4

A.

Yes, I do, yeah.

5

Q. 797

At 7425.

6

At 7370, please.

Is posted to Cherrywood General Promotion.

that is the fifth last entry.?

7

A.

Yes, I see that, yeah, yeah.

8

Q. 798

Do you see that?

9

A.

Yeah.

Q. 799

And the last payment is 1,500 pounds at 7426.

14:46:19 10

11

Which is a payment of 1,500 pounds to cash.

Which is the third entry down. Do you see that?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 800

And that is posted to the Cherrywood General Promotion Account at 7370.

14 14:46:44 15

16

A.

Yeah.

Q. 801

Do you have any assistance to the Tribunal as to why or in what circumstances those payments came to be made?

A.

19

No, well I'd certainly -- the 1,500 one looks quite small so it may have been somebody going abroad or something.

14:47:07 20

think, and Mr. Murray went to Japan.

I know that at one stage, Mr. Sweeney I So, it may well have been that some of

21

those were a sub for that trip. Other than that, other than my previous

22

explanations, I can't add to it.

23

Q. 802

24

At page 7370 when one looks at the payments that are made in '95 and the payments made in '96.

14:47:35 25

The names '95 come to 40,000 and the payments in '96

under inquiry come to 11,500, totalling 51,500?

26

A.

Okay, yeah.

27

Q. 803

Is that right Mr. Glennane?

28

A.

Yeah well I accept that.

29

Q. 804

That's out of a total figure of 62,767.64?

A.

Yeah.

14:47:45 30

Being

third from the end.?

17 18

And

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:47:46

14:47:57

104 1

Q. 805

2

For which the auditor could find no back up, sorry, no physical back up documentation?

3

A.

So it seems, yeah.

4

Q. 806

So it would seem.

And you can't tell the Tribunal why over certainly 80

5

percent of the payments that are recorded in the Cherrywood General Promotions

6

account in 1995 and 1996 cannot be explained by you, the Chief Financial

7

Officer then.

8

A.

9

Is that right?

Well I'm just saying -- obviously if I did have an explanation I would have given it to the auditors at the time and/or I mean they got an explanation, I

14:48:17 10

don't know.

But again in the overall context of a year, 51,000 wasn't a huge

11

sum of money.

And presumably the auditors formed a judgement whether they

12

were able to get sufficient information on it or not.

13

Q. 807

Yes?

14

A.

If they weren't happy they would certainly have brought it to the attention of

14:48:37 15

16

the Board at our annual signing off meeting. Q. 808

17

I have no recollection of that.

The sum of 62,767.64 is carried forward at 7369.

Where all of the Cherrywood

accounts are amalgamated; isn't that right?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 809

You see that figure 62 767.64 and it totals a 130,482.94?

A.

That's right, yeah.

Q. 810

And this would have been -- at this time the auditor, which is September '96.

14:49:02 20

21 22

The auditor has the query and is looking for back up?

23

A.

So it seems, yes.

24

Q. 811

Now, did anybody ever come to you looking for an explanation as to what

14:49:16 25

happened to this money?

26

A.

Not that I can recall, no.

27

Q. 812

Who would have been the person who would have had to provide an explanation for

28 29 14:49:29 30

these costs and expenses? A.

Well, obviously, Pat Caslin was the person that the auditor referred to and whatever investigations he made after that I don't know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

I have no

14:49:33

14:49:45

105 1

recollection of it but that's not to say that he didn't come to me.

2

don't have any recollection of it.

3

Q. 813

And that sum of 130,000.

But I

If we could have 7368.

4 5

And if you could just explain what's happening on this transaction here,

6

Mr. Glennane.

7

A.

Yes, sorry, yeah.

I'm just trying to find the sheet.

I find it easier to

8

read off the hard sheet than to read off the computer.

9

bad.

14:50:12 10

the 130,233. Q. 814

13 14

What essentially is happening is that, sorry, what's he saying in the

note at the bottom. Well, the opening balance is 668,000 and he's adding on

11 12

The writing's quite

Which is what we've just seen which includes within it the general Cherrywood General Promotion, for which he has given no back up?

A.

14:50:33 15

Yeah, he's given a balance.

The balance of Cherrywood stock which has been

held in Monarch services over all the years has not come to 798,000.

16

Q. 815

Yes. And what happens to that?

17

A.

What's happening is that 734 000 of it was written off in Monarch services.

18

Q. 816

That's at 7371; is that right?

19

A.

Well 7368 explains the note.

14:50:58 20

21

The note explains it, if you want me to read the

note I've written or try to read it. Q. 817

I just want you to explain to the Tribunal in your own words what's happening

22

to the transaction. What's happening at this stage, that would have been

23

January 1997, Monarch had disposed of a 50 percent interest in Cherrywood

24

Properties Limited to Caveat Limited.

14:51:22 25

And on foot of a balance sheet of

Cherrywood Properties Limited, presumably, of tapering of '96.

So it was

26

then -- it was then deemed that these would not be recoverable from Cherrywood

27

and they were written off in Monarch Properties Services Limited, which had the

28

effect that they actually never appeared then in the accounts or books of

29

Cherrywood Properties Limited which had the effect that they never actually

14:51:48 30

appeared then in the accounts or books of Cherrywood Properties Limited. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:51:48

14:51:57

106 1 2

And at 7373.

On the balance sheet, which I think is signed by yourself and?

3

A.

Yeah.

4

Q. 818

And Mr.--

5

A.

Yeah, it's written down there.

6

Q. 819

7373.

7

A.

It has gone down from 907,000 to 87,000.

8

Q. 820

That is in effect the writing off of the Cherrywood stock?

9

A.

Yeah.

Q. 821

Which contains within it all of the payments that we have looked at for today

14:52:09 10

11 12

and indeed on the last occasion on which you gave evidence; isn't that right? A.

13 14 14:52:26 15

Under the heading 'current assets' there was stocks?

Well, there was an exception of 64,000 on this note but I don't understand what that was about but ....

Q. 822

So if we could just review then?

A.

So, if we can just review then, what happened is all the stock which was built

16

up over the years in Monarch Properties Services Limited with the designation

17

of Cherrywood against it now has now been written off in Monarch Properties

18

Services Limited.

19

accounts of Cherrywood.

14:52:45 20

And as I say, has not appeared.

Q. 823

And in the build up --

21

A.

That's in summary.

22

Q. 824

In the build up of the Cherrywood stock.

Has never appeared in the

If we go back to the beginning,

23

Mr. Glennane.

24

consultancy fees; do you remember that? We looked at those figures on the last

14:53:07 25

It started out in 1991 with a figure of 27,850 being strategy

day that you were here.?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 825

1991.?

28

A.

Yeah.

29

Q. 826

Do you remember the strategy consultancy fees? Which were the political

14:53:18 30

Sorry what year is that?

donations? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:53:19

14:53:29

107 1

A.

2 3

I don't think -- I don't think that they were ever described in the books as strategy consultancy fees.

Q. 827

4

They were described in the internal working papers of Monarch as strategy consultancy fees?

5

A.

No, I think they were described in correspondence with GRE.

6

Q. 828

No.

7

I'll show you the documentation.

We went through it on the last

occasion?

8

A.

I've forgotten.

9

Q. 829

It's no difficulty or problem.

If I could have page 3996, please.

14:53:46 10

11

You remember this document? And I want to draw to your attention fourth from

12

the bottom

13

A.

That's not part of the accounts.

14

Q. 830

I'm not talking about nor did I suggest I was talking about the accounts,

14:54:02 15

Mr. Glennane.

What I told you I was talking about was an amount of fees?

16

A.

That's just a memorandum sheet.

17

Q. 831

And those fees were sought to be recovered from GRE; isn't this right?

18

A.

That's right, yes.

19

Q. 832

And those fees insofar as -- those political payments when they were --

A.

Sorry.

Q. 833

When those political payments were made.

14:54:21 20

21 22

This document was prepared for GRE as I understand it, yes. They were initially posted to

sponsorship in MPSL; isn't that right?

23

A.

So it seems, yeah.

24

Q. 834

But they were transferred into Cherrywood General Promotion; isn't that right?

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 835

So that in 1991, 27,850 pounds was put into Cherrywood General Promotions;

14:54:37 25

26 27

isn't that right?

28

A.

Um, I know there was 3,000.

29

Q. 836

3,000?

A.

Figure floating around the last day which I can't recall how it ended up but,

14:54:56 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:55:00

14:55:15

108 1

yeah, assuming you're right I certainly differentiated between the 3,000 and

2

the 22,150.

3

Q. 837

Uh-huh?

4

A.

And there was a figure of 2,700 which seems to have come from nowhere, but

5 6

however. Q. 838

7

And in 1992 political payments to Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Bruton were ultimately attributed to Cherrywood also; isn't that right?

8

A.

That's right, yes.

9

Q. 839

And in addition to that, we looked at in November 1992 payments of 15,000

14:55:32 10

pounds that had been attributed to Cherrywood General Promotions; isn't that

11

right?

12

A.

Well, if yeah.

13

Q. 840

The 10 and the 5,000.

14

A.

Yes, I can so, yeah.

Q. 841

They had also been attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion and you weren't

14:55:49 15

16

Do you remember that?

in a position to assist?

17

A.

No.

18

Q. 842

With where or how those funds had been utilised either; isn't that right?

19

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 843

In 1993, 41,885 pounds is attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion and you

14:55:55 20

21

haven't been able to assist the Tribunal today as to where the ultimate

22

destination of those funds was?

23

A.

Well, I gave my opinion, my strong opinion, yes.

24

Q. 844

That it was Mr. Philip Monahan?

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 845

In addition.

14:56:16 25

26

In 1994 a sum of 42,500 pounds was attributed to Cherrywood

27

General Promotion.

28

assistance as to the ultimate destination of those funds?

29 14:56:33 30

And you haven't been able to provide the Tribunal with any

A.

Other than the last answer I've given, yes.

Q. 846

Which is that you believe -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:56:35

14:56:51

109 1

A.

2 3

I believe they went to Mr. Monahan.

Any of them that relate to cash went to

Mr. Monahan. Q. 847

In 1995, a sum of 49,000 pounds is attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion.

4

Again, you can't assist the Tribunal as to the ultimate destination other than

5

your belief that it would have been given at least in the first instance to

6

Mr. Philip Monahan; is that correct?

7

A.

That's correct, yeah.

8

Q. 848

In 1996 a sum of 11,500 pounds was attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion.

9

And again, your position in relation to that is that if it was -- it's your

14:57:08 10

belief that if it was given to anybody it was given to Mr. Philip Monahan?

11

A.

That's right, yes.

12

Q. 849

And other than that, you can't assist the Tribunal as to how it might have been

13 14 14:57:22 15

treated in Mr. Monahan's hands? A.

No, my belief is that it was used to buy cars and things.

Q. 850

You were unaware of the fact that the late Mr. Monahan had paid 25,000 pounds

16

to Mr. Haughey in 1992?

17

A.

That's right, gentlemen.

18

Q. 851

You were aware of a payment of 16,000 pounds in 1989 to Fianna Fail?

19

A.

I assume I was, I can't be a hundred percent sure.

Q. 852

You can't recollect?

21

A.

No.

22

Q. 853

You were aware of a payment to Saatchi & Saatchi of 15,000 pounds but only

14:57:38 20

23 24 14:57:48 25

after the invoice was received within Monarch.

Is that correct?

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 854

And you were not aware of the fact that payments of at least 60,000 pounds had

26

been made to Mr. Liam Lawlor through a vehicle called Comex until the Tribunal

27

drew it to your attention; is that right?

28

A.

That's correct, yes.

29

Q. 855

Were you aware --

A.

Sorry.

14:58:04 30

I might have been aware at the time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

14:58:07

14:58:22

110 1

Q. 856

You can't recollect?

2

A.

I can't recollect.

3

Q. 857

Were you aware of the political payments that were made that we've looked at

4

the 5,000, the payments that were made in 1991, '92, '93 and '94?

5

A.

I'm sure I was, yes.

6

Q. 858

And insofar as they were allocated against Cherrywood promotions.

The

7

furthest you can put it is you wouldn't have made that decision but some junior

8

in the office would have made that decision?

9

A.

14:58:39 10

not disowning the decision.

11 12

No, I'm saying in the first instance that decision would have been made.

I'm

I'm just asking, the reason they were made at the

time. Q. 859

And the -- you accept I think, Mr. Glennane, that the purpose and function of

13

the Cherrywood Promotion Account, at 7378, as outlined by the auditor, was

14

something that will sway or influence local opinion on the worthiness or good

14:59:06 15

of their project?

16

A.

Well, I wouldn't disagree with it.

17

Q. 860

The value of the payments that we have looked at today, including Mr. Lawlor's

18 19

I mightn't put it in those terms, yes.

payments, come it 480,000 pounds, Mr. Glennane.? A.

If you say so.

Q. 861

We can go back through the payments again?

21

A.

No, no, there's no need.

22

Q. 862

And would it be fair to say, Mr. Glennane, that with the exception of the

14:59:26 20

It seems very high, yeah.

I assume your figures are correct.

23

Saatchi & Saatchi payment, you don't agree to have any direct knowledge of the

24

source or utilisation or attribution of any of these monies?

14:59:48 25

26

A.

Sorry, are you saying that cash payments came to 480 000?

Q. 863

No, no, all of the payments we've looked at in the course of your evidence to

27 28

date? A.

29 15:00:04 30

Well, I was aware of certainly any political contribution made. of the source.

Q. 864

I was aware

The source was Monarch Properties Services Limited.

The source of them is clear from the documentation? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:00:07

15:00:24

111 1

A.

Yeah.

2

Q. 865

What I had asked you about was the allocation of those payments.

What I'm

3

asking you, Mr. Glennane, is how can you be the Chief Financial Officer of a

4

company like Monarch and sums of money that come to 42,500 or 49,000 in one

5

fiscal year go into a particular account and you have absolutely no idea, good,

6

bad, or indifferent, where that money went?

7

A.

Well, I think as I've said, you're into the whole concept of materiality.

8

if things weren't considered material by the auditors then I don't think I

9

would have had to consider them material.

15:00:49 10

audit.

We relied on an extent by the

We had very good, very expensive auditors.

And we would have very

11

much relied.

12

dealing with millions of pounds in all sorts of transactions.

13

any year isn't a very large amount, with all due respects to it.

14

Q. 866

15:01:17 15

If they were happy with them we wouldn't be unhappy.

We were

So 42,000 in

Are you saying, Mr. Glennane, that it's good accounting practice to post monies willy-nilly anywhere and leave it to the auditors to pick it up to see if it's

16 17

And

correctly posted? A.

I wouldn't say we posted them willy-nilly.

They were all carried forward in

18

stock.

There was no attempt to conceal

19

anything from the auditors or from anybody else.

15:01:36 20

They were all totally transparent.

We had regular VAT

inspections over the years because we were very often in a reclaim situation.

21

So the Revenue would have been in on various occasions and they would have gone

22

through all of the payments.

23

have pointed it out to us so ....

24 15:01:55 25

If they were unhappy with anything they would

Q. 867

Did you ever write up any payment as a political donation?

A.

Not so far as I know.

It's -- I think it's quite clear.

If it has a name on

26

it and the political party is written after it, it certainly -- it couldn't be

27

more transparent, in my opinion.

28

on my behalf, on my part of the company to make sure that there was no --

29

there was really no question of them being in any way concealed or hidden or

15:02:21 30

And that was a deliberate policy certainly

improper. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:02:22

15:02:41

112 1

Q. 868

Yes.

And if your system is that transparent, Mr. Glennane, and you are the

2

person who put in place this transparent position.

3

Tribunal why the cash -- where the cash payments in 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 and

4

1996 went?

5

A.

6 7

In my opinion, most if not all of them

went to Mr. Monahan. Q. 869

8 9

Well I've already given my opinion.

Why can't you tell the

That would mean that in 1992 Mr. Monahan took 15,000 pounds out of the company and didn't account to you for what he did with it.?

A.

15:03:02 10

Sorry, when I say didn't account.

Mr. Monahan would have incurred expenses as

well outside the company on behalf of the company.

11

There was an annual

reconciliation carried out with the auditors and him.

12

Q. 870

Sorry?

13

A.

Let me finish, if you don't mind.

14

Q. 871

Of course.

A.

There was an annual reconciliation carried out by the auditors with him of his

15:03:13 15

16

own accounts, of expenses, of monies that he had drawn from the company and

17

expenses he had paid out from the company and at the time he was owed over a

18

million pounds by the company, as you'll recall from the last day.

19

Q. 872

15:03:33 20

We have seen, Mr. Glennane, with respect to you, that insofar as the 15,000 pounds paid by out by the 10,000 and 5,000 pounds cheque in '92, that didn't

21

happen because that went into Cherrywood stock and stayed in Cherrywood stock?

22

A.

That was eventually written off.

23

Q. 873

Yes.

24

A.

I assume there was but --

Q. 874

Sorry..?

26

A.

He may have disowned them and not been able to explain them.

27

Q. 875

Sorry.

15:03:48 25

28 29 15:04:01 30

So there was no reconciliation?

If there was a reconciliation and it was being reposted to a different

account, it would not have remained in Cherrywood stock? A.

Yeah, if there was a reconciliation.

Q. 876

And the fact that it remained in Cherrywood stock means up-to-date it was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:04:04

15:04:19

113 1

written off in January of 1997 means it was never re allocated.

2

no reconciliation.

Isn't that the position, Mr. Glennane?

3

A.

No, I wouldn't accept that there was no reconciliation.

4

Q. 877

I was going to finish my question?

5

A.

Sorry.

6

Q. 878

If it is your position that there was such a reconciliation.

7 8

Let me finish.

Will you point

to the documentation that indicates any such reconciliation took place? A.

9 15:04:36 10

And there was

Well I don't have it.

It would be with the audit file. The reconciliation of

it was carried out by the auditors. Q. 879

And in is so far as 1993 is concerned --

11

A.

I understand that you have all of their files.

12

Q. 880

And there's nothing?

13

A.

And I checked with them.

14

Q. 881

And there's nothing.

You can take it from me, Mr. Glennane.

15:04:56 15

16 17

In November 1993, in 1993 -A.

18 19

I don't know how you can say there's nothing.

If you ask the auditors they

will confirm that there was a reconciliation done. Q. 882

15:05:04 20

In 1993, 41,885 pounds was paid out attributable to Cherrywood stock.

And you

can't assist the Tribunal other than telling the Tribunal that it was probably

21

Mr. Monahan?

22

A.

That's right, yes.

23

Q. 883

And in 1994, 42,500 pounds was paid out attributable to Cherrywood stock.

24

And

you can't assist the Tribunal other than to say it was probably Mr. Monahan; is

15:05:21 25

that correct?

26

A.

That's correct, yes.

27

Q. 884

And in 1995, 49,000 pounds was paid out attributable to Cherrywood stock.

And

28

you can't assist the Tribunal other than to say it was probably Mr. Monahan; is

29

that correct?

15:05:32 30

A.

That's correct, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:05:33

15:05:48

114 1

Q. 885

And in 1996, 11,500 pounds was paid out attributable to Cherrywood stock.

2

you can't assist the Tribunal other than to say that it was attributable

3

probably to Mr. Monahan; is that correct?

4

A.

That's probably correct, yes.

5

Q. 886

And insofar as there is documentation available to the Tribunal.

And

That

6

documentation suggests very strongly that all of these Cherrywood promotion

7

cost and expenses were written off in January 1997, and that there does not

8

appear to be a trail of an adjustment being made between Mr. Monahan or inter

9

company or otherwise.

15:06:11 10

A.

11 12

15:06:26 15

Well I -- I don't have any trail.

But I'm not sure -- I'm sure if there is a

trail it's in the audit files. Q. 887

13 14

Would you agree with that?

Right.

Are you aware of any adjustment being made in connection with any of

those figures? A.

Not specifically, no.

Q. 888

Can you recollect having any discussion with the auditors about adjusting any

16

of those figures?

17

A.

Not specifically no.

18

Q. 889

Did you yourself have any discussion with either Mr. Caslin or anyone from KPMG

19 15:06:43 20

21

about the general promotion Cherrywood account? A.

I'm sure I would have over the years.

I don't specifically recall it.

Q. 890

Do you recall having any discussion with Mr. Monahan or with KPMG about any

22

adjustment in relation it to directors loans or otherwise in connection with

23

the Cherrywood promotions account?

24

A.

15:07:02 25

26

Well, not in connection necessarily with that account. connection with the account.

Q. 891

But certainly in

Or with his loan account, yes.

If we could turn to look, very briefly, Mr. Glennane, with Mr. Frank Dunlop.

27 28

I just want to revisit a few matters with you.

29 15:07:23 30

Before I leave that.

You agree that this note by the auditor is correct.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:07:27

15:07:40

115 1

That the whole purpose of Cherrywood promotion from the client's point of view

2

is to sway or enhance opinion in relation to the development?

3

A.

Well it's to promote the development, yes.

4

Q. 892

Yes?

5

A.

That's the same as -- you'd promote a shopping certainty.

Certainly when we

6

got involved in Cherrywood there was -- tremendous opposition had been built up

7

to it and really scurrilous opposition, if I may say so, orchestrated by

8

Mr. Smith.

9

Q. 893

15:08:11 10

And certainly we had to then sort of rectify that.

And any payments that are attribute to the Cherrywood promotion and advertising, are payments which have as their purpose enhancing the

11

development.

If I can use that word.?

12

A.

Well obviously, yes, I mean ....

13

Q. 894

And therefore any political --

14

A.

Loan interest is enhancing the development because it's something that you have

15:08:26 15

to pay to maintain the development.

16

Q. 895

Yes?

17

A.

It's a long process, the development process.

18

Q. 896

And any political payments that are recorded as being attributed to Cherrywood

19

promotion and advertising are payments that are regarded as being of

15:08:42 20

enhancement or enhancing the development; isn't that right?

21

A.

They are political contributions made, yes, to really -- to politicians, yes.

22

Q. 897

But they are recorded in the account which has as its purpose the enhancing of

23 24 15:09:04 25

the development; isn't that right, Mr. Glennane? A.

Well I think the enhancing -- well I suppose so, yes.

Q. 898

Right.

26 27

So would you now explain to the Tribunal how a political payment to a

sitting councillor or a sitting TD could enhance the development? A.

Well it would -- it would make him perhaps look more favourably on the

28

development.

29

been generated against the development by a small number of people, financed by

15:09:30 30

And plus it would counteract the tremendous opposition which had

commercial interests. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:09:48

15:09:48

116 1

Q. 899

2

Are you talking specifically about the Cherrywood development and the opposition that there was to that?

3

A.

At the start, yeah.

4

Q. 900

And is it fair to say then from what you say and correct me if I'm wrong, that

5

you would have regarded all of the political payments that are recorded in

6

Cherrywood promotions and advertising as payments that are made politically in

7

order to advance and enhance the development of the lands at Cherrywood?

8

A.

9

No, I would regard them more if somebody comes to you and asks you to make a contribution to some -- to some charity that they're sponsoring or to make a

15:10:13 10

contribution to their election expenses, I would think it would be very ill

11

advised not to do so.

12

Q. 901

Why?

13

A.

Because you would be in effect shooting yourself in the foot.

14

be making an enemy out of somebody.

15:10:33 15

16

Because you'd

And it's much easier to make enemies than

to make friends. Q. 902

Can I ask you, and I don't want to go back over all of the Dunlop payments.

17

just want to clarify something that I think will be clarified indeed with Mr.

18

Dunlop when he comes back.

I

19 15:10:46 20

In fairness to yourself, you had suggested Mr. Glennane, that Monarch were

21

unlikely to pay without an invoice.

And I want to draw to your attention a

22

document, while it's in the brief, that you may not have appreciated, indicated

23

the existence of such an invoice from Mr. Dunlop.

24 15:11:04 25

And the first thing I want to draw to your attention is 4051.

26

this is the remittance slip for the first of the payments to Mr. Dunlop?

27

A.

That's right, yes.

28

Q. 903

And at 4052.

29 15:11:34 30

Which is the --

If we could look at the first half of that page.

quite hard to see it. Dunlop.

Yes.

I think it's

Where the payment of 15,000, 4052. The payment to Mr.

Of 15,000, if that could be increased, please.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

It's three

15:11:40

15:11:59

117 1

from the bottom.

2

the area is dark.

3

25,000.

If we could just increase that.

I want it increased where

Sorry, I'm not making myself very clear.

You see there

I think it's very faint?

4

A.

Yeah, I think so, yes, yeah.

5

Q. 904

And that would suggest, and correct me if I'm wrong, that when you wrote the

6

cheque for 15,000 pounds, the amount due to Mr. Dunlop was 25,000. So it would

7

seem, yes.

8

A.

I didn't write the cheque but I accept it.

9

Q. 905

According to the accounting entry the way it's recorded, Mr. Dunlop was due

15:12:19 10

another 10,000 pounds.

11

A.

That's right, yes.

12

Q. 906

If we go back to look at the full of the document.

You will see further down,

13

in fact some five from the bottom there is the second payment of 10,000 pounds

14

to Mr. Dunlop.

15:12:32 15

Do you see that?

A.

I do, yes.

16

Q. 907

Do you know why it was decided to pay Mr. Dunlop in two portions at that time?

17

A.

No, well it appears to me -- and I've been thinking about this since the last

18

day I was here.

19

that there was meant to be a payment for 25,000.

15:12:54 20

It appears -- in fact that seems to confirm it.

issued as 15,000 in error. it was paid.

22

have been consecutive cheques.

23

as 25,000. Q. 908

15:13:18 25

Because if we were issuing two cheques for any reason they would It would seem to support that if it's extended

If I could show you a document at 4060.

Just for completeness, Mr. Glennane.

And these are in fact Mr. Dunlop's documents.

26

And for some reason it was

And he came back the next day for the other 10 and

21

24

Mr. Dunlop says that the 15,000

pounds that he got from Monarch is part of the lodgement, do you see that?

27

A.

I do, yes.

28

Q. 909

And the reverse of that lodgement is on the bottom document.

29 15:13:41 30

It appears

increased.

Yeah.

If that could be

What I want to draw to your attention to is that records

Monarch 834, 15,000 pounds beneath that IIF 80660570 and NTMA, I think it's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:13:51

15:13:59

118 1

90799940?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 910

That is a document that was created at the time the lodgement was made in March

4

of 1993?

5

A.

Yeah.

6

Q. 911

And that would suggest, Mr. Glennane, in fairness to yourself, that Mr. Dunlop

7

had provided an invoice No. 834 to Monarch before the payment for 15,000 pounds

8

was made?

9

A.

Sorry, how do you work that out?

Q. 912

Do you see it says 834 at the very top? It's quite difficult to see it?

11

A.

Is that an invoice number of his.

12

Q. 913

Yes?

13

A.

So it would seem, yeah.

14

Q. 914

I'm just drawing that to your attention.

15:14:17 10

15:14:35 15

I had drawn that to you on the last

occasion that you were here?

16

A.

Did he do that for the 15 or the 25,000.

17

Q. 915

15.

18

A.

We don't seem to have any record of that invoice as you know.

19

Q. 916

There was such discussion about whether or not there was such an invoice.

15:14:49 20

If we go back to 4060?

Created in March of 1993 when the lodgement is made by Mr. Dunlop. And that

21 22

This is the lodgement.

suggests the existence of an invoice No. 834? A.

I see, that yes.

See as I said, my understanding of the cheque and looking at

23

it now, and certainly confirmed by that, is that it was a mistake on foot of

24

the cheque.

15:15:05 25

Q. 917

26

Yes.

And from your point of view, is there any reason why you would have

split the cheque?

27

A.

No.

28

Q. 918

It wouldn't have made any difference whether you paid 15 or 25 to Mr. Dunlop?

29

A.

No, it wouldn't, no.

15:15:23 30

asked for it.

And if we had -- the only reason would be if Mr. Dunlop

If we had have been issue two cheques they would have been

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:15:29

15:15:43

119 1

consecutive cheques.

2

there.

3

Q. 919

4283.

There's actually about eight or ten cheques between them

Still on this point.

4

by Mr. Shipsey.

5

receipt.

This was a point in fact I think that was made

In which he suggested that this is in fact only a VAT

This is No. 834 paid with thanks for VAT purposes only.?

6

A.

Is this the same number as before?

7

Q. 920

This is a receipt dated May 1993.

8

A.

Paid for thanks with VAT purposes.

9

Q. 921

There was an invoice 834 which no longer appears to be available to anybody.

15:16:08 10

Which was paid in March of 1993.

A VAT invoice I would regard it as.

And for which this is now the VAT invoice.?

11

A.

Yeah, it seems strange to me.

12

Q. 922

Uh-huh?

13

A.

'Cos yeah I don't think we ever posted that invoice as far as I know so we

14 15:16:26 15

mustn't have received it. Q. 923

16

Well, no copy of that invoice was provided to the Tribunal by Monarch, Mr. Glennane.

17

A.

I'm looking at the invoice on our account.

18

Q. 924

Yeah.

19

The first one was the 12,100.

Which is the invoice that -- is this is the one that doesn't have the

same typeface as the others and it appears Mr. Liam Lawlor received the benefit

15:16:47 20

of?

21

A.

No, it was never paid in that specific amount.

22

Q. 925

This is the cheque for 10,000 pounds, it was then paid; isn't that right?

23

A.

No, well the invoice was dated I think the 10th of April and the payment was

24

26th of May.

15:17:05 25

So I don't think -- I would have assumed that 12,100 was the

first invoice for the first ten.

In fact looking at that, though he's

26

actually -- yeah.

27

one for the 15 and next one is the ten.

28

has added it on in the ten.

29 15:17:29 30

I don't know what number it was.

Q. 926

If he was the author of both invoices?

A.

Yeah.

It sounds like that's

He's included the VAT in the 15 and

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:17:29

15:17:52

120 1

Q. 927

2

He appears to have taken an inconsistent approach.

If we look at 4133,

together with the document on screen; isn't that right?

3

A.

Yeah, that's right, yes, yeah.

4

Q. 928

Because in one invoice which is Mr. Dunlop's invoice, which is at 4283.

5

the 15,000 pounds inclusive of VAT; isn't that right?

6

A.

That's right, yes.

7

Q. 929

It's VAT included.

8 9 15:18:04 10

It is

The second invoice is 10,000 pounds plus VAT; isn't that

right? A.

Yes, I see that yes.

Q. 930

And you have accepted, I think, Mr. Glennane, that no sum of 12,100 pounds was

11

ever paid out by Monarch?

12

A.

No, no, yeah.

13

Q. 931

But you do accept that a sum of 10,000 pounds was paid out by Monarch; isn't is

14 15:18:18 15

that right? A.

Yes, yeah.

16

Q. 932

And that was paid out I think in -- was paid out in --

17

A.

Well there was two.

One was I think --

18 19

JUDGE FAHERTY:

26th of May I think.

15:18:31 20

21

MS. DILLON:

25th of May -- 26th of May.

That was the payment ultimately

22

received apparently by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor

23

A.

So he says, yes.

24

Q. 933

And you were not able to assist, I think, as to how that might have come about;

15:18:45 25

isn't that right?

26

A.

No.

27

Q. 934

What I wanted to ask you about in particular was the payment of 15,000 pounds

28 29 15:18:54 30

in November of 1993? A.

Yes, I see that, yes.

Q. 935

And that payment is at page 4637.

Now, I think we had looked at this briefly

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:19:05

15:19:19

121 1

on the last occasion.

At 4633?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 936

This is invoice 2461 by Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?

4

A.

That's right, yeah.

5

Q. 937

This sum does not include VAT?

6

A.

Yes, so it seems, yeah.

7

Q. 938

This sum is being paid to Mr. Dunlop on the 2nd of November 1993.

At a time

8

when it was then believed that the vote would take place on the 3rd of November

9

'93; isn't that right?

15:19:35 10

11

A.

I don't know.

If you say so.

Q. 939

I think you know from being here, Mr. Glennane, that the critical vote for

12

Monarch was in November 1993.

13

been scheduled for the 3rd?

14

It took place on the 11th having originally

A.

I'm not sure if they knew on the 2nd it wasn't going to be on on the 3rd.

Q. 940

You can take it for the moment it was originally meant to be on the 3rd?

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 941

You made a comment on the last occasion when you were here.

15:19:54 15

18 19 15:20:05 20

You said that the

system netted off the payment? A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 942

And that because the invoice and the payment were the one day.

21

please.

At 4640,

And if we could increase?

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 943

Frank Dunlop & Co..?

24

A.

Yeah, well not the one day so much as the one amount, yeah.

Q. 944

The one amount?

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 945

So what is happening here, if I understand you or what you had previously told

15:20:22 25

28 29 15:20:34 30

the Tribunal, is because the invoice and the payment are on the one day? A.

No, not on the one day.

I'm sorry.

Q. 946

That's what you told the Tribunal, Mr. Glennane? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:20:36

15:20:45

122 1

A.

Sorry, I meant --

2

Q. 947

You said that the computer netted them off?

3

A.

Yeah.

4

Q. 948

Indeed, that payment of 15,000 pounds never appears again; isn't that right?

5

A.

Well it does.

6

Q. 949

Yes?

7

A.

Gone through by Eamonn and this is Mr. Dunlop's creditor's account.

It appears -- I mean, the invoice appears as an invoice ...

8

the account is clear.

9

payments the account would be nil.

15:21:05 10

So when

If they had all been specific invoices against specific

Q. 950

Right?

11

A.

It's still in the system.

12

Q. 951

Yes?

13

A.

It's still there.

14

Q. 952

It's netted off?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 953

Because I think you had told the Tribunal that the computer programme was such

15:21:10 15

16

It hasn't disappeared.

17

that it would net off.

18

day?

19

A.

15:21:24 20

21

Sorry, I shouldn't have said on the one day, I think it wouldn't necessarily have to be on the one day.

Q. 954

22 23

Where there was a payment and an invoice on the one

And can you assist at all then, Mr. Glennane, as to why no application was ever made to GRE for 50 percent of that invoice?

A.

24

Well I think if you look at the correspondence with GRE.

The arrangement we

had with them was this 4,000 per month plus the success fee eventually.

15:21:49 25

I

think they knew we weren't paying Mr. Dunlop the same basis of 4,000 per month

26

because we had made application to get reimbursed 50 percent of the 25,000

27

early on.

28

were giving us that we were paying at least double that to Mr. Dunlop.

29

Q. 955

I think their only concern was to make sure that the amount they

So 4633, please.

I don't think I am making myself clear Mr. Glennane.

15:22:18 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:22:18

15:22:34

123 1

What I'm asking you is this. by the 2nd of November 1993 Monarch had an invoice

2

from Mr. Dunlop for 15,000 pounds, no VAT, isn't that right ?

3

A.

Yeah, presumably, yeah.

4

Q. 956

You paid out on foot of that invoice, the same day 2nd of November 1993?

5

A.

Again I'm not sure if the payment was before the invoice or which came first.

6

Q. 957

Well, assuming for the moment that you had the invoice and the payment on the

7

one day?

8

A.

Yeah.

9

Q. 958

All right.

15:22:49 10

In December of 1993 invoices were sought from Mr. Dunlop; isn't

that right?

11

A.

Yes, that's right.

12

Q. 959

Right.

13 14 15:22:57 15

16

And they were sought in order to provide back up to GRE for payments

that had been made to Mr. Dunlop? A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 960

Okay.

A.

Well obviously he sent in more invoices.

Now, why didn't you use the invoice that you had? He sent in one for I think the 22

17

and the 31 and the one for the success fee so there was more than enough

18

invoices there to justify the payment that we were seeking from GRE.

19

Q. 961

15:23:23 20

Okay.

So let's look at what you -- sorry. And they've confirmed that, by the

way. GRE have confirmed what?

21

A.

Confirmed just what I've said.

22

Q. 962

4850, please.

23

A.

Yes, I have arranged for a cheque to be drawn pending receipt of the copy

24

invoice.

15:23:45 25

If you look at that, 4850.

Yes, they are paying on foot of the invoices?

Once these are received the cheque will be sent to you (witness

reading to himself).

26

Q. 963

Uh-huh?

27

A.

So they weren't looking for any more invoices.

28

Q. 964

That's not the point at all, Mr. Glennane, as I suggest you well know.

29

A.

Sorry, I don't well know.

Q. 965

Just listen now, Mr. Glennane.

15:24:10 30

You had an invoice for 15,000 pounds which you

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:24:10

15:24:10

124 1

paid?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 966

VAT exempt. On the 2nd of November 1993?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 967

You had at least one if not more previous invoices from Mr. Dunlop including

6

one of 12,100 pounds.

You are seeking to recoup money paid to Mr. Dunlop from

7

your partners GRE, isn't that right.

8

A.

Yeah.

9

Q. 968

Instead of supplying GRE with the invoice you already had dated 2nd of November

15:24:30 10

1993, you sought further invoices from Mr. Dunlop?

11

A.

Yeah.

12

Q. 969

Isn't that right?

13

A.

Yes, because that would have only justified payment from GRE of 7,500.

14

Q. 970

Yes.

15:24:45 15

Because GRE were looking for invoices from you because they weren't

prepared to pay Monarch unless they had original invoices from Mr. Dunlop isn't

16

that right?

17

A.

Certain of those, yeah.

18

Q. 971

So what was required were certified copies certified by Mr. Sweeney and the

19

invoices that were supplied to GRE were the following.

15:25:00 20

21

4133.

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 972

Which is the invoice Mr. Dunlop says is not his.

24 15:25:12 25

26

moment.

Leaving that aside for the

That was the first invoice you provided; isn't that right?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 973

The second invoice you provided was 6th of December 1993.

27 28

Invoice 555, 4722, please.

29 15:25:23 30

And the third invoice that was provided was 4839. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

Dated 14th of December

15:25:28

15:25:39

125 1

1993.

For a success fee in the sum of 50,000 pounds, invoice No. 1251.

2

A.

That's right, yes.

3

Q. 974

Now, I just want you to answer this question, Mr. Glennane.

4 5

I want you to explain to the Tribunal why Monarch elected not to use the

6

invoice for 15,000 pounds and instead sometime early in December 1993

7

approached Mr. Dunlop and got two other invoices from him so that you could

8

submit your claim to get Mr. Dunlop's fees back?

9

A.

15:26:07 10

Because the two invoices we had only came to 10,000 and 15,000 excluding the VAT.

11

Q. 975

Yeah?

12

A.

So that would have only given rise to a refund from GRE of 12,500. At that

13 14

stage we were keen to get back all our money from GRE. Q. 976

15:26:23 15

But there was no reason to think you wouldn't get all of your money back from GRE --

16

A.

You're asking why did we approach Mr. Dunlop for more invoices.

17

Q. 977

Now I didn't ask you that, Mr. Glennane.

Be very careful about this.

The

18

question I asked you and I'd like you to answer is why when you had an invoice

19

from Mr. Dunlop of the 2nd of November 1993, did you go back to him for

15:26:41 20

further invoices in December and send the December invoices to GRE and you

21

never forwarded the November invoice for 15,000 pounds dated 2nd of November

22

'93 to GRE.

23 24 15:27:07 25

A.

That is what I want you to answer?

There's no particular reason in my opinion, if you add up those three invoices you've just given they come to 91,177.

We were trying to recover a sum from

GRE of I think it was 42,000, I think.

So they were --

27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

I may be wrong.

28

Mr. Sweeney's evidence, and I may have taken this down wrongly.

29

invoice dated 12th of April '93.

26

15:27:25 30

Sorry, Ms. Dillon.

I understood also from There was an

Which I understand was certified by somebody

in Monarch. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:27:26

15:27:29

126 1 2

MS. DILLON:

10th of April.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Yes.

5 6

MS DILLON: That's 4133.

7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY:

That's the 4133, 10th of April?

9 15:27:35 10

MS. DILLON:

Yes.

11 12

The next invoices certified are the 6th of December '93.

13

'93.

14

A.

15:27:47 15

Yes, the point I'm making. 43,000 excluding VAT.

And 14th of December

The amount we were trying to recover from GRE was

The amount of those invoices we have sent.

There are

16

four invoices there and come to 91,177.

17

came to 45,000.

18

long as they were happy that we had paid Mr. Dunlop, that we weren't charging

19

them more than half, then we didn't need to send any more invoices.

15:28:15 20

21

So if you take 50 percent of that it

So as long as GRE and they made clear in this letter.

As

We could

have, I'm sure, as easily sent one for the 15 as the 10. Q. 978

All you had to do, Mr. Glennane, when you had an invoice for 12,100 and invoice

22

for 15,000 was to ask Mr. Dunlop to give you invoices to make up the balance.

23

It would appear you had no difficulty asking Mr. Dunlop for an invoice for

24

50,000 success fee and he gave it to you?

15:28:42 25

A.

He gave it because he was due it. He was claiming it.

26

Q. 979

Yeah, but you didn't do that --

27

A.

We did.

28

Q. 980

Just let me finish.

29 15:28:56 30

alone.

We asked him for invoices. You didn't do that.

He gave us three invoices. You left the 15,000 pounds invoice

And I suggest to you that you did that for the very good reason that

there were some problems with the invoice. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

One, there was no VAT on it; isn't

15:29:00

15:29:09

127 1

that right?

2

A.

Well that was no problem to us, yeah.

3

Q. 981

I didn't ask you whether there was a problem?

4

A.

You said there was problems with the invoice.

5

Q. 982

Yeah, there is yeah?

6

A.

So I'm saying there was no problem with the VAT.

7

Q. 983

There was no VAT on the invoice.

8

A.

No.

9

Q. 984

On the other invoice that you had from Mr. Dunlop, apparently from Mr. Dunlop

15:29:22 10

in, the sum of 12,100 pounds.

Was there VAT on the invoice?

Was there VAT on that invoice?

11

A.

Yes, there was, yeah.

12

Q. 985

On the other invoice that is you got from Mr. Dunlop on the 6th and 14th of

13 14

December.

Was there VAT on those?

A.

There was, yes.

Q. 986

Did you send any non-VAT invoice to GRE in respect of Mr. Dunlop's fees?

16

A.

We only had one non-VAT invoice.

17

Q. 987

Did you send any invoice?

18

A.

No, we did not.

19

Q. 988

Which did not include VAT in connection Mr. Dunlop's fees to GRE?

A.

No.

Q. 989

If GRE had received an invoice from Mr. Dunlop which was VAT exclusive, do you

15:29:35 15

15:29:50 20

21 22

think they might have raised questions as to why Monarch were paying 15,000

23

pounds in cash to Mr. Dunlop on 2nd of November 1993?

24

A.

Wasn't paid in cash. I don't know where you're getting this idea.

Q. 990

It was effectively a cheque made out to cash, Mr. Glennane?

26

A.

It wasn't.

27

Q. 991

Yes?

28

A.

That's completely untrue.

29

Q. 992

I think you've already agreed that it's strange that there was no VAT element

15:30:05 25

15:30:19 30

A cheque made out to Frank Dunlop & Associates.

That's completely untrue.

on it? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:30:19

15:30:30

128 1

A.

It's strange.

I mean, but the mere fact that a thing, an invoice doesn't

2

include VAT doesn't mean that you can -- that you don't record it in your

3

books.

4

Q. 993

And at 46 --

5

A.

It was up to Mr. Dunlop to record it in his books.

6

him for his own particular reason.

7

his account.

8

Q. 994

9

As far as I can see it wasn't lodged to

It was lodged to a building society.

In fact, I suggest that you're probably wrong about that also.

and is not attributable to Monarch? A.

Well, I can see that. It's the same date so it seems extraordinary.

12

adding two and two and may be getting five.

13

lodgement of 15,000 on the 4th of November.

14

And that the

15,000 pounds lodgement you are referring is attributable to Robert McGrattan

15:30:50 10

11

Obviously it was raised by

Q. 995

15:31:13 15

If you look at 4659, you'll see a

If you look at 4650 in relation to the lodgement of the 4th of November to which you are referring, Mr. Glennane.

16

I'm

If you look third from the bottom the

source is identified as Robert McGrattan?

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 996

4633, which was the invoice we were looking at?

19

A.

Yeah.

Q. 997

The only invoice or possibly two invoices if there was an invoice 834.

15:31:30 20

And

21

the second invoice for 12,100 that had been paid to Mr. Dunlop on foot of

22

invoices were payment that included VAT; isn't that right?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 998

The only non-vatable payment made by Monarch to Mr. Dunlop is the payment on

15:31:50 25

the 2nd of November 1993?

26

A.

Yeah, yeah.

27

Q. 999

Now, can I ask you this.

Was there ever indicated to you or do you know

28

whether it was indicated to anybody in Monarch that Mr. Dunlop might have a

29

requirement for 15,000 pounds in cash on or around the 2nd of November 1993?

15:32:08 30

A.

Certainly not. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:32:10

15:32:26

129 1

Q. 1000

And in 1993 --

2

A.

Do we have the cheque by the way on the 4th of November? Our cheque.

3

Q. 1001

Your cheque is at 4634.

4

A.

Yeah, it's made out to Frank Dunlop & Associates.

5 6

Which you've signed? It's crossed.

In a

million years I couldn't see how anybody could cash that cheque. Q. 1002

7

You will note from the stamp that it's in fact negotiated on the 2nd of November 1993?

8

A.

And where is that?

9

Q. 1003

I can't tell you that for definite.

15:32:40 10

I think it's probably Allied Irish

Banks.?

11

A.

Are you saying that he cashed that cheque.

12

Q. 1004

Yes.?

13

A.

Well certainly it wasn't with our consent or knowledge.

14

Q. 1005

Uh-huh?

A.

Again, as I said before, for the life of me I can't understand why any bank

15:32:50 15

16

would cash a cheque that was crossed. If they knew Mr. Dunlop they might have

17

done it.

18

Q. 1006

19

Well they appear to have cashed your own cheques. Indeed, the ones that were given to, I think, to Mr. Monahan, which were written up in your books as cash

15:33:13 20

but were made out to Allied Irish Banks.

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 1007

So it's no great surprise to you?

23

A.

It is, sorry.

24 15:33:20 25

They also appear to be cashed?

It's one thing making it out to Allied Irish Banks and another

thing making it out to Frank Dunlop & Associates. Q. 1008

26

So the situation is this.

When Monarch want to cash a cheque they write a

cheque to Allied Irish Bank.

They cash that cheque?

27

A.

In allied Irish bank.

28

Q. 1009

And attribute it to Cherrywood General Promotions and that's fine.

29 15:33:33 30

right? A.

Well. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

Is that

15:33:33

15:33:45

130 1

Q. 1010

I understand.

2

A.

We went through that several times already.

3

Q. 1011

So a number of things happened in November 1993, Mr. Glennane.

The critical

4

rezoning vote is coming up initially on the 3rd of November 1993 and finally on

5

the 11th, at which Monarch make some successful moves, isn't that right? They

6

have some success, not as much as they'd like.

7

prior position on the 11th of November '93?

But an improvement on the

8

A.

So, I understand.

9

Q. 1012

On 2nd of November 1993 Mr. Dunlop is, for whatever reason, provided with

15:34:05 10

11

15,000 pounds in cash by Monarch on foot of an invoice which -A.

Not in cash. I object to that.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

It was a cheque which he cashed

14 15:34:14 15

MS. DILLON:

Which Mr. Dunlop cashed.

17

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, I wonder could Ms. Dillon explain to the Tribunal and to

18

this witness how she regards a crossed cheque for 15,000 Euro made out to Frank

19

Dunlop & Associates as tantamount to cash.

16

15:34:28 20

21

We don't understand it and I don't think this witness understands it.

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

Which we believe was cashed.

24 15:34:34 25

MS. DILLON:

It was cashed.

26 27

CHAIRMAN:

28

point.

29

A.

So it wasn't provided as a payment to cash.

It wasn't cashed by us.

It certainly wasn't cashed by us.

15:34:45 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

That's Mr. Glennane's

15:34:45

15:35:04

131 1

MS. DILLON:

I think Mr. Glennane makes the distinction, and he can correct

2

me, as I'm sure he will, if I'm wrong that Monarch Property writing a cheque to

3

Allied Irish Bank and cashing it is in a different situation to making a cheque

4

to a supplier and being surprised when the supplier cashes the cheque.

5

could be wrong about this because we have spent the afternoon going through I

6

think nearly a quarter of a million pounds worth of cheques that were cashed by

7

Monarch Properties themselves in order to provide a cash fund apparently for

8

Mr. Monahan in circumstances where --

I

9 15:35:21 10

CHAIRMAN:

11

Well I think, as I understand Mr. Glennane's position, it is that

cheques where Monarch wanted cash themselves for whatever purpose.

12 13

MS. DILLON:

Yes?

14 15:35:32 15

CHAIRMAN:

16

The system was that they made a cheque out to the bank who then

cashed them.

17 18

MS. DILLON:

19

cheque is a complaint that applies equally to Monarch Properties being able to

15:35:46 20

21

Mr. Glennane's complaint about Mr. Dunlop being able to cash this

cash the same crossed cheques. A.

No, it doesn't.

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

24

institution, which provides cash in return.

15:35:58 25

I think the cheque payable to the bank is a cheque payable to an This is a cheque made payable to

Mr. Dunlop.

26 27

MS. DILLON:

Or a cheque made out to cash, as some of them apparently were.

28 29

CHAIRMAN:

Yes.

15:36:03 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:36:03

15:36:20

132 1

MS. DILLON:

Yeah.

If I could ask you this, Mr. Glennane, about this

2

particular transaction in the context of what we've looked at.

3

on it now and in the light of what you know was happening in early November

4

1993.

5

Dunlop, the rezoning meeting in Dublin County Council and the 41,885 pounds

6

paid at this time and attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion.

Do you see any connection at all between either this payment to Mr.

7

A.

No, I certainly see no connection between the two, no.

8

Q. 1013

Between the three.?

9

A.

Or the three.

15:36:41 10

Looking back

Sorry. the only connection I see, it was obviously a good time

for Mr. Dunlop to look for payment because it was the week or the day or the

11

week before the vote.

I'm not sure which.

12

position to refuse him.

Like what he did.

13

in the normal course of business you don't know what happens to it afterwards.

14

Only if it gets lost or something.

15:37:03 15

Q. 1014

16

Could I ask you about Mr. Whelan.

And obviously we weren't in a When you give somebody a cheque

The late, finally, about the late Mr. Jack

Whelan?

17

A.

Yes, certainly, yes.

18

Q. 1015

Were you involved in the High Court proceedings between Mr. Whelan and Monarch

19 15:37:14 20

Properties? A.

I was involved in the settlement of it, yes.

21

Q. 1016

And that was a settlement I think that was signed by you; is that right?

22

A.

That's right, yes.

23

Q. 1017

And at item No. 7 of the settlement.

24

At 9033.

Mr. Whelan is recorded as

acknowledging and agreeing that the compromise continues and would release GRE

15:37:40 25

Properties Limited in respect of any claim or action arising in respect of the

26

Cherrywood Lands?

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 1018

What claim or action did Mr. Whelan have in -- against either GRE or Monarch in

29 15:37:51 30

connection with the Cherrywood lands? A.

Well I think he was claiming fees for Dwyer Nolan. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:37:56

15:38:15

133 1

Q. 1019

And can you remember how much he was claiming?

2

A.

No, well I know -- we've seen already 100,000 floating around somewhere plus

3

VAT.

4

days.

5

appears to be one set of proceedings to do with slander.

6

wrap up agreement, if I can put it that way.

7

Q. 1020

But I'm not sure.

It seems we only got this document in the last few

There say there appears to be three sets of proceedings.

It all

This appears to be a

The previous document related to Mr. Jack Whelan and a fee of 121,000 pounds in

8

connection with the Dwyer Nolan lands and a previous invoice for 150,000 plus

9

VAT in connection with the residential consultancy at Cherrywood?

15:38:36 10

11

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 1021

Now, leaving aside -- I just want to know.

Maybe you can assist the Tribunal

12

because you're involved in the settlement, of precisely what claim Mr. Whelan

13

was making in connection the Cherrywood Lands?

14

A.

15:39:00 15

Sorry, I don't know.

I presume there's more documentation to this.

There

seems to be three sets of proceedings referred to. The only one I can see is

16

related to slander.

17

and presumably would say he was going to take proceedings against GRE, or that

18

might have been just -- I mean, that was I think maybe a belt and braces job,

19

if I can put it that way.

15:39:24 20

Q. 1022

21 22

The earlier claims for Mr. Whelan for payments had related to 1991. later in 1992.

A.

I suspect he was looking for his fees from Dwyer Nolan

And then

These proceedings are in 1997?

I think the Dwyer Nolan ones were later than '92.

It wasn't claims but I

23

don't think that he ever issued proceedings unless they were part of these

24

proceedings but certainly ....

15:39:44 25

Q. 1023

What I'm asking you, Mr. Glennane, if you don't know, just tell the Tribunal

26

that you don't know.

27

entitled to in respect of the Cherrywood lands?

28 29 15:40:03 30

A.

What precisely was Mr. Whelan alleging that he was

Well, obviously he was entitled to some sort of fee he was claiming. don't have the details. 10 to 20,000.

But I

I thought I said the last day it had been settled for

It now turns out that it was settled for 35,000.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

I had

15:40:08

15:40:21

134 1 2

completely forgotten that he had issued proceedings for slander. Q. 1024

Yes.

In relation to those proceedings for slander, Mr Whelan appears to have

3

contended that the late Mr. Philip Monahan had effectively bad mouthed him to a

4

number of potential clients?

5

A.

Yes, yeah.

6

Q. 1025

That, would you agree with that?

7

A.

What, that he had --

8

Q. 1026

That in --

9

A.

He had bad mouthed.

Q. 1027

I said that Mr. Whelan's proceedings appear to contend that the late Mr. Philip

15:40:27 10

11

Monahan had slandered him to a number of potential clients.

12

would you agree with that?

And I asked you

13

A.

That's what the proceedings were about?

14

Q. 1028

Yes?

A.

Yes.

Q. 1029

So it appears that the late Mr. Jack Whelan was alleging that the late

15:40:43 15

16 17

Mr. Philip Monahan had slandered him in his professional capacity as a land

18

agent?

19

A.

So it seems, yeah.

Q. 1030

And those proceedings were also compromised?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 1031

Was the late Mr. Monahan in the habit of making comments such as the sort set

15:40:55 20

23

out or attributed to him by the late Mr Whelan in 9036 and 9037? Do you see

24

there at 9036, at paragraph three?

15:41:28 25

A.

Well it seems all very petty but I wouldn't -- I wouldn't be surprised if

26

Mr. Monahan had said something bad about him at that stage.

27

fallen out.

28

Q. 1032

29 15:41:49 30

Uh-huh.

Well ultimately Mr. Whelan was paid 43,350 pounds.

They'd obviously

Are you

suggesting that was a petty amount of money, Mr. Glennane? A.

No, I'm talking about the words in No. three, and something about a 3,000 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:41:55

15:42:30

135 1 2

pounds fee or something. Q. 1033

3

At 9037.

I just draw to your attention what's alleged there at paragraph 6.

And again at paragraph 9.?

4

A.

Yeah. Sorry, what are you asking me.

5

Q. 1034

Was the late Mr. Monahan a person who was inclined to make comments such as

6 7

that? A.

I would have to say probably yes.

8

against Mr. Monahan.

9

according to this.

15:43:07 10

Q. 1035

Yes.

You see, these proceedings were actually

But there was obviously three sets of proceedings

Those proceedings.

It would appear from page 8574.

That in April of

11

'91 Mr. Whelan was looking for 181,000 pounds in connection with residential

12

consultancy at Cherrywood?

13

A.

That's right.

14

Q. 1036

Do you think these proceedings might have had something to do with that?

A.

No, no, I wouldn't think so.

16

Q. 1037

Why not?

17

A.

Well 'cos it's actually about six years later.

15:43:13 15

18 19

It's probably statute barred

for all I know. Q. 1038

15:43:31 20

But paragraph 7 of the agreement to which you are a witness, Mr. Glennane, and at 9033, which was signed I believe by you.?

21

A.

Yeah, yeah.

22

Q. 1039

On 9th of December 1997?

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 1040

Refers to a claim by Mr. Whelan in connection with the Cherrywood lands; isn't

15:43:50 25

26

that right? A.

It actually refers to the release of GRE properties.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

What paragraph?

MS. DILLON:

At paragraph 7.

29 15:43:56 30

At 9033 "Mr. Whelan further acknowledges and

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:44:01

15:44:09

136 1

agrees that the compromise herein contained shall include the release of GRE

2

Properties in respect of any claim or action arising in respect of the

3

Cherrywood lands".

4 5

And what I'm asking you, Mr. Glennane.

6

was put in by Mr. Whelan in the sum of 181,000 in connection with residential

7

consultancy at Cherrywood.

8

work done or jobs carried out in connection with the residential consultancy at

9

Cherrywood or indeed anything to do with the Cherrywood lands which is then

15:44:31 10

11

Is in view of the earlier invoice that

Did Mr. Whelan institute proceedings in respect of

settled by the document to which you are a witness? A.

Well, if he did then obviously there was some reference to Cherrywood.

12

must have sought to join in GRE in some shape or form.

13

thought it was more related to the Dwyer Nolan incident.

14

Q. 1041

You signed this document; is that right?

A.

Yes.

16

Q. 1042

Yes.

17

A.

Well I signed it, yeah.

18

Q. 1043

For and on behalf of Monarch.

15:44:52 15

19 15:45:02 20

But I would have

And you are a witness to this document?

Signed and sealed by you on behalf of Monarch;

isn't that right? A.

Yeah.

21

Q. 1044

Right.

22

A.

That's right, yes.

23

Q. 1045

And are you telling the Tribunal you don't know whether that settlement

24

In October 1997?

included whatever claim Mr. Whelan had about whatever fees Mr. Whelan said he

15:45:17 25

26

He

was due for his work in connection the residential consultancy at Cherrywood? A.

Well it says in No. 3 Mr. Whelan (witness reading to himself), so obviously

27

it's a very composite agreement drawn up by the solicitors making sure that

28

neither party had any claim against the other and bringing in GRE.

29

obviously he had made some threat to bring GRE into the proceedings.

15:45:53 30

don't remember the details of it now. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

So But I

15:45:54

15:46:06

137 1

Q. 1046

That's what I'm asking you, Mr. Glennane?

2

A.

I don't remember the specific details but obviously.

3

Q. 1047

Is --

4

A.

I negotiated the settlement with him.

5

Q. 1048

In negotiating the settlement.

And I was quite happy to do it.

Do you know whether Mr. Whelan had in fact

6

made a claim against Monarch or Mr. Monahan in connection with the Cherrywood

7

lands?

8

A.

I'm sure he had, yes.

9

Q. 1049

Do you know how much Mr. Whelan was claiming.

A.

No, I don't remember, no.

11

Q. 1050

And can I ask you --

12

A.

I presume that these three actions can be got from the High Court or something.

13

Q. 1051

At 9039.

15:46:19 10

14 15:46:41 15

16

I just want to show you one entry in your diary, Mr. Glennane.

And

this is an extract from your diary dated 11th of March 1993.? A.

Yeah.

Q. 1052

At the bottom it says Frank Dunlop & Co. Limited.

17

I think it says you can

confirm if I'm correct, 15,000 or 15K?

18

A.

15K, yeah.

19

Q. 1053

And that I suggest, is an entry in your diary made the same date as the first

15:46:55 20

payment to Mr. Dunlop.?

21

A.

Yes, you're right, yes, yeah.

22

Q. 1054

So you must have known that the invoice that you were getting from Mr. Dunlop

23 24

was for 15,000 pounds and not 25? A.

15:47:12 25

I probably made the mistake then.

I probably was the one would told the accounts department to draw the cheque

26 27

Well I must have believed that it was 15.

for 15. Q. 1055

Uh-huh.

But certainly it would appear that your note insofar as Mr. Dunlop is

28

concerned, which is the same date as the first payment of 15,000, records the

29

payment to Mr. Dunlop as being 15,000 pounds?

15:47:34 30

A.

Yes, that's right, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:47:35

15:47:57

138 1

Q. 1056

2 3

That would suggest that you had some input into deciding the allocation or the split between the 15 and the 10, the 25?

A.

No, I don't think there was any split. As I said it appears to me to have been

4

a mistake that presumably based on this, made by myself, that instead of

5

Mr. Sweeney had agreed to pay him 25.

6

cheque was drawn from 15.

7

supposed to get 25, I only got 15.

8

cheque and we'll give you a new one or we'll give you a new cheque for the 10.

9

It's really just as simple as that.

15:48:16 10

I picked it up somehow as 15, the

He presumably rang up the next day and said I was We would have said either send back the

Q. 1057

Is there any possibility that's 10 corrected to 15?

11

A.

I don't know now.

12

Q. 1058

And certainly you don't appear to have recorded in your diary any other payment

13 14 15:48:31 15

then for the 10 that takes place subsequently? A.

No, I don't, no.

Q. 1059

Do you accept now or are you telling the Tribunal now that the mistake that

16

arose in connection of the splitting of the cheque probably arose as a result

17

of an error on your part?

18

A.

I would think so, yes.

19

Q. 1060

Until you saw your diary just now had you recollected anything about that?

A.

No, having thought about it since I was here last.

15:48:46 20

If we had wanted to give

21

him two cheques we'd have given him two consecutive cheques.

22

I don't know if you did or not.

If we ever issued post dated cheques we would

23

still issue them consecutively.

It was still quite obvious to me that he was

24

given those two cheques at different times.

15:49:15 25

Q. 1061

You saw earlier,

And you will recollect on the first occasion on which you were here.

You had

26

been surprised by a letter that I had put to you, Mr. Glennane.

27

indicated that you felt it was unfair that you'd be asked to deal with it

28

without having an opportunity to consider it.

29

22nd of July 1992.

3776.

15:49:37 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

And you had

Do you remember the letter?

15:49:37

15:49:47

139 1

Mr. Monahan's letter to Mr. Baker about the additional costs in relation to

2

Tallaght

3

A.

That's right, yeah.

4

Q. 1062

I had been drawing to your attention at page 3781.

5

Paragraph five.

The

additional marketing costs which amounted to 850,000 pounds?

6

A.

Yeah.

7

Q. 1063

And I had been asking you to assist the Tribunal with whatever information you

8 9 15:50:01 10

could supply in connection with this. A.

I do indeed, yes,

Q. 1064

Well first of all.

11 12

Can you assist -- did you have any input into the

preparation of this letter? A.

13 14

Do you remember?

I probably had, yes, I don't recall having an input.

Yeah, I'm sure I had,

yes. Q. 1065

And under the allocation of the sum of 850,000 pounds.?

A.

Uh-huh.

16

Q. 1066

Do you have any breakdown on that figure?

17

A.

No.

15:50:15 15

Other than in fact it seems to be higher.

18

a query which I don't remember.

19

100 percent.

15:50:35 20

I don't remember whether it was 50 percent or

And it has since transpired it was 100 percent if you go on to

the last page of that letter.

21

Q. 1067

Yes?

22

A.

There's a summary in it.

23 24

I think Judge Faherty raised

Sorry, I was supposed to come back to that the next

day I think. Q. 1068

3787.

No. 5 is 850?

A.

Yeah.

To answer Judge Faherty's question, 850 was the amount.

26

Q. 1069

Was the full amount?

27

A.

An under amount if anything, yes.

28

Q. 1070

To go back at page 3781, and what I had wanted to ask you was about the

15:50:46 25

29 15:51:04 30

contention that the costs were supervised directly by Mr. Monahan? A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:51:05

15:51:27

140 1

Q. 1071

And what was meant by that?

2

A.

Well I think I said the last day, well certainly he would have done the

3

negotiations with Dunnes Stores and with this other company, pricewise.

4

think that's -- a reading that's just a wording.

5

reply.

If you look at Mr. Baker's

I think he says that's what we expected you to do.

6

Q. 1072

And --

7

A.

Carry out negotiations.

8

Q. 1073

There are two items which were supervised directly.

9

I

"These costs which were

supervised directly by Mr. Monahan were critical to ensuring 1 tax status and 2

15:51:47 10

appropriate tenant profile?"

11

A.

Yeah.

12

Q. 1074

Now, I want you to leave aside the appropriate tenant profile for the moment,

13 14

Mr. Glennane? A.

Yeah.

Q. 1075

And I want you to direct your attention to the tax status?

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 1076

And I want you to outline for the Tribunal the costs that were incurred in

15:51:55 15

18

connection with the machine - that were critical to ensuring the tax status of

19

the Tallaght town centre lands.?

15:52:10 20

A.

Well, as I think I said the last day, I know we had a lobbying or marketing

21

campaign with the local residents association, which was carried out by man

22

called Liam McParland, who had worked for us as the manager of Dundalk shopping

23

centre initially.

24 15:52:38 25

Q. 1077

I think that was 5,000 pounds, it's in the brief?

A.

I'm not sure whether there was more paid.

He also had a report prepared by, I

26

don't think it was SKC, I think it was somebody else pointing out the need for

27

tax designation and the advantages of it.

28

Dublin Corporation.

29

Dublin Corporation that the site be designated.

15:52:56 30

Q. 1078

Yes.

And we had several meetings with

In fact, insofar as I can recall, it was a condition with

Well it wouldn't -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:52:58

15:53:13

141 1

A.

So Dublin Corporation were bringing pressure on it to have it as well.

2

Q. 1079

I don't think that your meetings with Dublin Corporation could have cost you

3 4

anything. A.

I don't.

Would that be fair to say?

He -- to me the amount of that cost is probably 10 or 20,000 or

5

something.

Because there was a 5,000 to McParland. I don't remember what the

6

report cost.

Knowing accountant's I'm sure it cost 10,000 and all of that.

7

Q. 1080

8 9 15:53:32 10

You're not aware of any other costs that were supervised directly by the late Mr. Monahan in ensuring the tax status of the Tallaght lands?

A.

No.

Q. 1081

Would it also be fair to say from what we have reviewed from the financial

11

management of Monarch today.

12

Mr. Monahan had access to the funds of Monarch as and when he chose?

13

A.

No, I wouldn't accept that.

14

Q. 1082

You wouldn't accept that.

15:53:50 15

It would appear to be the position that the late

Insofar as the late Mr. Monahan is likely to have

been the recipient in the first instance as at least, of all of the funds

16

attributed to Cherrywood General Promotion, if your evidence is correct,

17

between 1991 and 1996.

18

funds and that you don't know what he did with the money when he got it; isn't

19

that right?

15:54:10 20

You say that Mr. Monahan would have obtained those

A.

Well I've offered my view as to what he did with a lot of it.

21

Q. 1083

Cars and antiques?

22

A.

Antique furniture, yes.

23

Q. 1084

Again what I'm asking you is in view of the fact that between 1991 and 1996,

24

in relation to one account within Monarch, it would appear to be the position,

15:54:30 25

Mr. Glennane, that Mr. Monahan was able to withdraw funds from the company as

26

and when he needed them.

27

A.

In small amounts, yes.

28

Q. 1085

In small amounts.

29 15:54:46 30

And other living expenses presumably, yes.

All I am putting to you --

Equally, Mr. Monahan could have had available to him other

funds? A.

I don't know what you mean by other funds. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:54:47

15:54:53

142 1

Q. 1086

Other money.?

2

A.

From where?

3

Q. 1087

Well, let's just consider for a moment the Cherrywood General Promotion

4

account.?

5

A.

Sorry, you mean prior to that or?

6

Q. 1088

I mean other accounts like the Cherrywood General Promotion account.?

7

A.

No, I mean, I think the only company he would have drawn funds out of was

8 9 15:55:08 10

11

Monarch Properties. Q. 1089

What about L&C Properties?

A.

I wouldn't have thought so, yes.

Q. 1090

So insofar as Mr Monahan is saying in this letter, that a sum of 850,000 pounds

12

should be allocated to cover the costs that were supervised directly by him.

13

Do you have any idea where such funds would have come from if Mr. Monahan did

14

in fact pay them?

15:55:30 15

A.

16

They had -- the one that I refer to, the second part, that came from the company.

17

Q. 1091

The 850,000 pounds?

18

A.

Yeah well there was -- yeah it was over 850,000, yes.

19

Q. 1092

These are the payments that were made to the?

A.

Anchor tenants.

21

Q. 1093

The anchor tenants?

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 1094

That I think was covered in later correspondence when GRE wrote back and said

15:55:46 20

24

the sum of 1 million pounds was paid to Monarch outside of the agreement to

15:56:01 25

reflect those dealings; isn't that right?

26

A.

I think so, yeah.

27

Q. 1095

2823.

28

A.

Sorry, can I remember where it was paid?

29

Q. 1096

Uh-huh?

A.

I think it was paid from L&C Properties Limited.

15:56:15 30

Can you remember where that 1 million pounds was paid?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:56:17

15:56:32

143 1

Q. 1097

2

No, no, no a net price was achieved for the joint venture on the basis that a million pounds was paid to Monarch?

3

A.

Yeah, yeah, sorry.

4

Q. 1098

Outside the joint venture.

5

Can you tell the Tribunal where that one million

pounds was paid to?

6

A.

To L&C Properties.

7

Q. 1099

By?

8

A.

By, out of the proceeds of the Dunnes Stores.

9

Q. 1100

The first deal?

A.

Dunnes Stores.

15:56:41 10

We had a claim or we had a view that we had compromised

11

proceedings which we could have had with Dunnes Stores over a shopping centre

12

site in Portlaoise and indeed over a development we carried out with them in

13

Drogheda.

14

wouldn't have gone into Tallaght.

15:57:06 15

And I think the view certainly was if we had tried to proceed they The negotiations were always carried out

with Mr. Ben Dunne, who was a fairly volatile individual.

So I think he

16

certainly sort of said if you don't drop those we're not going to do Tallaght.

17

So we felt aggrieved, if you like, that we had sacrificed monies due to us.

18

So we said that one million would be paid to us in compensation.

19

same million.

15:57:32 20

Q. 1101

21

It's not the same.

It's not the

You would get that 1 million pounds out of the first

million pounds paid?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 1102

What's being stated here is that the million pounds that is sought, one million

24

pounds was paid to Monarch outside of the joint venture agreement to reflect

15:57:47 25

deals elsewhere?

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 1103

That's what GRE are saying?

28

A.

Yeah.

29

Q. 1104

I'm asking you two things.

15:57:57 30

What deals elsewhere is he talking about and two

where was the million pounds paid? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:57:59

15:58:08

144 1

A.

The deals elsewhere were Portlaoise and Drogheda.

2

Q. 1105

What bank account received the one million pounds?

3

A.

I think our account with Ansbacher.

4

Q. 1106

Ansbacher?

5

A.

Yeah.

6

Q. 1107

And what -- they were the deals in relation to Portlaoise?

7

A.

And to Drogheda.

8

Q. 1108

And when that money went into Ansbacher was that money to which Mr. Monahan

9 15:58:21 10

would have had access? A.

No, no, no.

11

Q. 1109

Who would have had access?

12

A.

It was part of our -- probably used to reduce our loan at the time.

13

wouldn't have had access to it in Ansbacher.

14

up here.

15:58:40 15

He

I think Mr. Baker has mixed them

He's answering No. 5 of Mr. Monahan's letter.

Q. 1110

And --

16

A.

It says therefore Monarch would use their expertise to achieve such sales.

17

Q. 1111

And it is correct to say that when he is replying to it that he doesn't deal at

18 19

all with the tax designation issue; isn't that right? A.

That's right.

Q. 1112

He addresses only in his reply the point about obtaining the anchor tenants?

21

A.

Yeah, well he says that, yes.

22

Q. 1113

Yes.

15:58:55 20

23 24 15:59:14 25

And therefore, the reference to tax designation or monies being spent by

tax designation is simply left; isn't that right? A.

Yeah, it's not dealt with, yes.

Q. 1114

Other than the 5,000 pounds paid to Mr. McParland and a possible sum of 10,000

26

pounds to a firm of accountants.

Are you aware of any monies being paid by

27

Mr. Monahan in connection with tax designation?

28

A.

No, no.

29

Q. 1115

Do you know what Mr. Monahan did with any of the money that is attributed to

15:59:35 30

the Cherrywood General Promotions between 1991 and 1997? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

15:59:40

15:59:49

145 1

A.

Well other than what I've already given.

2

Q. 1116

Yeah?

3

A.

My opinion on it other than that, no.

4

Q. 1117

No.

5

A.

Well, I know certainly some of it was used to purchase secondhand cars, yes.

6 7

I asked you did you know what he did with the money that he took out?

I don't have a blow by blow account of it. Q. 1118

And do you recollect Mr. Monahan ever being asked to account for any of the

8

funds that are attributable to him now, according to your evidence, and which

9

are recorded in the Cherrywood promotions account?

16:00:11 10

A.

Well I assume, as I mentioned before, in the annual reconciliation that was

11

done with the auditors, that he would have been asked if they were payments to

12

him or whatever.

And obviously they accepted his position on it.

13

Q. 1119

You are a director of the company, Mr. Glennane, isn't that right? You were?

14

A.

I was.

Q. 1120

You were the Chief Financial Officer of the company; isn't that right,

16:00:29 15

16

Mr. Glennane?

17

A.

Yes, of several companies.

18

Q. 1121

For the entire time -- of Monarch Property Services Limited between 1991 and

19 16:00:41 20

21

1996 you were the Chief Financial Officer? A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 1122

Right.

These sums of money which are significant large and round sums are

22

being removed from Monarch Properties Services Limited and attributed or posted

23

to Cherrywood; isn't that right?

24

A.

16:00:58 25

That's right, yes.

Well, I would dispute that they are large amounts of

money.

26

Q. 1123

Leaving that aside?

27

A.

Well, no, you can't leave it aside.

28 29 16:01:11 30

In the context of the size of Monarch and

the various companies they were fairly small amounts of money. Q. 1124

Did you ever --

A.

The auditors weren't concerned about the size of them, then I wouldn't be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

16:01:16

16:01:29

146 1

concerned about the size of them.

2

Q. 1125

Did you ever ask Mr. Monahan what he was doing with the money?

3

A.

I'm sure if I was there and he came in and I signed the cheque for it, I'm sure

4 5

he'd have told me at the time. Q. 1126

In each case today when we went through each of these figures I asked you did

6

you know what happened to the money.

And other than suggesting it was to

7

Mr. Monahan, you can't couldn't assist the Tribunal; isn't that right?

8

A.

Yes, yeah.

9

Q. 1127

Did you ever sit down with Mr. Monahan and have a reconciliation with

16:02:01 10

Mr. Monahan in your capacity as the Chief Financial Officer in Monarch

11

Properties Services Limited and his capacity as a director to whom sums of

12

money were being paid?

13

A.

14

a reconciliation.

16:02:09 15

16

Well I don't recall sitting down with him and having

And for the record, I wasn't the Chief Financial Officer.

I was Financial Director. Q. 1128

17 18

No, I didn't -- I don't.

I beg your pardon.

Well as Financial Director, when other payments were being

made to another director, you never sat down? A.

19

If he'd come in and said -- they were fairly small amounts.

If he came in and

said I want a big salary increase we'd certainly have paid it to him, or he

16:02:29 20

could have demanded it. He was the major shareholder.

21

I was a minority

shareholder.

22

Q. 1129

Yes.

23

A.

Sorry?

24

Q. 1130

You were one of three directors.?

A.

Of the Monarch Group in general, yes.

26

Q. 1131

That was Mr. Monahan, Mr. Sweeney?

27

A.

And myself, yeah.

28

Q. 1132

And you had a 20 percent interest in the company?

29

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 1133

And every piece of money or amount of money that's removed from the company

16:02:39 25

16:02:49 30

And you were one of three directors; isn't that right?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

16:02:54

16:03:09

147 1

that's not accounted for, can effect the profitability of the entire company;

2

isn't that right?

3

A.

Well it could, yes, yeah.

4

Q. 1134

On a cumulative basis.

And you gibbed, if I can put it like that way to you,

5

Mr. Glennane, at paying 30,000 pounds to Fianna Fail for the Saatchi & Saatchi

6

invoice; isn't that right?

7

A.

At that particular time.

8

Q. 1135

You had words with Mr. Monahan at that particular time?

9

A.

That right, yes.

Q. 1136

You didn't have any difficulty in the same period with Mr. Monahan taking

16:03:20 10

11

substantially more money out of the company by way of the Cherrywood promotions

12

account?

13

A.

14 16:03:50 15

No, I'd have assumed he was generating assets for the company. that he had taken out.

Q. 1137

With any money

He was the generator of the wealth of the company.

Thank you very much, Mr. Glennane.

16 17 18 19 16:03:57 20

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

Well we'll see.

Mr. Sanfey, do you want to ask your

client anything?

21 22

MR SANFEY:

I have, I do have a good few questions, Mr. Chairman.

23

half an hour perhaps.

I'll be

24 16:04:03 25

CHAIRMAN:

Well, what about tomorrow? At half ten? All right.

26

can cross-examine your client tomorrow at half ten.

27

finish soon afterwards in relation to Mr. Glennane.

We'll -- you

And hopefully we'll

28 29 16:04:26 30

MS. DILLON:

Subject.

I'm not aware of anybody else who wishes to cross --

examine, Mr Glennane. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

16:04:27

16:04:34

148 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

Well hopefully Mr. Glennane won't be here for much

3

longer than half an hour.

4 5

MR SANFEY:

Thank you, Sir.

MS. DILLON:

Thank you, Sir.

6 7 8 9 16:16:27 10

11

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, WEDNESDAY, 12TH JULY 2006 AT 1030 A.M.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 664

09:56:33

10:36:12

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,

2

12TH JULY, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:

3 4 5

CHAIRMAN:

Good morning, Ms. Dillon.

6 7

MS. DILLON:

Good morning, Sir.

8 9

Mr. Dominic Glennane, please.

10:36:20 10

11 12 13

MR. CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Mr. Glennane A.

Good morning, Chairman.

14 10:36:41 15

MS. DILLON:

Mr. Glennane is to be cross-examined by Mr. Sanfey.

MR SANFEY:

Good morning, Mr. Glennane

16 17 18

A.

Good morning, Mr. Sanfey.

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:36:50

10:36:59

2 1

MR. DOMINIC GLENNANE WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. SANFEY AS FOLLOWS:

2 3

Q. 1

Can I begin by asking you about the second invoice, document 4633.

4

A.

Yes, yes.

5

Q. 2

Now, you were obviously examined by Ms. Dillon at length about this yesterday.

6

But I just want to ask you.

7

Ms. Dillon, that the fact that the invoice was VAT exempt unlike other Frank

8

Dunlop invoices suggests that it was effectively a cash payment which was off

9

the books.

10:37:21 10

A.

It was insinuated, if not directly suggested by

Would you agree with that?

No, certainly not.

It's just a normal invoice, whether it's VAT exempt or

11

VAT, it got recorded, posted in the normal way and would have been obviously

12

both, Mr. Dunlop and ourselves, would have to put it through our books.

13

Q. 3

14

It's suggested that the fact that it's VAT exempt would mean that

it wouldn't have to go through the books of Frank Dunlop & Associates.

10:37:45 15

16

All right.

Do you

have any comment on that? A.

That wouldn't be the case because obviously there's more to taxes involved than

17

VAT. Obviously he would have been liable for corporation tax or income tax or

18

whatever as part of his become.

19

Q. 4

10:38:08 20

In the normal way, if one issues a VAT invoice does that have to be accounted for in the books and records?

21

A.

Absolutely, yes, why he.

22

Q. 5

Must a VAT exempt invoice be included on the VAT 3 form that goes out every two

23 24

months? A.

10:38:22 25

It does.

There is actually a column more for 0 percent and VAT exempt. Now,

they are actually two different things.

A naught percent is something that's

26

chargeable at naught.

27

But it would be included under the naught percent anyway if you know what I

28

mean.

29 10:38:40 30

VAT exempt would mean something that's exempt from VAT.

Q. 6

And it must be specified on the VAT returns?

A.

Absolutely, yes.

And we had very regular VAT inspections that happened.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:38:46

10:39:02

3 1

When you are in the process of making re claims for VAT, which we would have

2

done in a lot of cases, then it's normal procedure for the Revenue to come out

3

and do a VAT inspection.

4

Q. 7

And were such inspections regularly done in relation to Monarch?

5

A.

They were, yes, they were.

6

Q. 8

Right.

The invoice is dated the day prior to when the Marren Coffey motion

7

was listed, the 3rd of November.

8

connection between this payment of 15,000 pounds and that motion.

9

say to that?

10:39:18 10

A.

11 12

It's suggested that there may be a What do you

Not as far as I know there was certainly no connection between the payment and the motion.

Q. 9

Right.

While we're on the subject of cash, Mr. Glennane.

Can I ask for

13

document 8156.

14

Now, this is a letter from Noel Smyth & Partners in relation to the golf club

10:39:41 15

swap, if you recall.

16

A.

Yes, I do, yes, yeah.

17

Q. 10

And there is a reference to cash in that letter.

If you look at the second

18

last paragraph it says "all costs of Dun Laoghaire Corporation would be the

19

responsibility of the developer and in addition the sum of 500,000 pounds cash

10:40:00 20

would have to be paid to the club on the actual hand over".

21 22

Can I ask you, just so everybody is clear, what is meant by the term "cash" in

23

that instance?

24

A.

10:40:13 25

Well, what it means is that the proposal was that the golf courses would be swapped.

You'd build a new golf course for them, presumably a new clubhouse

26

and everything.

27

half a million.

28

actual cash as against a cheque or more likely it is a bank draft or whatever.

29 10:40:34 30

So the only financial consideration passing over would be the

But there's no suggestion that it would be half a million in

Q. 11

So it wouldn't be cash, pound notes?

A.

No, certainly not, no. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:40:35

10:40:54

4 1

Q. 12

2 3

So the 500,000 pounds cash term is used to refer to a monetary consideration as opposed to a non-monetary consideration such as equity or something like that?

A.

In fact I read in the Irish Times last week that's actually been done now with

4

Cosgroves Homes with Dun Laoghaire Golf Club and I think there is a

5

consideration, I think, of 5 million plus all the swap and everything, you

6

know.

7

Q. 13

Which presumably wasn't handed over in cash?

8

A.

No, it wouldn't be, no.

9

Q. 14

Now, just in relation to Mr. Dunlop.

10:41:17 10

I take it from your evidence that you

had no role in the engagement of Mr. Dunlop as such?

11

A.

No.

12

Q. 15

Now, can I ask you, as far as you're concerned and as far as you were aware in

13

March 1993, what sort of reputation did Mr. Dunlop have at that time as regards

14

his involvement in lobbying local politics etc.?

10:41:31 15

A.

Well I would have -- certainly I'd have known of him historically.

I knew at

16

one stage he was, I think he was very close in fact to Jack Lynch.

17

Government Chief Press Secretary or whatever that title was.

18

also, I knew, had worked for, with Fine Gael.

19

had a top class reputation as a PR firm.

10:41:57 20

Q. 16

21 22

He was the

And then he

And he, I mean, he would have

So, I mean, he was ...

So what do you think was the motivation in Monarch in taking him on at that time?

A.

Well, it appears that it was just really to add a bit of extra weight if I can

23

put it that way.

24

the law, specialist PR firms, some of them would be better at some things than

10:42:21 25

26

I mean, when you normally applied specialist.

The same as

other things, you know. Q. 17

27

Were you aware in March 1993, or at any time up to Mr. Dunlop's Pauline conversion in April 2000, that he was in the habit of bribing politicians?

28

A.

Certainly not, no.

29

Q. 18

To your knowledge was anybody in Monarch aware that Mr. Dunlop was in the

10:42:43 30

business of bribing politicians? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:42:44

10:43:01

5 1

A.

Certainly not, I don't think there's any -- in fact, if I recall, he was

2

hosting a programme on RTE, for instance, so I assume they weren't aware or

3

nobody was aware of it.

4

Q. 19

5 6

A.

11

Q. 20

Yes, it would have been my official title, yeah, probably more in fact general

Now, it's suggested that as finance director you bore ultimate responsibility for any financial matters in the company.

Would that be a fair comment?

A.

Certainly, I would accept overall responsibility, yes.

Q. 21

Leaving aside overall responsibility for a moment.

12 13

I take it

manager type or ...

9 10:43:23 10

Now, you've been referred to as finance director.

that's an accurate description of your role in the company up to the time?

7 8

All right.

What were your day-to-day

responsibilities, in general terms? A.

14

Um, well probably on the finance end quite little.

I mean, I was over finance

really, over letting and over legal and over all shopping centre management.

10:43:45 15

Everything in the company other than the whole construction area, which was

16

Mr. Sweeney's responsibility, would have pretty much fallen under my

17

responsibility.

18

print out a sheet of the bank balance.

19

would have been most interested in you if you like on a day-to-day basis.

10:44:07 20

21

How many different projects are we talking about?

A.

10 and 20 projects going at the same time at various stages.

26

Q. 23

29 10:44:45 30

Well between 1991 and 1996.

You'd just got Tallaght off the ground in 1991;

isn't that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 24

So between 1991 and 1996 typically what sort of projects would you have been

27 28

All of the

shopping centres would have been just continuing on an ongoing basis.

24 10:44:25 25

That would have been the information I

Q. 22

22 23

I'd have very little involvement other than every morning I'd

overseeing? A.

Well certainly the whole, still the whole Tallaght project because we had -- a number of investments sales took place during those years.

We actually had to

redo all of the leases because of the new structure that was set in place. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

We

10:44:50

10:45:11

6 1

had to get new leases executed by all of the tenants which was as you can

2

imagine, a very difficult task.

3

Centre, various shopping centres for a company called MI, like Dundalk Shopping

4

Centre and Navan.

5

And then I would have been involved in Cherrywood, Somerton, Ongar and various

6

other projects that might have come across that didn't proceed.

We were running also Nutgrove Shopping

A lot of the shopping centres we had always been running.

7

Q. 25

And were you the person with ultimate responsibility for all of those projects?

8

A.

I would have been, yes, yeah.

9

Q. 26

Presumably, if you were the big picture man, if I could put it that way, there

10:45:34 10

was somebody else who had the responsibility of monitoring day-to-day recording

11 12

of transactions; is that right? A.

Yes.

We would have always had eight or ten people in the accounts department.

13

And we always tried to have a top class financial controller.

14

joined he was given the title of Chief Financial Officer.

10:45:59 15

think, 1991.

When Mr. Caslin

That was about, I

And he would have been responsible for the accounts department

16

and then below him you would have somebody responsible for credit control,

17

somebody for credit and somebody for writing up cheque payments books and

18

various things.

19 10:46:19 20

21

Q. 27

Mr. Caslin was Chief Financial Officer and he reported to you?

A.

That's correct.

Q. 28

Would it be fair to say that Mr. Caslin was the person in charge of the

22 23

department that recorded day to day transactions? A.

24 10:46:30 25

That's right, his office was based down in the accounts department and I was based in a different part of the building.

Q. 29

To what extent did you monitor Mr. Caslin's activities?

A.

I had a very good line of communication with him.

If he had any difficulty

27

he'd ring me or come up to the office or whatever.

I didn't go in and

28

supervise him.

29

about.

26

10:46:49 30

Q. 30

As long as the results came out that's all that I was worried

How long was Mr. Caslin there? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:46:51

10:47:12

7 1

A.

2

He was there from 1991 until the business was sold to Dunloe and then he transferred to Dunloe with the business in 1997.

3

Q. 31

Now in, the period 1991 to 1996, who were the signatories of cheques?

4

A.

Well, there was a chap called Pat Cooling who was the accountant who had been

5

with us for a long time.

6

employment.

7

still works for us.

8

there I would have signed the cheques or Mr. Sweeney would be a signatory or

9

Mr. Monahan.

10:47:39 10

10:47:53 15

16

So it was either him and Pat Caslin or if Pat wasn't

But in general, there were cheques being issued all of the time And most of them would

Q. 32

Right.

You referred to this yesterday and you gave the impression that there

was a very large number of cheques going through every week? A.

That's right.

Q. 33

Can you give us some idea of the size of that?

A.

Well, I think it would certainly run to 100 at least, I would have thought

17

between all of the various companies.

18

possible to only sign cheques on a Friday or something.

19

doesn't work.

10:48:08 20

In fact, he

have been signed by Mr. Cooling and Mr. Caslin.

13 14

So he was the person who I had absolute trust in.

for all of the shopping centres, expenses and that.

11 12

In fact he'd worked with me since 1971 in a previous

And we would always try as much as But in fact that

Q. 34

So you might have been signing 100 cheques on a Friday?

21

A.

Well I wouldn't have been, no.

22

Q. 35

But 100 cheques would get signed on a Friday?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 36

And typically if somebody came to you with a bundle of cheques to be signed you

10:48:22 25

But between the various operations.

wouldn't physically write out the cheques?

26

A.

Oh, no.

27

Q. 37

But there would be some degree of back up?

28

A.

Normally they would have the remittance advice which we've seen.

29 10:48:36 30

you like, the instigator of the cheque was the remittance advice.

It was, if

So it would

normally be stapled to, I know some of the cheques I saw, you can see on the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:48:42

10:48:54

8 1 2

carbon where my signature came through in fact on the remittance advices. Q. 38

3

All right.

When you were asked to sign a cheque made out to a bank for a

round figure sum would you generally ask for a explanation?

4

A.

Oh, I would have I'm sure, yeah, yes.

5

Q. 39

And would that explanation generally be given by Mr. Caslin or Mr. Cooling?

6

A.

Yes, well whoever presented the cheque to me, yes.

7

Q. 40

And you would expect them to have got an explanation?

8

A.

Yes, indeed.

9

Q. 41

And would you record that explanation?

A.

No, I wouldn't have, no.

11

Q. 42

But obviously if you were unhappy with it you'd take it up?

12

A.

Exactly, yes, yeah.

13

Q. 43

All right.

10:49:10 10

14

Could you just

explain to the Tribunal exactly what you understand by materiality in the

10:49:26 15

16

Now, you made reference yesterday to materiality.

context of auditing the accounts. A.

Yes, well I think it's a general accepted theory or practice with auditors that

17

there are items which they have, if you like, levels of materiality depending

18

on the size of the company, obviously, for somebody like say the Bank of

19

Ireland it's a much higher figure than a smaller company.

10:49:49 20

And the materiality

would, they would regard -- if, for instance, if they found a mistake at the

21

end of the accounts, which maybe there was maybe a sum that had been under

22

provided, if it wasn't material to it they wouldn't adjust the accounts for

23

it.

24

didn't just audit things that were material.

10:50:12 25

And now, it didn't effect their audit procedures like, if you like, they

representative sample of various things.

They would audit a But materiality was something that,

26

if you like, they felt that should be brought to the attention really of the

27

directors or of the person involved.

28

Q. 44

29 10:50:31 30

So a material error is an error that something requires to be done about; is that it?

A.

Exactly, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:50:32

10:50:52

9 1

Q. 45

Equally, if it's not material it can effectively be ignored?

2

A.

Exactly, yeah.

3

Q. 46

Now, you referred just there to the sort of procedures that auditors would

4

undertake.

Obviously, auditors can't examine every single transaction when

5

they are carrying out their audits?

6

A.

That's right.

7

Q. 47

Typically what do they do?

8

A.

They do a representative sample of various transactions and really they do what

9

they call a balance sheet audit.

10:51:03 10

They are really concerned that the balance

sheet reflects a true and fair view of the company's state of affairs.

Behind

11

that they would, for instance, they would -- like you would have a

12

reconciliation of creditors with statements and they might do 10 percent or 20

13

percent of them.

14

Q. 48

10:51:28 15

Now, if you can only check 10 or 20 percent of the creditors, typically one assumes that auditors will chose the larger balances, isn't that right, in

16 17

The same with cheques payments or the same with ....

checking the creditors ledger against .... A.

Not necessarily.

It could be a representative sample of size and that.

Or

18

anything that looked untoward.

19

account that was actually in debit, you know, it would certainly look peculiar,

10:51:49 20

you know.

For instance, if you showed a creditors

That there would be some explanation required, you know.

21

Q. 49

So they'd exam exhibit --

22

A.

Sorry.

23

Q. 50

So typically an auditor will examine anything that looks unusual or would

24 10:52:07 25

26

They's have just gone through the list of say of creditors.

appear on the face of it to require an explanation? A.

Yes.

Q. 51

They will do a sample in relation to perhaps larger balances.

Do I understand

27

you to say they will also do sample testing in relation to smaller balances or

28

balances that might not exceed the level of materiality?

29 10:52:21 30

A.

Yes, they would, yes.

Q. 52

All right.

So the mere fact that something is below a level of materiality Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:52:25

10:52:40

10 1

doesn't mean that it won't be checked?

2

A.

Yes, that's right, yes.

3

Q. 53

To your knowledge, I think the auditors were SK -- Stokes Kennedy Crowley now

4

KPMG?

5

A.

That's right, yes.

6

Q. 54

To your knowledge was it the practice of SKC to conduct those tests that you've

7

described and examine transactions over a certain level of materiality and

8

indeed some under the level of materiality?

9

A.

Yes, absolutely, yes.

Q. 55

Who would make decisions as to what the level of materiality was?

11

A.

The auditors.

12

Q. 56

In circumstances where they would have a transaction that had no corroboration

10:52:54 10

13

or would seem to require an explanation.

14

item involve seeking explanations from members of staff?

10:53:17 15

16

Would their investigation of that

A.

I would think so, yes, yes.

Q. 57

So presumably in the first event, if there was an unusual transaction, they'd

17

go to perhaps Mr. Caslin, would that be right?

18

A.

Yes, I would think so, yes.

19

Q. 58

Or whoever was in charge of the creditors ledgers and say I've found this, I

10:53:37 20

don't understand it?

21

A.

Can you explain it to me or whatever.

22

Q. 59

And if Mr. Caslin didn't have a ready explanation he presumably would get one

23 24

or direct the auditors to the person? A.

10:53:52 25

He would try. with them.

26

Well, he would normally or the accounts department would deal

He wouldn't normally send the auditors off.

In some cases he

would, we'll say Damien Clarke -- really to understand the procedures.

27

Q. 60

If no satisfactory explanation was tendered in relation to a material matter?

28

A.

Yeah.

29

Q. 61

What would happen?

A.

Well, I assume at the end of the day they would qualify the accounts.

10:54:13 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:54:19

10:54:36

11 1

Q. 62

What does that mean?

2

A.

It means that whatever qualification that they haven't received, they haven't

3

received sufficient information or full information and I mean it's the

4

difference between -- there is a strict wording of the auditors certificate.

5

And if it goes outside that you often see that there is for instance in cash

6

companies that there wasn't satisfactory controls in place, you know, to deal

7

with cash income or something like that.

8

qualification.

9

Q. 63

10:54:55 10

A matter that the auditors

consider material? A.

13 14

So anybody reading the published auditors accounts would know that there was a qualification in relation to a material matter.

11 12

So they would put that as a cash

Yes, yeah.

Or they might just consider the whole procedure to be faulty, you

know. Q. 64

10:55:11 15

Right.

Were the accounts from 1991 to 1996, to your knowledge, ever

qualified?

16

A.

No, they weren't, no.

17

Q. 65

Now, Ms. Dillon took you through payments yesterday in relation to the

18

Cherrywood General Promotions account in exhaustive detail, I think it's fair

19

to say?

10:55:27 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 66

And I think I'd like to ask you questions about some of those payments.

22 23

In 1991 there was a sum of 27,850 pounds charged to the Cherrywood General

24

Promotions account.

10:55:54 25

And they were described as strategy consultancy fees in

some of the documentation we've seen.

26 27

Could we have 3992, please.

28 29 10:55:59 30

A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

10:55:59

10:56:18

12 1

Q. 67

Now, we can see just towards the end.

2

enlarged, please.

3

in fact is 27,850?

4

A.

5

Perhaps we could have the bottom half

Strategy consultancy fees.

And we know that that figure

Sorry, I think there was a differentiation between 3,000 and that, the figure there was 22,150. But yeah, that was ...

6

Q. 68

Yes.?

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q. 69

Yes.

9

Now, you did deal with this in your evidence.

absolutely clear.

10:56:39 10

I'd just like to be

These fees which are described in this document as strategy

consultancy fees are not so described in the books of Monarch Properties

11

Services Limited; is that right?

12

A.

That's right, yes.

13

Q. 70

What is this document?

14

A.

It's a -- I think it's a document issued to GRE for the purposes of recovering

10:56:56 15

sums of money from them.

16

Q. 71

All right.

17

A.

No, it's purely an internal document.

18

Q. 72

It's not part of the books and records of Monarch Properties Services Limited;

19 10:57:11 20

21

But it doesn't form part of the? Internal between ourselves and GRE.

is it? A.

No, or Cherrywood Properties Limited either.

Q. 73

Indeed, indeed.

We know that ultimately all of these payments which were

22

carried in the books of Monarch Properties Services Limited as Cherrywood stock

23

were written off in 1996?

24

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 74

Are you satisfied that was an appropriate accounting treatment?

26

A.

I am, yes.

27

Q. 75

Why?

28

A.

Well, what had happened when we were completing the audit up to April '96 would

10:57:26 25

29 10:57:43 30

have been completed in January '97.

At that stage we had disposed of 50

percent of Cherrywood Properties Limited to Iviette Limited. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

And there had

10:57:50

10:58:10

13 1

been no reference of a disposal.

So whereas in previous years there would

2

have been taken into -- the value of Cherrywood would have been taken into

3

account in seeing if these were recoverable or not.

4

deemed to be irrecoverable.

At that stage they were

5

Q. 76

The company had been sold?

6

A.

Well 50 percent of the company had been sold.

7

Q. 77

These were costs you were not going to recover and therefore they were to be

8 9 10:58:19 10

11

written off? A.

Exactly, yes.

Q. 78

Were the auditors aware that this had taken place, a write off of these costs?

A.

Oh, yes, there was a schedule produced, yes, of their comments.

12

More likely I

would have said their recommendation, I would have thought.

13

Q. 79

All right.

14

A.

No.

Q. 80

And they certainly didn't qualify the accounts?

16

A.

No, absolutely not.

17

Q. 81

In 1992, other than the payments allocated to Cherrywood promotions in respect

10:58:39 15

So it's fair to assume that they didn't have a problem with it?

18

of Deputy Reynolds and Deputy Bruton, there was 15,000 pounds in that account

19

which were general round sum payments.

10:59:05 20

And it was suggested to you that this

was paid out in cash at the time of the General Election to politicians.

21

Firstly, is that true.

22

written a number of cheques to politicians in respect of General Elections

23

expenses, was there any reason to pay cash to a politician at the time of a

24

General Election?

10:59:27 25

A.

And secondly, can I ask that at a time when you had

No, it's certainly not true. as you've said, we'd written out a number of

26

cheques.

27

give money to a politician, we wouldn't have done it by cheque.

28 29 10:59:58 30

Q. 82

So I can't think of any reason why you wouldn't, if you wanted to

The sum in respect of round sum amounts attributed to the Cherrywood promotions account in 1993 was 41,885 pounds.

And it was suggested by counsel to you

that this was paid out in respect of the Marren Coffey motion. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

Or that it was

11:00:02

11:00:13

14 1

in some way connected to the Marren Coffey motion.

2

connection --

Are you aware of any such

3 4

MS. DILLON:

I think to be fair to myself.

5

whether in fact there was any connection.

6

in fact any such connection.

That what I asked the witness was Not that I suggested that there was

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

9 11:00:27 10

MR SANFEY:

11

Well my recollection is that the word "bribes" was actually used

by Ms. Dillon.

I won't quibble over it --

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

14

asked was the money or was some of the money paid.

11:00:44 15

I suppose at the end of the day, I understood Ms. Dillon to have She may well have used the

word "bribes" in connection with that motion or the votes that were required

16

for the motion.

But in any event, it's ...

17 18

MR SANFEY:

19

any connection between those withdrawals?

11:01:01 20

21

Well, whatever the formulation of words, Mr. Glennane,.

Is there

A.

No, there's certainly no connection.

Q. 83

You say that having written some of the cheques or perhaps all of the cheques

22

that make up this figure of?

23

A.

I think I signed them rather than wrote them, yes.

24

Q. 84

And your evidence has been where there was a withdrawal of cash you would have

11:01:17 25

asked for an explanation?

26

A.

I would have at the time, yes.

27

Q. 85

I take it that the explanation was not ever 'we want this to pay a bribe to a

28 29 11:01:28 30

politician'? A.

No, certainly not, no certainly not.

Q. 86

The amount in round sum withdrawals for 1994 is 42,500 pounds. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

And Ms. Dillon

11:01:37

11:01:52

15 1

suggested that this might be connected to a motion before Dun

2

Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in relation to the science and technology

3

park on 29th of June 1994.

4

connection there?

5

A.

Would you care to comment on the possibility of a

No, I don't see any connection.

As I recall from listening to the Tribunal

6

that motion was actually proposed by the workers parties or Democratic Left, or

7

whatever they were called, no.

So there's absolutely no connection.

8

Q. 87

I think it was Councillor Gilmore who in fact proposed that?

9

A.

That's right.

Q. 88

The sum in round sum payments attributed to the Cherrywood promotions account

11:02:11 10

11

in 1995 was 49,000 pounds.

12

Now, it was not suggested to you by counsel that there was any particular

13

motive related to a planning reason behind the payments either in 1995 or 1996.

14

Although the total of cash payments in 1995 is the biggest yet.

11:02:40 15

16

Do you have

any comment to make in relation to that? A.

17 18

Which is the biggest sum so far from 1991 onwards.

No, well obviously in my opinion it demonstrates that there was no connection in earlier years.

Q. 89

19

In 1993, 1994 and 1995 there were sums between 40,000 pounds and 50,000 pounds in cash withdrawn in various installments in the courses of those years.

Now,

11:03:09 20

can you give us some idea of the context of these payments in relation to the

21

value of the Monarch business? Were they small, big payments in relation to

22

the overall value of Monarch?

23

A.

24

I'd say they were small.

Very small, if you just take the company itself

Monarch Properties Services Limited, which was the trading company.

11:03:31 25

As per

the trial balance for those years our transactions were about 20 million

26

pounds.

So, in the context of comparing 30 or 40 or 50,000 out of 20 million,

27

it's very small.

28

Q. 90

So 50,000 would have been something like 0.05% of the value of the business?

29

A.

Yes.

Q. 91

I could well have got that wrong.

11:03:55 30

I'm sorry.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

I think that's about right.?

11:03:59

11:04:14

16 1

A.

And then of course there were all the other businesses as well, which would

2

have been on top of the 20 million maybe.

Like, we weren't a company that had

3

any -- we had no, if you like, income in cash if you know what I mean.

4

of companies do, obviously.

A lot

5

Q. 92

Yes.

So I can't ask you to relate it to turnover?

6

A.

Turnover in a property company really doesn't mean anything, you know, because

7

the likes of Cherrywood had no turnover for the likes of three or four years

8

and then suddenly a huge turnover.

9

property company, you know.

11:04:32 10

11

Q. 93

But in any event, your evidence is that --

A.

In Monarch services, itself which was the main trading company involved in all

12 13

sorts of things, at least 20 million in those years. Q. 94

14

All right.

I would just like to ask you to comment on Mr. Dunlop's evidence

to the effect that you said to him to put in an invoice in relation to the

11:04:56 15

success fee and see how he got on.

16 17

It's not a measure of anything really in a

I'd just like to give you an opportunity

to comment on that.? A.

No, I certainly wouldn't have said that.

I mean, either myself or

18

Mr. Sweeney, I think if I'm right he said either one of us said it to him.

19

Either of us would have had the authority to pay it so I don't know why we'd be

11:05:15 20

21

saying see how it gets on or see how it gets on with whom, you know. Q. 95

Could I have 3061, please.

22 23

I would just like to ask you about the suggestion that there was a payment of

24

300,000 pounds to Mr. Reilly.

11:05:41 25

26

If you look about two-thirds of the way down you'll see Phil Reilly PR work.

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 96

I think Mr. Reilly was somewhat tickled with the notion that he might have been

29 11:06:03 30

paid a 300,000 pound bonus for his work.

He certainly gave evidence that he

never got any such sum or anything like it. Can I just ask you do you have any Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:06:04

11:06:20

17 1 2

explanation of what that means or what it is? A.

Yeah, I think if you go on to the sheets which has the breakdown.

3

was 150,000 or 100,000 or 50,000 as I recall.

4

Monarch Properties Services Limited to L&C Properties Limited.

I think it

To me they were charges made by

5

Q. 97

That's page 8596 if you'd like to have a look at it?

6

A.

Yeah.

7

Q. 98

Once again about two-thirds of the way down?

8

A.

If you go on to the one with the 100, just trying to relate them in time.

9

Q. 99

It's 8597?

A.

It's April '89.

11:06:38 10

There's -- sorry.

There's 150 and April 1990 and then

11

there's 100,000 in October 1990.

12

working papers for is the year to October -- or April '91.

13

up sheet 3024.

14

sorry.

11:07:21 15

Now, if I could refer.

Which is the Monarch general ledger.

I'm trying to see where this is.

If you could throw If you go down about,

It's before -- it's about eight or

nine down you'll see a figure MPSL Limited fees. Yes.

The only one I have

It's about nine or ten down.

16

Yeah.

Do you see October 19th? You had 100,000.

17

the book of Monarch Properties Services Limited, so it's my opinion and my firm

18

belief that this is the 100,000 that's referred to on the previous sheet.

19

was fees really which were charged by Monarch Properties Services Limited to

11:07:52 20

L&C Properties Limited which was purely a transaction between inter company

21

transaction.

22

amounts not claimed.

23

amounts which weren't claimed from GRE.

24

transaction.

11:08:15 25

It's an entry in

I think on those other sheets there was a reference somewhere to What I had understood that to mean was these were This was purely an internal

We wouldn't have been entitled to claim it. I don't have the

sheet for the 150.

It hasn't come in the brief.

I have no doubt that's what

26

that is. You see October '90 was the date.

27

ones.

On page 2023, if I could have that thrown up as well.

28

there.

Actually the last two items there, which is the same year.

29

MPSL.

And 100,000.

11:08:46 30

It

In fact there were two other

And architects fees another 100,000.

If you see that Fees and

These would all

have been fees charged by L&C Properties sorry, by Monarch Properties to L&C Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:08:53

11:09:06

18 1 2

Properties limited. Q. 100

3

Am I safe in concluding that they are payments in relation to Tallaght rather than Cherrywood or anything else?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 101

The latest of them is October 1990?

6

A.

Yes.

They would have been ways of transferring income or cash from L&C to

7

Monarch Properties because Monarch Properties Services Limited would have

8

incurred all of the costs and overheads and all of the rest of it.

9 11:09:27 10

Q. 102

Phil Reilly PR work.

A.

I presume it is, yes.

Is that a reference to public relations? Phil Reilly unfortunately, his initials are PR.

And

11

all of the references you see PR.

12

that Phil Reilly's name is mentioned on it and it's probably PR work.

13

way if it's written on the invoice it certainly didn't have anything to do with

14

him or he didn't get any of it.

11:09:54 15

So I think it's an unfortunate coincidence Either

Q. 103

Much to his dismay.?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 104

Can I just ask you finally, Mr. Glennane, about the vote on the manager's

18 19

proposals on May 27th 1992. A.

11:10:16 20

I do.

Do you recall your movements on that day?

I was aware that the vote was on.

And I know I went down to the Royal

Dublin Hotel, Noel Murray and myself, somewhere I think between twelve and half

21

twelve.

We met Bill O'Herlihy there. I'm not sure if we had a prior

22

appointment to meet him there or not.

23

Q. 105

Did you go to the council chamber or straight to the hotel?

24

A.

Straight to the hotel.

Q. 106

And you met Mr. O'Herlihy where?

A.

The Royal Dublin Hotel.

11:10:35 25

26 27

And we were there with him until the vote came in in

the bar.

28

Q. 107

Do you remember where you sat, what you had to eat or drink?

29

A.

We were on the right-hand side.

11:10:51 30

a sandwich or something.

I don't remember, I assume we would have had

I understand the vote ended sometime after two.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:10:55

11:11:19

19 1

I'd have actually thought we were there longer than that.

I certainly assume

2

we'd something to eat and drunk tea or coffee. We wouldn't have drank alcohol.

3

Q. 108

So you were there for a couple of hours?

4

A.

With Noel Murray and Bill O'Herlihy, yes.

5

Q. 109

Was there anybody else present?

6

A.

Not that I can recall, no.

7

Q. 110

Was Richard Lynn present?

8

A.

No, he certainly wasn't, no.

9

Q. 111

Why are you so certain about that?

A.

I know or knew he would have been in the council chamber, which I had

11:11:23 10

11

understood was quite difficult to get into.

12

twice asking if we could get in and told there was only about 10 or 12 tickets

13

available and you had to be there early to get in.

14

in really.

11:11:44 15

16

So I remember asking once or

Q. 112

Right.?

A.

But I knew -- I'd have known he was there.

17

been there.

I certainly expected him to have

I was very surprised if he turned up in the Royal Dublin Hotel.

18

Q. 113

Did you see Mr. Lynn again that day?

19

A.

I don't recall whether I saw him again or not.

11:12:00 20

So we never tried to get

I don't recall seeing him, no.

I know we stayed until after the result of the vote came through.

And I

21

recall walking passed the council chamber and seeing Councillor Fitzgerald as

22

it happens coming out the door and a few other councillors coming out.

23

Q. 114

What did you do after the vote?

24

A.

Just walked back to the office.

Q. 115

I think you've heard the conversation which Mr. O'Herlihy has given evidence

11:12:18 25

26

took place on that day.

27

he wasn't there in the bar of the Royal Dublin Hotel to have it.

28

recall your conversation with Mr. O'Herlihy that day?

29 11:12:45 30

And Mr. Lynn will say not only did he not have it but Do you

A.

No, not recall, no, I'm sure we talked about sport and all sorts of things.

Q. 116

Does that conversation mean anything to you at all? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:12:48

11:13:04

20 1

A.

The conversation that?

2

Q. 117

That he alleges that he had with Richard Lynn on that day?

3

A.

No, it doesn't.

4

Certainly no reference was made to it by Mr. O'Herlihy or to

myself or Noel Murray.

Certainly not to me.

5

Q. 118

Thank you, Mr. Glennane.?

6

A.

Thank you.

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

9 11:13:09 10

MS. DILLON:

Just arising out of that, Sir.

11 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MS DILLON AS FOLLOWS:

12 13 14

MS DILLON: I just have one or two matters.

11:13:15 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

Yes.

17 18

MS. DILLON:

19

from the transcript that you say when you arrived on the 27th of May 1992 it

11:13:25 20

The last matter that you discussed with Mr. Sanfey.

I just note

was between twelve and 12.30

21

A.

That's right, yes

22

Q. 119

And you went to the Royal Dublin Hotel?

23

A.

That's right, yes.

24

Q. 120

And do you know who was in Mr. O'Herlihy's company prior to twelve o'clock or

11:13:36 25

12:30 on that date when you arrived?

26

A.

No, I wouldn't, no.

27

Q. 121

And can I ask you then.

Were you aware of matters that were going on in

28

Dublin County Council in 1995 -- sorry.

29

Council in 1995 that would have been of interest to Monarch insofar as the

11:13:55 30

In Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County

Cherrywood lands were concerned? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:13:57

11:14:12

21 1

A.

Not offhand, no.

2

Q. 122

Were you aware that the 1993 review -- sorry.

Were you aware that the review

3

of the 1993 plan commenced in Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in 1995 and

4

ultimately concluded in 1997?

5

A.

Well not offhand, I mean.

6

Q. 123

Were you aware that in the --

7

A.

I might have been aware at the time.

8

Q. 124

You would have been aware that the variation was confirmed in April 1995, which

9 11:14:31 10

11

I'm not aware now.

Sorry.

brought in the science and technology park? A.

I assume yes, I would have been, yeah.

Q. 125

And thereafter, Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council commenced a review of the

12

1993 Dublin County Plan in June of 1996.

Would you have been aware of that?

13

A.

I'm sure I was but I don't ever recall it, yes.

14

Q. 126

And would you have been aware that three motions were brought by various

11:14:54 15

councillors in support of a position or a submission made by Monarch Properties

16

to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council to change the zoning and the density

17

in relation to their lands in the course of that review?

18

A.

19 11:15:15 20

I don't recall the detail, yes, but I'm sure I would have been aware in a general sense of what was going on, yes.

Q. 127

So there would have been matters going on before Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County

21

Council in 1996 and 1997 in which Monarch Properties would have had a very

22

significant interest; isn't that right?

23

A.

Well they would have had an interest, yes.

24

Q. 128

And for example, one of the motions was removing the cap on the retail element

11:15:33 25

on the neighbourhood shopping centre.

That's a matter that would have been of

26

interest to Monarch because it would have significantly increased the value of

27

the land; isn't that right?

28

A.

29 11:15:57 30

I don't know how much it would have increased the value of the land but it certainly would have been of interest.

Q. 129

Mr. Fergal McCabe, who was your planner, has agreed I think that it would have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:15:57

11:16:02

22 1

substantially increased the value of the land to have removed the cap on

2

retail?

3

A.

Presumably if he says so, yeah.

4

Q. 130

And also, there was an application to increase the residential density on lands

5

that had been zoned agriculture and would you agree as a general principle,

6

Mr. Glennane, that lands zoned residential is in general worth more than lands

7

zoned agriculture?

8

A.

Certainly, yes.

9

Q. 131

Would you agree as a general principle lands zoned at 12 houses to the acre is

11:16:19 10

worth more than lands zoned at four houses to the acre?

11

A.

Depending on the location but in a general way, yes.

12

Q. 132

Lands zoned at four house to the acre is normally worth more than lands zoned

13 14 11:16:34 15

one house per acre? A.

In the normal way, yes.

Q. 133

Therefore there was in 1996 and 1997 significant events unfolding before Dun

16

Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council in which Monarch Properties had an interest;

17

isn't that right?

18

A.

Yes, so it appears, yes.

19

Q. 134

And I think you've been here for most of the evidence and you will have heard

11:16:50 20

the evidence that has been given in relation to the motions that were brought

21

in 1997 which successfully changed Monarch's position; isn't that right?

22

A.

I'm not sure.

23

Q. 135

In 1997?

24

A.

Yeah but do you know what time in 1997?

Q. 136

Early in 1997.

26

A.

No, no it's just ...

27

Q. 137

Had you left Monarch at that stage?

28

A.

Monarch disposed of the land in September 1997 so it had no interest in the

11:17:09 25

29 11:17:21 30

When were those motions?

I think.

I can get ...?

land after that. Q. 138

After what date in '97? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:17:22

11:17:35

23 1

A.

I think it was the 15th of September if I recall.

2

Q. 139

The actual submissions I think and applications were made in the name of

3

Monarch Properties?

4

A.

Well, if they were before September '97 they would have been presumably.

5

Q. 140

But up to that point at least you would accept that Monarch would have had an

6

interest in the outcome of any such motions.

7

the value of their assets; isn't that right?

8

A.

9 11:17:51 10

Because it would have effected

Yes though I think the valuations for the eventual take over had taken place much earlier than '97.

Q. 141

Can I just ask you one thing.

It just struck me when you were discussing

11

matters of I suppose fiscal or corporate responsibility with Mr. Sanfey this

12

morning?

13

A.

Yeah.

14

Q. 142

Do I understand you to say or to suggest to the Tribunal that you do not have

11:18:05 15

ultimate financial responsibility for the financial affairs that we have been

16 17

discussing for the last two days? A.

No, I didn't say that at all.

18 19 11:18:18 20

MR SANFEY: A.

He said the exact opposite I think, Chairman

Yes.

21 22

MS. DILLON:

23

Mr. Cooling or anybody else is the appropriate person to provide information to

24

the Tribunal.

11:18:28 25

A.

Oh, yeah.

You are not suggesting to the Tribunal that either Mr. Caslin or

You are the person?

I fully accept that, yes.

I'm just pointing out that I wasn't

26

involved in every transaction taking place.

27

ultimate responsibility.

28

Q. 143

Thank you very much, Mr. Glennane?

29

A.

You're welcome.

11:18:40 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

But, yeah, I accept fully I had

11:18:40

11:18:54

24 1

CHAIRMAN:

2

to the books, detailed as having been paid by way of donations to the

3

politicians.

4

A.

Mr. Glennane.

In relation to the sums that were paid, according

Yes.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

7

Monarch viewed these payments, these political donations as a necessary expense

8

associated with the ambition of Monarch to rezone and develop the lands?

9

A.

11:19:22 10

Can you say if Monarch, if yourself and the other executives in

No, I wouldn't have described them as being a necessary expense.

But I think

if you're asked for a donation from somebody for something it's very easy to

11

cause offence if you ignore it or don't do it.

So ...

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

14

was freedom on the part of Monarch to say no to these?

11:19:39 15

A.

Well, is that another way of saying that you didn't feel that there

Well I don't know.

I know it would never have been discussed in the that sort

16

of philosophical terms.

I think if you said no everybody, you'd be much

17

better than if you said no to some and didn't say no to others, if you

18

understand me.

19 11:19:54 20

CHAIRMAN:

21 22

But it's quite clear that some, that Monarch were very generous to

some and I suppose ... A.

Yes.

23 24 11:20:05 25

CHAIRMAN: A.

And I suppose less generous to others.

So it appears, yes.

26 27

CHAIRMAN:

28

in all fairness we would have been very aware that politicians were A, working

29

very hard and B, that they weren't paid as far as I know at that stage at all.

11:20:27 30

Some of the politicians seemed to do very well.

yes well I think

And C, that they required, each person really was liable for his own really the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:20:28

11:20:43

25 1

costs of his own election funds.

I don't think there was any central fund,

2

head office, that distributed money out to them.

3

so certainly we'd have been very sympathetic towards people that we knew who

4

were very good people and were very good for the area and that.

5

learnt a lot of that really in Tallaght, which I suppose was a very big

6

learning curve for us.

To the local politicians,

We'd have

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

9

had any sense of discomfort with the idea that here were politicians whose job

11:21:02 10

Would you have had a sense or do you think some of your colleagues

it was to independently, so to speak, approach the questions of the rezoning of

11

land and how they would vote in relation to the zoning of land? Did you have

12

any sense of discomfort or disquiet that on -- that while that was their

13

obligation and duty on the one hand.

14

clearly benefit from any or from the rezoning of their lands, were paying

11:21:35 15

16

On the other hand, Monarch who would

substantial and significant sums to the same politicians? A.

No, I don't think we would have had any.

Because I think in fairness, we --

17

we were asked for contributions for people who were opposed to what we were

18

proposing.

19

were picking out supporters.

Like, we made the contributions, you know.

So it wasn't that we

11:21:57 20

21 22

CHAIRMAN: A.

So you didn't see any sort of conflict between those two positions?

No, I don't think so, no, no.

23 24 11:22:06 25

CHAIRMAN: A.

Would that still be your view?

Yes, I suppose in the light of all that's gone on in the Tribunals you'd be a

26

lot less -- you'd be a lot more cautious now.

27

it seems to have been that they were all going around so really begging and ...

28 29

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

11:22:24 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

At the time certainly, I think

11:22:24

11:22:37

26 1

JUDGE FAHERTY:

2

Mr. Glennane.

3

plight of politicians.

4

who weren't paid

5

A.

Yes.

Just to follow-up from what the Chairman asked you,

You said within Monarch that they'd be sympathetic to the I think here you're talking about County Councillors

As far as I know they weren't. Some of them would have been.

6 7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Back then

Some of them would have been very poor as far as I know, you know.

9 11:22:45 10

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11 12

And can I ask you, Mr. Glennane.

Was this a position that

was adopted at Board level within Monarch? A.

No, I don't remember ever any Board discussion about this.

13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11:22:58 15

16

Yes.

Mr. Sweeney has told us that there was some documents

put to him when he was in the witness box A.

Yeah.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

akin to prepared for transmission to GRE.

11:23:10 20

A.

And these were what I think you described earlier as documents

That's right, yes.

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY:

23

future costs I think

24

A.

And there was a document prepared I think they were projected

That's right, yes.

11:23:20 25

26

JUDGE FAHERTY:

27

for May and June 1992

28

A.

And in that provision was made for sums of 10,000 and 50,000

Yes.

29 11:23:29 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

And Mr. Sweeney told us that this would probably have been

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:23:35

11:23:51

27 1

discussed and agreed at Board level.

2

strategy consultancy fees which he said was the name given to political

3

donations

4

A.

And then he said the 10 and 50,000 were

Well I think --

5 6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I'm just asking Mr. Glennane ...

Sorry?

8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11:24:00 10

11

Did such discussion take place within, at Board level within

Monarch? A.

I don't believe so, no.

I think that document that you're referring to was

12

prepared purely for the purposes of alerting GRE that there weren't going to be

13

future payments and that we would be requiring to obtain 50 percent of them.

14 11:24:21 15

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney's recollection is that he thought

16

that would have been discussed at Board level.

And I think he was answering

17

questions in respect of I think document 3992.

Which was I think a document,

18

it was a schedule I think to a letter

19

A.

Yes.

11:24:39 20

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I see it there, yes.

Of the 28th of April to GRE All right.

When I said discussed at Board level.

23

There were very few formal sort of Board meetings.

24

company.

We were a small private

11:24:51 25

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

There were only three Board members.

It may well have been discussed by myself and Mr. Sweeney.

28 29 11:24:59 30

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Mr. Lynn?

Wasn't a director, no. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:25:00

11:25:03

28 1 2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Mr. Lynn wasn't a director

No.

4 5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Exactly.

To some extent he was an employee of Monarch

That's all he was, yeah.

7 8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

11:25:17 10

Can I just ask you in relation to that --

I'm sure we would have said if you're going to put in a figure make sure you put in a high enough figure, if you know what I mean.

11 12

JUDGE FAHERTY:

13

asked you wouldn't refuse you didn't think I suppose it would be in your

14

interest to refuse a request for political donation

11:25:31 15

A.

You said to the Chairman just a few minutes ago if you were

Exactly.

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY:

18

correct?

19

A.

You had made 28,850 or sums to that ilk in 1991; isn't that

I'm not sure about 28.

11:25:40 20

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Most of that you attribute to the June 1991

Local Election.

23 24 11:25:45 25

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Local Election

That's right.

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

Mr. Glennane, when such sums were being projected by -- as I understand it,

29

being projected by Monarch.

11:25:58 30

A.

Yeah, well sorry.

But there was no election in the offing in April of 1992,

I don't know if there was any election in the offing or

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:26:03

11:26:10

29 1

not.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

4

very snappy election certainly in late '92

5

A.

We know there was an election called.

I understand it was a

Yeah.

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

8

himself in writing in 1992 to projecting an election in 1993.

9

A.

And indeed Mr. Sweeney has told us that he was committing

Yeah well I certainly wouldn't -- I wouldn't have at that stage known.

11:26:26 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

such sums or political donations in April 1992

13

A.

14

I'm just curious to know why would such provision be made for

I'm not actually sure in preparing that sheet.

It seems to have become

accepted that consultancy fees covered political donations.

11:26:43 15

it was necessary.

I don't believe

But it would have been regarded as necessary the same as

16

the ones which that had been made before.

It might well have covered other

17

expected fees, you know.

18

on we are going to call it political contributions to GRE strategy consultancy

19

fees.

I don't think there was ever any decision from now

11:27:02 20

21

JUDGE FAHERTY:

22

that Monarch were making provision to seek recoupment from GRE in respect of

23

sums which heretofore had been political donations.

24

A.

11:27:18 25

It appears from that document and indeed from a later document

I would think so. I'm sure we would have said these are going to come up again and we better make sure to err on the generous side, if I can put it that way.

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

Mr. Dunlop

29

A.

Can I just ask you in relation to the November 1993 invoice by

Yes.

11:27:32 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:27:32

11:27:42

30 1 2

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I can't remember the number of it now.

15,000 I think.

3 4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

4633 yeah, the 15,000.

Yes.

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

8

Mr. Dunlop's diary reflects that they had met.

9

A.

Mr. Sweeney's evidence, as I understand it, that both his and I think perhaps on that day.

Yes.

11:27:56 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

Mr. Glennane, as I understand it

13

A.

I don't think that you were certainly at the meeting,

No.

14 11:28:03 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

You signed the cheque

That's right, I would have, yes.

17 18 19

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

So, the invoice was produced and the cheque signed

I'm not sure which came first.

11:28:11 20

21

JUDGE FAHERTY:

22

hired for and that he wasn't hired to engage in any communications training for

23

Monarch.

24

A.

Mr. Dunlop has also told us, as I understand it, what he was

That's right.

11:28:25 25

26

JUDGE FAHERTY:

27

evidence

28

A.

I think that was his evidence.

I'm only summarising his

I think that's right, yes.

29 11:28:30 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

And why do -- we see that.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

You presumably knew what he was

11:28:36

11:28:45

31 1 2

being hired for back in March, Mr. Glennane A.

Yes.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

was hired for

6

A.

7

And presumably anybody, Mr. Sweeney would have known what he

Yeah, I think it would have been hard to put, if you like, precise words on what he was hired for but yes.

8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11:28:54 10

mention and I think there was a couple of invoices prior to this.

11 12

I can't remember what the earlier one said.

was in April I think. A.

It didn't One of them

But I don't think it mentioned training.

No, I don't think so, no, no.

13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11:29:10 15

16

And why would -- and obviously there was some suggestion made

that training wouldn't attract VAT A.

I'm not aware of that.

I don't understand why that would.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

element altogether.

11:29:25 20

21

I don't know either.

I'm just saying.

This is the 2nd of November.

Forget about the VAT

The day before the

scheduled vote, Mr. Glennane A.

Yes.

22 23

JUDGE FAHERTY:

24

down provision of media and communications training for '93, '94?

11:29:38 25

A.

And why would, why do you think Mr. Dunlop would be putting

Well, I can only assume that that was the wording that he wanted.

26

some particular reason for doing that.

27

was no VAT that he wouldn't have to put it through the books.

28

accept that at all.

It's been suggested I think that there

29 11:29:52 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

That he had

But for some reason

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

But I wouldn't

11:29:54

11:30:09

32 1

A.

Yes, the invoice would have just been passed by Mr. Sweeney as you see and

2

would have gone to the accounts department.

3

invoice.

I don't know if I ever saw that

I wouldn't necessarily have seen it, I wouldn't see invoices.

4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY:

6

Anybody would have to take possession of it to authorise payment; isn't that

7

correct

8

A.

9

That's correct.

Anybody looking at that would have been dealing with it.

It's authorised that way by Mr. Sweeney as you can see.

initials are ES on that.

11:30:22 10

His

It would have gone to the accounts department and

would have just got posted in the normal way.

11 12

JUDGE FAHERTY:

13

asked you why this particular invoice wasn't certified for

14

A.

And I'm just asking.

We know yesterday.

I think Ms. Dillon

Did she.

11:30:34 15

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

For GRE

I don't think there's any particular reason why.

I don't think GRE would have

18

been in any way concerned about the terminology on the invoice or the fact it

19

was VAT exempt. They actually paid us invoices generated by us which had VAT.

11:30:50 20

So, I think, reading the file, as I was saying yesterday, I think all they

21

were concerned about was that we were paying Mr. Dunlop at least twice what

22

they were paying us, if you understand me.

23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11:31:09 25

If you forget about the VAT element for the moment,

Mr. Glennane.

We've seen documentation.

26

with yourself.

Where Mr. Sweeney is referring to or we need invoices from Mr.

27

Dunlop because GRE was looking for back up, rightly so

28

A.

I think it probably was not raised

Yes.

29 11:31:22 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

And that was their function.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

But here was one instance.

11:31:26

11:31:35

33 1

There seemed to be a lot of mix-ups about Mr. Dunlop's invoices whether they

2

were before or after the event; isn't that correct?

3

A.

Certainly, yes.

4 5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

And certainly within Monarch there seemed to be some confusion

Yeah.

7 8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

That's right.

Reflected in internal documentation; isn't that right?

We ended up over posting, yes.

11:31:47 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

yesterday or the other day when you were here as one that was arrived and it

13

was dealt with within the computer system?

14

A.

Now, here was one where you very definitely described

Yes.

11:31:59 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

payment?

18

A.

It met a particular payment or it matched a particular

That's right, sorry, yes.

19 11:32:04 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

And it would have, it seems to me and it's just an

21

observation, that it would have been the best one, if you like, or one of the

22

better invoices to submit as back up to GRE because you could actual match it.

23

There was no -- GRE couldn't put to or from it. I'm just wondering in that

24

context, given that there had been confusion on certainly Mr. Sweeney's

11:32:29 25

evidence and other's evidence, about Mr. Dunlop's invoices, why this wasn't put

26 27

through the books or put through -- I should say, the GRE. A.

I don't know.

I can only assume that there would have been a normal -- like

28

obviously GRE's year end was the 31st of December.

29

to get everything cleared through their books before the 31st of December.

11:32:54 30

Obviously reading the correspondence there was -- they'd actually made no Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

They were always anxious

11:33:00

11:33:14

34 1

payments towards Mr. Dunlop's fees I think before then.

So we were trying to

2

gather -- we were trying to gather invoices to send them off to make sure we

3

got the cheque.

4

because obviously.

We would have been trying to get the cheque before Christmas

5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY:

7

December 1993

8

A.

I understand that the certifications began sometime in

Yes.

9 11:33:20 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

That you had this in-house. Certainly on the date

Yes.

12 13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Thank you

The invoice mightn't have got posted until later.

Sorry.

11:33:28 15

16 17

JUDGE KEYS: A.

Mr. Glennane

Yes.

18 19

JUDGE KEYS:

11:33:35 20

Yesterday, in reply to Ms. Dillon you said that if a politician

asked for a donation that you'd be ill advised not to pay it.

21

were more or less asked why.

22

yourself in the foot.

23 24 11:34:00 25

A.

And then you

And you said because in effect you'd be shooting

What do you mean by that?

Well I meant, I think really if somebody asked -- if you refuse something to somebody they would tend to have sort of a grudge against you. a grudge.

I'm not saying

As the saying going a refusal often causes offence.

26 27

JUDGE KEYS:

28

when your motion comes before the council that the grudge would be such that

29

that particular politician who you refused to pay a donation to, would not vote

11:34:20 30

Could we go further.

And I suggest that the grudge would be

in favour of that project or that motion? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:34:22

11:34:45

35 1

A.

I don't -- I couldn't make that quantum leap, with due respects, Sir.

2 3

JUDGE KEYS:

4

context of which all of the monies were paid by Monarch and the reasons why

5

they were paid.

6

the foot if you refused to pay a donation to a politician for his expenses or

7

otherwise.

8

that.

9

A.

That is not a quantum leap.

Think about it.

And look at the

It was you who introduced that you'd be shooting yourself in

And surely, as night follows day, there is a strong inference from

That if you don't pay the donation you won't get the vote?

No, I think what I meant to say was you might cause offence.

11:35:07 10

11 12

JUDGE KEYS: A.

What would be the consequences of the offence do you know

I don't know.

13 14

JUDGE KEYS:

11:35:17 15

16

I'm going to ask you to speculate now.

What do you think would

be the consequence A.

Well, it would depend on the individual concerned.

Some people may well bear

17

grudges some people may well feel why have you done, why have you refused

18

particularly if it was a third party?

19 11:35:31 20

21

JUDGE KEYS: A.

Mr. Glennane, you are a businessman

Yes.

22 23

JUDGE KEYS:

24

what do you think would be the consequence?

11:35:39 25

A.

It doesn't take an awful lot of speculation.

Well I don't know.

Now speculate on

I mean, the only I suppose consideration would be

26

eventually if and when a vote came up that they had a say if they had a grudge

27

against you they might vote against you.

28 29 11:35:57 30

JUDGE KEYS: A.

The likelihood is that they won't vote?

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:35:57

11:35:59

36 1 2 3

JUDGE KEYS: A.

There's a risk?

Yeah.

4 5

JUDGE KEYS:

6

is to pay the donation?

7

A.

In order to avoid that risk, to get over it, the obvious solution

A donation, yes.

8 9

JUDGE KEYS:

11:36:11 10

And could it be that at that time there was an atmosphere

among the councillors that if you didn't pay donations you didn't get their

11 12

Yes.

support? A.

Well I'm not aware of that, Sir.

I wouldn't have been -- I had no contacts.

13 14

JUDGE KEYS:

11:36:25 15

16

Well, why then yesterday when you were asked would you say you'd

be shooting yourself in the foot? A.

I think it was a very loose comment.

17 18 19

JUDGE KEYS: A.

Are you serious?

Yes.

11:36:29 20

21 22

JUDGE KEYS: A.

That was a loose comment yesterday which you made?

Yes.

23 24

JUDGE KEYS:

11:36:36 25

donation.

26 27

In the context of asking what was the purpose of paying the

Was it to enhance the development.

That was the context of the

questions being raised by Ms. Dillon yesterday? A.

Yeah, sorry, yeah well I think it was a loose comment, yes.

28 29 11:36:49 30

JUDGE KEYS: A.

Well I don't accept that.

Thank you very much.

Not at all. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:36:49

11:36:53

37 1 2 3

CHAIRMAN: A.

All right.

Thank you very much, Mr. Glennane.

Thank you.

4 5 6

MS. DILLON: A.

Thank you, Mr. Glennane

Thank you.

7 8

MS. DILLON:

It's 25 to twelve now, Sir.

9 11:36:59 10

11

CHAIRMAN:

Well, we'll take a ten minute break now so as not to interrupt the

next witness.

12 13

MS. DILLON:

I'm obliged, Sir.

14 11:37:19 15

THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:37:24

11:37:28

38 1 2

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK

3

AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:

4 5 6 7 8

MR. QUINN: Mr. Noel Murray, please.

9 11:56:22 10

11 12

MR. NOEL MURRAY HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY

13

MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:

14 11:56:52 15

16 17

CHAIRMAN: A.

Good afternoon, Mr. Murray.

Good afternoon, Chairman.

18 19

MR. QUINN: Thank you, Mr. Murray.

11:56:59 20

21 22

Q. 144

Mr. Murray, you were written to by the Tribunal in April 2005.

And I think

23

you provided a statement to the Tribunal in June of this year, through your

24

solicitors, Noel Smyth & Partners.

11:57:14 25

26

And I think that statement is found at 8719 to 8723 of the brief.

27 28

And if we could have perhaps 8720 on screen.

29 11:57:26 30

You have advised the Tribunal I think that you were employed by Monarch Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:57:31

11:57:41

39 1

Properties Services Limited from 1982 to August 1997; is that correct

2

A.

That's correct.

3

Q. 145

And in 1997, I think, Monarch Properties Services Limited was acquired by

4

Dunloe Ewart plc?

5

A.

That's correct.

6

Q. 146

Was that in September 1997?

7

A.

The deal actually closed in September.

8 9

It would have been going on, there

would have been negotiations and discussions I'd say from early summer. Q. 147

11:57:59 10

But by September 1997 Dunloe Ewart had acquired Monarch Properties Services Limited?

11

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

12

Q. 148

And I think you were appointed a marketing director of Dunloe Ewart plc and you

13

set out your responsibilities there in relation to sales and marketing

14

activities of the organisation in the Republic of Ireland; isn't that correct?

11:58:13 15

16

A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 149

And you said that in 1991 and in your capacity as marketing director of Monarch

17

Properties Services Limited you were required by Monarch to assist in a media

18

campaign seeking the support of local community for a new master plan for the

19

Cherrywood lands; isn't that right?

11:58:29 20

A.

That was correct.

21

Q. 150

This was the campaign spearheaded by Bill O'Herlihy, PR consultants?

22

A.

That's correct.

23

Q. 151

If we look at 3539 for a moment.

24

We see an extract from a newspaper of the

23rd of January 1992, dealing with the planned shopping centre for the

11:58:45 25

Cherrywood lands.

And we see there that you are one of the people who is

26

quoted on behalf of Monarch; isn't that right? The bottom left hand corner.

27

Do you see "Monarch's marketing director, Noel Murray, said yesterday he

28

believed there may be a misconception that the developers were planning to

29

build a large shopping centre such as the one they opened in Tallaght"?

11:59:07 30

A.

That statement is credited to me, that's correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

11:59:10

11:59:31

40 1

Q. 152

2 3

So part of your responsibilities would have been to brief journalists in relation to queries raised in connection with the project?

A.

Well I'd say probably not to brief journalists.

I'd -- I think the system

4

that prevailed at the time was we did have a PR company on a retainer.

5

you may have seen previous evidence.

6

Q. 153

And that was Pembroke PR?

7

A.

Pembroke PR.

So what would happen in the normal course of events would have

8

been that the briefing would have been done by me to Pembroke.

9

went to the press.

11:59:51 10

And Pembroke

But on occasions if the press got in touch with the office

directly I would have been normally the person in the office to take the call

11 12

And

and to deal with the queries from the press, Chairman. Q. 154

And you go on in your statement to say that during this period a campaign of

13

the architectural model, the proposed development was brought into various

14

local venues and members of the public were invited to attend.

12:00:11 15

attended most of those meetings.

You would have

And it was your function at those meetings

16

to give an overview to the locals of the type of development envisaged by the

17

company, in respect of the lands.

Is that correct?

18

A.

That's correct, Chairman, correct.

19

Q. 155

You say in 1995 Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council became a joint venture

12:00:27 20

partner in the science and technology park.

We'll be coming to that at a

21

later stage. Most of the assets were acquired by Dunloe Ewart in 1997.

22

in 1997 also you say you were requested by Dunloe Ewart to identify possible

23

tenants for the science and technology park.

24

you sourced at page 8721 and 8722.

12:00:52 25

And

And you set out the tenants that

And that at 8722 you say that in December

2003 Dunloe Ewart ceased to be a public entity and a controlling interest was

26

acquired by Mr. Liam Carroll and you continued to work for Dunloe as it was and

27

is now known?

28

A.

Correct, Chairman.

29

Q. 156

And you report directly to Mr. Carroll.

12:01:10 30

Between 1990 and 1998 various

development submissions and master plan proposals for the site had been made by Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:01:14

12:01:27

41 1

Monarch Property Services Limited. Its professional team to Dun

2

Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, elected members and local communities.

3

you say these submissions were used as a method for outlining Monarch's

4

development strategy for the Cherrywood lands.

5

responsibilities, say that from time to time over the years you would have been

6

requested by the company to attend these meetings and give an opinion as to the

7

suitability of the Monarch proposals for the Cherrywood lands and also to give

8

an overview of the economic benefits of the Monarch proposals to the community?

9

And then you, as part of your

A.

That's correct.

Q. 157

Particularly in relation to the science and technology park?

11

A.

Correct.

12

Q. 158

In that capacity, I think you have identified a series of members of the Dun

12:01:43 10

And

13

Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council including the manager and former manager that

14

you would have met?

12:01:56 15

16

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 159

8723 you say you say you would have met with elected members of the County

17

Council to inform them of your proposed master plan for the Cherrywood lands

18

and to seek their support for the project?

19

A.

That's correct.

Q. 160

I think we call that lobbying.?

21

A.

Well to gain support, yeah.

22

Q. 161

Yes.

12:02:08 20

And you say that you had no precise dates for these meetings otherwise

23

you were not involved in the planning side of the project.

24

of the representations made by you in respect of the Cherrywood project would

12:02:24 25

You say that all

have been made on behalf of Monarch Properties Services Limited, Dunloe Ewart

26

plc or latterly Dunloe?

27

A.

Correct, Chairman.

28

Q. 162

Now, if I could have 2165, Mr. Sweeney, in his statement to the Tribunal, and

29 12:02:44 30

you will have seen this in the circulated documents, set out a structure in relation to the Monarch team.

For example, you see the management team

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:02:48

12:03:05

42 1

structure in relation to the square, the town centre in Tallaght, which is on

2

the screen and you'll see that the Chairman and Managing Director is

3

Mr. Monahan and then under Mr. Glennane, who is the Financial Director, he has

4

you entered for marketing/legal/sales; you see that?

5

A.

I see that, Chairman.

6

Q. 163

Would you agree with that as a reasonable representation?

7

A.

I do.

8

Q. 164

Were you reporting to Mr. Glennane or to Mr. Sweeney, can I ask you?

9

A.

I would say I would have reported to them both in different areas in the

12:03:23 10

context of marketing and finance. I would have probably reported more on a

11

daily basis to Mr. Glennane.

12

the revenue element of the job that I was doing.

13

would have reported to Mr. Sweeney because there would have been a technical

14

side to the marketing and selling end of it as well.

12:03:43 15

Q. 165

16

Because he would have had more of an interest in And from time to time I

Did you have any reporting responsibilities to Mr. Monahan, the late Mr. Phil Monahan?

17

A.

Well, he was the ultimate boss so I would have reported to him.

18

Q. 166

Yes.

19

I think there were three directors of the company.

Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney.

12:04:01 20

Mr. Monahan,

And I think in 1996 you became a director;

isn't that right?

21

A.

That's correct, yes.

22

Q. 167

And I think Mr. Glennane, the previous witness, was also a 20 percent

23 24 12:04:10 25

shareholder in the company? A.

He was, I believe.

Q. 168

Did you attend any of the formal Board meetings of the company at any stage up

26 27

until your own appointment in 1996? A.

Um, I may have been requested to come in and out at various meetings.

Again,

28

I would state that there wouldn't -- they wouldn't have been structured in any

29

grandiose form as structured Board meetings.

12:04:38 30

But I would have attended

meetings from time to time where Mr. Monahan Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney were Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:04:42

12:04:54

43 1 2

having meetings. Q. 169

3

Yes.

And were you consulted by Mr. Monahan before he acquired the Cherrywood

site in 1989?

4

A.

No.

5

Q. 170

Did that surprise you having regard to your expertise in the sales and

6 7

marketing area? A.

Not particularly because Mr. Monahan was very much an entrepreneurial. He was

8

very much the driving force behind Monarch.

9

gone around asking individuals should, do you think should I buy this.

12:05:17 10

And he certainly wouldn't have He

would have formed a view himself, bought it and then we'd be expected to make

11

it work or extract the maximum value from it or assist in that process.

12

Q. 171

By 1989 you had been with the company I think for quite a number of years?

13

A.

Since 1982.

14

Q. 172

Since 1982.

A.

I was, yes.

Q. 173

Yes.

12:05:36 15

16

And were you involved in the Tallaght project?

You heard the evidence I'm sure, over the last number of days with

17

previous witnesses in relation to that project.

18

was coming on line; isn't that right?

19 12:05:52 20

By 1989 I think the project

A.

Correct, yes.

Q. 174

And then on the newspaper I think of the 12th of May '89.

At 8510.

There is

21

an announcement of the acquisition of the Cherrywood lands; isn't that right?

22

Had you known in advance of that date that these lands were being acquired?

23

A.

24

Other than to say I would not have known prior

to Phil having made the decision to buy the lands that he was thinking of

12:06:19 25

26

I can't be precisely accurate.

buying them. Q. 175

Yes.

At 2843 for example we have a letter to Mr. Gary Maloney of Ansbacher &

27

Co. Limited.

28

banks and updated the banks in relation to the loans outstanding on the site;

29

isn't that right?

12:06:36 30

A.

I think particularly in 1993, you dealt and negotiated with the

I would have acted predominantly as a support to Mr. Glennane. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:06:39

12:06:57

44 1

Q. 176

Yes?

2

A.

Mr. Glennane would have dealt with the technical aspects of the financing

3

vis-a-vis the rate and the term and the strict financial.

4

there supporting him to give the bank comfort as to what ultimate value could

5

be extracted from the land or what ultimate end users there may be or what were

6

our plans to bring these plans to fruition and pay back the debt ultimately,

7

yes.

8

Q. 177

9

I would have been

That letter on screen was advising Ansbacher of the intention to acquire the lands for 10 million with the deposit of 500,000 and the balance to be paid by

12:07:16 10

two stage payments.

11

The first on the 2nd of June '89 of 1.5 million and the

final payment on 2nd of October '89 for 8 million; isn't that right?

12

A.

That's what it says, yes.

13

Q. 178

Were you aware of that at the time, Mr. Murray?

14

A.

I can't recall honestly.

Q. 179

That letter suggests that the lands were being acquired by Mr. Monahan and

12:07:32 15

16

Mr. Cathal McCarthy; isn't that right?

17

A.

I'm aware that Mr. Cathal McCarthy was intended to be a partner now, yes.

18

Q. 180

And was Mr. McCarthy a joint owner of the lands at some stage?

19

A.

I don't believe he actually was.

12:07:56 20

I believe he had intended to be.

But when

it came to the legal closing, I don't believe he actually was a partner.

21

Q. 181

I think it closed in September 1989; is that right?

22

A.

That could be correct.

23

Q. 182

You think somewhere between May and September 1989 Mr. McCarthy dropped out of

24

I can't recall correctly.

the picture and the lands were financed by Mr. Monahan on his own for a time.

12:08:16 25

And then by October/December 1990 GRE came on board?

26

A.

That's correct, that's my...

27

Q. 183

That's your recollection?

28

A.

That's my recollection.

29

Q. 184

Yes.

12:08:28 30

And I think when GRE came on board this was the second project that they

were involved in? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:08:30

12:08:38

45 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 185

With Monarch?

3

A.

They were involved in Tallaght, correct.

4

Q. 186

And again, an almost similar agreement was reached in relation to the sharing

5

of expenses; isn't that right?

6

A.

That's right.

7

Q. 187

If we could have --

8

A.

Tallaght.

9

Q. 188

On the Tallaght experience?

A.

Yes.

Q. 189

If we have 8744, for example.

12:08:45 10

11 12 13

This is a note of the 7th of March 1990.

14

the Tribunal from Anglo Bank.

12:09:07 15

And I think it's been discovered to

Anglo Irish Banks.

for 50 percent of the costs to date.

GRE will be responsible

6 million immediately and a further 1

16

million on the issue of planning permission plus 50 percent of all outgoing

17

costs.

18 19

In a nutshell, would be it be fair to say by and large that was the agreement

12:09:21 20

between Monaghan and GRE

21

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

22

Q. 190

I think Monarch Properties Services Limited were going to be responsible for

23 24

the day-to-day development of the site including its planning? A.

12:09:37 25

The structure was that in the Tallaght project L & C Properties was the vehicle, where the shareholding was held.

It appointed Monarch Properties

26

services to carry out the technical, marketing and other functions.

27

fee generating proposal for Monarch Services, yes.

28

that formula in the Cherrywood project.

29 12:10:01 30

Q. 191

Yes.

It was a

It was intended to repeat

Which actually happened.

Now, whilst I think you had no direct responsibility for planning

matters in relation to the site, you were nonetheless, I think, updated in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:10:05

12:10:23

46 1

relation to and attended meetings where the planning on the site and the zoning

2

were being considered; isn't that right?

3

A.

Yeah, from time to time I would have attended and would have been informed.

4

wouldn't have been at all of -- I wouldn't have been a necessary attendee at

5

all of the planning meetings.

6

Q. 192

Okay?

7

A.

At time to time I would have been.

8

Q. 193

For example there's a meeting on the 25th of November '91.

9

This is after --

or during the first public display of the Draft Development Plan.

12:10:36 10

There's a

meeting I think chaired by Mr. Sweeney attended Mr. Lafferty, Mr. Reilly,

11

Mr. Glennane and yourself.

12

submission to be lodged, further meetings with O'Herlihy on Tuesday; isn't that

13

correct?

14 12:10:50 15

Under the heading Cabinteely it says zoning

A.

That's correct.

Q. 194

And you are pencilled in for some responsibility in relation to the O'Herlihy

16

meetings?

17

A.

That's correct.

18

Q. 195

That's yourself and Mr. Reilly, I think, and Mr. Sweeney; is that correct?

19

A.

That's correct.

Q. 196

For example, if we look at 8098.

12:11:00 20

I

This is a meeting on the 16th of December

21

'91.

And I think again you have sent your apologies.

But it was intended

22

that you would be at that meeting, I think, isn't that right?

23

A.

That's correct, yes.

24

Q. 197

Again, the zoning submissions at this stage had to have been lodged and were

12:11:20 25

lodged on the 2nd of December, I think, the closing date was the 3rd of

26

December '91.

27

right?

And the -- they go on to review the situation; isn't that

28

A.

That's correct.

29

Q. 198

Now, did you know that Mr. Monahan had had three meetings with Minister Flynn

12:11:37 30

as he was then.

One on the 24th of May '89.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

One on the 22nd of November

12:11:43

12:12:01

47 1 2

'89. A.

And one on the 12th of February '91?

No, I would have -- I wouldn't know that for a fact, My Lord.

And I cannot

3

recall the exact dates.

But I was certainly at a meeting which was a public

4

function in Tallaght where I would have been one of the principal hosts with

5

Mr. Monahan and Mr. Sweeney where Mr. Flynn did attend.

6

recollection it was either the turning of the first sod or the topping out, I'm

7

not quite sure which one.

And from my

8

Q. 199

I think Mr. Burke attended one of those functions and Mr. Flynn another?

9

A.

Correct.

Q. 200

And I think finally?

11

A.

And I was to host both of them.

12

Q. 201

When it opened in October '90, I think, the Taoiseach of the day Mr. Haughey,

12:12:17 10

13 14

attended? A.

That's correct.

Q. 202

Would you again have hosted that?

16

A.

I would have been the MC at the opening of the Tallaght in October 1990.

17

Q. 203

Yes?

18

A.

So I would have had a role to play in the media and PR activities around that

12:12:28 15

19 12:12:48 20

time. Q. 204

Now, Mr. Sweeney has given evidence in relation to the consideration within the

21

company, in relation to the providing of financial support for the politicians

22

who were contesting elections and candidates.

23

philosophy within the company for supporting the political process?

24

A.

12:13:14 25

26

Q. 205

But were you aware that in almost all cases where requests was made for money that money was provided?

A.

29 12:13:31 30

I would have been aware that contributions were being made on foot of requests from elected representatives, yes.

27 28

Were you aware of the ethos or

I couldn't factually say in all cases but I was aware that certain contributions were being made, yes.

Q. 206

And were you aware that contributions were being made where the money hadn't Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:13:36

12:13:42

48 1

been sought?

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 207

Are you saying that there was never a contribution made in circumstances where

4

it hadn't been sought?

5

A.

To the best of my knowledge and to the Tribunal, I don't.

6

Q. 208

Mr. Reilly has given evidence.

7

A.

For most of it, My Lord, Chairman, yeah.

8

Q. 209

My recollection is that Mr. Reilly's evidence was that himself and Mr. Lynn had

9

Have you been present for Mr. Reilly?

a discussion on what candidates that they might support at different times,

12:14:00 10

particularly 1991 and 1992?

11

A.

I heard that evidence.

12

Q. 210

And he said that that support was given in circumstances where it wasn't

13 14 12:14:14 15

necessarily requested.

Did you hear that evidence?

A.

I may have now. I was here for most of his evidence.

Q. 211

And if I could have 1579.

16 17

I put to him the instructions to the Tribunal on behalf of the Monarch Group as

18

conveyed by their solicitors Mr. Noel Smyth & Partners on the 22nd of June

19

2000.

12:14:34 20

Namely, that contributions would have arisen on foot of requests for

assistance.

21

And he said that he hadn't been consulted in relation to that.

And he disagreed with it.

22

A.

I wasn't consulted in relation to it either.

23

Q. 212

I see.

24

Do you disagree then with Mr. Reilly's evidence or do you accept

Mr. Reilly's evidence that contributions weren't necessarily always made as a

12:14:51 25

result of a request?

26

A.

I believed they were only made on foot of a request.

27

Q. 213

So you disagree with Mr. Reilly's evidence?

28

A.

That would be the case, yes.

29

Q. 214

And you would have worked with Mr. Reilly over a number of years; isn't that

12:15:04 30

right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:15:04

12:15:17

49 1

A.

I did, yes.

2

Q. 215

And you would have worked with Mr. Reilly in relation to the Cherrywood project

3 4

and the meetings with the councillors in relation to the Cherrywood project? A.

Well not meeting with councillors.

I certainly would have had very few

5

meeting with councillors.

6

certainly I wouldn't have been, to the best of my recollection, at any meetings

7

with councillors with Phil Reilly.

8

Q. 216

9

I see.

I did have a meeting with a number of them.

But

Did you know for example that Mr. Monahan had made a contribution to

Mr. Haughey in January or February of 19 -- 6th of February 1991.

12:15:37 10

11 12

3100, please. A.

13 14 12:15:47 15

16

I only knew that Chairman, as a result of the attending the Tribunal and reading it in the newspapers.

I didn't know it at the time.

Q. 217

You only discovered as a result of which Tribunal?

A.

This Tribunal.

Q. 218

Even though that public evidence was given in relation to it on the 31st of

17

October 2000?

18

A.

When I read about it in the papers was the first I knew about it.

19

Q. 219

You didn't know that Mr. Monahan had made that contribution?

A.

Absolutely not, no.

Q. 220

I think you yourself had been written to by Fianna Fail fundraisers.

12:16:01 20

21 22

could have 8732 and asked to contribute.

23

30th of March 1993, do you recall receiving that fax, Mr. Murray?

24 12:16:33 25

Isn't that right, this is on the

A.

I don't recall receiving it but I'm not denying that I got it.

Q. 221

Do you recall the conversation with Mr. Duignan in relation to that's referred

26

to there?

27

A.

No, I don't, no.

28

Q. 222

You know Mr. Duignan, obviously?

29

A.

He used to work for the company.

Q. 223

For Monarch Properties?

12:16:43 30

If we

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:16:44

12:16:58

50 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 224

I see.

3

A.

No, he worked for the company from about I just can't remember the year.

Was this in Tallaght?

4

would have been working in or around the Tallaght project, yes.

5

employee of Monarch Properties services.

He

He was an

6

Q. 225

Would this have been in '87, '88, '89?

7

A.

Could have been, yes.

8

Q. 226

But he was no longer with the company, was he, in March 1993?

9

A.

I don't believe he was, no.

Q. 227

But in any event, I think you approved a payment of 600 pounds in relation to

12:17:09 10

11

that as we see per the manuscript note at the bottom of that?

12

A.

I see the manuscript note at the bottom of it but it isn't my writing.

13

Q. 228

I see?

14

A.

I'm not denying.

Q. 229

What appears to be Noel Murray?

A.

That's not my signature.

12:17:33 15

16 17 18

tidy. Q. 230

19 12:17:44 20

21

You can see it from my affidavit, it's very neat and

If we look at 8731, for example.

We see the remittance advice in relation to

that payment; isn't that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 231

And I think it's on behalf of MPSL.

22

But again, are you saying that you didn't

approve that payment?

23

A.

I don't believe I approved it.

24

Q. 232

Who do you think might have approved that payment?

A.

If I was to go on what normally happened, I would suspect that I would have

12:17:58 25

26

consulted with Richard Lynn and asked was it appropriate to pay it or whatever.

27

Q. 233

Why Mr. Lynn?

28

A.

Because Richard was dealing on a day-to-day basis with various councillors and

29 12:18:21 30

with the various zoning aspects. Q. 234

And did he -- had Mr. Lynn the responsibility within the company for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:18:25

12:18:39

51 1

sanctioning payments in relation to politicians?

2

A.

No, not for sanctioning them, no.

3

Q. 235

Well had he a veto, for example on the payments?

4

A.

He wouldn't have had a veto.

5

But he would have had a role in deciding how

much to put on, make a contribution for.

6

Q. 236

In other words he would decide the amount rather than the actual payment?

7

A.

The amount of the payment, yes.

8

Q. 237

So the -- whether or not a payment would be made would be a decision made by

9 12:18:53 10

yourself or others.

But the actual amount of the payment would be?

A.

He would be consulted on.

11

Q. 238

He would be consulted on?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 239

And I think the cheque we see it at 8733.

14

I think the 4th of February '94.

You received a further request on behalf of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Chamber of

12:19:08 15

Commerce.

At 8567 for a payment.

16 17 18

Do you recognise any of the handwriting on that document, Mr. Murray? A.

19 12:19:30 20

Can I have time just to look over it again? I think that's Mr. Reilly's at the top.

Q. 240

On the top right?

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 241

The request, the query as to whether or not you wanted to contribute.

23 24 12:19:40 25

And who

was that addressed to, Mr. Murray? A.

It's addressed to me.

Q. 242

So the document -- the letter comes to you.

It's circulated to you.

It

26

comes into the possession of Mr. Reilly sometime around the 9th of February.

27

He asks you do you want to contribute.

28

Richard can you find out how much 14th of February' 94, whose is that writing?

29 12:20:04 30

And what -- do you see the reference

A.

I think that's Phil Reilly's writing I think.

Q. 243

And then down in the bottom right hand corner we see 16th of February '94. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:20:09

12:20:33

52 1 2

Whose writing is that? Or whose signature is that, do you know, Mr. Murray? A.

3 4

I actually don't recognise it. I don't believe it to be either Phil Reilly's or Richard Lynn's and it's not mine.

Q. 244

5

So I don't know whose it is.

And somebody has further writing entered and in particular there's an NB that Betty Coffey's husband was running this project?

6

A.

I don't recognise the writing.

7

Q. 245

You don't recognise the writing?

8

A.

I don't, no.

9

Q. 246

But you don't seem to have had any real input into anything on that document.

12:20:46 10

But you did direct I think that the cheque be drawn.

If we look at 8568.

11 12

In a memo to Mr. Cooling.

Of the 4th of May '94.

13

A.

That's right, that's my memo.

14

Q. 247

That's your memo?

A.

Yes.

Q. 248

So are you saying and advising the Tribunal that you directed that the cheque

12:21:04 15

16 17

for 700 be drawn having first taken Mr. Lynn's advice in relation to the amount

18

that should be paid?

19 12:21:17 20

21

A.

Can I just go back to the ....

Q. 249

Yes.

A.

Having read that again, I may have -- I certainly was the person in the company

8567, please.?

22

that attended the Dun Laoghaire Chamber of Commerce functions.

23

this role commenced in or around 1994 when we bought the Dominican Convent, Dun

24

Laoghaire.

12:21:56 25

So I would have had a role in that project at that time.

other people may have been canvassed.

And it was --

Whilst

It probably would have been my decision

26

to make a contribution to the Chamber of Commerce at that time because I was

27

the company delegate on the Chamber of Commerce from '94.

28

Q. 250

It was directed to you?

29

A.

That's correct.

Q. 251

And it appears that the letter was circulated to you; suspect that right?

12:22:10 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:22:16

12:22:32

53 1

A.

That's right.

2

Q. 252

I'm not so much interested on this payment but the procedure within Monarch in

3

relation to the payment.

If it went to Mr. Reilly and Mr. Reilly went to Mr.

4

Lynn to find out if it should be paid and if so how much and eventually

5

agreement was reached on the amount; isn't that right?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 253

So this document would have been making its way internally within Monarch; is

8 9

that correct? A.

Correct, yes.

Q. 254

Until you ultimately sanctioned the 700 pounds payment?

11

A.

That's correct, yes.

12

Q. 255

Was there any limit on the amount that you could sanction for payment,

12:22:40 10

13 14

Mr. Murray? A.

12:22:52 15

16

I wouldn't have had any sanctioning powers without consultation with Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney.

Q. 256

17

So can we take that the 700 pounds payment here would have been sanctioned or approved by Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney?

18

A.

I would have thought, yes.

19

Q. 257

If we look at, for example, 8569.

12:23:06 20

21

This is again the remittance advice.

You see Monarch Properties Limited? And

22

there is an initial over the bottom right hand corner.

Whose initial is that?

23

A.

It's somebody in the accounts department but I couldn't swear which one it is.

24

Q. 258

They would have been operating out from the memo at 8568?

A.

That's correct.

26

Q. 259

Of the 4th of May '94?

27

A.

That's correct.

28

Q. 260

So the decision would have been made.

12:23:30 25

29 12:23:41 30

It would have been sent by way of memo

from you to Mr. Cooling, who was in the accounts section working under Mr. Glennane presumably? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:23:43

12:23:57

54 1

A.

That's correct.

2

Q. 261

He would have issued a remittance advice.

At 8570 a cheque would have been

3

drawn.

Would have been entered up in the books of Monarch Properties Limited

4

as a payment to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Chamber of Commerce?

5

A.

That's correct.

6

Q. 262

A sum of 700 pounds.?

7

A.

That's correct.

8

Q. 263

And a cheque would have been drawn.

9 12:24:08 10

I think there was a further payment of

150 pounds just immediately above that also; is that right? A.

Where's that now sorry?

11

Q. 264

Do you see --

12

A.

Sorry I beg your pardon, yes.

13

Q. 265

Were you consulted in relation to that payment?

14

A.

I cannot recall.

Q. 266

You were, however, I think consulted in relation to a Saatchi & Saatchi

12:24:18 15

16

payment; isn't that right? In respect of advertising.

17

please.

If we could have 5350,

18 19

This is a Saatchi & Saatchi invoice.

12:24:37 20

In respect of market research and

consultancy services for 1994 dated 24th of February 1994.

21

30,250 pounds.

In the sum of

Do you see that?

22

A.

I do see it yes.

23

Q. 267

Do you recall a discussion within Monarch in relation to that invoice and the

24 12:24:52 25

26

payment of that invoice? A.

I do, I recall it, yes, yes.

Q. 268

And you heard the evidence of Mr. Glennane in relation to that I'm sure

27 28

yesterday, Mr. Murray? A.

29 12:25:06 30

I do, indeed.

And it certainly prompted my memory that it was the source of

aggravation between himself and Mr. Monahan at the time. Q. 269

And were you present at that discussion? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:25:08

12:25:19

55 1

A.

No, I wasn't present.

2

Q. 270

And how did you become aware of the discussion between Mr. Glennane and

3 4

Mr. Monahan? A.

Because what happened, Mr. Monahan then came to me and instructed me to send

5

the cheque out and make sure that it was in full and final settlement and I got

6

the instruction from him which would only be from recollection after

7

Mr. Glennane refused to sign the cheque and they had some words over it.

8

Q. 271

9 12:25:40 10

Did Mr. Monahan tell you that he had some words

with Mr. Glennane in relation to the payment of the invoice? A.

11 12

And the instruction to you.

I presume he did, yes, because it wouldn't have been unusual for him to tell me that he had a row with Mr. Glennane.

Q. 272

Yes.

In any event, he came to you.

13

sum of 15,000 should be paid.

14

settlement?

12:25:57 15

And his instruction to you was that a

You should ensure that it was in full and final

A.

Yes and write the letter and send it out.

16

Q. 273

Did you in fact contact Saatchi and Saatchi?

17

A.

I cannot recall.

18 19

I do know from the brief that I did sign the letter and send

it out. Q. 274

12:26:10 20

We see the letter at 5356. This is a letter of the 19th of September of that year.

21

The invoice had been dated I think 24th of February of the same year;

isn't that right?

22

A.

Yes, that's right.

23

Q. 275

But my question to you.

24

A.

I don't believe I did because I wouldn't have known -- I didn't know anybody.

Q. 276

Yes?

A.

In fact, I knew they were a very big ad agency and they were in London and they

12:26:24 25

26 27

were a glamour company.

28

them.

29

rang them.

12:26:38 30

Q. 277

Did you contact anybody in Saatchi & Saatchi?

I certainly didn't know we had any involvement with

So I wouldn't have any contact name to ring.

So I don't believe I

Did you know for example when writing to them that you were writing a payment Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:26:43

12:26:59

56 1 2

in relation to a pick me up payment for Fianna Fail? A.

3 4

I only come to know about that verbally during that type, as a result of the Tribunal.

Q. 278

So you're saying that your recollection of events is that Mr. Monahan came to

5

you to say that he had a dispute with Mr. Glennane in relation to a payment to

6

an advertising agency Saatchi & Saatchi who had an invoice for 30,250 pounds.

7

Mr. Glennane wouldn't pay it.

8

didn't know what services Saatchi & Saatchi had provided?

9

You didn't ask him why.

You paid it but you

A.

That's correct.

Q. 279

And you did not know at the time that this was a pick me up payment?

11

A.

I did not know at the time it was a pick me up.

12

Q. 280

But surely you must have known whether Saatchi & Saatchi had provided services

12:27:18 10

13 14 12:27:31 15

to the company? A.

I would have known they didn't provide services.

Q. 281

So you must have known therefore that there was an amount being paid to a

16 17

company who hadn't provided services to the company? A.

18 19

It wouldn't be unusual.

I certainly didn't know and I didn't know.

I'm

saying that. Q. 282

12:27:47 20

Well there were two unusual features to this transaction, Mr. Murray, at this time; isn't that right.

21

Firstly, had it had been the subject of dispute

between two shareholders in the company and two of the three directors?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 283

Secondly, you were being asked to make a payment to a company that you knew

24 12:27:58 25

26

hadn't provided services to the company? A.

Yes.

Q. 284

And yet you say that it never occurred to you to ask Mr. Monahan or enquire as

27

to why this payment had been disputed by Mr. Glennane or why it required to be

28

paid?

29 12:28:11 30

A.

He wasn't that type of gentleman.

Q. 285

Well, what about Mr. Glennane? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:28:12

12:28:19

57 1

A.

I don't believe I had any debate with Mr. Glennane.

2

Q. 286

But you reported to Mr. Glennane?

3

A.

I did.

4

Q. 287

Almost on a daily basis?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 288

Did you never raise with Mr. Glennane the issue of why he had refused to make a

7

payment or the fact that you had been requested by the other principal

8

shareholder to make the payment?

9

A.

12:28:35 10

11

tight at the time. Q. 289

12 13

Maybe he was refusing to pay it because Saatchi & Saatchi, as you knew, hadn't provided any services to the company?

A.

14 12:28:52 15

I take it if Mr. Glennane didn't want -- refused to pay it because things were

I thought it was because it wasn't the appropriate time to pay it from the cashflow point of view.

Q. 290

Which often would have been the case in our business.

I think a query arose in 1998 in relation to the pick me up payment. Were you

16

aware that the Revenue had raised queries in relation to the pick me up

17

payment?

18

A.

19 12:29:07 20

I wasn't aware.

Not at the time.

I am aware since the evidence here.

wasn't aware of it at the time. Q. 291

I see?

21

A.

I'd have been in Dunloe in 1997.

22

Q. 292

You were at this stage?

23

A.

Yes, yes.

24

Q. 293

And these queries wouldn't have come across to you?

A.

No, definitely not.

26

Q. 294

And did Ms. Gosling, whom I presume you knew?

27

A.

I knew Ann, yes.

28

Q. 295

And Mr. Glennane.

29

A.

No.

12:29:13 25

I

Did either of them contact you in relation to the payment?

12:29:37 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:29:37

12:29:48

58 1 2

Q. 296

3

Now, if I could have 7583, please. This is a document, Mr. Murray, provided to the Tribunal by Mr. Lawlor, the late Mr. Lawlor.

4 5

Where he is advising the Tribunal of individuals who may have contributed or

6

made payments to him.

7

from that document at 7583, is Mr. Phil Monahan/Edward Sweeney of Monarch

8

Properties where he advices the Tribunal that by way of cheques a sum he

9

estimated of 40,000 pounds had been provided to him.

12:30:19 10

Were you aware

Mr. Murray, that Mr. Lawlor, first of all, had received any payment from the

11 12

And amongst the people he has identified, as appears

Monarch Group? A.

No, I would not have been aware that he had received payments.

I was aware

13

that he certainly was in and out of the office and was performing a

14

consultancy role and advising Eddie but I wouldn't have been aware of the --

12:30:39 15

16

either strict payments or his terms of engagement. Q. 297

17

Yes.

When you say he was in and out of the office.

period, the Tallaght period, as I might call it?

18

A.

Predominantly, yes.

19

Q. 298

Predominantly.

12:30:56 20

21

Are we dealing with the

When you say in and out of the office.

Was that in and out

of the office in Harcourt Street? A.

22

Yes but it would have been later than 1990 come to think it of because he was also involved in the Prague project.

23

Q. 299

We'll come to that in a moment?

24

A.

Okay.

Q. 300

For the moment I just want to concentrate on the Tallaght project?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 301

Is it your evidence to the Tribunal that he was in and out of the was in

12:31:07 25

28 29 12:31:22 30

relation to the Tallaght project in the period '87 to '89? A.

I don't think we were in Harcourt Street.

Q. 302

Where were you situated between' 87 to '89? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:31:35

12:31:36

59 1

A.

From memory I think it was Earlsfort Terrace.

2

Q. 303

Was he in and out of the office in Earlsfort Terrace?

3

A.

From memory I recollect him more in Harcourt Street.

4

Q. 304

Had you an office in Tallaght at any stage?

5

A.

I had access to an office in Tallaght, a marketing suite but my office was

6 7

based in Earlsfort Terrace first and then Harcourt Street. Q. 305

8 9 12:31:52 10

Did you know that Mr. Lawlor had quite a good deal of contact with the Monarch Group in relation to Tallaght?

A.

Yes.

Q. 306

And you knew that because you saw Mr. Lawlor and probably attended meetings

11

attended by Mr. Lawlor?

12

A.

Yes, yes.

13

Q. 307

Can you advise the Tribunal on the assistance, if any, that Mr. Lawlor was

14 12:32:06 15

providing to the Monarch Group that the time? Now, I'm dealing with Tallaght? A.

Tallaght.

Um, I can only advise that I believe he was helping Mr. Sweeney in

16

his negotiation with the city corporation because it was a very complicated

17

structure.

18

And I believe that's what Mr. Lawlor was advising on.

19 12:32:27 20

There was a lot of people dealing with it in the corporation.

Q. 308

He was advising Mr. Sweeney not Mr. Monahan or Mr. Glennane?

A.

Well effectively Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane, the three of them I

21

think attended a meeting of the corporation.

22

Q. 309

Yes?

23

A.

Normally as a team.

24

Q. 310

But in advance of those meetings with the corporation.

12:32:45 25

And sometimes then Mr. Noel Smyth as well after that.

there would have been meetings attended by Mr. Lawlor?

26

A.

Off and on, yes, yes.

27

Q. 311

Yes.

28

A.

I believe there were, yes, yes.

29

Q. 312

Were there several meetings?

A.

There would have been several meetings.

12:32:55 30

Are you saying that

Were there more than one meetings?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:32:57

12:33:13

60 1

Q. 313

And these would have been attended by Mr. Lawlor?

2

A.

I believe that's correct.

From memory I did but not too many of the ones in

3

Tallaght now.

4

Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane and Mr. Lawlor in respect of Tallaght.

5

I can't remember that.

6

yes.

7

Q. 314

8 9 12:33:25 10

Mr. Lawlor would have been well known to you and other Monarch personnel by

A.

I certainly knew him, yes, knew him, yes.

Q. 315

And are you saying that you didn't know that Mr. Lawlor had received or was likely to receive monies for -- from the Monarch Group?

A.

13 14

I did attend meetings with them on other projects,

1990?

11 12

I can't remember actually being physically at a meeting with

I assumed he was on a fee rate but I don't know how much or what his arrangement was with Mr. Monahan or Mr. Sweeney..

Q. 316

12:33:44 15

But you would have assumed that he was entitled -- getting some fee for his efforts?

16

A.

I believe I would have assumed that, yes.

17

Q. 317

You had some contribution, I think, to make towards the budgets of the Monarch

18 19 12:33:55 20

21

Group isn't that right in your capacity as marketing director? A.

From time to time, yes.

Q. 318

Correct.

A.

Not really in finance I'll be honest with you. I'd find it boring but I would

22 23

have been very involved in the marketing and selling. Q. 319

24 12:34:11 25

So you would have an interest in finance?

The people who had a responsibility for finance would have had an interest in what you had to say as a marketing director?

A.

Correct.

26

Q. 320

You were advising them of the likely income?

27

A.

My opinion would have been represented I believe, yes.

28

Q. 321

Also and we'll come to it, and you have given evidence of it, you had a kind of

29 12:34:25 30

a supporting role in relation to the negotiation with the banks etc. isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:34:25

12:34:40

61 1

A.

That's correct, yes.

2

Q. 322

And a troubleshooter that would attend bank meetings and update the banks?

3

A.

Not troubleshooter.

I would say they would have respect for my view.

4

Mr. Glennane would have presented a picture for them and they would certainly

5

rely on me to support that view because in the Tallaght project the same banks

6

were involved in the funding of Tallaght as were involved in Cherrywood and I

7

think they had the confidence that I knew what I was talking about and did

8

deliver when I'd say I'd deliver in terms of income projections etc. etc.

9

Q. 323

If I could have 1255, please.

12:35:03 10

11

This is an L&C cheques payments book extract, Mr. Murray.

12

of October 1992. Two payments to a company Comex Trading Corporation in the

13

sum of 28,000 and 28,300 respectively.

14

We see her on 16th

A.

I see them, yes.

Q. 324

Yeah.

16

A.

Until I came to the Tribunal I'd never heard of Comex in my life.

17

Q. 325

Yes.

18

A.

No.

19

Q. 326

Did you know that payments had been made to a company called Comex?

A.

No.

21

Q. 327

Were you ever at a meeting where payments to Comex were being discussed.

22

A.

No, not to the best of my knowledge, no.

23

Q. 328

Who would have known that those payments had been made in October 1990?

24

A.

I presume if I followed the structure, the person that took the invoice in,

12:35:19 15

12:35:37 20

12:36:11 25

What can you tell the Tribunal about those payments?

You had never heard of Comex?

which I believe may have been Mr. Sweeney.

Somebody in the accounts

26

department, who would have been asked to draw a cheque and then whoever signed

27

the cheque so ....

28

Q. 329

29 12:36:12 30

Why do you say that Mr. Sweeney may be the person who took the invoice in in relation to the company?

A.

Because I believe he dealt with Mr. Lawlor mostly in respect of the Tallaght Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:36:16

12:36:28

62 1 2

project. Q. 330

3 4

So the Tallaght contact was with Mr. Sweeney.

Mr. Lawlor's Tallaght contact

with Monarch was through Mr. Sweeney? A.

5

With Mr. Monahan and Mr. Sweeney.

To get something paid he probably would

have went to Mr. Sweeney.

6

Q. 331

So this payment would have been sanctioned by Mr. Sweeney?

7

A.

I believe so, yes.

8

Q. 332

And under normal circumstances there should be an invoice or at least two

9 12:36:41 10

11

invoices in relation to that payment; isn't that right? A.

I would have thought so, yes.

Q. 333

Yes.

12

And it's your evidence that that would have been sanctioned by

Mr. Sweeney.

13 14

If we could have 1263, please.

12:36:50 15

16

The payments having been made would then have to be posted, isn't that right,

17

to the books and records of L&C Properties Limited

18

A.

I believe so, yes.

19

Q. 334

And they are for the fiscal year '91 we see the payments posted to the general

12:37:10 20

ledger report; isn't that right?

21

A.

If they're on this I don't doubt it. I just can't find them.

22

Q. 335

Yes.

They're actually about one-third of the way down.

23 24

And if we could have 1267, please.

12:37:25 25

26

This is a report done on the 5th of February '92.

27

see the second and third entry at the very top.

28

you see that? And you'll see the two payments on the right-hand side

29 12:37:41 30

We see the payments. You see strategy plan.

You Do

A.

I do, yes, yes, yes, yes.

Q. 336

Who would have posted them under the heading "strategy plan" do you say, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:37:46

12:37:55

63 1 2

Mr. Murray? A.

Other the than the accounts department I couldn't give you an individual.

I

3

wouldn't know whose function it was to press the buttons. There was eight or

4

nine people there.

5

Q. 337

Would Mr. Sweeney have any role in designating these to a strategy plan?

6

A.

Well, the role he may have had if somebody in the accounts department wanted to

7

go with him and go back to him, he may have been the person that said put them

8

on that heading.

9 12:38:17 10

11

Q. 338

Could the heading for example be taken from the invoices as presented?

A.

May have been, yes.

Q. 339

It would appear there from the transaction dates that the invoices may have

12

come in on the 21st of March 1990.

13

see the transaction date?

14

A.

12:38:35 15

I do.

Could I just say, Chairman.

And the 19th of September 1990.

Do you

My expertise, certainly I would be very

weak as to the procedure for accounts and posting and computers.

And I'm not

16

trying to be evasive.

17

certainly wouldn't know the function of how a transaction is taken from a

18

receipt and an invoice in the office through to getting to a computer sheet.

19

I'm agreeing with you because they're there. I

Q. 340

Can I ask you.

A.

I probably would have, yes.

21

Q. 341

And the procedure would have been that you would have received the invoice?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 342

If the invoice was posted to the company it would come in presumably to

12:39:00 20

24 12:39:10 25

26

Did you ever have reason to certify a payment of an invoice?

Harcourt Street or Somerton? A.

Correct, yes.

Q. 343

And somebody there would decide it was your responsibility, fell under your

27

heading?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 344

And then it would be forwarded to you?

A.

Yes, if I was happy with it.

12:39:19 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:39:21

12:39:31

64 1

Q. 345

You'd initial it?

2

A.

And send it down to the accounts department.

3

Q. 346

And once the accounts department got it with your initial, they would post it,

4

enter it up, draw a cheque and send out the cheque.

5

A.

That's the normal procedure.

6

Q. 347

If there was a query in relation to it, the query would come to you?

7

A.

Yes, or it may have come to Mr. Glennane but it would probably come to me in

8 9

the first instance. Q. 348

12:39:46 10

So can the Tribunal take it that having regard to his involvement with Mr. Sweeney that the Comex payment would have been sanctioned on foot of an

11

invoice received by Mr. Sweeney?

12

A.

I believe that's a fair assumption to make, yes.

13

Q. 349

Yes.

Now, if I could have 8574, please.

14 12:40:00 15

Can I ask you, Mr. Murray, what you know about Mr. Jack Whelan's involvement in

16 17

relation to residential consultancy at Cherrywood in April 1991? A.

18 19

I don't know what his function was in 1991, but I do know what his function was some little time after it.

Q. 350

12:40:30 20

When you say some little time.

Are we talking about the Dwyer Nolan sales in

1993 is it?

21

A.

Correct.

22

Q. 351

For the moment I just want to concentrate in 1991?

23

A.

Okay I appreciate that.

24

Q. 352

Did you know Mr. Jack Whelan in 1991?

A.

I would have known him in 1991.

Q. 353

And what function was he performing within the Monarch Group in 1991 or up to

12:40:43 25

26 27 28

1991? A.

29 12:41:02 30

He was -- he'd -- he befriended Mr. Monahan and he would have been working closely with Mr. Monahan at that time, looking for land deals basically.

Q. 354

Well, what residential consultancy was he involved in in relation to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:41:06

12:41:19

65 1

Cherrywood project in 1991?

2

A.

I actually don't know.

3

Q. 355

Yes.

4

Just to put it in context.

I think in May 1991 we had the vote on the

map that would go on display; isn't that right?

5

A.

That's correct.

6

Q. 356

The lands at this stage had been zoned, one house to the acre on septic tank?

7

A.

That's correct, yeah.

8

Q. 357

Which had been in the 1983 map?

9

A.

Yeah.

Q. 358

There had been a proposal by the manager, I think, in October/November 1990

12:41:28 10

11

which had been struck down in a vote in December 1990; isn't that right?

12

A.

I believe that's correct, yeah.

13

Q. 359

The lands had recently been acquired; isn't that right?

14

A.

They were acquired in' 89, yeah.

Q. 360

There was very little added value from the point of view of the zoning on the

12:41:43 15

16

lands in April '91?

17

A.

Did we not get the district centre in '91?

18

Q. 361

No?

19

A.

Okay, sorry.

Q. 362

Can I put this to you, Mr. Murray.

12:41:55 20

21 22

Was there any sale of lands being

contemplated as early as April '91? A.

I'd say Phil always had in his mind to make a quick sale or to turn the land.

23

Jack Whelan could have been trying to encourage people into the lands at that

24

time.

12:42:14 25

Q. 363

Did you know as marketing manager if the lands were for sale in April 1991?

26

A.

I can't recall.

27

Q. 364

As matter of probability, isn't it almost improbable that the lands weren't for

No, I don't believe so, no.

28

sale in April 1991.

29

zoning that the lands had in 1983?

12:42:32 30

A.

Since the zoning in April 1991 was exactly the same

That's probably right, yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:42:33

12:42:49

66 1

Q. 365

2 3

Yes.

A sale would only take place when the zoning or the planning status or

the development status of the lands had improved? A.

4

Yes, but he wouldn't have been selling all of the lands. He would have been selling a portion of the land I would suspect, the residential portion.

5

Q. 366

150,000 pounds is the claim for the works done?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 367

On a 1% that would be a 15 million sale.

8 9 12:43:08 10

And I think the purchase of the

lands was 9, 10 or 11 million depending what document you read? A.

10.6, I think was the right figure.

Q. 368

10.6.

If he's working on 1% commission here in relation to the sale of the

11

lands, I'm not sure that Mr. Whelan had an auctioneering license at this date.

12

You would be talking about a 15 million pounds sale?

13

A.

1% is 15 if you do that sum, yes.

14

Q. 369

In any event, you say you know nothing about Mr. Whelan's involvement in

12:43:29 15

relation to the residential consultancy for the Cherrywood lands in April 1991,

16

although you do and can assist the Tribunal in relation to his subsequent

17

involvement in relation to the sale of the lands?

18

A.

I can.

19

Q. 370

Do you know if Mr. Whelan was paid the monies we see on that invoice?

A.

I believe he wasn't paid.

21

Q. 371

Yeah.

22

A.

I believe that was the evidence given by Mr. Glennane, which I was listening

12:43:51 20

23 24 12:44:05 25

26

That's right, yeah.

What's your source of knowledge for that?

to. Q. 372

So based on Mr. Glennane's evidence, you believe he was not paid?

A.

I believe he was not paid that sum.

Q. 373

That document or that invoice would have been circulated I think to both

27

Mr. Monahan and Mr. Glennane; isn't that right?

28

A.

I noticed that on the letter, yes.

29

Q. 374

Do you see the "received" stamp?

A.

Yes.

12:44:18 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:44:19

12:44:38

67 1

Q. 375

Can you assist the Tribunal in identifying whose stamp that is?

2

A.

I wouldn't have a clue.

3

Q. 376

Was it usual for the Monarch Group to stamp documents on receipt?

4

A.

Oh, it would be usual, yeah.

There would have been -- it could have either

5

come in to Harcourt Street or it could have come straight to Somerton.

6

would have been a stamping process, Ann Gosling would have stamped the post in

7

Somerton and I suspect the accounts department, the Chief Financial Officer,

8

Pat Caslin, would have stamped the post in Monarch House.

9 12:44:58 10

Q. 377

The invoice is addressed to Monarch Properties at Harcourt Street?

A.

I see that, yeah, so it would have come in.

There

That wouldn't have meant that he

11

wouldn't have given it in to Somerton 'cos he was spending most of his time in

12

Somerton.

13

would have addressed it to Somerton.

14

So he might have handed the letter in there.

He'd have known he

Q. 378

Did you ever meet Mr. Whelan in Somerton?

A.

Oh, I did yes.

16

Q. 379

Did you ever meet Mr. Lawlor in Somerton?

17

A.

Not to the best of my knowledge, no.

18

Q. 380

Your meetings with Mr. Lawlor would have been either in Tallaght, Harcourt

12:45:20 15

19 12:45:34 20

I can't recall in '91 but certainly in '92, yes.

Street or Earlsfort Terrace? A.

I would have said not Tallaght, I would have said Harcourt Street.

21

Q. 381

When did you move to Harcourt Street?

22

A.

I believe it was in 1991.

23

Q. 382

1991.

24

A.

I believe that's correct.

Q. 383

So the meetings that you referred to that Mr. Lawlor attended to in relation to

12:45:47 25

And prior to that you were in Earlsfort Terrace?

26

Tallaght.

Those meetings would have had to have taken place in either

27

Earlsfort Terrace, Somerton or Tallaght?

28

A.

There would have been no office in Tallaght in 1989.

29

Q. 384

So Earlsfort Terrace?

A.

That logically would prevail, yeah.

12:46:02 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:46:06

12:46:20

68 1

Q. 385

2

So now, I think you said that you had contact with Mr. Lawlor in relation to Prague; isn't that right?

3

A.

That's correct.

4

Q. 386

And I just want to deal with that, if I may?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 387

Mr. Murray.?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 388

And just if we could have 4536.

9

September, '93.

12:46:34 10

and Mr. Sweeney.

11

This is a documented dated 29th of the

Signed by Mr. Phil Monahan.

Directed to you, Mr. Glennane,

And it's enclosing information received from Ambrose Kelly

via Liam Lawlor and it's for your information; isn't that right?

12

A.

That's correct.

13

Q. 389

And if we look at 4537.

14 12:46:47 15

We have a document from Ambrose Kelly Group.

Headed actual/projected

16

outgoings for Prague office over 12 month period.

And if we look at 4538.

17

We see that that totals a sum of 144,000 pounds being a projection of 12,000

18

per month.

19 12:47:08 20

A.

I see that, yes.

Q. 390

Yes.

21 22

12:47:24 25

26

A.

I don't recall getting it but I don't doubt that I did because I was involved in the Prague project.

Q. 391

You were involved in the Prague project?

A.

Yes.

Q. 392

Well had you been involved in the Prague project prior to the 29th of September

27

1993?

28

A.

It was around that time I became involved.

29

Q. 393

October '93?

A.

October '93.

12:47:36 30

Do you

recall receiving this document?

23 24

Now, if we could just go back, if we could, please, to 4536.

My first trip was in.

So I would have been getting involved around that time.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:47:40

12:47:54

69 1

Q. 394

2

What I really want to establish, if I can, and you may or may not be able to help me, Mr. Murray.

Is when the Prague project commenced?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 395

Would it be -- the documentation would seem to suggest that this was kick-off,

5

so to speak, of the Prague project.

I'm just wondering could it have existed

6

prior to the documentation which we have on screen?

7

A.

I think the Prague as a project would have existed prior to that.

8

Q. 396

When you're talking about Prague as a project.

9 12:48:11 10

Were Monarch interested in

Prague on their own? A.

No, no.

11

Q. 397

Okay?

12

A.

I would have thought what happened.

I believe, not I know what happened was a

13

group of investors with Ambrose Kelly were involved in Prague.

14

looking for a partner, a development partner, which is how we became involved

12:48:27 15

on the success of The Square in Tallaght. That's the logical sequential

16 17

sequence of events. Q. 398

18 19

And they were

And when did Prague first -- the prospect of becoming involved in Prague with Mr. Ambrose Kelly's consortium, if I could call it that, first arise?

A.

I believe it was in the middle of 1993.

Q. 399

In the middle of 1993?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 400

And was this fax which we see on screen or the memo, was that the culmination

12:48:44 20

23 24

of ongoing discussions in relation to the Prague project? A.

12:49:02 25

26

that that is what we should be doing as a company. Q. 401

27 28

Yes.

Had Mr. Lawlor, to your knowledge, been involved with Mr. Monahan after

the Tallaght project and before this period, that is to say, September '93? A.

29 12:49:20 30

I believe it was. Mr. Lawlor had been trying to get Mr. Monahan to convinced

When you say "involved".

I don't know.

He certainly would have had contact

with him I suspect. Q. 402

Ongoing contact? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:49:21

12:49:33

70 1

A.

I would have thought so, yes.

2

Q. 403

They appear from evidence given to have been very close?

3

A.

They were neighbours, first of all.

4 5

I don't know what you mean by very close.

They were in contact. Q. 404

6

To your knowledge did Mr. Lawlor have any contact with Mr. Sweeney during this period, that is to say after Tallaght and before September '93?

7

A.

I'm assuming he did, I can't give dates.

8

Q. 405

It wouldn't surprise you --

9

A.

No, it wouldn't.

Q. 406

Your evidence seems to be that because of their contact at least in Tallaght

12:49:52 10

11 12

that they were quite close? A.

Correct.

Well they were certainly -- also Mr. Lawlor would have recognised

13

that if he wanted to encourage Philip Monahan to invest in Prague he would have

14

needed Eddie Sweeney's blessing to that as well.

12:50:06 15

16

Q. 407

Yes?

A.

Because Eddie would have had a very good eye for the development prospects

17 18

overseas. Q. 408

19 12:50:25 20

So he would have had contact with Eddie as well.

So we can take it that the -- if Mr. Lawlor wished to get the Monarch Group involved in Prague he'd have to convince both Mr. Monahan and Mr. Sweeney?

A.

That's a fair assumption, yeah.

21

Q. 409

What about Mr. Glennane?

22

A.

And Mr. Glennane, yes.

23

Q. 410

And did Mr. Lawlor have contact with Mr. Glennane?

24

A.

I'd say probably not as much.

12:50:38 25

26

He would have probably -- probably not as much.

He would have had contact with him but not as much. Q. 411

But this document which is being brought to your attention, is a document which

27

has come to Mr. Monahan through Mr. Lawlor.

28

It's suggesting that the cost of getting involved in Prague would be

29

approximately 12,000 a month.

12:50:58 30

And it's from Mr. Kelly's office.

And it was being suggested that if we look at

4538, that the costs would be split 50 percent, Ambrose Kelly International and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:51:06

12:51:17

71 1

50 percent Monarch Properties International?

2

A.

That's correct.

3

Q. 412

If we look at 4539 there is a further accompanying document which is more or

4

less selling the idea on behalf of Ambrose Kelly; isn't that right? And it's

5

selling the investment opportunities in Prague?

6

A.

What's the source of that document now?

7

Q. 413

I think that that also accompanied the fax, the memo.?

8

A.

Okay I take your word for it, that's right.

9

Q. 414

I may be incorrect.

12:51:35 10

I'm working from the fax number and the sequence we got

them. It Would appear to follow naturally; isn't that correct?

11

A.

That's correct.

12

Q. 415

You have been advised that for two years Ambrose Kelly Partnership have had an

13 14 12:51:44 15

office in Prague? A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 416

And you have been advised that agreement was necessary from Monarch for 6,000

16

per month to cover 50 percent of the costs over a 12 month period?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q. 417

And you have been advised that it was intended to make presentations to some

19

financial institutions over the coming months.

12:52:00 20

You are being advised that

the population of Prague was 1.2 million and the fact that it had very little

21

retail facilities?

22

A.

That's correct, yes.

23

Q. 418

The big selling point here, from Monarch's point of view, because of your

24 12:52:14 25

26

success in Tallaght was the retail ability? A.

Particularly on the black of The Square which had won awards.

Q. 419

You were advised that the country has a 10 million population and strategically

27

located between Germany and Austria?

28

A.

That's correct.

29

Q. 420

A Stable Government and excellent development opportunities for the next three

12:52:29 30

to five years? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:52:30

12:52:43

72 1

A.

That's correct.

2

Q. 421

And you have been advised that they were anxious to sign a joint venture

3

agreement with a property developer capable of bringing expertise and capacity

4

of raising finance?

5

A.

That's correct.

6

Q. 422

You were advised that Mr. Sweeney was visiting EBRD Bank with Mr. Lawlor the

7

following Monday and Jack Whelan was travelling to Prague to participate in a

8

meeting with Praha 5 architect's office to discuss a fifteen acre city centre

9

site and also a number of other development opportunities; is that correct?

12:53:03 10

11

A.

That's correct.

Q. 423

So there was some informal agreement at this stage involving Mr. Sweeney, Mr.

12

Lawlor, possibly Mr. Monahan, certainly Mr. Whelan and Prague at this stage;

13

isn't that right?

14 12:53:20 15

A.

That's right, September '93 is it?

Q. 424

That's correct.

16

It appears to have been faxed either to or from Somerton on

the 1st of October '93?

17

A.

That would be correct, yes.

18

Q. 425

Yes.

19

You see the fax number there.

is, Mr. Murray.

12:53:36 20

I don't know which of the Somertons it

And you might be able to help us.

If we could have the full

document on screen, please, we'll give it a number, 8205653?

21

A.

That would be the Somerton, Mr. Monahan's house.

22

Q. 426

Mr. Monahan could very well have been faxing this in to Harcourt Street in to

23 24 12:53:52 25

you; is that correct? A.

That's probably it.

Q. 427

And you received this.

26

And you knew you had some knowledge of some

involvement but this was putting it on a more formal footing; isn't that right?

27

A.

That's correct, yes.

28

Q. 428

And at 4567.

29 12:54:04 30

We get a draft document.

Entitled Co-operation Agreement.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

This is a draft

12:54:12

12:54:33

73 1

of a an agreement that it was proposed might be signed by Monarch and what was

2

described as Ambrose Kelly International.

3

A.

That's correct, yeah.

4

Q. 429

At 4555.

Is that right ?

We again see on the 4th of October '93, Mr. Lawlor this time

5

directly to you, sending a number of additional items for an upcoming Thursday

6

agenda; isn't that right?

7

A.

That's correct.

8

Q. 430

And we get those at 4556.

9 12:54:37 10

Now, there are 17 items on that agenda for that meeting, Mr. Murray.

Had

11

Mr. Monahan directed that you would be the liaison person within the Monarch

12

Group in relation to the Prague, possibility of a Prague venture

13

A.

Well I'm certainly one of them.

14 12:54:57 15

CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Sweeney would have been the other.

Mr. Monahan would have

16

relied on Mr. Sweeney for anything relevant to construction matters or

17

potential building contracts.

18

as to the marketability of any scheme we were looking at, correct, yes

19

Q. 431

12:55:21 20

And he would have relied on me to have a view

When you received the document that we had on screen a moment ago, namely, the memo from Mr. Monahan, that's at 4536 and the accompanying documentation.

21 22

Did you have a meeting with Mr. Glennane, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Monahan in relation

23

to it? Or had you had a series of meetings prior to that in relation to the

24

possibility of investing in Prague?

12:55:41 25

A.

I don't believe any structural meeting as such in that context.

But I do

26

remember a meeting which I believe was after that date in Tallaght where

27

another shareholder was added to the consortium, Rotary International, I

28

believe is the name of the company.

29

Tallaght.

12:56:05 30

Q. 432

And that was a structured meeting in

And I believe it was shortly before my first trip to Prague in ...

October 1990? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:56:06

12:56:13

74 1

A.

In October '93.

2

Q. 433

Well, we'll come to that.

3 4

If we go back, please, to 4556.

5 6

This is Mr. Lawlor's agenda being faxed to you for an upcoming meeting on the

7

8th of October; isn't that right?

8

A.

I believe in Prague, I think is it?

9

Q. 434

So the meeting, it was a meeting that was to take place in Prague on the 8th of

12:56:29 10

October?

11

A.

I believe that is possibly right, now.

12

Q. 435

And there are a whole series of projects there; isn't that right?

13

A.

That's correct, yes.

14

Q. 436

There was a reference to a follow-up -- sorry.?

A.

A reason why I think that -- sorry.

12:56:41 15

I beg your pardon.

I recognise two

16

sites which I visited because I was only in Prague twice.

17

site and Pilzen site was certainly two sites I recollect from memory.

18

Q. 437

19 12:57:01 20

21

Certainly the SYPs

If we just look at the first item there. Attached is a follow-up letter to ERBD and we saw reference to that bank earlier?

A.

That's correct.

Q. 438

E Sweeney meeting on Monday last 27th of September.

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

24

right?

12:57:09 25

A.

26

Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Lawlor met with the bank in London; is that

I thought it might have been somewhere else other than London from memory but you could be right.

27

Q. 439

Okay.?

28

A.

It may have been Spain, no?

29

Q. 440

If we could have 4539.

12:57:22 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:57:22

12:57:29

75 1

Maybe I'm incorrect.

But we see

2

A.

No, you may be right.

3

Q. 441

I don't want to ...?

4

A.

No.

5

Q. 442

This is quite confusing. The second last paragraph.

Ed Sweeney visiting the

6

EBRD Bank with Liam Lawlor on Monday next but it doesn't say where the meeting

7

is to take place.

8

Spain?

9

So you think that that meeting may have taken place in

A.

I believe it may have taken place in Spain, from memory.

Q. 443

Do you see the reference to a meeting with Praha 5?

11

A.

I've seen it now.

12

Q. 444

That's the same paragraph.

13

A.

I beg your pardon.

14

Q. 445

Mr. Whelan is travelling to Prague to participate in a meeting with Praha 5.

12:57:49 10

12:58:06 15

16

It's Mr. Whelan?

Who or what was Praha 5? A.

I'll try and give you a layman's version because it's stale in my memory.

To

17

the best of my memory Prague was broken up into electoral districts and each

18

district was governed by a local mayor.

19

had a site and was one that we were looking for doing a development.

12:58:39 20

the Praha 5 one we're looking at in the centre of Prague.

21

number of projects in Prague.

22

squares, I believe, from memory.

23

And Praha 5 was a district which had,

Q. 446

I think

We looked at a

And I think Praha 5 was the best of those

If we go back to 4556.

24 12:58:54 25

Can I ask you, why was Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Sweeney meeting with that ERBD bank?

26

A.

I can only speculate.

27

Q. 447

Yes?

28

A.

That it was to try and negotiate funds in the event of us succeeding in putting

29 12:59:19 30

a development together in the Czech Republic, Prague. Q. 448

And we see reference then to a series of sites; the Tatra site, the Pilzen Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

12:59:19

12:59:25

76 1

site, the SYP site?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 449

4557?

4

A.

I think SYP isn't is a site from memory. SYP is a name of a company who are a

5

specialist company like Tesco or like Superquinn in Ireland we had entered into

6

an arrangement with in the event of us identifying successful locations that

7

they would perform the role of anchor tenant. So SYP is not a site, it's a

8

company based in the Balearus, that were its headoffice was.

9 12:59:51 10

Q. 450

And there is a reference to Barndoff, Prague four, Ikea?

A.

Ikea again would be a company that we had hoped to encourage to go into one of

11 12

the sites. Q. 451

13 14

Housing information to urban research.

Is

that a French company that you were joining up with? A.

I can't say that.

Q. 452

No. 10?

16

A.

Sorry?

17

Q. 453

No. 10 on the?

18

A.

I'm only at four.

19

Q. 454

4557.

13:00:09 15

Meeting with Caisse des depots.

13:00:16 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

22

o'clock.

23

A.

It's one o'clock, Mr. Quinn.

So we might break now until two

All right?

Thank you, Chairman.

24 13:00:23 25

26 27

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

13:03:33

14:04:37

77 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.

2 3 4 5

MR. QUINN: Mr. Murray, please.

6 7 8 9 14:04:50 10

CHAIRMAN:

Good afternoon.

Q. 455

11 12

MR. QUINN: Thank you, Mr. Murray.

13

dealing with an agenda which had taken place in respect of the Prague strategy

14

and the investment in Prague

14:05:01 15

16

A.

That's correct.

Q. 456

I think on the 5th of October '93.

Mr. Murray, before lunch I had been

At 4570 Mr. Lawlor faxed through to you,

17

Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Ambrose Kelly and Mr. Frank Dunlop a document at 4571.

18

would appear to be a letter from him on behalf of Ambrose Kelly International

19

to a member of the bank EBRD that we referred to earlier; isn't that correct?

14:05:33 20

21

A.

Yes, that's correct.

Q. 457

And that refers to the meeting with Mr. Sweeney director of the Monarch

22

Properties and himself, that is Mr. Lawlor, at your London office on 27th of

23

September?

24 14:05:54 25

A.

Yes, that clarifies that.

Q. 458

And he was advising that he was travelling to Prague.

Which

Can I just ask you,

26

Mr. Murray.

27

that is to say it was yourself Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Glennane and Mr. Monahan; isn't

28

that right?

29 14:06:14 30

A.

We know who was dealing with the Monarch interest at this stage,

I would say Mr. Glennane wouldn't have been dealing with it.

It would have

been Mr. Sweeney, predominantly myself, to a lesser extent Mr. Sweeney. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:06:19

14:06:41

78 1

Q. 459

If we look at the entity then that is the joint partner then in relation to the

2

Prague venture which is to be known as and referred to the as the Ambrose Kelly

3

International consortium or grouping.

4

that grouping.

5

also involved with that grouping?

We know Mr. Kelly was involved with

Can we take it from 4570 that Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Lawlor were

6

A.

I don't know that to be a fact.

7

Q. 460

Yes.

Well you were very much associated with the Monarch interest.

And you

8

were now in correspondence and being appraised by Mr. Lawlor on behalf of

9

Ambrose international.

14:06:59 10

11

What role did you think Mr. Lawlor was performing at

this time? Did he think he was an employee or a partner in the consortium? A.

I wouldn't differentiate between a partner or a fee earner.

12

was remuneration in it for him somewhere.

13

his role was.

14

Q. 461

14:07:21 15

16

I presumed there

But I wouldn't know obviously what

He was playing a lead role in relation to the Ambrose Kelly end of the partnership isn't that right?

A.

He was playing a role.

The lead role -- Ambrose Kelly had an office in Prague

17

staffed full-time for a considerable time before that with a gentleman who used

18

to be the senior architect in Guinness, a guy called Conroy Elliott.

19

playing a role.

14:07:47 20

He was playing a major role.

He was

There was other senior roles

played by Mr. Ambrose Kelly.

21 22

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, sorry to interrupt My Friend.

We are struggling to see

23

the relevance of this, a lot of questioning about the Prague project.

24 14:07:58 25

CHAIRMAN:

I understand that it won't continue for much longer.

26

number of issues we want to explore in relation to Prague.

27

be a major element in Mr. Murray's cross-examination.

28

document is in the brief.

There are a

It's not going to

But I think all this

29 14:08:19 30

MR. QUINN: It is in the brief.

And Mr. Murray has been supplied with it, as

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:08:22

14:08:23

79 1

indeed has my friend.

2 3 4 5

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, sorry to interrupt once again.

6

in the brief doesn't necessary mean it's relevant.

7

Mr. Quinn questioning but ...

The mere fact that it's

I have no objection to

8 9 14:08:40 10

11

CHAIRMAN:

It's relevant insofar as the Tribunal have to get some insight,

into the relationship between Mr. Lawlor and the Monarch interests.

Or the

Monarch company which obviously involves Mr. Murray.

12 13

So on that basis alone has it a relevance.

14 14:08:52 15

MR SANFEY:

16

Cherrywood.

Well I suppose, Chairman, that's true insofar as it relates to

17 18

I haven't heard any question so far which would suggest that there is any

19

involvement between Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Murray in relation to Cherrywood as

14:09:05 20

such.

All of the problems seem to have been --

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

It doesn't have to be.

This is an inquiry.

And we know that

23

there's -- that there was a strong relationship between Mr. Lawlor and

24

Mr. Monahan and the Monarch companies.

14:09:25 25

26

So that makes it relevant to the Tribunal to establish whether -- and the

27

extent of any relationship or the relationship that did in fact exist between

28

Mr. Lawlor and Monarch and Mr. Monahan.

29 14:09:40 30

That doesn't necessarily stop at Tallaght.

But it may involve Cherrywood and

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:09:46

14:10:03

80 1

that's the basis for this line of cross-examination.

2 3

But this is an inquiry.

So it doesn't -- the fact that it's not immediately

4

recognisable as having a relevance to Cherrywood doesn't mean that it doesn't

5

have some possible ...

6 7

MR SANFEY:

8

way.

I'm not seeking in any way to put any impediment in Mr. Quinn's

9 14:10:12 10

Thank you, Sir.

11 12 13 14

MR. QUINN: You would have got a copy of that fax, Mr. Murray, isn't that

14:10:16 15

right? It was intended when Mr. Lawlor sent it on the 5th of October that you

16

would have received, got a copy of it; isn't that right?

17

A.

That's correct.

18

Q. 462

And you saw there a reference to Mr. Dunlop?

19

A.

Correct.

Q. 463

Had you known by the 5th of October that Mr. Dunlop had some association with

14:10:27 20

21

Ambrose Kelly international?

22

A.

I would have assumed that, yes.

23

Q. 464

You would have assumed that?

24

A.

Yes.

Q. 465

And of course by Mr. Dunlop by October '93 had an involvement with Monarch?

26

A.

That's correct.

27

Q. 466

He had been retained by Mr. Sweeney isn't that right?

28

A.

That's correct.

29

Q. 467

On the instructions of Mr. Monahan, if Mr. Sweeney's evidence is accepted?

A.

I believe that is the case, yes.

14:10:35 25

14:10:48 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:10:49

14:10:56

81 1

Q. 468

On the recommendation of Mr. Lawlor?

4

A.

I'm not sure.

5

Q. 469

When did you first discover that Mr. Dunlop had been retained by Mr. Monahan?

6

A.

I can't recall the exact date now.

7

Q. 470

It would appear from the records that he had a meeting with Mr. Sweeney in

2 3 I don't know if it's on the recommendation of Mr. Lawlor.

8

either the 8th or 9th of March 1993.

9

payments made on 12th of March 1993 that he had been retained by them isn't

14:11:16 10

And certainly it would appear from

that right?

11

A.

That seems to be correct, yes.

12

Q. 471

And he had an involvement and had attended several meetings with Monarch in

13 14 14:11:24 15

relation to the Cherrywood project; isn't that right? A.

That's correct.

Q. 472

And if Mr. Sweeney's evidence is correct, he became involved with Monarch on

16

the suggestion of Mr. Lawlor to Mr. Monahan; isn't that correct?

17

A.

I believe that's correct, yeah.

18

Q. 473

And now this is again Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Dunlop having an involvement with

19 14:11:43 20

21

Monarch in relation to a project other than Cherrywood; isn't that right? A.

That's correct.

Q. 474

And in fact I think on 11th of October '93.

22 23

If we could have 4581, you wrote on behalf of Monarch Properties services to

24

Mr. Kelly in relation to the Prague project.

14:11:56 25

26

It followed on a meeting that you had; isn't that right?

27

A.

That is correct, yes.

28

Q. 475

And I think you referred to meeting on the Thursday morning looking at the

29 14:12:11 30

second paragraph of that letter last with both yourself and Frank. Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

Is that

14:12:15

14:12:24

82 1

A.

It would appear to be correct, yes.

2

Q. 476

So you were meeting with Mr. Dunlop with Mr. Sweeney in the context of Prague

3

as well as?

4

A.

That's right, yes.

5

Q. 477

As well as Cherrywood?

6

A.

That's correct, yes.

7

Q. 478

And I think at that stage you had forwarded a cheque for 6,000 pounds being

8 9 14:12:37 10

your contribution for the October month; isn't that right? A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 479

There is a co-operation agreement.

We dealt with the draft one a moment ago.

11 12

But at 4597 there is an agreement dated 18th October '93.

13

since the agreement which accompanies that letter dated 11th of October is

14

dated the 18th of October.

14:12:58 15

I'm just wondering

Could in fact that letter at 4581 have been

incorrectly dated?

16

A.

It is possible it could be incorrect.

17

Q. 480

I think at 4583 we see the request, the remittance advice for the 6,000 pounds.

18 19 14:13:19 20

And we see it being forwarded; isn't that right? A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 481

That would have been the October 6,000 pounds payment, isn't that right on foot

21

of the agreement which would have been the first payment on foot of the

22

proposal which we dealt with earlier today?

23

A.

That appears to be the first payment, yes.

24

Q. 482

Then I think on the 28th of October, '93.

14:13:32 25

At 4623 you yourself were writing

to a bank in the Netherlands isn't that right? In relation to the matter.

26

And you were thanking them for the courtesy they extended to Mr. Lawlor and

27

Mr. Jack Whelan when they met with the bank in the Hague, isn't that right?

28

A.

That's what that letter's doing, yes.

29

Q. 483

On whose behalf was Mr. Whelan attending that meeting?

A.

He was attending it on behalf of Mr. Monahan and Monarch.

14:13:51 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

Monarch.

14:13:56

14:14:14

83 1

Q. 484

And Mr. Lawlor?

2

A.

Well it's difficult to say who he was, he was certainly facilitating a meeting

3 4

for us out there 'cos he had -- he would have been working for Ambrose Kelly. Q. 485

As we see at 4626 which is the final paragraph of that letter.

We see he was

5

facilitating meetings and visits here in that you were able to extend to the

6

recipient of that letter an invitation to stay with Mr. Lawlor when next in

7

Dublin; isn't that right? The final paragraph of that letter.?

8

A.

That's correct, yeah.

9

Q. 486

Now, I think that further meetings were arranged in Prague; isn't that right?

14:14:38 10

And I don't intend to go through them in any detail.

And we see several

11

meetings in the diaries of Mr. Glennane over the succeeding weeks for meetings

12

with Mr. Lawlor.

13 14

If I could have 4752.

14:14:54 15

for Hazel Lawlor.

16

There is a meeting referred to in Mr. Glennane's diary

Well I won't say it's a meeting.

Certainly an entry for

Hazel Lawlor.

17 18

Then at 4800.

19

you see that? Do you recognise the handwriting on that document?

14:15:14 20

21

26th of November a 3,000 pounds payment to Hazel Lawlor.

A.

I do not, no.

Q. 487

Did you know that Hazel Lawlor had received 3,000 pounds on the 26th of

22

November 1993?

23

A.

Not until I heard it as part of the evidence in this Tribunal.

24

Q. 488

And I think on the 26th -- on the same day, if we could have 4754.

14:15:29 25

You

forwarded the 6,000 pounds, November payment, in relation to the Prague project

26

to Mr. Kelly; isn't that right?

27

A.

That's right, yes.

28

Q. 489

And at 4758, I think, you were able to write again to Mr. Vile in the Prague

29 14:15:49 30

Do

concerning and making an appointment for a meeting with yourself and Mr. Whelan? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:15:50

14:16:03

84 1

A.

That's correct, yes.

2

Q. 490

And you describe Mr. Whelan of being of Monarch Properties in that letter?

3

A.

I described him as that.

4

Q. 491

He was representing -- you were setting up a meeting at which Mr. Whelan would

5 6

be representing Monarch? A.

7 8

11

He was, yes, he would have been.

I suppose in that context a support to me at

the meeting, yes. Q. 492

9 14:16:19 10

He was never an employee of Monarch properties.

And at 4759 you did up a resume of your visit to Prague on Sunday 28th of November '93; isn't that right?

A.

Yes.

Q. 493

And yourself and Mr. Whelan were connected -- collected at the hotel by

12

Mr. Lawlor and Mr. McElligott?

13

A.

That's right.

14

Q. 494

We see from the final paragraph there that yourself, Mr. McElligott, Mr. Whelan

14:16:33 15

and Mr. Lawlor had a look around the town and had a look out for potential

16

sites that you might develop together; isn't that right.

17

A.

That is correct, yes.

18

Q. 495

And at 4775 Mr. Lawlor sends Monarch, including yourself, I think a briefing

19

note in relation to the purchase of a site at Pilzen, a military airport site

14:16:56 20

at Pilzen; is that right?

21

A.

That's correct, yes.

22

Q. 496

And at 4780.

I think on the 7th of December '93, the bank in the Hague write

23

to Monarch Properties Services Limited, J Whelan and Ambrose Kelly Group, L

24

Lawlor, confirming a meeting in Prague for the 19th of December.?

14:17:19 25

26 27

A.

I see that, yes.

Q. 497

Now, I think in fact there was a meeting then in Monarch's offices on the 8th of December.

28 29

If we look at 4792.

Attended by Mr. Dunlop.

14:17:32 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:17:32

14:18:03

85 1

Isn't it the case, Mr. Murray, that by this period, that is to say, December

2

1993.

3

Kelly International? And that Ambrose Kelly International were being

4

represented by Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Dunlop?

5

A.

That there was quite a bond developing between Monarch and Ambrose

Well, I don't know, it would be quite a bond.

We certainly had developed

6

the -- or had made a decision between October '93 and possibly the first

7

quarter of '94 to put time and energy into investigating, doing developments

8

in Prague on foot of an invitation into it by the Ambrose Kelly partnership.

9

It actually all filtered out and nothing ever happened.

14:18:23 10

We did spend about

six months looking at it, as I said between October and March.

A close bond,

11

I would say it was never a close bond.

12

Ambrose Kelly myself for ten or fifteen years and would respect his view.

13

Where he had opened the architectural office and thought there would have been

14

opportunities there and investigated it.

14:18:46 15

16

But we certainly, I would have known

Close bond is, I would suggest with

respect, too strong. Q. 498

17

All right.

Quite a number of meetings for a common purpose namely the joint

partnership?

18

A.

Between October and probably December and January maybe.

19

Q. 499

In fact at 4910.

14:19:00 20

Mr. Lawlor is advising in relation to -- and forwarding I

think the itinerary for the visit to Prague on the 9th of January to the 14th

21

of January; isn't that right?

22

A.

That's correct, yes.

23

Q. 500

And I think we see there that he is advising that Frank Dunlop has stated he

24 14:19:13 25

26

intends to travel; isn't that right? A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 501

I think a visit did take place in early January 94.

27

Did Mr. Dunlop go on that

visit?

28

A.

I can't remember if Mr. Dunlop was on that trip or not.

29

Q. 502

Were you on that trip?

A.

I was on that trip, yes.

14:19:23 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:19:24

14:19:38

86 1

Q. 503

Now, I think on 28th of January '94 at 4957 Mr. Kelly is writing to you

2

acknowledging receipt of 6,000 pounds on 20th of January 1994; isn't that

3

right?

4

A.

I think he's writing to Mr. Caslin.

5

Q. 504

Yes.

6

A.

I think that's.

7

Q. 505

When I say you.

8

A.

I beg your pardon, yes.

9

Q. 506

He is acknowledging 6,000 pounds isn't that right which he receives on 20th of

14:19:50 10

Mr. Caslin, yes.?

He's writing to Monarch?

January as we see from the third paragraph of that letter?

11

A.

Yes, that's correct.

12

Q. 507

He's saying that that relates to the December payment isn't that right?

13

A.

(witness reading to himself) yes, yes.

14

Q. 508

And the January payment he's advising has fallen due for payment; isn't that

14:20:04 15

right?

16

A.

Yes, yes.

17

Q. 509

In fact, the payment was received on 26th of January '94.

18 19 14:20:18 20

since the 20th of December '94.

And it was due

Isn't that right?

A.

Well that's, if that's the evidence I accept that.

Q. 510

Now, if I could just go back then, if I may, Mr. Murray.

21 22

We saw the three payments, that is to say the October '93 payment made on 11th

23

of October' 93, at page 4583, which was the first payment of 6,000.

24

the November payment made on 26th of November' 93, at 4754.

14:20:42 25

seen the December '93 payment made in, 26th of January '94.

We saw

And we have now At 4957.

26 27

So they are the three 6,000 pounds payments for October, November and December

28

1993; isn't that right?

29 14:20:55 30

A.

Yes.

Q. 511

In relation to this joint partnership? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:20:58

14:21:08

87 1

A.

That would appear, that's correct.

2

Q. 512

Yeah.

Now, could I have 4763, please.

3 4

This is an extract from Monarch Property Services' books and appears to have

5

been compiled on the 3rd of July '95 as appears from the top left hand corner.

6

Under the heading 'Praha Strategy Studies' we see 4,000, 3,000 and 10,000

7

pounds payments.

Do you see that under the heading strategic studies?

8

A.

I do see them, Chairman.

9

Q. 513

Can I ask you, Mr. Murray, from your involvement and knowledge of the Prague

14:21:32 10

project.

What do those payments relate to?

11

A.

I have no idea.

12

Q. 514

Have they any association or involvement with the Prague venture that we've

13 14

Honestly I have no idea.

just been dealing with? A.

I can only speculate that they're not because the monthly payments were 6,000.

Q. 515

And completely different?

16

A.

And I would suggest that.

17

Q. 516

Do you know from your involvement with the Prague project that if there were

14:21:51 15

18 19

I don't know what they're about.

any Pragus Strategic Study payments due to anybody in relation to that project? A.

I cannot recollect, I have no knowledge.

Q. 517

Does Pragus have any association with the Prague project?

21

A.

It doesn't prompt me at all.

22

Q. 518

As marketing director of the Monarch Group did you have any association with an

14:22:09 20

23 24 14:22:28 25

entity or a company called Pragus Strategic Studies? A.

No.

Q. 519

Are you in any position to assist the Tribunal in relation to those series of

26

payments that we see there?

27

A.

I'm not.

28

Q. 520

Would you agree with me that they amount to a sum of 20,000 pounds paid between

29 14:22:45 30

Unfortunately I can't help you.

December '93 and March '95? A.

Yes, if that's the total, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:22:46

14:22:53

88 1

Q. 521

And you can't tell the Tribunal who received those payments?

2

A.

Oh, I definitely can't, no.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Did you say 20,000

5 6

MR. QUINN: Yes, it would appear that the stroke beside each proves the

7

payment.

8 9 14:23:01 10

It's either 20 or 40,000 pounds Mr. Murray; isn't that right? A.

Can we just ...

11

Q. 522

In other words if we take?

12

A.

Four, four, three, three, ten, ten, three, three, are they the figures you're

13 14

referring to? Q. 523

14:23:13 15

16

Yes.

I'm assuming that the first four cancels the second four or proves

payment for the second four? A.

17

I see what you're referring but I don't know what they were paid for. know anything about them.

18

Q. 524

You know nothing about those?

19

A.

I do not.

Q. 525

If we could have 4740, please.

14:23:21 20

I don't

21 22

This is an entry in the books of Monarch Properties services which appears to

23

have been compiled on 30th of March '94.

24

Do you see that?

14:23:35 25

Headed Ambrose Kelly Partnership.

A.

The second last one?

26

Q. 526

Yes.?

27

A.

Yes, I see that.

28

Q. 527

Has that -- have those payments anything to do with the Prague project?

29

A.

Could I ask you maybe to blow them up a bit, please.

Q. 528

Yes.

14:23:48 30

It's the second last one.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:23:50

14:24:12

89 1

A.

I see where you're talking about.

I would guess the 6,000 ones would because

2

there's a synergy between them and the agreement.

3

probably they would have to do with the agreement.

4

Q. 529

5

I have a recollection that

Well if we look at the first 6,000 pounds payment, which appears to have been made on the 24th of November '93?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 530

Now, a moment ago we referred to the payment at 4754.

8

the 26th of November '93.

Which was I think on

If we could have 4754, please.

9 14:24:28 10

Your letter is dated the 26th of November.

11

A.

Right.

12

Q. 531

Are you saying that the payment that accompanied that letter is the first of

13 14

those payments as we see them? A.

14:24:42 15

that.

16 17

14:24:55 20

I certainly signed

I sent the cheque but I can't reconcile it with the entries in the

books. Q. 532

18 19

I have no knowledge of trying to reconcile the accounts.

If we could have 4583.

This would show a payment in October '93; isn't that

right? That is the first of the payments? A.

I don't know if it's the first, it's certainly a payment I made.

Q. 533

It's certainly the first payment arising out of the memo of September '93.

21

It

accompanied by the signed agreement?

22

A.

That would appear to be correct, yes.

23

Q. 534

Isn't that right? That would appear to be the first payment; isn't that right?

24

A.

Yes, yes.

Q. 535

But if we go back to 4740.

14:25:07 25

Would you agree with me that there is no reference

26

there to 6,000 pounds payment in October '93.

27

please.?

28

A.

The first one seems to be November.

29

Q. 536

Yes.

14:25:32 30

If we could blow that up again,

So the October one is missing; isn't that right? And the November

payment accompanies a letter I think on the -- is a payment dated 26th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:25:38

14:25:53

90 1

November '93.

If I could have 4755, please.

2

that the November payment?

3

A.

It's dated 26th of November.

4

Q. 537

That's correct.

5

A.

It would appear, yes.

6

Q. 538

If we go back to 4740.

7

Do you see that cheque? Isn't

So it would appear to have been paid on 26th of November?

Doesn't this appear to show either two payments or one

payment on 24th of November not the 26th of November?

8

A.

It's the 24th of November there, yes.

9

Q. 539

Yes, not the 26th of November as appears from the cheque?

A.

Yes.

11

Q. 540

There's no reference to an October payment?

12

A.

No, there's an error there.

13

Q. 541

And there are references to payments as early as May '92 and April and May '93;

14:26:12 10

14 14:26:28 15

isn't that right? A.

16 17

Now, I'm not trying to just - had ....

Yes.

It's conceivable that payments could have been made before the agreement

was signed. Q. 542

I don't know is the answer to that.

If I go back to -- if we go back to 4763.

18 19

Having regard to its title, Mr. Murray, that is to say Pragus Strategic

14:26:50 20

Studies.

21

Would you agree with me that whatever that money relates to.

It

has something to do with Prague?

22

A.

Logically that would be a fair assumption, yes.

23

Q. 543

In any event, you know nothing about the 3,000 pounds payment to Ms. Hazel

24

Lawlor.

14:27:10 25

You know nothing about Pragus Strategic Studies and the claim for

those sums. And you agree with me that the Ambrose Kelly Partnership accounts

26

that we put up on screen don't appear to relate to the actual payments which

27

were made in October/November and January '94, October/November '93 and

28

January '94?

29 14:27:27 30

A.

I agreed and I don't know anything about the Hazel Lawlor payment. know anything specifically about Pragus Strategic Studies. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

I don't

I certainly know

14:27:33

14:27:49

91 1

about the cheques I signed and sent.

2

book-keeping there, that's certainly what I've said.

3

Q. 544

4

Now, if I could move on to 424.

I don't know if there's an error in the

This is an extract, Mr. Murray, to Mr.

Dunlop's statement to the Tribunal.

5 6

And if you look at the third paragraph there.

He says "The disparity in

7

objectives became obvious to me as time progressed and after a number of

8

meeting in Monarch's offices in Harcourt Street at which Mr. Monahan, Noel

9

Murray, Mr. Liam Lawlor and I, though not always in this format, were present.

14:28:05 10

11

Do you recall, first of all, having meetings with Mr. Dunlop after he was

12

retained in relation to Cherrywood?

13

A.

I do, yes, I do, yes.

14

Q. 545

And do you remember having meetings with Mr. Dunlop attended by Mr. Lawlor in

14:28:20 15

which Cherrywood was discussed?

16

A.

I actually don't remember both of them being at the same meetings.

17

Q. 546

Do you see the first paragraph third sentence "Mr. Liam Lawlor, Mr. Philip

18

Monahan were present at several of these meetings though not necessarily all at

19

the same time?"

14:28:39 20

A.

I don't remember several.

21

Dunlop.

22

attended.

23

Q. 547

24 14:28:59 25

I certainly remember being at meetings with Mr.

I can't recollect specifically a meeting Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Dunlop I'm not saying I didn't.

I doubt if it was several.

You knew that Mr. Dunlop was involved with Mr. Lawlor in relation to Cherrywood; isn't that right?

A.

26

Not the two of them together.

I know that Mr. Dunlop was definitely engaged

as a PR consultant on Cherrywood.

27

Q. 548

And you know that Mr. Lawlor was helping out in relation to Cherrywood?

28

A.

I don't know what terms of engagement.

29

Q. 549

You knew that he was helping out in relation to Cherrywood?

A.

Yes.

14:29:15 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:29:16

14:29:31

92 1

Q. 550

And you attended meetings with him in relation to Cherrywood.

2

necessarily with Mr. Dunlop as appears here.

3

with Mr. Lawlor where Cherrywood would have been discussed?

Maybe not

You would have attended meetings

4

A.

I would have, I would have had, yes.

5

Q. 551

Now, I think you continued to have meetings with Mr. Dunlop after 1994; isn't

6

that right? If we could have 5540, please.

7 8

There is a ten o'clock meeting in your diary for Frank Dunlop in -- on 27th of

9

January 1995.

14:29:49 10

A.

I actually think that that doesn't refer to a meeting.

I would -- I think

11

that first of all that diary is a desk diary maintained by a secretary called

12

Christine.

13

myself and would record who the call came in for.

14

necessarily means a meeting.

14:30:17 15

And she actually kept a desk diary for both Mr. Glennane and I don't believe that

And if you notice in brackets DG after it.

it could have been a phone call for, from Mr. Dunlop for DG.

So

We shared the

16

one secretary in the context of a desk diary for phone calls when we were both

17

out of the office.

18

Q. 552

19

Dunlop.

14:30:41 20

21

For example if we have 5542.

This is the 30th of January 1995, DG phone Frank

Do you think that's an entry to remind Mr. Glennane that he should

phone Mr. Dunlop? A.

22

I would think that's an entry whereby Mr. Dunlop rang looking for Mr. Glennane and the secretary is asking him to ring back, to record a message for him.

23

Q. 553

Did you have any role or involvement in paying Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Murray?

24

A.

No.

Q. 554

At any stage?

26

A.

At no stage.

27

Q. 555

Did you know the terms under which Mr. Dunlop were retained?

28

A.

I did not.

29

Q. 556

Were you involved in seeking the recovery of Mr. Dunlop's fees from GRE at any

14:30:56 25

14:31:09 30

stage? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:31:09

14:31:24

93 1

A.

No, I would have been involved from time to time in seekìng the recovery of

2

money from GRE of which he may have been included but not specifically his in

3

isolation.

4

Q. 557

Now, in relation to Mr. O'Herlihy.

You heard the evidence or you would

5

have -- it would have been brought to your attention and you would probably

6

have read about if you didn't hear the evidence of Mr. O'Herlihy in relation to

7

a conversation we he says that he had with Mr. Lynn in May 1992; isn't that

8

right?

9 14:31:53 10

A.

I'm aware of his evidence.

Q. 558

Yes.

11

I understand from Mr. Glennane's evidence that yourself and Mr. Glennane

came to the Royal Dublin on the 27th of May '92?

12

A.

That's my recollection.

13

Q. 559

And you found Mr. Murray there -- or sorry Mr. O'Herlihy there.?

14

A.

I believe he was there, yes.

Q. 560

And was he then there on his own?

16

A.

I believe he was there on his own, yes.

17

Q. 561

Did you travel with Mr. Lynn to the Royal Dublin?

18

A.

I travelled with Mr. Glennane to the Royal Dublin.

19

Q. 562

Yourself and Mr. Glennane travelled separately?

A.

We would have normally gone for lunch together because our offices were quite

14:32:00 15

14:32:16 20

21

adjacent.

22

Q. 563

And you went down between 12 and half twelve?

23

A.

I'm not as specific on the time but I believe that is correct.

24

Q. 564

And in any event, it was around lunchtime?

A.

It was around lunchtime, that's correct, yes.

Q. 565

You can't tell the Tribunal whether Mr. Lynn and Mr. O'Herlihy had been

14:32:28 25

26 27

together before you came?

28

A.

Before I came?

29

Q. 566

Yes.?

A.

I'd have no way of knowing, no.

14:32:38 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:32:41

14:32:48

94 1

Q. 567

2

So they could very well have had a conversation before you and Mr. Glennane arrived?

3

A.

I don't know.

4

Q. 568

But they could have had?

5

A.

The day before or any time?

6

Q. 569

No, no, but earlier that day?

7

A.

I would have thought Mr. Lynn would have been in the council chambers before

8 9

that. Q. 570

Did you see Mr. Lynn in the council chambers?

A.

I didn't.

11

Q. 571

Did you attend the council chamber?

12

A.

I did not attend the council chamber.

13

Q. 572

So you went directly to the hotel?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 573

And it's to be presumed that Mr. Lynn was in the chamber?

16

A.

I believe that's correct, in the Royal -- in the Dublin council offices.

17

Q. 574

He could have been in the Royal Dublin with Mr. O'Herlihy before you arrived?

18

A.

He could have been, yes.

19

Q. 575

Now, do you have any recollection of him visiting the Royal Dublin whilst you

14:32:59 10

14:33:06 15

14:33:27 20

were there?

21

A.

Any recollection of?

22

Q. 576

Of Mr. Lynn coming to the Royal Dublin.?

23

A.

I do not, no.

24

Q. 577

At any stage.?

A.

I do not.

26

Q. 578

When next did you meet up with Mr. Lynn?

27

A.

I would have to speculate, Chairman, that it was the following morning in the

14:33:35 25

28 29 14:33:48 30

office but I can't be sure. Q. 579

When you left the Royal Dublin you had been informed of the outcome of the vote; is that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:33:50

14:34:00

95 1

A.

2

I believe I knew the outcome of the vote but I don't know how I found out about it.

3

Q. 580

Did Mr. O'Herlihy leave the Royal Dublin with you?

4

A.

I can't:

5

Q. 581

And left Mr. O'Herlihy behind?

6

A.

I don't know that now.

7

Q. 582

And again would you agree with me that if you left Mr. O'Herlihy after you were

No, I believe I left with Mr. Glennane.

That's speculation, I don't know.

8

in the Royal Dublin, he could have been met -- he could have met up with Mr.

9

Lynn whose business in the chamber would have now finished and he could have

14:34:17 10

11

had a conversation with Mr. Lynn at that stage? A.

I think that's conjecture, I don't know.

12 13

MR SANFEY:

14

was a possible scenario.

14:34:32 15

It's not only conjecture.

It wasn't put to Mr. Herlihy. That

I'm concerned this is being put up now when it was

never put to Mr. O'Herlihy in the first place.

16 17

CHAIRMAN:

18

determine what happened on that day and whether or not in fact Mr. O'Herlihy

19

did meet or did have this conversation with Mr. Lynn.

14:34:49 20

I think it's necessary to put it, I mean, we have to try and

And I think it's

appropriate that Mr. Murray, who was in the hotel, should be asked about,

21

should be asked questions to see if he can throw some light on what might have

22

happened on the occasion.

23 24 14:35:09 25

26

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, Mr. Murray is being asked to conjecture whether or not

it's possible that Mr. O'Herlihy met Mr. Lynn after Mr. Murray left. find it strange that that was never put to Mr. O'Herlihy.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

I suppose he can't comment on it.

29 14:35:21 30

MR. QUINN: It's more a matter for information, I accept that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

I just

14:35:23

14:35:32

96 1 2 3

Q. 583

Mr. Murray, what is your evidence in relation to your time in the hotel? Is it

4

your evidence solely that Mr. Lynn never came to that hotel on that day while

5

you were there with Mr. O'Herlihy?

6

A.

That is correct.

7

Q. 584

Mr. O'Herlihy accepts that you were there.

8

He couldn't remember Mr. Glennane.

9

conversation that he had with Mr. Lynn.

14:35:48 10

He says you were coming and going.

He doesn't say that you knew or heard the

A.

That's his evidence.

11

Q. 585

Yes.

12

A.

I believe that's correct.

13

Q. 586

Yeah.

14

A.

I'm surprised that he didn't know Mr. Glennane was there because .... I find

14:35:58 15

that surprising but that's a volunteer to the account.

16

Q. 587

Who told you of the outcome?

17

A.

I don't know that.

I tried to rack my brains but I can't remember.

Now, I

18

did have a mobile phone and I could have got a call on the mobile phone.

19

don't know, that's conjecture, Chairman, I don't know who told me.

14:36:25 20

21

Q. 588

I

Now, if I could just go to the matters which were happening in or around that time.

22 23

I think earlier I referred to a quotation from you which appeared in a

24

newspaper.

14:36:30 25

26

If I could have 3955, please.

27 28

This again is an extract from Business and Finance at the 9th of April 1992, it

29

was circulated.

It's in the brief.

14:36:39 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:36:39

14:36:45

97 1

CHAIRMAN:

That's not the correct.

2 3

MR. QUINN: Sorry.

3599.

My apologies.

4 5 6

A.

Sorry, I?

7

Q. 589

This is an extract, Mr. Murray?

8

A.

That's an invoice there.

9

Q. 590

No, no, it was my -- I called the wrong number.

14:37:03 10

What's on screen now is an

extract from a Business and Finance article which appears in an edition of the

11

9th of April 1992 in relation to Monarch.

12

a better view of it.

In fact, if we go to 3958.

We get

13 14 14:37:19 15

It's entitled Cherrywood battle. A.

16 17

Well there were so many. find that hard to read.

Q. 591

You probably remember this article

Could I ask you to blow that up a little bit.

I

Yes.

If we could go maybe to 3599.

I don't want to dwell on this, Mr. Murray.

18

Just to put matters in context.

If we look at the top left hand corner.

19

I could just blow that up.

14:37:41 20

If

Do you see the second paragraph there? Monarch

has denied it is behind the group.

This was a group which was set up known as

21

the Unemployed Action Group which was supporting the Cherrywood project; isn't

22

that right?

23

A.

Monarch has denied it's behind the group though it stands by its claim ....

24

Q. 592

I'm just referring you to the quote that's attributed to you there,

14:38:04 25

Mr. Murray.?

26

A.

It's like a statement I would have made, yes.

27

Q. 593

Nothing turns on this?

28

A.

No, no, I'm just.

29

Q. 594

The Cherrywood detractors might well say that the grouping known as the

14:38:17 30

I don't remember making the statement but it is like one.

unemployed action group, which was in support of development in Cherrywood, was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:38:21

14:38:35

98 1

really a front or a subgroup sponsored by Monarch.

2

It's being put to you --

You are denying this here.

3

A.

I've never heard of it.

4

Q. 595

But you are highlighting the construction jobs etc. that might be availed of?

5

A.

I am indeed, yes.

6

Q. 596

So on the 9th of April 1992 you are dealing with Business and Finance as one

7

would expect as marketing manager on behalf of Monarch in relation to their

8

project.

9

isn't that right?

14:38:51 10

And it's part of the publicity in the lead up to May 1992 vote;

A.

That would be reasonable.

11

Q. 597

Just putting it in context?

12

A.

That's not much of a problem.

13

Q. 598

And then I think that there are a series of projections produced and sent

14

forward to GRE for payment.

14:39:12 15

And on the 7th of May 1992.

If I could have

3666, please.

16 17

You send a memo to Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney, on the 8th of

18

May 1992.

19

7th of May, isn't that right

14:39:26 20

Arising out of a meeting which you have had with Mr. Gillies on the

A.

I see, that yes.

21

Q. 599

Do you recall that meeting, Mr. Murray?

22

A.

I don't recall that particular meeting.

23 24 14:39:41 25

I would have met Mr. Gillies probably

every week during that period. Q. 600

I just want to bring your attention to one matter that you advise there, that is on the fourth paragraph.

26 27

I can also advise that Brian is quite adamant that GRE will not contribute

28

towards the strategic consultancy fee element of the cashflow projections.

29 14:39:50 30

Do you see that reference there? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:39:52

14:40:06

99 1

A.

I see, that yes.

2

Q. 601

So would it be fair to say as appears from that memo.

There is a meeting on

3

7th of May 1992.

Attended by you and a representative Monarch.

4

cashflow projections are being discussed; isn't that right?

5

A.

Yes, that's ....

6

Q. 602

If we could have 3668, please.

Where the

7 8

I think this is a copy of the projections; isn't this right? In question.

9

And I think there are a series of entries there in somebody's hand.

14:40:22 10

suggest that the entries marked with the circle are the entries which he wasn't

11 12

prepared to approve of at that meeting. A.

13 14

And I

I can't go as far as that.

I know the other is my memo and I accept that.

can't comment on this now. Q. 603

14:40:44 15

Yeah.

I'm not disputing it.

I just can't confirm it.

And if -- I don't want to go back to it but.

If we look at that one

and that document which must be a document which was available to you when you

16

met with him.

17

consultancy fees, which is about five from the bottom and you'll have heard

18

quite a bit of evidence in relation to this do you think.

19

the handwriting at the bottom of this, by the way, Mr. Murray? Is it your

14:41:07 20

21

And I want you to concentrate for a moment on strategic

Do you recognise

your's? A.

22

I don't think so.

Next Thursday check everything except rings.

I don't

think so.

23

Q. 604

You see it says 'next Thursday check for everything except rings'?

24

A.

Oh, I beg your pardon, yeah.

Q. 605

Sorry.

14:41:27 25

I

One of the matters ringed was the strategic consultancy fees.

So

26

what I want you to tell the Tribunal now, Mr. Murray.

27

attended that meeting and the person advised by the representative of Monarch,

28

that they wouldn't contribute towards the strategic consultancy fees.

29

discussion you had at that time and at that meeting?

14:41:49 30

A.

Is, as the person who

Well I'll try and paint a picture if I can, generally speaking. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

What

Brian Gillies

14:41:55

14:42:21

100 1

was a marketing surveyor in Guardian Royal and I was the marketing guy in

2

Monarch.

3

GRE point of view any lettings or sales that I was negotiating on my end.

4

in effect I would have had to get Brian's acquiescence or approval to any of

5

the transactions.

6

doing that on a regular basis there was other roads given to me to try and get

7

money or payments.

8

Mr. Baker or Mr. Lynn would have been dealing with Mr. Beng and I was dealing

9

with Mr. Gillies. There was several strands of negotiation going on.

14:42:46 10

And effectively, Chairman, Brian's function was to report from the

That was the primary role that interfaced with him.

So

On

Similar, where Mr. Sweeney would have been dealing with

And

certainly that represents a meeting that I would have had with Brian Gillies,

11

not, I would suspect purely to discuss a 50 percent recovery but it would have

12

come up at a meeting discussing lettings or sales or marketing.

13

have been asked to put that on the table as well and try and get payment on it.

14

So that's the context of it.

14:43:08 15

Q. 606

Right.

And I would

I hope that's helpful.

And I think it's also the case and we have heard evidence and I don't

16

want to spend unnecessary, unless you require me to do so, on the documentation

17

to establish it.

18

isn't that right?

19 14:43:27 20

Consultancy fee there should read payments to politicians;

A.

Well there were other things in that other than payments to politicians.

Q. 607

Well the 22,150 pounds that we see there is directly related to the payments

21

made in 1991; isn't that right?

22

A.

Okay.

If you say so, yeah.

23

Q. 608

In fact if we could have 3122, please.

24 14:43:41 25

You'll have seen this in the brief and you were probably here when this was

26

dealt with during the evidence of both Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Glennane

27

A.

Yes, yes, yes.

28

Q. 609

And isn't it -- can we take it and move forward on the basis that the strategic

29 14:44:00 30

consultancy fees that we see here on this document at 3668. for the payments to politicians? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

It's a heading

14:44:03

14:44:13

101 1

A.

Well that 22,150 is anyway.

2

Q. 610

22,150?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 611

The projected payments of 10 and 50 are equally payments which were anticipated

5

would be made to politicians; isn't that right.

6

A.

Which now?

7

Q. 612

If we could have the full document again, please.

8

A.

I wasn't the source of this document.

9

Q. 613

You had this document presumably when you went to meet with Mr. Gillies?

A.

I would have been told if you're going over to meet Brian try and get a cheque.

Q. 614

You would have been briefed on the document and you would have been advised

14:44:29 10

11 12 13

3668?

I'm not the source of that document.

what the various headings were for; isn't that right? A.

14

Well briefed is a bit strong now.

I'd have been given the document.

primary purpose of the meeting wasn't to negotiate.

14:44:49 15

The primary purpose would

have been a much bigger meeting in my own area and I would have told here try

16

and get this money as well when you're there.

17

Q. 615

Was there anybody else from Monarch at the meeting?

18

A.

At that particular meeting it would appear not.

19

it was on my own. Q. 616

22

Are you suggesting to the Tribunal that you didn't know what strategic consultancy fees meant?

23

A.

I'm not trying to suggest that, no.

24

Q. 617

So you did know?

A.

I'm not saying that I knew either.

14:45:16 25

26

I'm not saying that they were solely --

there could have been other things.

27

Q. 618

Did we not just a moment ago?

28

A.

That's the 22,150.

29

Q. 619

22,150?

A.

Whatever that figure is, yeah.

14:45:32 30

Because in my reporting back

to Mr. Monahan I say my meeting with Brian Gillies, which would seem to infer

14:45:06 20

21

The

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:45:33

14:45:34

102 1

Q. 620

What else could they have been.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Mr.--

4

Q. 621

Mr. Murray?

5

A.

10, 5, whatever you're saying here.

6

Q. 622

Well what were they?

7

A.

I don't know.

They could have been other things.

I'm speculating.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

Could we see the memo?

14:45:42 10

11

MR. QUINN: If we could have the memo of 3666.

12

there, Mr. Murray?

13

A.

14

You see the third paragraph

He will not contribute towards the strategic consultancy fees element of the cashflow projections.

14:45:59 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

17

able to put into a memo the fact that GRE were adamant that they wouldn't

18

contribute towards it.

19

what they were and the reasons why GRE were taking such a stance in relation to

14:46:21 20

21

Mr. Murray, you must have known what they were for.

If you were

Surely there would have been some discussion about

them. A.

Chairman, I'm not arguing on the 21,050, I'm arguing I don't know if there was

22

other items under that heading included, Chairman.

23

am making. I can speculate that he didn't want to pay them because they were

24

political contributions.

14:46:38 25

I believe he subsequently paid them because I

believe that strategic consultancy fee may have been given the heading that he

26 27

That is the only point I

suggested at some stage, either before or after that. Q. 623

28 29 14:46:49 30

MR. QUINN: Mr.-A.

It was subsequently we ended up getting a payment in full and final settlement Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:46:53

14:47:03

103 1 2

at one stage and that money would have been included. Q. 624

3

That's all I'm saying.

Mr. Murray, you were at this meeting with a representative of GRE isn't that right?

4

A.

That's right.

5

Q. 625

It's the 7th of May 1992?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 626

The only payments that have been made under that heading are the payments to

8

politicians.

9 14:47:10 10

If we look at 3657.

11 12 13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 627

Isn't that right?

A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 628

You coming back to tell your seniors the outcome of that meeting.

14:47:18 15

16

You are

17

advising that he will not make those payments either those payments or the

18

projected payments?

19 14:47:29 20

A.

That would appear to be correct, yes.

Q. 629

So there must have been some discussion between you and him in relation to this

21 22

item; isn't that right? A.

23 24 14:47:44 25

meeting from 1992.

I cannot recollect it.

Q. 630

You can't --

A.

I'm not denying that I wrote the memo and had the meeting.

26 27

Well if there was, on my honour, I can't recollect this, the minutia of that

I can't recollect

the minutiae of the meeting. Q. 631

This isn't minutiae, Mr. Murray, with respect.

This is you seeking to recover

28

actual and projected expenditure on behalf of the project in Cherrywood; isn't

29

that right?

14:48:03 30

A.

I would have had maybe 50 meetings with Brian Gillies over the two years or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:48:07

14:48:21

104 1 2

more. Q. 632

I met him every --

Leaving aside the date Mr. Murray.

Can you recall any meeting that you were

3

at where Mr. Gillies told you that he would not pay half of either the actual

4

or projected expenditure to politicians?

5

A.

I'm saying in evidence I don't deny I had the meeting.

I don't recollect the

6

minutiae or the debate per se but it's obvious that I had the meeting, had the

7

debate and reported on it.

8

Q. 633

Yes?

9

A.

You're asking me to sit down now and do a minute of that meeting in respect of

14:48:38 10

that element of the meeting, it would be remiss of me to mislead you.

11 12

I

could not do it. Q. 634

I'm not so much concerned about the actual meeting itself, Mr. Murray.

I am

13

concerned about your meeting with the representative of GRE where you are

14

seeking 50 percent contribution towards monies given to politicians and a

14:48:59 15

projected 60,000 pounds expenditure for the same purpose or under the same

16 17

heading? A.

I am admitting that was obviously the source of the debate at the time, yes.

18 19

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14:49:13 20

told you that us that you'd meet Mr. Gillies about the Cherrywood project,

21

among others.

22

isn't that correct?

23

Mr. Murray, what Mr. Quinn is saying to you, you have already

A.

24

You'd have to get his acquiescence to pay up on foot of it;

Sorry, Chairman.

When we were -- the relationship developed as a result of

the Tallaght project.

14:49:30 25

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Yes, we know that, yes.

And that was what my regular contact with him was.

Then it followed on.

28 29 14:49:42 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

He was the GRE -- he was the person that GRE were putting out

to negotiate regarding the Cherrywood project? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:49:45

14:50:01

105 1

A.

I would say he was one of four.

2 3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Mr. Baker and Mr. Gillies

He was one of them, yes.

5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY:

7

him as the memo would suggest in relation to this.

8

Monarch's case for those projections; isn't that correct

9

A.

What Mr. Quinn is suggesting to you is when you were meeting You would have to make

I would have had at the time oh, yes, yes.

14:50:05 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

you just increase it a bit, Mr. Quinn, just to see.

13

will do.

14

A.

And if you go back to the document.

Is it 3668? Just could

Yes, just the latter half

Yes.

14:50:19 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

If you look at that.

There's Mr.-- could I suggest to you,

17

Mr. Murray, that this is May, I think, isn't it?

18 19

MR. QUINN: 28th of April '92.

14:50:30 20

21

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28th of April '92.

22 23

MR. QUINN: The meeting is on the 7th of May '92.

24 14:50:35 25

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Yes.

So we're talking now about May '92.

And a lot of

26

what's gone on in this document, Mr. Murray, as I understand it, is historical.

27

The 22,150 was historic.

28

A.

You understand that

Yes.

29 14:50:50 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Fair enough.

You're seeking to recover GRE's contribution to

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:50:54

14:51:00

106 1 2

that? A.

Yes, yes.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

two month period for 60,000?

6

A.

Equally.

Under the same heading you're making a claim over a

Yes.

7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY:

9

87,500.

14:51:14 10

And in June it's 80,000.

And of the sum being sought or being

projected, expenses as I understand it, and Mr. Quinn will correct me, is

11 12

If you look at the total that's sought for -- well in May it's

80,000. A.

Do you see that?

Yes.

13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14:51:28 15

16

And yes and of that 80,000, 50,000 is under the heading

strategy consultancy fees A.

Yes, I see that.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

having this meeting with GRE you would have to be in the strongest possible way

14:51:40 20

And I think really what Mr. Quinn is asking you is if you're

making your case for Mr. Gillies's acquiescence to those projections and their

21

subsequent contribution to it.

22

to.

23

A.

I think that's really what Mr. Quinn is coming

I --

24 14:51:51 25

JUDGE FAHERTY:

26

A.

27

Q. 635

And as I read it that's the context.

If that's the context, that is correct, yes.

28 29 14:52:02 30

MR. QUINN: You were looking for a contribution of, in addition to the existing expenditure of 22,150 of 10,000 in respect of a payment in May and a projected Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:52:07

14:52:16

107 1

50,000 for June of that year; isn't that right?

2

A.

These were projections ...

3

Q. 636

Yeah?

4

A.

That would have been done by somebody else and I was told these are what we're

5 6

projecting forward and try and get a cheque, yes. Q. 637

7

As payments that would have to be made.

There was no election in May or June

'92; isn't that right?

8

A.

If you say so.

9

Q. 638

Now, just if I could move to the actual day back, if I may, for a moment to

14:52:34 10

1992.

I don't know, yes.

If we could have 7144.

This is a motion which was received by the

11

council on 4th of May 1992 signed by Councillors Lydon and Hand.

12

have -- you'll be familiar with that Mr. Murray, I presume?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 639

Did you meet Mr. Lydon and/or Mr. Hand at any stage?

A.

I never met Mr. Hand in my life.

14:52:51 15

16 17

I have met Mr. Lydon but I don't know -- I

certainly have met him in the context of chamber dinners in Dun Laoghaire. Q. 640

18 19

You'll

Yes.

Did you ever seek any councillor's support for the Cherrywood proposal

or the -- or this motion in the lead up to the 27th of May '92 meeting? A.

14:53:16 20

I probably would have sought support from councillors who would be in my own area where I live locally.

21

Q. 641

Yes.

Now, who -- what councillors would have fallen into your area?

22

A.

In -- in Malahide/Portmarnock it would have been Councillor GR Wright or

23

Councillor Nora Owen or Councillor Mr. Coyle, I think they would be the three

24

that I would have.

14:53:37 25

Q. 642

26

I think in 1999 Mr. Lynn has advised the Tribunal you were instrumental in getting a political contribution for Mr. Wright; isn't that right?

27

A.

That's correct, I've seen that in the brief, yes.

28

Q. 643

Now, you --

29

A.

Sorry, I think it was made to the Fianna Fail party if I may.

Q. 644

Was the request made by Mr. Wright?

14:53:52 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:53:55

14:54:10

108 1

A.

My recollection is that -- just my recollection, Chairman, that there was a

2

letter that came in.

3

green and white yellow flag with FF, yes GV Wright would have asked me for

4

support.

5

Q. 645

6

I haven't seen it in the brief.

But I remember the

Did you know in the lead up to that meeting in May '92 that there was going to an a motion tabled by Councillors Lydon and Hand in respect of the Cherrywood?

7

A.

I wouldn't have known that was the detail, no.

8

Q. 646

Now, on the 27th of May.

9

If I could have 7207.

As happened the manager had

produced a map which, if accepted, would have been acceptable to the Monarch

14:54:31 10

team; isn't that right? 92/44.

DP92/44.

Do you see the third paragraph

11

there, proposal by Councillors Lydon and McGrath, that the Manager's report be

12

accepted?

13

A.

I see it here, yes.

14

Q. 647

And there was a vote on that.

14:54:54 15

And had that been accepted, a rezoning proposal

of four houses to the acre would have been adopted; isn't that right?

16

A.

That would appear to be correct, yes.

17

Q. 648

Now, on piped sewage.

18 19 14:55:09 20

Now, that was the vote that Monarch lost effectively;

isn't that right? A.

We lost it, yes, yes.

Q. 649

Yes.

21

And the Lydon/Hand motion which was intended to be moved was in fact

withdrawn; isn't that right?

22

A.

I don't know that now to be honest.

23

Q. 650

Yeah?

24

A.

I wouldn't know that.

Q. 651

And when you left the Royal Dublin and the succeeding days and weeks.

14:55:18 25

Were

26

there meetings in relation to what went wrong in relation to the vote on 27th

27

of May '92?

28

A.

Meetings between?

29

Q. 652

Within Monarch.

A.

I'm sure we did.

14:55:35 30

Did you discuss?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:55:36

14:55:42

109 1

Q. 653

What the outcome?

2

A.

I can't remember specifically but I'm sure we did.

3

Q. 654

A postmortem effectively.

4 5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Yes.

I'm sure we did.

7 8

MR. QUINN: You would have attended those as the marketing manager.

9

big setback to Monarch, I suggest to you?

14:55:50 10

11

A.

Off and on, I wouldn't have attended every meeting.

Q. 655

And what view was taken within Monarch as to what in fact had gone wrong and

12 13

It was a

how the proposals had been unsuccessful? A.

14

I don't know how to answer that other than to say that if a vote failed or if a vote went down we'd get on with life and try and work towards getting it

14:56:14 15

rectified the next time there was an opportunity either in the Development Plan

16

process or whatever to try and get the lands rezoned, that's what we would have

17

done with it.

18

banks, the partners, GRE, whoever it was, that would have been the fundamental

19

philosophy on the time, let's get on with it.

14:56:37 20

21

Gone off and put the best spin on it to both the press, the

Q. 656

Yes?

A.

We had a lot of other projects in the company other than Cherrywood.

22

Cherrywood was by far the biggest one I admit.

23

life and start again.

24

Q. 657

14:56:52 25

Yes.

But we would have got on with

I think in late 1993 you had attended some of the meetings with the

bank, isn't that right, with Ansbacher particularly?

26

A.

I would have attended a lot of meetings with the banks, yes.

27

Q. 658

And you'll have seen those in the brief; isn't that right?

28

A.

I've seen them in the brief.

29

Q. 659

I think Ansbacher revised their facility.

14:57:10 30

I think it was 4.5 million facility

from Ansbacher and 2.5 million from Equity Bank and that was revised on 22nd of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:57:16

14:57:28

110 1 2

October '93 on terms; isn't that right? A.

3 4

Without going into detail I would have been aware that there was refinancing done and numbers.

Q. 660

That was 7 million pounds.

I think if we look at 8102, it was anticipated

5

that 150,000 would be paid in relation to interest by the 31st of December 1993

6

and that the balance of interest would be paid by 31th of January '94; isn't

7

that right?

8

A.

If that's what it says there, yes.

9

Q. 661

And there was -- if we look at 8103.

14:57:42 10

There were two further conditions which

I want to bring to your attention.

11 12

There was a target achievement fee of 39, 000 pounds payable in the event of a

13

contract for the sale of residential lands not being executed by 31st of March

14

'94; isn't that right

14:57:54 15

16

A.

Yes, I see that there, yes.

Q. 662

And in fact, the final repayment date for the loan was the 31st of January

17

'94?

18

A.

Um, um,.

19

Q. 663

If we look at final repayment date on that.

14:58:11 20

Do you see the heading 'final

repayment date'?

21

A.

Yes, I see that.

22

Q. 664

Yes?

23

A.

Yes, I see that.

24

Q. 665

So there was pressure in the lead up to the November '93 meeting on Monarch

14:58:23 25

from their bankers; isn't that right?

26

A.

Yes, yes, yes.

27

Q. 666

There was 7 million outstanding.

It had to be paid by 31st of January '94.

28

Interest had to be paid by the 31st of December '93.

29

had to be payable 31st of January '94.

14:58:43 30

The balance of interest

And there had to be a sale of

residential land to the tune of 217 acres by 31st of March '94 or otherwise Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

14:59:02

14:59:04

111 1

there would be an achievement fee of 39,000 payable to the bank; isn't that

2

right?

3

A.

Yes, that would be appear to be the conditions of that facility, yes.

I'm

4

just saying generally banks would always put target dates and pressure on you.

5

They would have been renewed then, the following facility would have rolled on

6

from that.

7

Q. 667

I think the bank wrote to you on 17th of November' 93, at 8031 and raised a

8

series of issues with you in relation to the sale and development of the site;

9

isn't that right? You'll have seen that in the brief?

14:59:18 10

11

A.

Yeah, yeah.

Q. 668

I think at 7941 you wrote to the bank on 19th of November 1993.

Would you

12

agree with me and you are familiar with this correspondence.

13

want to waste time on it.

14

strategy at this stage to either sell off the residentially zoned land and

14:59:43 15

That there was pressure on Monarch to have a

develop the balance of the industrially zoned or about to be zoned lands; isn't

16 17

Again, I don't

that right? A.

I wouldn't say there was pressure.

We would have been -- we would have

18

created our own strategy by saying Monarch was never known to be a company

19

involved in the residential element.

15:00:02 20

Our primary focus would have been the

retailer offices or warehousing or factories.

So we would have created that

21

pressure ourselves by going to the bank and saying we intend to reduce the

22

indebtedness by selling the residential lands and then we'll have -- our

23

expertise would have been more in the commercial area.

24

Q. 669

15:00:23 25

But you were under pressure in relation to this project in Cherrywood in October and November and December of 1993 to the extent that the bank were

26

expecting you to move on the sale of some of the lands so that you could reduce

27

your indebtedness.

Is that fair?

28

A.

Because we would have said that was our plan.

29

Q. 670

In fact if we look at 7947 we see a consideration of your letter to the bank on

15:00:41 30

the 3rd of December '93.

Between representatives of the two bankers that is

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:00:46

15:01:03

112 1

to say Ansbacher and Equity; isn't that right?

2

A.

I see they were the two partners in the consortium, yes.

3

Q. 671

And the very first line of that is that MD, who appears to be Mark Duffy of

4

Equity Bank, described the response by Monarch as incomplete with proposals

5

which fell short in key areas.

6

of your letter in November?

Do you see that? Isn't that their assessment

7

A.

That would appear to be their assessment of the letter.

8

Q. 672

They go on there to discuss, you will have seen this.

9

Again, I don't want to

open it unless you wish it me to do so?

15:01:19 10

11

They discuss what's required.

12 13 14 15:01:25 15

If we go to 7948. A.

Yes.

Q. 673

They are speaking about their penalty and the interest that was payable.

16

Do

you see that?

17

A.

Yes, I do.

18

Q. 674

And they refer to Mr. Monahan's verbal meeting that it was the company's

19

intention to sell off the residential zoned land as quickly as possible to

15:01:39 20

reduce their holding costs and concentrate on their strength namely commercial

21

development?

22

A.

That's just like I said, yes.

23

Q. 675

And I think the they wrote to you on 6th of December '93.

24 15:01:52 25

At 7945.

26

And they more or less told you to concentrate on the commercial

element at the earliest possible date'; isn't that right?

27

A.

The commercial or the residential is it, sorry?

28

Q. 676

Well I think point No. 2, the comments in your letter regarding the sale of 150

29 15:02:17 30

acres zoned residential at Cherrywood are noted.

During the most recent

syndicate meetings to dispose of the residential lands at Cherrywood and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:02:20

15:02:36

113 1

concentrate on the commercial element --

2

A.

That's correct, yes.

3

Q. 677

And again, I think you had a meeting with them on 23rd of December '93.

4

4731.

Sorry.

21st of December '93.

5

ongoing negotiations in relation to the sale of lands; isn't that right?

6

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yeah.

7

Q. 678

Yes.

8 9

And you update them on the various

Again, there's a further meeting at 4934.

Where again you are advising

them of the ongoing discussions? A.

Yes, that's correct, yes.

Q. 679

A file note?

11

A.

Sorry, I beg your pardon of the previous meeting.

12

Q. 680

The meeting of the 23rd of December, that's to say?

13

A.

I think so.

14

Q. 681

If we have 4734.

15:02:59 10

At

No, I actually think that's a file note.

That's an internal file note from the bank.

15:03:13 15

16

Could that be the file note? Or a subsequent file note

17

A.

It is, yes.

18

Q. 682

And it provides that somebody had contacted you to outline the syndicate's

19

position regarding the earlier proposals in Cherrywood.

15:03:30 20

I pointed out that

both syndicate banks considered that the primary objective at present was to

21

raise cash to service the interest requirement and reduce the overall volume of

22

the company's borrowings?

23

A.

That's correct, yes.

24

Q. 683

Now, can I just ask you what you can tell the Tribunal, Mr. Murray, about

15:04:06 25

projected costs at different times in relation to the project in Cherrywood.

26 27

On the 27th of July 1992.

28

enclosed I think a -- at 391 a Cherrywood Property Limited Planning Application

29

Cashflow Projection.

15:04:32 30

A.

At 3789 Mr. Sweeney wrote to Mr. Baker.

Do you see that?

I see that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

And he

15:04:33

15:04:48

114 1

Q. 684

2

And do you see strategic strategy consultancy fees of 40,000 being projected there, second from the bottom?

3

A.

I see it on that, yes.

4

Q. 685

Payable on the third month after the application start date.

5

A.

Yes, I see it on, that yes.

6

Q. 686

Had you any contribution to the compilation of that projection?

7

A.

You don't mind if I just glance down through it?

8

Q. 687

Yes.?

9

A.

Maybe on the perspectives I would have had a view but not on any of the other

15:05:15 10

elements.

Do you see that?

That would be coloured pictures and fancy photographs.

11

Q. 688

Can I ask you, what was the 40,000 in respect of?

12

A.

I've no idea.

13

Q. 689

And again, at 8753.

14 15:05:26 15

You see strategy consultancy of 10,000

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 690

On a projection between August and December '92?

18

A.

I see that, yes.

19

Q. 691

And when I'm referring now to strategy and consultancy.

15:05:44 20

I'm -- I believe I'm

referring to payments to politicians aren't I, Mr. Murray?

21

A.

I don't know. That's what you're saying.

22

Q. 692

That seems to be designation given to them in the books and records of

23 24

Monarch.? A.

15:06:01 25

would be the only one on that sheet, because I commissioned that report.

26 27

Well I would have been the author of the Irish Productivity Centre costs, that To

justify the jobs being created. Q. 693

If I could have 3781, please.

28 29 15:06:15 30

This is an extract from a letter written on 22nd or 24th of July 1992 by Mr. Monahan to GRE.

Again, you will have heard Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney's

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:06:19

15:06:29

115 1

evidence in relation to it.

2 3

Did you assist in the preparation of this letter, Mr. Murray?

4

A.

I don't believe I did, no.

5

Q. 694

Do you see the reference there to additional marketing costs?

6

A.

I do, yes.

7

Q. 695

Marketing costs would be a description or a designation which would fall

8 9 15:06:43 10

No, I don't believe I did.

naturally under your Stewardship; isn't that right? A.

It would, yes.

Q. 696

And Mr. Murray -- Mr. Monahan is there speaking about significant professional

11

fees incurred in relation to tax designation.

12

A.

Yeah, I see it, yes.

13

Q. 697

And then if we go to 3782.

Do you see that?

14 15:06:58 15

He quantifies the fees falling under that heading and also under the heading

16

of -- in relation to the sourcing of tenants.

17

you see that?

A sum of 850,000 pounds.

Do

18

A.

I see that.

19

Q. 698

Can you assist the Tribunal in any way in relation to how that sum was incurred

15:07:20 20

21

or how it was calculated by Mr. Monahan? A.

22 23

I don't other than I would have been involved in some of the negotiations on the various tenants referred to in the preceding paragraph.

Q. 699

24

Yes.

And in fact I think you were at a meeting on the 25th of September' 92.

At 3829 between representatives of Monarch and representatives of GRE.

15:07:44 25

that portion of that letter was discussed; isn't that right? We see that at

26

3830.

The heading marketing fees?

27

A.

Could I ask --

28

Q. 700

The very last.

29 15:08:02 30

Where

You see paragraph B the very last paragraph, Noel Murray

attended the meeting for this item and advised that the agreement reached on 1st of August '91 was in his opinion not related to marketing for investment Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:08:08

15:08:22

116 1

sales etc. but related mainly to project management but was in any case subject

2

to review?

3

A.

I see that.

4

Q. 701

Can you assist the Tribunal in any way on advising on the expenditure of

5

I don't know what it means.

I see it.

850,000 under that heading?

6

A.

I can't assist.

No, honestly, I can't.

7

Q. 702

On the 2nd of September '93.

8 9

If I could have 4493, there's a further letter including projections sent by

15:08:56 10

Mr. Sweeney to Mr. Baker.

11

If I could have the first schedule accompanying

that at 4209 which is a cost projection to the 1st of January '94.

12 13 14 15:09:29 15

Did you have any input into the preparation of that, Mr. Murray? A.

If you just bear with me a second. No, I don't believe I had.

Q. 703

Who would have been in a position to provide the detail for the items at 12 and

16

13 namely the Carrickmines Valley Sewage Scheme 1994, third party costs to

17

accelerate access to the sewer?

18

A.

19 15:09:56 20

I can speculate it was Muire & Associates who are civil engineers but I can't be sure.

Q. 704

How would those costs be incurred?

21

A.

I don't know the answer to that now.

22

Q. 705

Were you --

23

A.

There's no figure there.

24

Q. 706

Do you see the incentive bonus payments for staff in 1994 for achieving zoning

15:10:10 25

I don't know, I don't know.

and enhanced value of site.

26

Did you know that there were such payments being

discussed?

27

A.

No, I did not receive any, no.

28

Q. 707

We do know that Mr. Sweeney received a bonus payment; isn't that right? And

29

that's at 4347.

15:10:27 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:10:28

15:10:45

117 1

Sorry.

Mr. Lynn I should say.

At 4347 Mr. Lynn was to get 15,000; isn't

2

that right? Did you know that that Mr. Lynn was getting a bonus payment

3

A.

I didn't actually, no I didn't.

4

Q. 708

At 7813, Mr. Sweeney is reminding that Mr. Lynn be paid?

5

A.

I've seen that from the brief, yes.

6

Q. 709

Did you know that that bonus payment had been agreed or achieved?

7

A.

I have no recollection of it now.

8 9

I do now seeing as I read it in the paper.

I didn't know it at the time. Q. 710

15:11:02 10

Now, at 5167, there is a report entitled Cherrywood Development Report, again, this is a report in June '94.

11

And you will have heard quite a lot of

evidence in relation to it.

12 13 14

Did you have any input into the compilation of that report, Mr. Murray? A.

Could I maybe just have something?

Q. 711

If I could have 5168, please. 5169?

16

A.

Sorry, could I just go back.

17

Q. 712

5167?

18

A.

Is there a marking? Could I look at 15, appendix E, please.

19

Q. 713

Appendix E.

15:11:14 15

15:11:41 20

If you would bear with me, Mr. Murray, I'll come to appendix E.

While I'm doing that.

Can I ask you if you had any input into appendix A, at

21

5178, where it is anticipated that there would be payments towards General

22

Election and Seanad Election?

23

A.

No, I had no input into that.

24

Q. 714

Did you know that a document was in circulation within Monarch?

A.

I may have known at the time.

15:11:59 25

26 27

now. Q. 715

28 29 15:12:22 30

But I certainly wasn't, I don't recollect it

At 5180, appendix S, I think, there is zoning costs.

Do you see that? Did

you ever see that document and costs in relation to success -A.

Only in the context of the brief I've seen it.

Q. 716

I'll come back to that, appendix E.

It's at 5191.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

Would the marketing

15:12:36

15:12:49

118 1

department be under your?

2

A.

It would have come under my ...

3

Q. 717

So would it be fair to say if we could have 5192 what's included there under

4

that appendix was compiled within your department?

5

A.

It would, that would come under my ...

6

Q. 718

Now, I think by November '94 agreement had been reached with the manager in

7

relation to the science and technology park; isn't that right?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 719

And we see that, those heads of agreement at 4539.?

A.

Yes.

11

Q. 720

Were you involved in those negotiations, Mr. Murray?

12

A.

I was involved in the negotiations with Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown on the joint

15:13:19 10

13 14

venture agreement, I was, yes. Q. 721

15:13:40 15

And I think the manager brought them to the councillors on the 14th of November '94.

16

At 2390.

And they were discussed in his report at 2392; isn't that

right?

17

A.

I accept that would have been a fact, yes.

18

Q. 722

And I think we see there that the manager was to purchase or the council was to

19

purchase one-third of the lands which would form the proposed science and

15:14:01 20

21

technology park initially; isn't that right? A.

Yeah, the reason that's coming back to me now, that's correct.

Because the

22

view of the council was that it was the first time they got into a PPP, a

23

private with a developer.

24

strongly of the view that the elected representatives wouldn't approve of it

15:14:25 25

And the manager and the senior executives were

unless the council had an ownership in land rather than their equity being

26

regulated through a joint venture agreement.

27

came about selling the land.

28 29 15:14:47 30

Q. 723

So that was the reason how we

So I think it was agreed that they would acquire additional lands if necessary. For their part the council would initiate a procedure for a Draft Development Plan which would provide, as it had to, for the rezoning of the science and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:14:51

15:15:05

119 1 2

technology park? A.

I think the first bit was always disputed whether or not they had the right to

3

participate in further lands just to be clear.

They did, when the joint

4

venture was signed.

It was for 63 acres of which they owned 21 acres and that

5

was the agreement.

In fact remains in place today.

6

standing.

That agreement is still

7

Q. 724

What is in dispute is whether or not they were entitled to additional lands?

8

A.

Whether or not they were entitled to 33 and one-third percent of any additional

9 15:15:23 10

lands bought by Dunloe or its successors. Q. 725

11

But for their part, I think they were prepared to recommend a draft variation to cater for the rezoning for science and technology?

12

A.

That's correct.

13

Q. 726

And the re-siting of the existing C zoned lands to ensure that 7 hectares would

14 15:15:40 15

16

be relocated north? A.

That's correct.

Q. 727

And that the lands currently zoned agriculture would be north of the link road

17

would be rezoned residentially at 16 houses per hectare?

18

A.

Yeah, are you reading that? That's from their?

19

Q. 728

Yes.?

A.

Yes.

Q. 729

But if we look at 5450.

15:15:52 20

21

This is your -- sorry.

This is a note to file by

22

Ansbacher.

23

And do you see item No. 4 there? This increased density that is 7 houses per

24

acre also effects the first 94 acres of residential lands recently sold to

15:16:18 25

As a result of a meeting with you on the 10th of November '94.

Neville's and will result in an extra payment of 1.2 million to Monarch?

26

A.

I see that.

27

Q. 730

You don't think that would have come from you.

28

A.

It would have come from me, I beg your pardon.

29

Q. 731

You would agree with me, that doesn't appear in the formal heads of agreement?

A.

In which?

15:16:37 30

That wouldn't have come from me that information.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:16:38

15:16:57

120 1

Q. 732

Which we were just looking at and that were put up to the council?

2

A.

No, no. You don't need to.

The regulation of the relationship between

3

Neville's and Cherrywood Properties was regulated in a contract between

4

Cherrywood and Neville's .

5

of the science park lands.

6

Q. 733

I accept that.

It had nothing whatsoever to do with the rezoning

I'm not trespassing on the agreement.

I appreciate in a.

7

What I'm saying is that it would appear to be an added bonus to the agreement

8

you had entered into that the additional 94 acres would be rezoned higher

9

density.?

15:17:19 10

11

A.

Oh, well that's a statement of fact, yes.

Q. 734

But that doesn't appear.

12 13

If I go back to 2392, which is the agreement that

was being put up to the council; isn't that right? A.

14

Sorry, they are two distinct separate strands to what was happening. say this.

15:17:41 15

I must

Because the local authority themselves had an intention of zoning.

Wanting to get more lands zoned in Dun Laoghaire for industrial.

They were of

16

the view that that would not go through the system because industrial wasn't

17

perceived as being sexy enough, if I can use the word, in the development

18

context.

19

science park would be very good for the local authority, would increase jobs in

15:18:07 20

We sold the concept to, in fact Eddie Sweeney and myself, that a

the county, would give them a clean industry and that this was a form of

21

development that would be good for them.

22

separate transaction that we had entered into with Nevilles to sell the land,

23

which was our objective for the preceding twelve or eighteen months to sell any

24

lands, ideally residential, ideally to pay for it as quickly as possible.

15:18:36 25

26

But it wasn't in any way linked to a

Sorry. Q. 735

What you are saying, Mr. Murray, as I understand it, although you had sold the

27

lands to Neville's as you had to because of the negotiations with the banks.

28

That contract or option enabled you to get additional monies if the zoning on

29

those lands was increased?

15:18:52 30

A.

Yeah.

I just -- there's a slight -- I don't want to say that we were -- we Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:18:57

15:19:18

121 1

always set out to sell the residential lands.

2

that -- we made that statement to the banks ourselves.

3

sale by the bank.

4

at that stage it would have been prudent.

5

an earn out in the event of additional planning permissions coming at any

6

stage, you'd also have a top up in the contract for sale.

7

were selling sites at 15 or 20,000 a site and the developer or the landowner

8

would like to ensure that if the builder succeeded in getting increased

9

densities that there would be an earn out or a top up in the revenue for the

15:19:45 10

developer.

11 12

Yes, we sold the lands.

And certainly we created It wasn't a forced

And it -- in fact any land sale And I think normally to provide for

Normally, if you

That's what that agreement with Neville's gives vent to.

Sorry

for being too long-winded. Q. 736

Mr. Murray, you heard the evidence of Mr. Glennane, the matters that were dealt

13

with in detail in relation to the various payments to cheques drawn to cash or

14

to Allied Irish Banks?

15:20:02 15

16

A.

I heard his evidence.

Q. 737

Yes.

And you heard those payments having been made.

Can you assist the

17

Tribunal in any way as marketing manager of the Monarch Group in relation to

18

the ultimate destination of those funds or monies?

19

A.

15:20:23 20

I can't factually.

But if you want me to speculate.

certainly Mr. Monahan had a reputation for having a huge amount of cash around

21

him, for want of a better word.

22

That's speculation.

23

Q. 738

24 15:20:43 25

I believe that

I certainly would have been aware of that.

I don't know.

Did you know that that cash had been taken out of the company when it was in the periods being dealt with that is to say,'91, '92?

A.

I would not have known.

26

Q. 739

At that time?

27

A.

Not at that time, no.

28

Q. 740

Thank you very much, Mr. Murray.?

29

A.

Thank you, Chairman.

15:20:50 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:20:50

15:20:56

122 1

CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Sanfey, do you want to ask anything?

2 3

MR SANFEY:

No, thank you, Chairman.

4 5 6

CHAIRMAN: A.

All right.

Thank you

Thank you, Chairman.

7 8 9 15:21:01 10

THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.

11 12 13

MS. DILLON:

Mr. Richard Lynn, please.

14 15:21:03 15

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:21:16

15:22:04

123 1

MR. RICHARD LYNN, HAVING BEEN SWORN,

2

WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:

3 4 5 6 7

CHAIRMAN: A.

Good afternoon, Mr. Lynn.

Good afternoon.

8 9

MS. DILLON:

Good afternoon, Mr. Lynn.

15:22:09 10

11

I propose to try and take you through your evidence as quickly as possible.

12

And there are a certain number of matters which I think are not really in

13

dispute.

14 15:22:21 15

And I hope that we won't have to spend too much time on those.

16 17

But first I want to show you a number of documents that you were provided with

18

this morning, which are a series of documents that in fact have been prepared

19

by the Tribunal staff.

And if I could have page 9041, please.

15:22:42 20

21

And really this is only in an effort to expedite matters, Mr. Lynn.

22 23

And this is a document which has been prepared by reference to the

24

documentation in the brief that discloses either contact by you or payments by

15:22:57 25

you on behalf of Monarch to various councillors.

26

Do you understand the nature

of the exercise that was carried?

27

A.

I do, yes.

28

Q. 741

If we could increase, say, the first half of the page.

29 15:23:13 30

dealing with these today.

I don't propose

Just to explain what the exercise that has been

carried out, Mr. Lynn. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:23:15

15:23:30

124 1 2

Is that insofar as documentation discovered to the Tribunal indicates a contact

3

whether, say, by way of a meeting on foot of which you claimed expenses or a

4

political donation which is either admitted or accepted.

5

referenced on the documentation by reference to a page in the brief.

That has been

6 7

And if we look at that page again in full.

At 9041.

8 9

The councillors that are dealt with there are Councillor Sean Ardagh, Sean

15:23:46 10

Barrett, Cathal Bolan, Betty Coffey, Liam Cosgrave, Michael J. Cosgrave, Liam

11

Creaven, Anne Devitt, William Dockrell, Mary Faherty

12

Following page at 4092.

13

Richard Green, Tom Hand, Finbarr Hanrahan, Mary Harney, Barry Hayes, Helen

14

Keogh, Larry Lohan, Don Lydon.

Similarly Tony Fox, Sean Gilbride, Eamon Gilmore,

Sean Lyons

15:24:09 15

16

On the following page.

17

Mitchell, Tom Morrissey, Charlie O'Connor, Michael O'Donovan, John

18

O'Halloran, Anne Ormonde, Nora Owen, Pat Rabbitte, Therese Ridge, Ned Ryan,

19

Mervyn Taylor.

15:24:24 20

Trevor Mathews, Mary McGuinness, Colm McGrath, Olivia

There is an error with Mr. Mervyn Taylor at the bottom of

9043. That in fact is not a contact with you.

It's a contact with Mr. Eddie

21

Sweeney and I'll have that amended, Mr. Lynn.

22

9044.

And at the following page at

Sheila Terry, Tyndall, GV Wright.

23 24 15:24:41 25

And what I want it ask you in a broadway ... A.

Could I just say.

26

Q. 742

Yes?

27

A.

Maybe you would take out Mary Flaherty as well.

28

Q. 743

Certainly if you see any errors.

29 15:24:54 30

Lynn.

I'm not going to deal with these today, Mr.

But if you want to look at them overnight and see whether apart from

the Mary Faherty and I've identified Mervyn Taylor, whether in general terms Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:25:00

15:25:18

125 1

you accept the level of contact as is evidenced by the documentation.

2

brief page of which is referred to on the document.

3

with the level of your contact with councillors rather than going through each

4

document page by page but I have no problem doing that.?

5

A.

6

I appreciate what you have you are saying.

The

It might expedite dealing

I would imagine that you have

extracted these from the expense or contributions?

7

Q. 744

Either contributions --

8

A.

They would be only one fifth of the contacts that I had made to the various

9 15:25:35 10

members. Q. 745

11

These wouldn't reflect the actual contacts.

Oh, I fully accept that in so far as there is documentary evidence of contact between yourself and councillors?

12

A.

Oh, I know that.

13

Q. 746

What we were attempting to do with this documentation was to reduce the

14

necessity of going through maybe two folders of pages which simply show that

15:25:53 15

you have contact with councillors?

16

A.

I have no problem with that.

17

Q. 747

If you were prepared to accept these to the level of contact that you had with

18

these councillors over the particular period of time, and you are under no

19

obligation to do so, it would simply mean we wouldn't have to go through that

15:26:08 20

exercise in public?

21

A.

That's okay with me.

22

Q. 748

I would like to you to consider it overnight Mr. Lynn and indicate to the

23

Tribunal that you are happy to with the document and we can proceed on that

24

basis. In general, what I understand you are saying to the Tribunal, is that

15:26:19 25

you would say that your contact with councillors was many multiples of the

26

contact that's evidenced by the documentation?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 749

And that you would have had much greater contact with the councillors, a lot of

29 15:26:34 30

which or most of which was not evidence by any document? A.

That's quite correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:26:36

15:26:56

126 1

Q. 750

I'll come to deal with the level of your contact. First could I ask you to

2

outline to the Tribunal the circumstances of which you came to be retained by

3

Monarch Properties and the nature of the job that you were employed to do?

4

A.

Well, I made application to the late Phil Monahan for a job in 1989.

And he

5

had just acquired the Cherrywood Property in Cherrywood in Lahaunstown.

6

previously worked as town clerk in Dundalk.

7

he's from Dundalk.

8

represented the council in a planning case whereby Monarch were trying to

9

extend the shopping centre there.

15:27:26 10

I had come across Mr. Monahan,

I suppose my first business contact with him was when I

appeal to the board.

There was a council refusal.

An oral hearing was called for.

There was an

I represented the

11

council.

12

won and I think emerging from that and I was interested in leaving local

13

Government and I made an application to him and he could see that I could

14

fulfil a role that he then perceived a need to fill.

15:27:50 15

I had

And he had his representatives on the other side.

And the council

Q. 751

And did you approach Mr. Monahan, the late Mr. Monahan.

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 752

About a particular job in general or did you approach him about the Cabinteely

18 19

lands? A.

No, in general.

I would have made an approach to him I'd say from maybe late

15:28:07 20

'88 into early '89.

21

offered a position.

It was only afterwards about May or June that I was

22

Q. 753

And specifically what position were you offered, Mr. Lynn?

23

A.

I was offered the position as a project co-ordinator for the Cherrywood

24

project.

15:28:26 25

been acquired.

26 27

15:28:41 30

Certain history to it and he wanted it to be put into a

developable state. Q. 754

28 29

And basically that was that. It was a Greenfield site and it had

And correct me if I'm -- at the time that you were employed. partners with Monarch in the venture?

A.

No.

Q. 755

Or did that occur later? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

Were GRE

15:28:43

15:28:53

127 1

A.

No, that was later.

2

Q. 756

And when you were appointed project manager?

3

A.

Co-ordinator.

4

Q. 757

Project co-ordinator of the thing.

5 6

Were you to project coordinator, the

professional team if I can call it that? A.

That's correct, headed by Fergal McCabe, Muir Associates, Brady Ship and

7

Martin.

8

people to put together various submissions.

9

held as a team, then having got as far as making planning applications.

15:29:16 10

Q. 758

11 12

And there they would have been

And who was the overall head in charge of the Cabinteely or Cherrywood

project? A.

13 14

Right.

An archeologist, noise people, we'd a whole gambit of professional

Ed Sweeney, he was the development director.

It was to Mr. Sweeney that I

reported. Q. 759

15:29:33 15

Yes.

And at the time that you were retained by Monarch.

Would you have been

aware of the fact that the 1983 Development Plan for Dublin was coming up for

16

review or was in fact the review process had been initiated by Dublin County

17

Council?

18

A.

19

underway.

15:30:00 20

21

That was the reason that I was engaged.

That the review was about to get

That was the first task that I had was to make the preparation for

the submission to the review. Q. 760

Right.

So that the first attempt in order to achieve an upgrade on the

22

Cherrywood lands would have been in an attempt to seek it through the officials

23

of Dublin County Council by way of making a submission to them and to see if

24

that submission could be adopted?

15:30:08 25

26

A.

That's quite correct.

Q. 761

And I think that ultimately and I'm trying to short circuit matters a little

27

bit here.

28

as the manager's proposals for the Carrickmines area.

29

manager had adopted substantially proposals that had been made by Monarch

15:30:28 30

That when DB 90/123 came to be published by Dublin County Council

through Mr. Fergal McCabe in late 1989? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

It's your view that the

15:30:32

15:30:48

128 1

A.

That's quite correct.

2

Q. 762

And that you accept as the project co-ordinator that the manager in promoting

3

DP90/123 was accepting in substance, if not in detail, the submissions that had

4

been made by Monarch in connection with the Carrickmines Valley?

5

A.

That's correct, Your Honour.

6

Q. 763

Would it also be fair to say that at that time in late 1989 and indeed

7

subsequently, that Monarch were by far the greatest landowner in terms of size

8

in the Carrickmines Valley as a single landowner?

9

A.

15:31:06 10

We would certainly have been a significant landowner.

I couldn't say whether

we were the biggest -- Mr Galvin.

11

Q. 764

Between yourself and Mr. Galvin's lands?

12

A.

Certainly between those two, I'd certainly say yes, we were the largest pack of

13 14

land, yes. Q. 765

15:31:27 15

And when your -- when you took up the job, as it were, as I understand it. Again correct me if I'm wrong.

The post position was on the 1983 plan was

16

approximately slightly more than two-thirds of the land were zoned residential

17

on one house to the acre on septic tank.

18

1983 line were zoned agriculture and there was some amenity lands to the very

19

north?

15:31:46 20

A.

The balance of the lands west of the

I don't know that there was any amenity lands in the '83 zoning.

21

be correct.

22

one-third.

You could

Certainly basically it was residential two-thirds agriculture

23

Q. 766

And the residential zoning was one house to the acre on septic tank?

24

A.

That's correct.

Q. 767

The reason for one house to the acre on septic tank was because the

15:32:00 25

26 27

Carrickmines sewer hadn't been developed at that time; isn't that right? A.

28 29 15:32:15 30

That's right.

Despite the fact that the outfall had been commissioned, had

been built and commissioned. Q. 768

At Shanganagh?

A.

And yet the pipeline hadn't been put in.

Which was a bit surprising.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:32:20

15:32:37

129 1

Q. 769

So in order to develop the lands on a commercial basis, you would have to set

2

about achieving a number of matters.

3

change in the residential density?

4

A.

In the residential zoning first off.

5

Q. 770

Yeah well if we deal it in sections.

6

You would have to set about achieving a

And the residential as part of that. On the lands also zoned residential you

would be looking for an upgrade on the density?

7

A.

Ordinary normal residential density.

8

Q. 771

Would depend upon having sewer availability?

9

A.

That's quite correct.

Q. 772

On the lands that were zoned agriculture.

15:32:51 10

11

You would be hoping to get those

zoned residential or industrial?

12

A.

I think initially we went for -- well most of that land sorry for residential.

13

Q. 773

Uh-huh?

14

A.

A part of, you have one section of it was going into the business park.

Q. 774

And you were also seeking in the submissions that you made to the council, that

15:33:08 15

16

part of the lands would be zoned for retail, a small town centre effectively

17

and also commercial or industrial zoning?

18

A.

That's correct, a district centre and --

19

Q. 775

And this was adopted by manager who brought it to the council?

A.

That's right in October 1990 he brought that report to the council and

15:33:25 20

21

recommended it to the council.

22

Q. 776

And the council debated it over two meetings and went out on a site visit?

23

A.

That's right.

24

Q. 777

In December of 1990.

15:33:43 25

rejected by the councillors and the manager was directed to prepare fresh

26 27

On foot of a motion by Councillor Coffey, dP90/123 was

plans? A.

I wouldn't agree with you there.

28

sought to amend DP90/123.

29

the mountains if you like.

15:34:12 30

The motion by McDonald, Coffey, Murphy

To take away the development to the, if you like,

Can we use the west side of the southeast

motorway. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:34:12

15:34:34

130 1

Q. 778

Yeah.?

2

A.

Anyway.

To the west side of the southeast motorway.

All the parts that were

3

in DP90/123 in relation to the Monarch lands were retained as a result of that

4

motion and that was depicted in the map January 1991, which was noted by the

5

council.

6

to what the word "noted" means for matters going through the council.

And I presume you've seen the notation of Sinead Collins in relation

7

Q. 779

Yes?

8

A.

So in essence, there was no change for the Monarch lands between October 1990

9 15:34:52 10

and January 1991. Q. 780

Except that the 1983 line was to be the line that was deciding -- sorry.

11

According to what Sinead Collins has told the Tribunal.

12

is recorded in later minutes of the meeting, the line of the 1983 plan which --

13

sorry.

14

plan that's operative is the old plan?

15:35:18 15

16

I'll go back to re phrase it.

And I think indeed as

Until the new plan is made, the only

A.

That's right.

Q. 781

So that all of the debates that take place and suggestions, motions and

17

amendments that happen, none are operative until the Development Plan is

18

adopted by the council?

19 15:35:30 20

A.

That's quite correct.

Q. 782

So throughout the entire time that Monarch were making submissions to the

21

council and the council were dealing with Monarch and other lands.

22

operative Development Plan was the 1983 plan?

The

23

A.

That's quite right.

24

Q. 783

So that references to the plan or the adoption of the '83 line were references

15:35:44 25

to the line that existed in 1983?

26

A.

That is right.

27

Q. 784

So that when the plan came to be made in 1993, that then became the new plan in

28 29 15:36:00 30

December 1993? A.

Well again -- in December -- in December 1993, yes.

Q. 785

That became the -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:36:01

15:36:18

131 1

A.

2

I think maybe if you look at the meeting of the 6th of December 1990 and look at that motion.

3

Q. 786

6954, please.?

4

A.

You'll see that it refers to the south -- that the development was to go up to

5

the proposed line.

6

Q. 787

953 is the beginning of this.?

7

A.

If you don't mind I ....

8

Q. 788

So the beginning of the motion is at 6953.?

9

A.

The draft development for 1990 (witness reading to himself) proposed line.

Q. 789

Yes?

A.

Now, the proposed line was that which had been contained in the October 1990

15:36:43 10

11 12 13

County Manager's proposal. Q. 790

14

Well in fact I suggest to you.

I'm not going to argue with you because it's

irrelevant and this isn't a judicial review.

15:37:02 15

I suggest to you you're wrong.

I think it's clear from all of the Manager's Report, at all stages the manager

16

maintained that the line at the southeast of the motorway was a diagrammatical

17

line, a proposed line always.?

18

A.

That emerged in 1992 not in 1991.

19

Q. 791

And that -- in fact it's your opinion that what the manager was talking about

15:37:20 20

21

there was the line in DP90/123? A.

22 23

Q. 792

15:37:59 30

And you will be aware of course when the manager prepared the maps.

The later

of the motorway had reverted to the line of the 1983 line? A.

27

29

It was off the Monarch

maps that were prepared by the manager in DP92/44 and DP 90129 A that the line

15:37:40 25

28

It was to the west of the Monarch lands.

lands.

24

26

Absolutely.

No, no, it never reverted in accordance with any manager's proposal back to the 1983 line.

Q. 793

No I'm saying back to the line of the 1983 line.

We'll go through.

Rather

than trying to summarise it we can go through it map by map, Mr. Lynn. will become clear as we do that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

It

15:38:01

15:38:08

132 1 2

In any event, insofar as what had been decided at this meeting your opinion was

3

that Monarch could --

4

A.

6th of December?

5

Q. 794

Yes.

6 7

Monarch could develop up to the line of the Southeastern Motorway as

proposed in DP90/123? A.

Well that we could develop all of our land insofar as the Southeastern Motorway

8

was off our lands and to the west and there was lands between us and it, i.e.

9

the Galvin lands.

15:38:25 10

Q. 795

And the motion in question that's on screen says that the draft development for

11

1990 be prepared on the basis of limiting zoning development to the eastern

12

side of the Southeastern Motorway proposed line and taking cognisance of

13

developments approved in the area since the adoption of the 83 plan and in

14

doing this significantly reduce the number of areas being proposed for

15:38:48 15

industrial zoning and indicate where public open space parks would be provided

16

for and indicate the nature of residential zoning for proposed residential

17

lands.

18 19

So when Ms. Collins told the Tribunal that this in effect was a rejection of

15:39:02 20

DP90/123 you don't agree with that; is that correct?

21

A.

I don't.

22

Q. 796

All right?

23

A.

It rejected or rather took away development from the Western side of the

24

proposed Southeast Motorway line and then it reduced, substantially reduced,

15:39:18 25

the extent of the industrial development which was to be located around the

26 27

It rejected.

Carrickmines interchange at the behest of a number of residents in that area. Q. 797

Yes.

And in January 19 -- yes.

If I could just have page 7019, please.

28 29 15:39:46 30

This might just clarify.

This is the manager's proposal DP90/129A.

a map prepared in May of 1991 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

This was

15:39:48

15:39:54

133 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 798

You will see there that there are two lines for the motorway.

3

One is

described as the revised line for the motorway.

4 5

And the other -- do you see that?

6

A.

I do, yes.

7

Q. 799

And the other line is the original 1983 line, if I can call it that.?

8

A.

Yeah, but the 1983 line.

9

Q. 800

If you just -- do you agree with that anyway for a start?

A.

I agree that the Southeastern Motorway line is as provided under the revised

15:40:07 10

I think if you go to the --

11

line for the motorway which is in accordance with the October 1990 position of

12

the County Manager.

13

Q. 801

Yes?

14

A.

The manager never moved the Southeast Motorway line back onto the Monarch

15:40:24 15

16

lands. Q. 802

17

No, no.

Sorry.

There are two lines proposed for the Southeast Motorway line

on that map?

18

A.

I beg your pardon.

19

Q. 803

So when it says revised line.

A.

From the previous line.

21

Q. 804

Where is that indicated on the map?

22

A.

The previous map is on that, on the line within the Monarch lands.

23

Q. 805

Right.

15:40:38 20

24

There is not.

There is only one.

It's being revised from what, Mr. Lynn?

And if we go back then to -- do you say then that the -- do you see

where the line is being cut off there? You see the line that's going through

15:40:55 25

the Monarch lands?

26

A.

I do.

27

Q. 806

Do you see it says AS1 to AP?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 807

Is that effecting both east and west of the line that's bisecting the Monarch

15:41:04 30

lands? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:41:07

15:41:21

134 1

A.

AS1 to AP?

2

Q. 808

Yes.?

3

A.

It could be effecting all of the lands.

4

Q. 809

Are you sure about that? If you are correct in what you've been telling the

5

Tribunal about DP90/123 it follows automatically that all of the lands on that,

6

that go up to what you describe as the only line of the motorway, were

7

capable -- were, could be developed for residential.?

8

A.

That is quite correct.

9

Q. 810

Yeah?

A.

I mean, if you go on to -- I'll find the reference by and by for you.

11

Q. 811

Uh-huh?

12

A.

Which signifies that the 1983 line had moved.

13

Q. 812

Yes.?

14

A.

If you go on --

Q. 813

If you just deal with the question now about the extent of the residential

15:41:35 10

15:41:47 15

16

development according to that map.

17

your opinion that the out -- blackout line which contains the words AS1 to AP

18

both north and indeed on the Monarch lands includes lands to the west of the

19

1983 line?

15:42:09 20

A.

21

Are you telling the Tribunal that it's

What I'm saying to you is that the only change between October 1990 and January 1991, there was no change for the Monarch lands.

22

Q. 814

No, no, if you just listen to the question I asked you, Mr. Lynn --

23

A.

If I look at this.

24

Q. 815

Yes?

A.

And I don't know where this comes in the sequence of events.

15:42:22 25

This is

26

suggesting that previously zoned lands at one house per acre on septic tanks

27

are now proposed to be zoned at four houses to the acre, that's what they mean

28

there.

29 15:42:39 30

Q. 816

Are you saying?

A.

Sorry. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:42:39

15:42:57

135 1

Q. 817

2

That the residential zoning that's indicated by AS1 on that map includes the lands that are west of the 1983 line?

3

A.

Sorry.

4

Q. 818

This was part of Ms. Collins' evidence.

5

I'm not familiar with this particular map. And you'll be aware.

that was put before the council on 24th of May 1991.?

6

A.

On the 24th of May 1991?

7

Q. 819

Yes.?

8

A.

In what context?

9

Q. 820

It was adopted -- accepted by the council.?

A.

That's precisely what I'm saying to you.

15:43:08 10

This was a map

11

was given three options.

12

with the three options.

The council on the 24th of May 1991

The question arises why they were.

Anyway, to deal

13 14

To go back to the 1983 line.

15:43:41 15

Sorry.

The 1983 zoning.

1991 proposal or to take the -- I may have got those.

To take the January I think it was to take

16

the October 1990 proposal or take the January 1991 proposal.

17

proposal and the October 1990 proposal were similar for Monarch.

18

Development Plan was not.

19

Q. 821

15:43:55 20

Yes.

Just insofar as this map is concerned.

definitive answer on it.

The January 1991 The 1983

If I could just get your

Are you telling the Tribunal that it's your opinion

21

that the residential zoning indicated on that map includes the lands that are

22

west of the 1983 line or not?

23

A.

24 15:44:15 25

Well I don't know what this map is associated with.

Is it associated with the

motion adopted? Q. 822

26

These are the adjustments to the 1983 plan to form the basis of the 1991 draft proposed by the manager in May of 1991.?

27

A.

Sorry, I don't think they are proposed by the manager.

28

Q. 823

They were brought before the council?

29

A.

They were brought before the council.

Q. 824

Uh-huh.?

15:44:32 30

That's different.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

The council --

15:44:35

15:45:03

136 1

A.

This appears to be the Development Plan as -- sorry.

This appears to be the

2

result of the decision of the council on the 24th of May 1991.

Which was to

3

go out on public display at one house per acre on septic tanks, i.e. to go out

4

again with the 1983 zoning.

5

services coming through the lands that the one house per acre on septic tanks

6

should now read four houses per acre on services.

The manager interpreted that because there was

7

Q. 825

So --

8

A.

So if that -- if that is the particular -- if that is the particular map

9

associated with the decision.

15:45:26 10

1991.

11

The decision of the council on the 24th of May

The housing only refers to the lands east of what we would normally

term the former Harcourt Street rail line.

12

Q. 826

The 1983 line as its been called?

13

A.

The 1983 line.

14

Q. 827

And as it's been called by the manager in his reports I think?

A.

Yes.

16

Q. 828

If we stick with the 1983 line it might keep everything relatively simple?

17

A.

Right.

18

Q. 829

Insofar as all of that is concerned.

15:45:44 15

19

Lynn.

15:45:59 20

21

What I really wanted to ask you, Mr.

Was when department 90/123 was published.

Obviously that would have

been something that was very acceptable to Monarch? A.

22

Yes, insofar as it reflected our professional team's input into the Development Plan proposal.

It made for sound planning and development of the area.

23

Q. 830

Yes?

24

A.

It was acceptable to the County Manager. Acceptable to the professional

15:46:15 25

planners.

26 27

Was so promoted by them.

So it certainly would have been

acceptable to Monarch. Q. 831

And would you have been aware when you became employed by Monarch first of any

28

contact at, say, a ministerial or political level between anybody in Monarch

29

and any politicians in connection with the Carrickmines lands?

15:46:33 30

A.

No, I wouldn't have been aware of that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:46:36

15:46:48

137 1

Q. 832

2

Were you aware, for example, that Mr. Monahan apparently had a meeting in May of 1989 which was around the time that you were employed; isn't that right?

3

A.

No, it wouldn't surprise me.

No, I wouldn't be aware, no.

4

Q. 833

You weren't aware of that?

5

A.

No.

6

Q. 834

And were you aware of discussions that took place on the 6th of June 1989 with

7

the drainage department of Dublin County Council at 2850.

8

just see under the heading foul drainage and move down to the fifth line,

9

Dublin County Council engineers had been instructed to prepare tender documents

15:47:11 10

for approval by the Department Of The Environment.

Where the -- if you

J Mc D who was John McDaid

11

and BM Barry Morris stated that they had been surprised by the instructions and

12

it was not on the priority list.

13

five months time.

They expect it to be complete in four to

14 15:47:26 15

16

That was in connection with the Carrickmines sewer; isn't that right? A.

I can't say the precise date that I was employed.

If I was employed prior to

17

the date 6th of June 1989.

18

alerted me.

19

between our consultant engineers and the relevant section of the local

15:47:49 20

21

I would have expected Ken McEvoy would have

It doesn't surprise me that there would be ongoing contact

authority. Q. 835

22

Well certainly you were at a meeting, Mr. Lynn, on the 28th of June 1989. where the similar matter was being discussed.

At

At 2875, please.

23 24

You will see here that you are on record -- you are that RM line co-ordinator

15:48:06 25

at the top of the document

26

A.

Yes, yes.

27

Q. 836

And that would mean that by the 28th of June 1989 at least --

28

A.

I was there.

29

Q. 837

You were there.

15:48:17 30

In relation to the present position of the motorway.

Mr. McEvoy on the third paragraph was outlining option C. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

And it was

15:48:22

15:48:43

138 1

preferable insofar as it moved the motorway westwards and provided for benefits

2

for the main landowner effected, in that Galvins would have one-third of his

3

lands east of option C line.

4

Mr. McEvoy again is stating that as far as he knew, it had not been on the

5

priority list of Dublin County Council up until this point in time.

Following page at 2876, foul drainage heading.

6 7

So there was discussions going on at an early stage of your employment with the

8

line of the motorway and also with the necessity of getting the foul drainage

9

or the sewer operative.

15:48:57 10

A.

11 12

Certainly because without foul drainage and without access you can't have development.

Q. 838

Yes.

So it was necessary to move on all fronts.

And certainly by 10th of August '89.

At 2893 Mr. Frank Simons was

13

writing to you and under the heading 'drainage proposals' were telling you that

14

Dublin County Council had been instructed by the Department Of The Environment

15:49:21 15

to prepare contract documents for the Carrickmines Valley drainage scheme

16

according to Mr. Hennigan, deputy chief engineer.

17

80 percent of the necessary documents and the total scheme should be available

18

within three months.

19

Carrickmines Valley including the Galvin lands at Cabinteely.

15:49:41 20

21

The council prepared some

This will cater for all of the zoned lands in the By Galvin

lands, is it likely that he might have meant the Monarch lands? A.

22

At least including the Monarch lands.

Would you just give us the date of that

again?

23

Q. 839

10th of August 1989?

24

A.

1989?

Q. 840

Yes.?

26

A.

Have you any idea when the contract documents were actually prepared.

27

Q. 841

In the light of your previous answer about the level of knowledge about whether

15:49:52 25

28

or not there was contact at any political level in relation to either the sewer

29

or the roadway.

15:50:09 30

I'm just drawing these documents to your attention, Mr. Lynn,

so that you can comment on them? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:50:10

15:50:25

139 1

A.

2

I accept that but I made a comment I wasn't aware but I wouldn't be surprised. I would be surprised if there wasn't contact.

3

Q. 842

You would be surprised if the Minister for the Environment wasn't in contact?

4

A.

If somebody wasn't in contact either with the legal authority or with the

5 6

Minister's office. Q. 843

Would you have been aware then or did you know that in November 1989

7

Mr. Monahan is recorded as having a meeting with Mr. Padraig Flynn then

8

Minister for the Environment although Mr. Flynn cannot recollect such a

9

meeting?

15:50:38 10

11

A.

I wouldn't be aware of any save what I've heard here at the Tribunal.

Q. 844

Certainly by May of 1989.

At 2980.

12 13

Still on the issue of Carrickmines sewage scheme there's a meeting between

14

Mr. Meehan, McCabe, Sweeney and yourself.

15:50:57 15

And it is recorded there that it

was agreed that a political -- on the fourth paragraph down under the heading

16

Carrickmines Valley sewage scheme, political input was required to ensure that

17

the Carrickmines Valley sewage scheme went ahead as soon as possible.

18

Mc C, that's Mr McCabe, indicated that Michael Cotter would accompany Eddie

19

Sweeney to see Minister Flynn to indicate an overall need in that area.

And F

15:51:21 20

21

Certainly it would appear by May of 1990 if you were at this meeting, you would

22

have been aware of the discussion that the Minister for the Environment should

23

have an input of some sort or a meeting in connection with the Carrickmines

24

Valley sewage scheme

15:51:34 25

A.

26

Well, this sort of states what I've just said.

I would be amazed if there

hadn't been some contact.

27

Q. 845

Uh-huh?

28

A.

It would appear to me that the Carrickmines Valley sewage scheme was long

29 15:51:53 30

awaited insofar as the outfall had already been constructed. recollection is it was there for quite a number of years. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

And my

15:51:56

15:52:11

140 1

Q. 846

Yes?

2

A.

The development of the valley, as it was called.

Not only in the Monarch

3

lands but also the upper lands, up as far as Stepaside, was all held back.

4

There was County Council cottages, which were -- my understanding is that the

5

sewage system was completely antiquated.

6

Q. 847

7

In July of 1990 I think you were recommending to Mr. Sweeney at a meeting at 2985.

8 9

And particularly at 2986.

Under the heading access to site.

In the second

15:52:32 10

paragraph RML, that's yourself I assume Mr. Lynn, indicated that it was not

11

alone necessary to have the line of the motorway established but to have it

12

actually constructed to facilitate the development and recommended contact be

13

made at the highest level i.e. ministerial level to ascertain the position.

14 15:52:48 15

16

And that seems to have been cc'd to Mr. Monahan, Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney A.

17

Yes, that would reflect my view that the N11 was heavily trafficked and the possibility of getting any major development off the N11.

18

Q. 848

Yes?

19

A.

Without the Southeast Motorway at least being sanctioned.

Q. 849

So certainly --

21

A.

And possibly and hopefully under construction.

22

Q. 850

So certainly it was within your mind by August of 1990 that contact at the

15:53:10 20

You wouldn't have a hope.

23

highest ministerial level was necessary and relevant to Monarch's interests in

24

progressing their plans in relation to the line of the motorway?

15:53:28 25

26

A.

It would appear to be so, yes.

Q. 851

And therefore, if you had intended to indicate earlier to the Tribunal that you

27

yourself didn't have any direct knowledge of any ministerial contact at any

28

level, what you're now saying to the Tribunal is that you did make such a

29

recommendation in August of 1990.

15:53:43 30

A.

I beg your pardon. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:53:45

15:54:03

141 1

Q. 852

Was that the correct date? In July of 1990.?

2

A.

I answered your question that you asked me.

Did I know sometime in May 1989

3

whether Mr. Monahan had had contact with the Minister Flynn I think you

4

mentioned, I didn't have that knowledge.

5

actually that memo in front of you.

I don't know the outcome of

6

Q. 853

Uh-huh?

7

A.

I strongly recommended, as I would if I was in the same position today.

8 9

It

was the only way of getting movement. Q. 854

15:54:16 10

And would you have seen any necessity for a meeting between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Flynn in connection with the rezoning of the Cabinteely lands?

11

A.

Absolutely not.

12

Q. 855

And at 851 --

13

A.

The only thing.

14

There was no way the Minister would interfere with that.

Maybe.

I don't know whether it's relevant.

to look at it, the sanctioning of a sewerage scheme.

15:54:36 15

come first and zoned land second.

But you have

The sewage scheme would

In the department's eyes unless you have

16

zoned land there's no need for a pipe.

17

schemes around the country that unless the Minister is from that particular

18

area he may not be inclined to put his money there if the land is not zoned for

19

development to receive the services.

15:55:01 20

And there are so many competing

And that's where you get the circle.

Q. 856

This land was zoned residential since 1983 as to a portion of it.

21

A.

One house per acre.

22

Q. 857

On septic tank?

23

A.

I would imagine that the Minister would say if -- sorry.

24 15:55:14 25

I better not say

what the Minister might say. Q. 858

You didn't yourself meet the Minister?

26

A.

No.

27

Q. 859

In connection with the Carrickmines lands?

28

A.

No.

29

Q. 860

Were you aware of any meeting in 1990 between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Flynn in

15:55:26 30

rezoning of the lands or the Shanganagh sewer? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:55:30

15:55:43

142 1

A.

2

Q. 861

I wasn't aware of any meeting. Any such contacts that would have passed between the late Mr. Monahan and

3

Mr. Flynn or the department and the outcome of any such contacts would have

4

been a relevant matter for you as project co-ordinator?

5

A.

6 7

It would have been very relevant.

But I wouldn't and wasn't made aware of the

contact or of the outcome. Q. 862

Why was that as such meetings apparently did take place.

Why would you think

8

there wouldn't have been any feedback to you, Mr. Lynn, about such contact or

9

communication?

15:56:02 10

A.

Unfortunately, the only person who could answer that was the late Phil Monahan.

11

If there was contact it would have come through Mr. Sweeney who would have been

12

kept more au fait about what was going on than I would be.

13

Q. 863

14

I'm incorrect.

15:56:29 15

16

I'm sure I'll be corrected by Mr. Sanfey if

But nobody seems to have had any knowledge of any meetings

between Mr. Monahan and Mr. Flynn.? A.

17 18

I think it would be fair to say.

All I can tell you is that I didn't have any knowledge.

I can't speak for

anybody else. Q. 864

19

And yet you were the person who was appointed personally by Mr. Monahan if Mr. Sweeney is correct.

15:56:48 20

To project manage this entire Carrickmines

development; isn't that right?

21

A.

No, to coordinate the project.

22

Q. 865

Right.?

23

A.

I was under the supervision of and worked towards Mr. Sweeney.

24

Q. 866

Yes.

15:57:00 25

And was Mr. Sweeney correct when he told the Tribunal that you in fact

had been taken on by Mr. Monahan without his knowledge, as it were?

26

A.

Um, well I don't know is the answer to that.

27

Q. 867

Did Mr. Sweeney interview for the position, can you remember?

28

A.

Not at that time.

29

Q. 868

And if a meeting took place -- sorry.

15:57:23 30

apparently again.

But two years previously he had interviewed me. I just want to point out to you.

That

7664. Mr. Padraig Flynn's ministerial diary records a

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:57:30

15:57:45

143 1

meeting with Mr. Philip Monahan of Monarch, which is likely to have been the

2

late Mr. Philip Monahan, I think you will agree?

3

A.

Phil Monahan is spelt correctly and Monarch is there, yes.

4

Q. 869

Yes.

5

A.

I wasn't aware of any meetings between any personnel and the relevant Minister

And were you aware of that meeting in February of 1991?

6

for the day.

7

recommendation.

8

Q. 870

9 15:58:04 10

11

All I could do was assess the situation and make a

And were you aware of any political payments that had been made by Mr. Monahan up to 1990?

A.

No, Chairman, no.

Q. 871

Were you aware of the fact that a payment of 16,000 pounds had been made in

12

June of 1989 to Fianna Fail?

13

A.

No, Chairman, no.

14

Q. 872

And were you aware of a payment of 25,000 pounds in February of 1991 to the

15:58:19 15

late Mr. Charles Haughey?

16

A.

No, Chairman, no.

17

Q. 873

Can I ask you, what was the position in relation to making political donations

18 19 15:58:34 20

within Monarch when you arrived in 1989? A.

I must say I don't know what the position was.

Q. 874

Did you have any -- when was the first occasion on which you came to consider

21

or had to make a decision about making a political donation or anything such as

22

that sort?

23 24 15:58:56 25

A.

I'd say, Chairman, as we approached the Local Elections in June 1991. I had been in contact with -- I wouldn't say most of the members. significant number of the members.

In that

But with a

If you know anything about elected

26

members.

27

Forthcoming elections had been postponed by one year.

28

they were going to take place in June 1991.

29

discussion of the possibility of being re-elected or people running etc. was

15:59:20 30

The one thing on their mind when elected is to become re elected.

always a topic of conversation.

They were known that

And as I was meeting them, the

And in that context, I would have been asked

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

15:59:26

15:59:40

144 1

if I could help them.

2 3

So as we approached the Local Elections in 1991 it would have been the first

4

occasion that I -- that the requests were made to me

5

Q. 875

By the 24th of May 1991, whatever -- whether your interpretation or anybody

6

else's interpretation of it is correct.

7

was to put a map at page 7019.

8

the purposes --

9 16:00:02 10

What the council had decided to do,

Which was called DP90/129A.

On display for

A.

I have no difficulty with that.

Q. 876

This is what happened immediately prior to the Local Elections which took

11

place; isn't that right?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 877

Now, that map, from -- if -- that map was not the best thing that could have

14

happened to Monarch but it mightn't have been the worst thing that could have

16:00:17 15

happened to Monarch either.

16

Did you have any discussion that you can

recollect with any councillors prior to that meeting in May of 1991?

17

A.

Did I have --

18

Q. 878

Uh-huh?

19

A.

Discussions.

16:00:32 20

I had discussions with loads of councillors.

I was making

representations in relation to the McDonald, Coffey, Murphy motion of the 6th

21

of December.

22

the agenda and I fully anticipated that the January 1991 proposal would have

23

been passed.

24

know how the manager came to the mind that having re re-sited the 6th of

16:01:01 25

And referred to the January 1991 map.

How he then said that

the council had three options. Q. 879

But be that as it may.

I mean, you may disagree with that.

28

happened was the council were given three options.

29

it may seem, on one particular option first.

16:01:21 30

Which was on

In actual fact if you look at the sequence, it is difficult to

December 1990.

26 27

Which reflected into the January 1991 proposal.

In fact what

They voted, strangely as

And that option was to adopt the

map that's presently on screen as the first display map for the Carrickmines Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

16:01:26

16:01:47

145 1 2

Valley. A.

Is that right?

I don't want to be pedantic.

That is not -- what the members had decided was

3

to go out on display at one house per acre on septic tank, which was the 1983

4

Development Plan position.

5

interpretation of that, which was because there were services coming into the

6

area he related one house per acre on septic tank to four houses per acre on

7

services.

8

The answer is no.

9

Q. 880

16:02:12 10

11

A.

16

But that is the manager's interpretation of that position.

You and the manager disagree, let's put it like that, on the interpretation of

No, no.

I don't disagree that that is what the manager did do.

But that is

not what the council decided -Q. 881

14 16:02:35 15

So if you're asking me is that the map on the 24th of May 1991.

what you understood the manager was doing --

12 13

What you see on screen here is the manager's

All right.

What the council decided is recorded on page 7006.

And if you

just look at option one there.? A.

Yeah.

Q. 882

And option one is described as the 1983 plan unchanged except for updating to

17

take account of developments to date and adjustment of objectives?

18

A.

Yeah.

19

Q. 883

Drawing DP90/129A refers.

16:02:50 20

And option B is DP90/123 which had as it genesis

the submission made by Monarch; isn't that right? Option two?

21

A.

Sorry the No. 2.

22

Q. 884

Yes.

23

A.

Well it wasn't only the Monarch lands.

24

Q. 885

Yes but --

A.

And No. 3 then covered the whole valley again.

26

Q. 886

Yes?

27

A.

Save that the development on the west side of the Southeast Motorway was

16:03:03 25

Is option two.? That covered the whole valley.

28

removed and the industrial land around the Carrickmines interchange was also

29

effected.

16:03:16 30

Q. 887

Yes.

So DP90/123 had been not accepted by the council in December of 1991. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

16:03:23

16:03:38

146 1

New maps had been prepared in January of 1991, which are --

2

A.

26, 27.

3

Q. 888

26 and 27.

4 5

The manager prepares a new map DP90/129A which he brings before

the council? A.

No, because it was -- I mean, if you went further into the reports.

I don't

6

know whether it's Sinead Collins' or somebody else's report.

7

as his interpretation of what the members had passed was that they went out on

8

the '83 -- they went out on the 1983 Development Plan zoning, which was one

9

house per acre and septic tank.

16:04:12 10

And he re interpreted -- he interpreted that

as four houses per acre on services.

11

The manager gave

I fully accept what you say was there. I

was at the meeting and I know what was on the wall.

12

Q. 889

You disagree with what Ms. Sinead Collins says; is that right?

13

A.

I do sorry, if that's what she says.

14

Q. 890

That is what she says?

A.

Well I disagree with that.

Q. 891

You disagree, notwithstanding that Ms. Collins was never cross-examined.

16:04:27 15

16 17 18

Leaving all of that aside -A.

19 16:04:41 20

I don't think there's an argument between us. you had there on the screen.

Q. 892

What went out on display is as

I have no --

If the genesis of what went out on the first public display was the map on page

21

7019, which DP90 A -- which is wrongly called, it's called DP 90129 A was the

22

drawing number on this map.

23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY:

16:05:00 25

on public display?

Ms. Dillon, is there a map at 7021, map 27, that actually went

26 27

MS. DILLON:

7021, please.

28 29 16:05:10 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

I just may be wrong.

I think that is the:

actual legal map, if you like, for the display map. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

That is the

16:05:13

16:05:21

147 1 2

MS. DILLON:

That's correct.

And that's based on

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

The drawing DP 90 / 129 A

5 6

MS. DILLON:

7

the map that actually went on display, Mr. Lynn.

8

A.

9 16:05:38 10

11

Do you understand the point that the Judge was making? This is

If that went on display, and I take it that it did.

Where is the one house

per, where is the one house per acre on septic tank? Q. 893

Because the council accepted what was said by the manager on DP90/129A which --

A.

He didn't say that on the 24th of May 1991, he interpreted the decision after

12

that event.

13 14 16:05:56 15

16

MS. DILLON:

Yes, I have that.

Q. 894

You disagree with what the manager -- how the manager interpreted matters. What I just want to?

A.

19

I accept that the manager interpreted correctly.

All I'm

What the meeting decided was that council would go

out on display at one house per acre on septic tank.

21

That's what they

decided. Q. 895

23 24

Sorry, I do not.

saying is at the meeting.

16:06:12 20

22

At 7006.

A.

17 18

If we just go back for a moment.

That is not replicated by either the minutes of the meeting or on the map that was proposed and adopted at that meeting.?

A.

There was no map adopted at the meeting.

Q. 896

If you just look at the minutes on screen for the moment?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 897

And if you look at option one which refers to drawing No. DP 90 A/129 A refers?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 898

If you move down through the minutes of the meeting.

16:06:27 25

16:06:40 30

Councillor Coffey

seconded a vote be taken on the options set out in the Manager's Report. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

On a

16:06:45

16:06:55

148 1

division the vote resulted as follows in relation to option one?

2

A.

That's quite correct.

3

Q. 899

Drawing DP 90 A/129 A?

4

A.

That's what.

5

Q. 900

That's what the minutes recorded?

6

A.

That's correct.

7

Q. 901

Now, are you saying that you were at the meeting?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 902

And your recollection is different to that?

A.

Yes, my recollection is different.

16:07:02 10

Insofar as what was on display or what was

11

put to the members was that they -- and don't forget they were in the face of a

12

Local Election.

13

the way 1983, adopt October 1990.

14

in the previous page.

16:07:41 15

16

They could go back out.

Make no change.

Make no change in

Or adopt the January 1991.

And as I say,

Sorry 7044 you will see that the manager replicated the

decision of the 6th of December 1990. Q. 903

Be that as it may, Mr. Lynn -- your recollection -- no, no, no -- your

17

recollection is that the minutes of the meeting as recorded does not accurately

18

record your recollection of what the manager did on the occasion in question.

19

Is that correct?

16:08:00 20

A.

On the 24th of May 1991.

21

Q. 904

Yes?

22

A.

That's correct.

23 24 16:08:08 25

the council. Q. 905

Yes?

A.

That because services were coming in to the area, that they should change from

26 27

Subsequent to that the manager interpreted the decision of

being on septic tanks to going on services. Q. 906

And are you telling the Tribunal that when it came towards the meeting of the

28

24th of May 1991, what exactly were you seeking the councillors to support,

29

Mr. Lynn?

16:08:25 30

A.

To adopt the January 1991 proposal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

16:08:28

16:08:43

149 1

Q. 907

Right.

Because it was your view and your belief that the January 1991

2

proposal effectively kept the Southeast Motorway off the Monarch lands and

3

allowed development up to the line of the new motorway?

4

A.

Of the proposed motorway, that's correct.

5

Q. 908

That was your interpretation of what had been done?

6

A.

That's quite correct.

7

Q. 909

Yes.

8 9 16:08:56 10

Now, Ms. Collins had given evidence that is markedly different to that

to the Tribunal. A.

That is right.

Q. 910

Very good.

But that is your opinion of what was occurring at the time?

I think I can leave it there until the morning, Sir.

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

Half ten tomorrow morning.

13 14

MS. DILLON:

May it please you, Sir.

16:09:04 15

16 17 18 19 16:09:25 20

21 22 23 24 16:09:30 25

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, THURSDAY, 13TH JULY, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.

26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 665

09:48:11

10:34:55

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON THURSDAY,

2

13TH JULY, 2006, AT 10:30 A.M.:

3 4

MR. CHAIRMAN: Good morning, Ms. Dillon.

5 6

MS. DILLON:

Good morning, Sir.

7

Mr. Richard Lynn, please.

8 9

CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. RICHARD LYNN BY MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:

10:35:05 10

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

Good morning, Mr. Lynn.

13

A.

Good morning, Chairman.

14

Q. 1

MS. DILLON:

10:35:32 15

Good morning, Mr. Lynn.

I should probably have asked you yesterday at the commencement of your evidence

16

whether or not you were aware of the involvement of Mr. Liam Lawlor in any

17

matters connection with Monarch in any of their companies?

18

A.

No, no, Chairman, no.

19

Q. 2

Did you yourself know the Late Mr. Liam Lawlor?

A.

I did, yes, yeah.

Q. 3

And had you known Mr. Lawlor prior to your involvement with Monarch Properties

10:35:49 20

21 22

in 1989?

23

A.

No, Chairman.

24

Q. 4

Did you ever meet Mr. Liam Lawlor at any meetings in Monarch Properties?

A.

In Monarch Properties, no, Chairman, no.

Q. 5

Were you aware of any involvement of Mr. Lawlor in the retention of Mr. Frank

10:35:59 25

26 27

Dunlop in March of 1993?

28

A.

No, Chairman, no.

29

Q. 6

Were you aware of any relationship between the late Mr. Monahan and Mr. Liam

10:36:16 30

Lawlor? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:36:17

10:36:39

2 1

A.

Um, I would have seen Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Monahan together at some social

2

events.

3

say that they didn't have a business connection.

4

Q. 7

Yes.

I never saw them, if you like, in a business context but that doesn't

Would you have in the normal course of your activities on behalf of

5

Monarch, approached Mr. Lawlor seeking his support in connection with the

6

Carrickmines lands?

7

A.

Yeah, prior to June 1991 he was a member of Dublin County Council and I did

8

approach him and had conversations with him and sought his support for the

9

January 1991 position.

10:36:58 10

11

Q. 8

And what was Mr. Lawlor's response?

A.

Mr. Lawlor's response was that he was very positive towards the January 1991

12 13

position. Q. 9

14

Did Mr. Lawlor indicate to you or did anyone indicate to you that in -- that Mr. Lawlor had been in receipt of monies from companies associated with the

10:37:20 15

Monarch Group?

16

A.

No, Chairman.

17

Q. 10

Were you aware prior to this Tribunal that Mr. Lawlor had apparently put in

18 19

invoices in the name of Comex Trading Corporation and received monies -A.

No, Chairman.

Q. 11

-- from the Monarch Group in 1990, in October of 1990?

21

A.

No, Chairman.

22

Q. 12

If you had been aware in October 1990 that Mr. Lawlor had received some 56,000

10:37:33 20

23 24

pounds from Monarch, would that have surprised you do you think? A.

Um, well in that I didn't know, I can't say what I would have.

Q. 13

Yes.

26

A.

But ... so ...

27

Q. 14

Certainly the Tribunal has been told and feel free to disagree with it, if you

10:37:58 25

28

wish, Mr. Lynn, that Mr. Lawlor was regarded as an influential and

29

knowledgeable figure about planning matters in Dublin County Council, would you

10:38:15 30

agree with that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:38:15

10:38:26

3 1

A.

I would accept that, yes.

2

Q. 15

And in that capacity would have been one of the people I assume high up on your

3

list whose support you would have been anxious to obtain.

4

A.

That's quite correct, yes.

5

Q. 16

And it would have been known, I assume within Monarch and indeed it was in your

6

job description as I understand it yesterday, that you were to approach and

7

seek support and lobby councillors and to get support for the proposals being

8

put forward by Monarch?

9 10:38:37 10

A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 17

Therefore it must have been known within Monarch that you would have had or be

11

likely to approach Mr. Liam Lawlor?

12

A.

That would be correct, yes.

13

Q. 18

Looking at that scenario now, Mr. Lynn, do you find it strange that you weren't

14

informed of an already existing connection within Monarch between Mr. Philip

10:38:53 15

Monahan and the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?

16

A.

No, Chairman, I wouldn't be surprised at that.

17

Q. 19

Why wouldn't you be surprised at you not being told that?

18

A.

Because that is the way the organisation operated.

19

strands.

10:39:11 20

22

I had a particular strand which was Cherrywood at the time.

totally focused on that.

21

They operated in various I was

And I wouldn't have been informed as regards what

other relationships existed outside of Cherrywood. Q. 20

Yes, but regardless of what relationship might or might not have existed with

23

Mr. Mr. Lawlor, he was a person on the council who you've greed was influential

24

or could be influential and yet you were kept unaware of the fact that there

10:39:33 25

was an existing relationship between Mr. Philip Monahan probably or the Monarch

26

Group and Mr. Lawlor.

27

A.

Well.

28

Q. 21

And that --

29

A.

I wasn't aware of any other relationship that the late Liam Lawlor had with

10:39:49 30

either Monarch or with Phil Monahan, save as I say, at some social events I saw Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:39:56

10:40:15

4 1 2

Liam Lawlor conversing with Phil Monahan. Q. 22

And looking back on it now, in the light of the particular task that you were

3

asked to do, which was to garner as much support as you could.

Do you not

4

find it strange that you were kept in the dark, as it were, by your

5

co-employees or possibly the directors of Monarch about the relationship that

6

already existed between Monarch and the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?

7

A.

No, I'm not surprised, no.

8

Q. 23

Was it part and parcel of the ethos within the Monarch Group that things were

9 10:40:33 10

11

kept segregated, as it were? A.

Um, I suppose looking back, yes, I would agree with that.

Q. 24

And who were the people who would have had the knowledge within Monarch of

12 13

everything, Mr. Lynn? A.

14 10:40:52 15

16

Monahan. Q. 25

And --

A.

And then after that would be the two other directors; Dominic Glennane and

17 18

Edward Sweeney. Q. 26

19

So that between Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Glennane and the late Mr. Phil Monahan, they resided or was contained within that triumvirate all of the knowledge of all of

10:41:12 20

21

Well I suppose the person who had most knowledge would be the late Phil

the associations and workings of the companies within the Monarch Group? A.

Yes, because the various personnel underneath that layer would be reporting to

22

one or more of the directors.

23

upwards.

24 10:41:32 25

26

So the information -- information was fed up,

Q. 27

Yeah, not downwards, is that what you're saying?

A.

Rarely downwards.

Q. 28

So that if information was resided with Mr. Glennane, Mr. Sweeney and

27

Mr. Monahan, all of them, some of them or one of them, it didn't filter

28

downwards necessarily but all information below that line always filtered

29

upwards; is that the position as you understood the way the structure worked in

10:41:53 30

Monarch? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:41:53

10:42:04

5 1

A.

I can't say all of the information.

2

Q. 29

Yeah.

3

A.

But that is the way generally the structure operated in Monarch.

4

Q. 30

Yeah and in the light of that then, Mr. Lynn, presumably it doesn't surprise

5

you because information didn't come down the line as it were.

That there

6

would have been a pre-existing relationship with Monarch with the late Mr. Liam

7

Lawlor of which you were kept unaware?

8

A.

No, no, that wouldn't surprise me no.

9

Q. 31

And did you have any knowledge of any involvement of Mr. Lawlor's in the

10:42:20 10

introduction of Mr. Frank Dunlop?

11

A.

No, Chairman, no.

12

Q. 32

And when did you first become aware that the late Mr. Liam Lawlor might have

13

had some involvement in the introduction of Mr. Dunlop into the Cabinteely

14

lands and Monarch?

10:42:33 15

A.

16 17

10:42:50 20

That was the first time I saw an

association between Liam Lawlor and Frank Dunlop. Q. 33

18 19

When it appeared in the briefs here.

This is notwithstanding that you were the project co-ordinator of the very project Mr. Dunlop was brought in to assist?

A.

Absolutely, yeah.

Q. 34

So that the level of lack of information, if I can put it like that, was that a

21

fairly significant addition is being made to your team when Mr. Dunlop is being

22

brought in.

Is that right?

23

A.

Well that is what the company felt.

24

Q. 35

Yes.

10:43:08 25

Well we'll come to your view of what it was but just leaving that aside

for the moment.

26

In March 1993 there is an additional member to your team.

Is that right?

27

A.

That's quite right.

28

Q. 36

And --

29

A.

Well not particularly to my team.

Q. 37

But the team of which you are project co-ordinator?

10:43:16 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:43:19

10:43:31

6 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 38

This -- in the person of Mr. Frank Dunlop is in effect, if I understand you

3

correctly, is imposed on your team without consultation with you?

4

A.

That's quite correct, yes.

5

Q. 39

And it now appears according to the documentation that the late Mr. Liam Lawlor

6

had some role to play in the introduction of Mr. Frank Dunlop into your team in

7

connection with the rezoning of the Cherrywood lands?

8

A.

9

Well I think that is what is being alleged.

documentary -- I think what Frank Dunlop said of it was, that he was informed

10:43:54 10

that there was to be a meeting between himself or that there had been a meeting

11

between himself and Edward Sweeney.

12

Lawlor.

13

I have never seen any

Q. 40

14

Yes.

And he was informed of that by Liam

And I think Mr. Sweeney's diary which we'll come to when he come to in

March '93 records that he had recorded a meeting between Liam Lawlor and Frank

10:44:16 15

Dunlop on a particular --

16

A.

9th of March '93.

17

Q. 41

And there are telephone messages then to Mr. Dunlop's office from Mr. Lawlor

18 19 10:44:28 20

indicating that he is going to be late for the meeting. A.

Yes, yes, I recollect.

Q. 42

That appears to be what the documentation shows.

21

But really I'm trying to get at was the level of input or knowledge into the

22

introduction that you had of Mr. Dunlop through Mr. Lawlor in March of '93.

23

Did you have any?

24

A.

10:44:50 25

I had none.

Well my recollection of Mr. Dunlop in his engagement is that I

was informed of his engagement at a meeting in the board room in Monarch House.

26

Q. 43

Yes.

27

A.

So, I mean, I had no prior knowledge of contacts or how his remuneration or any

28 29 10:45:09 30

I'll come to deal with that.

of that. Q. 44

And it follows from that, does it not, Mr. Lynn, that you wouldn't have, other than you approaching the late Mr. Liam Lawlor as you approached other Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:45:14

10:45:34

7 1

councillors seeking their support.

2

Mr. Lawlor with Monarch personnel present?

3

A.

After January -- sorry.

You did not attend any meetings with

After June 1991 I didn't again speak with Mr. Lawlor

4

until after an All-Ireland hurling final in about 1995, '96 in Morrissey's Bar

5

in lower Leeson Street.

6

Q. 45

7

So I think your answer is yes; is that correct? That you didn't have any meetings with --

8

A.

I didn't have any meetings.

9

Q. 46

With Mr. Lawlor.

10:45:48 10

And it follows therefore that your knowledge of Mr. Lawlor

insofar as it relates to the Cabinteely lands was confined to the approaches

11

you did to him as you did to other councillors seeking their support?

12

A.

That's quite correct.

13

Q. 47

And you were, for whatever reason, kept unaware of any other relationship that

14

existed between Monarch and the late Mr. Liam Lawlor or indeed any role that

10:46:03 15

the late Mr. Liam Lawlor might have played in the introduction of Mr. Frank

16

Dunlop?

17

A.

That's correct.

18

Q. 48

And would that, if I understand you correctly, that doesn't surprise you

19 10:46:14 20

21

because that was the way business was conducted in Monarch? A.

Yes, I would agree with that.

Q. 49

Can I ask you about Mr. Jack Whelan whom you may have heard mentioned in the

22 23

Tribunal while you've been here. A.

24

When you say did I know him.

Did you know Mr. Whelan?

The answer is no, I didn't know him.

him about Monarch House, mainly with the late Mr. Monahan.

10:46:34 25

But I saw

But I never had

any dealings with him.

26

Q. 50

Do you know whether Mr. Whelan provided any services in connection with --

27

A.

No.

28

Q. 51

-- the Cherrywood lands?

29

A.

No, no Chairman.

Q. 52

If Mr. Whelan had provided any services in connection with the Cherrywood lands

10:46:45 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:46:49

10:47:01

8 1

he wasn't doing it to your order.

Is that right, Mr. Lynn?

2

A.

Certainly not, no, Chairman.

3

Q. 53

Would it follow from that that if he did provide services in connection with

4 5

the Cherrywood lands he was doing it on behalf of somebody else? A.

Well I presume he would have been doing it on behalf of Mr. Monahan in

6

particular because he was Mr. Monahan.

Mr. Monahan was the only person I ever

7

saw in the company of, when he came into Monarch House.

8

Q. 54

And would you have seen him reasonably frequently with Mr. Monahan?

9

A.

No, Chairman, no, not frequently, no.

Q. 55

But of your knowledge of the situation that existed in Monarch, it appeared to

10:47:20 10

11

you that Mr. Whelan if he was working to anybody was working directly to the

12

late Mr. Philip Monahan?

13

A.

That's correct.

14

Q. 56

And to your knowledge, Mr. Whelan did not do anything that you're aware of in

10:47:37 15

connection with the Cherrywood lands?

16

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

17

Q. 57

And if I could show you the invoice.

18 19

At 8574 and you'll have seen this in the

brief, Mr. Lynn? A.

I have.

Q. 58

Did you have any knowledge of this invoice?

21

A.

No, Chairman, no.

22

Q. 59

You can you assist or explain as to the circumstances in which that invoice

10:47:45 20

23 24 10:47:55 25

might have been generated? A.

No knowledge at all, Chairman.

Q. 60

And you will have seen reference in the documentation I think also to

26

references to, I think in relation to June 1994.

27

to again.

28

forward zoning costs.

29

1994.

10:48:22 30

But there is reference at 5180.

A document we'll come back

And this again are projected

And you will see there it's dated the 20th of June

And it's headed "Zoning costs Cherrywood".

And you'll see under the

heading "staff success bonus" it says "R Lynn 100,000 pounds". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

But in

10:48:26

10:48:41

9 1

brackets beside that it's similar to JW?

2

A.

Yes, Chairman, I've seen, that yes.

3

Q. 61

Can I ask you first of all was there any other JW within Monarch who had a

4

contribution to make of any description to Cherrywood other than Mr. Whelan?

5

A.

Not that I can recall, no.

6

Q. 62

And was there anybody with the initials JW on your Cabinteely or Cherrywood

7

team, if I can call it that?

8

A.

Um, I don't believe so.

9

Q. 63

Right.

10:48:57 10

And would you think looking at that, that is likely to be a reference

to the late Mr. Jack Whelan?

11

A.

I'd say it is likely to be a reference to the late Jack Whelan.

12

Q. 64

Do you know who is the author of that document?

13

A.

I think that particular document came from Eddie Sweeney.

14

Q. 65

Did you prepare the document?

A.

I certainly assisted in the preparation of the overall document.

16

Q. 66

Yes.

17

A.

I think that the actual --

18

Q. 67

The specific?

19

A.

The specific amount.

Q. 68

Yeah.

21

A.

Or the specific page I think came from Eddie Sweeney.

22

Q. 69

He would have prepared this document?

23

A.

He certainly prepared the figures which went into the document.

10:49:15 15

10:49:22 20

24 10:49:34 25

So he would

have to prepare that page, yes. Q. 70

26

So do you have any knowledge of a proposal for 100,000 pounds success bonus for you?

27

A.

No, Chairman.

28

Q. 71

Or were you aware of any similar arrangement in connection with Mr. Jack

29 10:49:44 30

Whelan? A.

No to both, Chairman. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:49:46

10:50:05

10 1

Q. 72

I'll come back to deal with that document in June 1994.

I just wanted to draw

2

it to your attention in connection with Mr. Whelan.

Finally in relation to

3

Mr. Whelan can I ask you -- if I can show you at 4050.

4

I think that is a 1994 document.

5

under the heading "other amounts due: Jack Whelan introducing Dwyer/Nolan

6

121,000 pounds".

7

to GRE in connection with --

And this is a document

And third from the end there is a reference

And this is part of a composition of a document for claims

8

A.

Yes, Chairman.

9

Q. 73

-- in connection with the Cabinteely or the Cherrywood lands.

10:50:21 10

of the involvement or any involvement by Mr. Whelan in the introduction of the

11

Dwyer/Nolan lands?

12

A.

No, Chairman.

13

Q. 74

Or dealing with Dwyer/Nolan in connection the lands?

14

A.

No, Chairman.

Q. 75

If I could show you just in relation to that at 4731.

10:50:31 15

Were you aware

And while you may not

16

have been aware of this at the time because it related to an Ansbacher meeting.

17

Under the heading "Dwyer/Nolan" at paragraph one on this document which is

18

dated 23rd of December 1993.

19

that Phil Monahan had been carrying out all of the negotiations with Eddie

10:50:55 20

It records and I quote "Noel Murray confirmed

Dwyer directly and that the other Monarch directors are not fully informed of

21

the arrangement".

22

That would suggest that Mr. Monahan was the person who was dealing with Dwyer

23

Noel then connection with the Cherrywood lands.

24 10:51:07 25

A.

It appears so, Chairman

Q. 76

And from your recollection at the time, Mr. Lynn, was Mr. Monahan the person

26

who dealt with Dwyer/Nolan at that time in connection with buying or selling a

27

portion of the Cherrywood lands?

28

A.

Again, I wouldn't know, Chairman.

29

Q. 77

You weren't dealing --

A.

I wasn't involved, no, no.

10:51:20 30

It wouldn't surprise me.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:51:22

10:51:39

11 1

Q. 78

2 3

And decisions such as buying in more land or selling land.

Were they

decisions that were made at board level and passed down the line? A.

4

Well they were certainly made at a level higher than I. at board level.

I wouldn't even say

If Phil wanted to buy land he just bought it.

5

Q. 79

Yes.

6

A.

He would then inform the board.

7

Q. 80

That he had bought the land.

8

A.

That he had bought the land.

9

Q. 81

And In so far as the lines of communication that existed, there appears to have

10:51:49 10

been within Monarch a system of recording meetings and details, say, for

11

example, with GRE and details being passed up to and including Mr. Glennane

12

certainly on financial matters?

13

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yeah.

14

Q. 82

And would you have -- there have been a similar structure in place in relation

10:52:08 15

to non-financial matters but directed towards, ultimately to Mr. Sweeney, say

16 17

technical matters? A.

18 19

Yes, most of the directors would have received -- if the meeting had any importance it would have gone to the three directors.

Q. 83

10:52:31 20

And would it be fair or correct to describe the late Mr. Monahan's modus operandi that he often took decisions or made decisions without discussion with

21

his co-directors that he presented them with a decision already made or a

22

purchase already made?

23

A.

Well I wouldn't know that but as I understand it that is the position.

24

Q. 84

Yes.

A.

Well when an event had occurred and the information became known, then you

10:52:52 25

And how do you understand that to be the position, Mr. Lynn?

26

would know that Phil had made a decision, had acted on it and then passed it

27

down.

28

Q. 85

And was that how Mr. Monahan carried out his business in general?

29

A.

As I would understand it, yes.

Q. 86

Right.

10:53:12 30

And other than Mr. Whelan, were there other people in Monarch who Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:53:17

10:53:43

12 1 2

worked closely directly or exclusively with Mr. Monahan? A.

I suppose the only other person who worked quite close to him was John

3

Sherwood, who remains with Monarch Properties and I suppose his personal

4

secretary Ann Gosling.

5

Somerton they located themselves out there.

And these were when Phil opened his office out in

6

Q. 87

But you were never based in Somerton.

7

A.

No, I wasn't.

8

Q. 88

You were based in Harcourt Street?

9

A.

I was in Earlsfort Terrace first.

10:53:56 10

transferred over to Harcourt Street. Q. 89

13 14 10:54:15 15

I think he went out to Somerton.

So that Mr. Monahan had his own team, albeit a small team, working with him in Somerton?

A.

That would appear to be, yes, that's correct, yes.

Q. 90

And insofar as Mr. Jack Whelan worked to anybody or worked any place it was

16 17

Whilst I was in Earlsfort Terrace, John

Sherwood was in Earlsfort Terrace but he didn't transfer, I don't think he

11 12

Is that correct?

with or to Mr. Monahan. A.

And was he based primarily in Somerton?

Well I wouldn't say he was based there now.

But certainly he worked with PM,

18

that he was the only person I ever saw Jack Whelan with or, so but I couldn't

19

say he was based in -- I would very much doubt that he had an office for

10:54:41 20

instance in Somerton.

21

Q. 91

And what exactly did Mr. Whelan do, do you know, Mr. Lynn?

22

A.

I've no idea, Chairman.

I mean, I was introduced to him only as a person

23

passing through the foyer of Monarch House and I didn't know what function he

24

had.

10:55:06 25

26

any business relationship with him. Q. 92

27 28 29 10:55:27 30

I mean, he didn't -- he didn't effect what I was doing so I never had

Did you know whether he ever made approaches, say, to councillors for example in connection with any of the Monarch Properties lands?

A.

No, Chairman, I wouldn't know.

I wouldn't know directly but I would expect

that I would -- if he had I would have heard back from, you know, from the councillor that somebody else had approached them. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:55:30

10:55:47

13 1

Q. 93

2 3

Somebody else had approached them or somebody else had approached them about Monarch lands?

A.

Yes, I would expect to -- well it may depend on the number of members that he

4

may have -- but I don't believe that he approached anybody.

5

that was his function.

6

Q. 94

But you don't know what his function was?

7

A.

No, no, save that he was in the company of PM.

8

Q. 95

And when you say PM for the transcript?

9

A.

Sorry Phil Monahan, I beg your pardon.

Q. 96

You mean the late Mr. Monahan?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 97

If we could go back to 1991.

10:55:59 10

Sorry, not 1991.

13

And if I can show you the map at 7021.

14

familiar with the map.

10:56:19 15

I don't think

1990 in fact very briefly.

And I think you'd be reasonably

And I think this is the map that went out on the first

public display following the meeting of May 1991. Now, it didn't go out on

16

public display in fact until September.

17

A.

September 1991.

18

Q. 98

September 1991.

But this was the -- after the meeting in May of 1991 this is

19

the extract from the map that went on public display and on foot of which

10:56:40 20

Monarch made certain submissions I think on the 2nd of December 1991?

21

A.

That would be correct, Chairman, yes.

22

Q. 99

And you would have co-ordinated the preparation of that report with the experts

23 24

that you had on your team? A.

That's right.

Q. 100

The technical?

26

A.

Technical professional team, yes.

27

Q. 101

We'll come to look at that briefly but not in very great detail.

10:56:55 25

Charlie McCabe headed if you like the planning team.

But just to

28

set out what the position appears to have been following the meeting of May of

29

1991 and the first public display, what went on public display was that the

10:57:14 30

lands that are coloured yellow on the map at 7021 were zoned at four houses to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:57:20

10:57:25

14 1

the acre on --

2

A.

On services.

3

Q. 102

-- on services.

4

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

5

Q. 103

And the balance of the lands which are within the Monarch take but which were I

6

Isn't that correct?

think we said to the west of the 1983 line were then zoned B?

7

A.

Agriculture.

8

Q. 104

Or agriculture lands, is that correct?

9

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 105

And the line of the Southeastern Motorway had moved from its '83 position to

10:57:37 10

11

south of the Monarch lands and was bisecting to a degree Mr. Galvin's what

12

became the golf course lands?

13

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

14

Q. 106

From Monarch's position insofar as that map was concerned once the decisions

10:57:56 15

with made in May 1991 what was the reaction within Monarch to that decision by

16 17

the councillors? A.

Well we were very surprised in May 1991 that the January 1991 position hadn't

18

passed.

19

suppose it was understandable insofar as, was it the 18th of May 1991.

10:58:32 20

So we were very much down beat in relation to what had happened.

Whenever the meeting was.

It was in the mouth of a Local Election.

21

Q. 107

Yes, I think the election had been called on the 21st of May?

22

A.

But it had been known for the previous 12 months.

23 24 10:58:39 25

I

It was supposed to take

place in 1990 but got postponed by a year. Q. 108

Uh-huh.

A.

And in the light of the campaign that had been waged on candidates as well as

26

existing members who were seeking re-election, and there's a note on the file

27

in relation to the meeting that I attended, I suppose it was understandable

28

what the members did, in that they postponed any decision until the new council

29

had been formed and it could be dealt with then in the context of a new council

10:59:14 30

who wouldn't be faced by a concerted campaign to get them to undertake, not to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

10:59:24

10:59:39

15 1

allow any development in the Carrickmines Valley.

2

Q. 109

So --

3

A.

So from Monarch's point of view, and I personally was terribly disappointed

4

that the -- that the May 1991 decision didn't adopt the January 1991 position.

5

I still don't know why the manager gave them the three options.

6

was concerned, the record shows that the council made a decision on the 6th of

7

December 1990, which was reflected in the map, the January map of 1991 and that

8

that was what should have gone on display.

9

I think you asked me what was the --

11:00:03 10

Q. 110

But it didn't.

What I meant is what did Monarch set about doing?

Insofar as I

I mean, it's all.

I mean, with what did you

11

have at that stage as the goal that you now needed to achieve insofar as that

12

map was concerned?

13

A.

14 11:00:19 15

Well basically what we wanted to do was to get back to the October 1990 County Manager's proposal.

Q. 111

You wanted to go back to DP90/123?

16

A.

Absolutely.

17

Q. 112

Right. But you had now got an uphill battle in effect on your hands, isn't

18 19 11:00:28 20

21

that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 113

Just insofar as the map is concerned?

A.

Yes, Chairman, I mean, there was an uphill battle.

I mean, we were' back to

22

square one and you will all the work that we had done came to naught.

23

now faced with new council, new personnel.

24

old council were going to be back there.

11:00:48 25

27

You didn't know how many of the

You didn't know whether they were

going to be pro-development, anti-development.

26

You were starting a new ball

game. Q. 114

And there were certain motions that had been listed after the map went on

28

publish in the January '91, which either fell or were withdrawn after the

29

decision was taken to go with the manager's map, as it were?

11:01:05 30

We were

A.

That's right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:01:06

11:01:17

16 1

Q. 115

Isn't that right?

2

A.

That superseded all those, yeah.

3

Q. 116

So that there would have been some battle on your hands if the manager hadn't

4

put the proposal forward first.

5

that is were to be heard and they fell because of the decision that was made?

6

A.

In other words, there were certain motions

No, no, I mean if you look at the agenda and look at the minutes.

There was

7

three items 1983, 1990 and 1991 I think, that was the way they came out on the

8

agenda.

9

and the 1991 been passed all of those succeeding motions also would have

11:01:44 10

11

Had the 199 -- had the 1983 been defeated and the 1990 been defeated

fallen. Q. 117

12

So it had a knock on effect.

But in any event, you now had an uphill battle

on your hands, isn't that right, in Monarch?

13

A.

That's right.

14

Q. 118

Can I ask you now about the Local Election in 1991.

11:01:59 15

3241, please.

This is a

schedule of expenses provided to the Tribunal by Monarch in connection with a

16

Local Election of 1991.

17

within Monarch that Monarch would have volunteered political donations or

18

whether it would have been the position that Monarch would only have provided

19

donations on foot of request?

11:02:20 20

A.

Can I ask you whether it would have been the position

Um, I would say in the main we responded.

We responded to requests made for

21

political donations.

22

making recommendations for candidates or members for political donations save

23

that I needed a wit bit of paper to get it through the system.

24

hung up upon whether a member or a candidate either asked or was encouraged to

11:02:48 25

26

I would never have had any difficulty in relation to

So I'm not

ask in relation to Local Elections or General Elections or Senate Elections. Q. 119

You will have heard Mr. Philip Reilly's evidence that he sat down or he was at

27

a meeting in Monarch with you and you produced a list in connection with the

28

1991 election and went down through the list with him and asked him, I think

29

it's at page 58 of day 657 at question 393, Mr. Reilly says "Well what happened

11:03:16 30

exactly was I was in the office in Harcourt Street one evening the elections Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:03:20

11:03:34

17 1

were coming up.

Richard said we're going to send somebody out, some donations

2

to politicians. He had a list on his desk and he said did you know any of

3

these people from Tallaght and I looked down through the list and although I

4

didn't recall I had obviously met Mary Harney and she suggested a number of

5

names and I think they were added to the list and I asked him was this normal

6

and he said yes he understood that there had been a tradition of making

7

donations to politicians at elections times".

8 9 11:03:46 10

Do you agree with that? A.

Well I wouldn't agree with the last part that there was a tradition of making

11

contributions to -- I wouldn't have known what, if there was a tradition or

12

whatever.

13

Q. 120

Yes.

14

A.

I was making a recommendation based upon what I perceived was the correct

11:03:59 15

position.

16

Q. 121

And --

17

A.

And in relation to, I mean, I was compiling a list probably based upon the

18

contacts that I had made, if you like, the letters that we had received.

19

I suppose I was at pains to ensure that somebody wouldn't be left out of it who

11:04:17 20

should be supported.

That's why, I mean, I wouldn't have been au fait with

21

all of the county at the time and that's why Mr. Reilly was asked for his

22

input.

23

Q. 122

24

And

But is Mr. Reilly correct when he says that you already had a list and you asked him to go down through the list and indicate whether there were people

11:04:40 25

who should be added to the list?

26

A.

I was compiling the list.

But I mean he wasn't the only one that I asked.

27

Q. 123

And were you compiling that list, Mr. Lynn, on foot of requests that had been

28

made to you or to Monarch for political support or were you compiling the list

29

of whom you felt Monarch should support?

11:04:56 30

A.

I was compiling the list on the basis of the contacts that I had made myself on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:05:03

11:05:17

18 1

applications that had been received by me and by others.

And then a decision

2

had to be made, you know, was this a complete list of people who had sought

3

support.

4

Q. 124

Yes.

5

A.

So there wasn't -- there wasn't any grandiose plan about this, this was just

6 7

... Q. 125

No, no. What I'm trying to establish for the benefit of the Tribunal, Mr.

8

Lynn, is whether in May or June of 1991 a decision as was made to prepare a

9

list of people who would received political donations from Monarch or whether

11:05:39 10

11

the list was prepared as a result of requests received by Monarch? A.

12 13

The list was prepared as a result of and requests received by Monarch.

Then

we had to ensure that the list was correct. Q. 126

14

And therefore when Mr. Reilly goes on to tell the Tribunal that he was then asked to ring people up and see whether he could assist them with election

11:06:00 15

expenses and he was asked to do that by you.

16

Is Mr. Reilly incorrect in that

evidence?

17

A.

Sorry, could you just point out where.

18

Q. 127

Page 59 question 401.

19

At question 401, Mr. Reilly is asked "Would you agree

we with me that this implies that those people you identified on the list were

11:06:20 20

going to receive or be offered support by Monarch?

21

A: Can I follow that up.

Exactly what he asked me to do was to ring some of

22

the people on the list, yes and ask them could be we assist in election

23

expenses".

24 11:06:32 25

So what I'm asking you now is do you agree with Mr. Reilly's evidence that what

26

he understood you were asking him to do, was to ring the people on the list and

27

ask them did they want election donations?

28

A.

No, I wouldn't imagine that that was correct, Chairman.

29

Q. 128

So you don't agree with Mr. Reilly's evidence that that is what happened as a

11:06:49 30

result of the meeting that he had with you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:06:50

11:07:11

19 1

A.

That certainly wouldn't be my recollection.

2

Q. 129

So what exactly is your recollection then of what Mr. Reilly was asked to do?

3

A.

Well my recollection of that -- I was compiling the list based upon

4

applications which had been made and I was -- I wasn't sufficiently au fait

5

with the whole county to ensure that if we were going to do, to make

6

contributions, that people who should be included were included.

7

asked for his input, as were other members of Monarch asked for their input.

8

Q. 130

9

And when you asked Mr. Reilly and other members for the assistance in compiling the list, were they all being approached by you on the basis that they

11:07:35 10

themselves had been approached by councillors or were they being approached on

11 12

And he was

the basis of who do you think should be put on the list? A.

No, they were based upon, if you like, contacts which had been made and then

13

they were, if you like, put on the list.

14

appreciate this is quite some time ago.

11:08:01 15

I'd imagine, I mean, you can I'd imagine if there was anything in

relation to telephoning, you could get -- if you had a verbal request.

Our

16

difficulty is that we had to have a bit of paper to get money through.

So it

17

may have been that he was asked to get a bit of paper to cover the request that

18

he had had.

19

That's the only explanation I can give for it.

Q. 131

So who else did you approach for assistance in compiling the list, Mr. Lynn?

A.

Well the only other --

21

Q. 132

3241, please.

22

A.

Well Noel Murray who lived out in the northeast out in Malahide, I would have

11:08:27 20

Who else within Monarch?

23

approached him.

24

Ongar at the time.

11:08:53 25

26

Q. 133

So are you saying then that anybody who received money on this list was receiving a solicited political donation?

A.

29 11:09:16 30

There's nobody else would be, I don't think would have

been in contact with local communities.

27 28

The only other person was John Sherwood, who lived out in

Well I can't say that everyone was but in the main it would have been.

There

was a request for some assistance in relation to the Local Election. Q. 134

And in general, would it be fair to say that you were the person who was -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:09:21

11:09:34

20 1

through whom all of these requests were being followed and you were the person

2

who was then and indeed subsequently insofar as a lot of the councillors were

3

concerned who made recommendations as to whether or not political support

4

should have been provided?

5

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

6

Q. 135

And in general, would it be fair to say that nearly in all occasions it was

7

recommended that political support be provided?

8

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

9

Q. 136

And if I could just ask you.

11:09:49 10

Just in relation to that list, Mr. Lynn.

And

just looking at Mr. Hand, for example.

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 137

Who appears to be the person who is in receipt of the largest amount of money

13

on that list.

14

which Mr. Hand approached you for money and the circumstances in which you came

11:10:03 15

16

Would you just outline to the Tribunal the circumstances in

to make a recommendation that he be paid 5,000 pounds? A.

Yes, Chairman.

The late Mr. Hand represented that he was if you like, the

17

organiser for the Rathdown area of the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council

18

area.

19

was -- he was acting as the, if you like, the election agent for all candidates

11:10:37 20

and outgoing councillors for the Local Election.

21 22

Now, this is prior to the County Council being set up.

And that he

And he pulled the wool over

my eyes very nicely. Q. 138

Did you understand that Mr. Hand was making you a request in circumstances

23

which you understood that he would dispensing a portion of those monies to

24

other Fine Gael Councillors who were standing within the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown

11:10:58 25

ward?

26

A.

Not only councillors but candidates.

27

Q. 139

This was people who weren't already sitting councillors but who were new

28 29 11:11:06 30

candidates? A.

Yes, Chairman, that's correct.

Q. 140

So there was -- it was your understanding of what Mr. Hand said to you that he Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:11:10

11:11:18

21 1

was going to disburse these monies to --

2

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

3

Q. 141

-- to other people?

4

A.

That's correct, Chairman, sorry.

5

Q. 142

And you would have known of course who those other candidates were and you

6 7

would have known who the other sitting Fine Gael councillors were? A.

Well excuse me.

I would have known from the outgoing councillors were who

8

were seeking re-election.

9

candidates.

11:11:34 10

Q. 143

11 12

11:11:55 15

A.

Olivia Mitchell.

Mary Elliott.

an outgoing councillor.

Sam Carroll, somebody over in Stillorgan was

The actual candidates now I wouldn't ...

Q. 144

You wouldn't have known who the candidates were?

A.

Well I wouldn't remember them now unless they actually succeeded and got onto

16 17

And who else in Mr. Hand's ward as it were was a sitting Fine Gael candidate, can you remember?

13 14

I may not necessarily have known all of the

the council. Q. 145

And Mr. Jim Fahy who is immediately ahead him there in the sum 1,000 pounds.

18

Would you just outline the circumstances in which Mr. Fahy came to approach you

19

for money?

11:12:10 20

A.

Yeah, I mean, I really -- I mean, I can't recollect Jim Fahy approaching me.

21

I know he was out in the, I think he was in the Mulhuddart area, but I presume

22

like everybody else he made approaches.

23

Q. 146

24 11:12:40 25

Right.

And Mr. Hammond of Fianna Fail, who is just after Mr. Daly.

gets 1,000 pounds? A.

Mr. Hammond was in, my recollection now, you'll appreciate again it's some

26

years ago.

27

he used to fly back to go to meetings.

28

him etc.

29

anybody else.

11:13:02 30

He also

Q. 147

Mr. Hammond, as I can recollect, was actually based in the UK and And it was on that basis that I met

And I think that's the reason why he got a little bit more than

And Mr. Ned Ryan got 1,000 pounds as well. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

Did he approach you for that

11:13:07

11:13:25

22 1 2

money? A.

3 4

Ned was my local councillor. And I suppose that is the reason why

he got that. Q. 148

5 6

Ned would.

And Mr. Hickey, Mr. Paddy Hickey got 1,000 pounds.

I believe was Mr. Hickey a

councillor on the south side? A.

7

Paddy Hickey was, yeah, yeah.

Again, I can't be specific about Paddy.

He's

a very nice gentleman but I don't know why he got 1,000 I must say.

8

Q. 149

And was Mr. Sean --

9

A.

Can I just say.

Q. 150

Yes.

11

A.

I may not be responsible for everything on the list.

12

Q. 151

Yes.

13

A.

These are a list of actual, as I understand it, contributions which were made.

11:13:44 10

14

I don't know that I would be responsible.

11:13:59 15

In actual fact, I'd know from

looking down for instance L Mulvihill, I never met Larry Mulvihill.

I find it

16

hard to see but I mean, there are people on that that I didn't -- that I didn't

17

have on my list.

18

list that I had.

19 11:14:23 20

So I presume somebody added one or two people to whatever

Q. 152

And would you have met Mr. Sean Barrett?

A.

I hadn't met Sean Barrett up to that point.

And in fact it took me some time

21

to organise and arrange a meeting with Deputy Barrett.

22

thought it was something that came in from the Cumann, from the Dun Laoghaire

23

Cumann or something and that is the reason why I think a contribution was made

24

to Sean.

11:14:48 25

Q. 153

26

My recollection was I

Notwithstanding that Mr. Hand who was the person who had received the 5,000 pounds for the same, effectively the same constituency area, isn't that right?

27

A.

No, we understood that Sean Barrett was running in Dun Laoghaire.

28

Q. 154

Uh-huh.

29

A.

And as it happened, he ran in the Glencullen area.

Q. 155

Yes.

11:15:03 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:15:03

11:15:10

23 1

A.

Which would have brought him into the Rathdown area.

2

Q. 156

That's right, yeah.

3

A.

And he unseated Sam Carroll.

4

Q. 157

Uh-huh.

5

A.

Why he ran in the Glencullen area, I don't know.

6

Q. 158

You weren't expecting that.

7

You didn't feel that he was already covered by

the 5,000 pounds had a that had been paid to Mr. Hand?

8

A.

His Dail constituency is in Dun Laoghaire so why he was going outside that ...

9

Q. 159

And subsequently, Mr. Lynn, did Monarch seek reimbursement of those fees for

11:15:33 10

those payments from Guardian Royal?

11

A.

Yes, I mean, they would have been ascribed to the Cherrywood project.

12

Q. 160

They were posted in the accounts, albeit not until the following year, to

13

effectively the Cherrywood project.

14

accounts in Monarch Properties Services Limited?

11:15:50 15

They were posted to the Cherrywood

A.

This the one that adds up to 22,150?

16

Q. 161

Well no it actually adds up to considerably more than that?

17

A.

Does it.

18

Q. 162

It goes into the Cherrywood accounts it wasn't there initially?

19

A.

All right.

Q. 163

But -- Can I ask you just to outline to the Tribunal the circumstances in which

11:16:01 20

21

you regarded political donations to be third party costs that is were

22

attributable to the Carrickmines development?

23

A.

24

In

actual fact, I think I recollect advising you previously that it was no concern

11:16:30 25

26

I never -- it wasn't my function to determine where these were posted.

of mine where things were posted. Q. 164

Yes. I didn't ask you that.

That was an accounting matter.

I'm just asking you to explain to the Tribunal,

27

you were involved in seeking the reimbursement of these fees as third party

28

costs from GRE, isn't that right?

29 11:16:46 30

A.

That's right.

Q. 165

All right.

I want you to outline to the Tribunal the circumstances in which Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:16:50

11:17:07

24 1

you regard these political donations to be third party expenses associated with

2

the Cherrywood development?

3

A.

Because the Cherrywood development was the only major development that we had

4

ongoing at that time.

5

accounts.

6

charged into Cherrywood.

7

reimbursement of it but I didn't initiate where they were to be posted.

8

Q. 166

9

And it was -- it was where they were posted in the

And when I was asked to try to seek reimbursement, they had been And therefore I was given the task of trying to seek

Leaving aside where they were posted for the moment.

The agreement between

GRE and Monarch provided that third party costs which had been effectively

11:17:30 10

wholly unnecessarily incurred for the Cherrywood project would be split 50/50?

11

A.

That's correct.

12

Q. 167

And that where Monarch Properties Services Limited paid them out they would get

13 14 11:17:53 15

50 percent of them back? A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 168

In seeking the reimbursement of these fees, these political expenses from GRE,

16

Monarch in effect are saying that these expenses are political donations were

17

wholly and unnecessarily incurred in connection with the Cherrywood

18

development, isn't that right?

19 11:18:02 20

A.

They were certainly associated with the Cherrywood development, yes.

Q. 169

If we just stop there and you say how they were associated with the Cherrywood

21 22

development. A.

23 24

Because the Cherrywood development was the largest development that we had ongoing at that time.

Q. 170

11:18:18 25

It's as simple as that.

In order for GRE to have a liability to pay these expenses, these political donations had to be a third party cost that was incurred in connection with the

26

Cabinteely development only, isn't that right?

27

A.

They were, yes, they were associated with Cherrywood.

28

Q. 171

Associated --

29

A.

Okay.

Q. 172

In order for GRE to have a liability to pay these costs, they had to be paid

11:18:33 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:18:39

11:18:57

25 1 2

for the Cabinteely development. A.

Isn't that right?

Well if you look at the correspondence from GRE.

They initially refused to

3

have anything to do with third party costs.

4

or whatever terminology that they had on them.

5

that we got GRE to accept that they should reimburse it because this was an

6

outgoing by Monarch at that time, which we -- well which accounts had ascribed

7

to the Cherrywood account.

8

Q. 173

9 11:19:20 10

Sorry, with political donations And it was only eventually

There's no great mystery in it.

Was it believed at the time that these donations were for the benefit of the Cherrywood project?

A.

Well for the benefit of the Cherrywood project? I wouldn't think so.

I would

11

have thought that political donations were made and made by other firms to

12

support local democracy. So when you say for the benefit, I wouldn't see -- I

13

wouldn't marry a political donation with a benefit.

14

Q. 174

11:20:02 15

I don't see that at all.

So you don't agree -- you wouldn't agree then that -- well then if that is the case then, Mr. Lynn, in what circumstances could these expenses have been

16

sought back from GRE?

17

A.

Because we tried to seek every penny we possibly could back from GRE.

18

Q. 175

And can you explain why all of these expenses were posted as an expense to the

19 11:20:19 20

Cherrywood lands? A.

Well I can't insofar -- but, I mean, it was done on accounts and by the time I

21

came to try and recoup it they were being shown as part of the Cherrywood

22

expense.

23

Q. 176

24 11:20:37 25

26

You had nothing to do with them being initially posted or attributed to the Cherrywood?

A.

No.

Q. 177

If I could show you a document at 142.

Sorry, I beg your pardon, 8769, sorry.

27

And I think you'll be familiar with this document if we could increase the

28

bottom half of the document.

29

last three items on the list.

11:21:03 30

And I just want to draw your attention to the

"Strategy consultancy fees, community

contributions and courtesy personnel."

Do you see those headings?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:21:06

11:21:25

26 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 178

Did you -- were you instrumental in drawing up this list, this schedule?

3

A.

I'm just trying to get this.

I find it easier if I can find it in my own.

4

It's like everything when you go to look for it it's not there.

Yes, I was

5

instrumental in drawing up the list but that list -- that list, if you like, is

6

scheduling out on an excel document the various headings that appeared in the

7

accounts, in the accounts section in relation to Cherrywood.

8

Q. 179

Uh-huh.

9

A.

So from A to Z, if you went through, those are the various headings and what

11:21:53 10

we're seeking to do was A, to balance our own books, which was fairly tedious.

11 12

And B, then to try to recoup 50 percent of that from GRE. Q. 180

The account heading to which the political donations had been attributed as I'm

13

sure you're probably aware from looking at the documents, was "general

14

promotion", isn't that right?

11:22:19 15

A.

16 17

Limited and Development Plan" and "cashflow projections." Q. 181

18 19 11:22:34 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 182

And transferring them on to an excel sheet?

A.

That was under general promotions.

If you say so I accept that, there's no

problem. Q. 183

24 11:22:54 25

No, no, you had just told the Tribunal how this list was combined was taking the heading of the Cherrywood accounts?

22 23

Well it says on my document "Cherrywood projections" and "Cherrywood Properties

Yes. That the political donations had been posted to the Cherrywood general promotion account?

A.

I accept that.

26

Q. 184

That there was in fact no strategy consultancy fees account per se?

27

A.

As I understand it, yes, yes.

28

Q. 185

Yes.

29 11:23:06 30

So when you are compiling this list, Mr. Lynn, if there was no strategy

consultancy fees heading in the accounts, can you just tell the Tribunal where you came up with the description "strategy consultancy fees"? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:23:11

11:23:25

27 1

A.

It was a heading in the accounts.

Otherwise it couldn't have appeared here.

2

Q. 186

Are you saying that's where you got it from?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 187

Okay.

And within that -- when you prepared this document within that -- when

5

you prepared this document it's divided in half.

Those expenses that have

6

been paid to date and those that are projected.

Isn't that right?

7

A.

That's right.

8

Q. 188

And on the 27th of April '92, at 3736.

9 11:23:50 10

Sorry, that document was prepared for

the purpose of preparing a statement in cashflow.

Isn't that right?

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yeah.

11

Q. 189

And you I think --

12

A.

Well sorry it was prepared on the basis A, to balance our own books and B, to

13 14

recoup from Guardian everything we possibly could. Q. 190

11:24:05 15

And I think you -- it was prepared for the purpose of sending it on as indeed it was sent on.

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 191

Isn't that right?

18

A.

That's correct.

19

Q. 192

To GRE.

A.

That's correct.

Q. 193

I think at April of '92.

11:24:09 20

21

At 3736 a second version of that document was

22

prepared.

23

find the 25,000 pounds in respect of strategy consultancy fees. Can you be

24

specific.

11:24:27 25

And then increased courtesy personnel as follows March '92, 5,000

and April '92, 5,000."

26 27

And there's a note at the bottom of it addressed "Richard, I can't

Could you just tell the Tribunal what exactly was

courtesy personnel? A.

Well courtesy personnel, let me see, January 1992.

28

personnel, at that stage, let me see.

29

pardon.

11:24:57 30

I'm going into, courtesy

At that stage we were, I beg your

We were out on the road from January 1992 to April of 1992, 14

weekends on every Friday night from six o'clock to ten. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

Saturday from nine

11:25:04

11:25:31

28 1

o'clock until six.

2

Monarch were out there.

3

payments in relation to any over time etc. etc. which had been incurred.

4

Q. 194

And Sunday nine o'clock until six.

And the personnel of

And that was, I presume, that that was to provide

And on the following day, the 28th of April 1992, at 3992.

An adjustment has

5

been made to strategy consultancy fees by the addition of a sum of 22,150

6

pounds.

7

A.

That's right and that's that list on 3994.

8

Q. 195

And that is the list of political donations.

9

And I think that Mr. Glennane

and indeed other witnesses have agreed that by strategy consultancy fees was

11:25:49 10

understood to mean within Monarch the political donation that is are prepared

11

on the list that we've already seen.

12

A.

Um, certainly the 22,150 are all political donations.

13

Q. 196

Uh-huh.

14

A.

I think that figure eventually goes up to something else but maybe you're going

11:26:05 15

to come to that.

16

Q. 197

I am, indeed.

17

A.

It goes up to 27 and I don't know where the extra came out of because I

18 19

couldn't find it. Q. 198

11:26:16 20

Well the extra I think you can -- if you look at the original list that was provided to the Tribunal.

21

I think the original list that the list that was

prepared by way of initials, Mr. Lynn, comes to 22,150, isn't that right?

22

A.

That's right, yes.

23

Q. 199

But the list of actual donations that were made in May and June of 1991 comes

24 11:26:38 25

26

to 23,450.

As per --

A.

But yet there's a figure eventually of 27,000.

Q. 200

And there's a figure of 3,000 pounds additional which I'm going to come to in

27

any a moment.

28

political donations that have been made in May and June of 1991?

29 11:26:55 30

In any event, that figure of 22,150 refers only to the

A.

That's correct.

Q. 201

So was it the description within Monarch that one described political donations Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:26:59

11:27:25

29 1 2

as strategy consultancy fees? A.

My understanding of that phraseology is that it was -- the phraseology of which

3

was acceptable to GRE.

I don't see in this internal memorandum which is only

4

between ourselves and GRE, how and why we wouldn't describe political

5

contributions as political contributions.

6

Q. 202

That didn't happen that?

7

A.

Didn't happen.

8

Q. 203

Okay.

9

A.

My understanding is that that was -- that they didn't want to have a heading or

11:27:37 10

a sub-heading political contributions.

11

Q. 204

And from whom did you get that understanding, Mr. Lynn?

12

A.

I had that understanding I think from -- I think in the initial document the

13

22,150 doesn't appear and we've just gone over that.

14

appears and on the bottom of it.

11:28:01 15

And I'm asked about this -- I can't find the

25,000 with respect to strategy consultancy.

16

they mean by that.

And then this note

So I had to go and see what did

And that 25, I presume related to 22,150.

17

Q. 205

Yes.

18

A.

And I presume I asked someone in accounts why are you describing and I've some

19

feeling that a similar description was used in Tallaght.

11:28:22 20

21

have transferred over from the Tallaght account. Q. 206

22 23

But certainly you understood and you knew when they were talking about strategy consultancy fees they were talking about political donations?

A.

24 11:28:39 25

And I think it may

As soon as the 22,150 went in under that banner they definitely, at least include the political donations.

Q. 207

So if one looks at the document at 8769 that was first prepared.

Under the

26

heading strategy consultancy fees.

27

forward from February of 1992, 75,000 pounds under the heading of strategy

28

consultancy fees.

29 11:29:02 30

A.

Um, is this 3993?

Q. 208

No.

You are projecting forward projecting

Isn't that right?

It's 8769. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:29:05

11:29:13

30 1

JUDGE FAHERTY:

What ones are you saying the reduction is in?

2 3

MS. DILLON:

The document on screen.

4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY:

March, April May?

6 7

MS. DILLON:

March, April, May.

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, I wonder could I just clarify.

8 9 11:29:20 10

A.

I beg your pardon.

11 12

MR SANFEY:

13

Ms. Dillon appears to be suggesting that strategy consultancy fees were

14

synonomous with political donations and all of the Monarch witnesses have

11:29:32 15

Chairman, I wonder could I just clarify something.

agreed that that is the case.

16 17

I certainly don't understand that to be Dominic Glennane's evidence.

18

that was put to Mr. Glennane and I think Mr. Glennane didn't accept that

19

strategy consultancy fees related solely to political donations and said that

11:29:44 20

21

I think

it would have been envisaged that other things could have been included in the projection figures.

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

Yes.

That's my understanding of his evidence but I don't think

24

Ms. Dillon did say that -- I think she was asking this witness if in fact --

11:29:57 25

26

MS. DILLON:

Yes.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

The strategy consultancy fees did just include.

29 11:30:02 30

MS. DILLON:

And he said from the time the 22,150 went in.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:30:05

11:30:12

31 1 2

CHAIRMAN: A.

But I think --

Sorry.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

I think you're correct.

The previous witnesses --

5 6

MS. DILLON:

Mr. Glennane.

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

9

just ...

Haven't confirmed that all of this category did necessarily include

11:30:21 10

11

MS. DILLON:

Solely and exclusively.

MR SANFEY:

Thank you, Sir.

MS. DILLON:

I wasn't suggesting that. Certainly insofar as the if the

12 13 14 11:30:25 15

Q. 209

16

definition strategy consultancy fees includes political donations, Mr. Lynn?

17

A.

Yes, I think that's what I said to you.

18

Q. 210

The 22,150?

19

A.

22,150.

11:30:47 20

I would go along because that 22,150 eventually becomes 27.

three is dropped.

21

At it at least included the 22,150.

The

I couldn't find anywhere in the brief how the three came to

be dropped and the 22 goes up to 27.

22

Q. 211

Maybe it will become clear when we go through --

23

A.

Except you can appreciate it's very difficult to marry these things in unless

24 11:31:06 25

you have hard copy in front of you. Q. 212

Of course. Certainly.

26

A.

I may have the hard copy.

27

Q. 213

The document on screen is projecting --

28

A.

Yeah.

29

Q. 214

-- 75,000 pounds under the heading strategy consultancy fees for March, April

11:31:17 30

Take your time.

May of 1992. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:31:18

11:31:25

32 1

A.

Yeah, there's no problem with those.

2

Q. 215

Included in that figure would have been a projection presumably for political

3

donations?

4

A.

That's correct, yes.

5

Q. 216

Because we do not know what else might have comprised strategy consultancy

6

fees.

But we do know now that it at least included political donations, isn't

7

that right?

8

A.

That's right, yes.

9

Q. 217

We haven't been able to establish what other component definitely would have

11:31:41 10

gone into strategy consultancy fees, isn't that right?

11

A.

We breakdown the 27.

12

Q. 218

We'll come to that in a second.

That means when you created this document,

13

Mr. Lynn, you were projecting forward a sum of 75,000 pounds which would have

14

included political donations as an expense you expected to have to pay in

11:31:59 15

16

March, April and May of 1992. A.

No, all I was doing was projecting the utmost possibilities and what I had in

17

mind there was a General Election going to be called.

18

to be called.

19

Q. 219

Uh-huh.

A.

Yes.

21

Q. 220

Or a portion of them?

22

A.

Yes but not 75,000 as a definite.

11:32:28 20

Was a by-election going

But you had in mind political donations for the 75,000 pounds?

It was based upon the possibility if a

23

General Election had been called we would have been called upon to make

24

contributions over a number of months and if -- and/or if a by-election was

11:32:39 25

called we could also have been asked to -- for contributions.

26

Q. 221

And --

27

A.

I wouldn't -- sorry.

I can't tell you your job --

28 29 11:32:50 30

CHAIRMAN: A.

Well they were projections.

That's all they were.

They were estimates and anybody --

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:32:53

11:32:59

33 1 2

CHAIRMAN: A.

They weren't going to become a reality?

Not at all.

3 4 5

CHAIRMAN: A.

Absolutely.

Q. 222

MS. DILLON:

Unless certain events occurred.

6 7

And would you have been aware, for example, that when Mr. Liam

8

Lawlor was paid money by Monarch, the designation that was given to the

9

payments made to Comex was strategy plan.

11:33:14 10

A.

11 12

No, Chairman.

Were you aware of that?

As I said before I wasn't aware of any payments being made to

Mr. Lawlor. Q. 223

To Mr. Lawlor, and at 3668, which is dated the 28th of April 1992.

And I

13

think this is a document that was used for discussion purposes between Mr. Noel

14

Murray and Mr. Brian Gillies.

11:33:36 15

A.

Well I'll accept that it was.

16

Q. 224

Yes.

17

A.

I take it that's similar to 3992 is it? You have 3668 and I have 3995 but I

18 19

And I think at the bottom it says next Thursday --

have the same total, 549.

Sorry, I don't have that bit of.

Q. 225

The writing at the bottom?

A.

I don't have the writing at the bottom.

21

Q. 226

And you see the little marks on the document? If you could bring 3668 back.

22

A.

Yes, I recollect seeing this when Mr. Murray was being ...

23

Q. 227

What the document apparently records is that there was agreement between

11:33:52 20

24 11:34:10 25

Monarch and GRE except for the items that are marked? A.

Yes.

26

Q. 228

One of the items marked is courtesy personnel and strategy consultancy fees?

27

A.

That's right.

28

Q. 229

And Mr. Murray at 3666 recorded in his report to Mr. Glennane, Mr. Sweeney, and

29 11:34:31 30

Mr. Monahan, that Brian Gillies was adamant that GRE would not contribute towards the strategic element of the consultancy fees? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:34:36

11:34:50

34 1

A.

That's right.

2

Q. 230

So notwithstanding that is was being designated strategic consultancy fee at

3 4

the request of GRE, certainly as of May of 1992, they are refusing to pay it? A.

They are refusing to pay it in May 1992 but I think I got him to pay it some

5

time later and I think maybe in 1994 we eventually got the money from them, if

6

you like, in a round sum composite figure.

7

Q. 231

And I think in May of 1992 Mr. Lawless, at 8845 -- 8845.

He wrote and he said

8

that the sum due to Monarch from GRE was 156,478 as set out in the schedule.

9

And the schedule at 8846.

11:35:20 10

A.

8845 has a figure of 146,473.

11

Q. 232

Yes.

12

A.

And that doesn't appear on this.

13

Q. 233

And the schedule at 8846, the bottom figure?

14

A.

311,640, yeah, that --

Q. 234

Yes.

A.

That is the 178 plus 26 plus 106 it's the first three amounts and the schedule

11:35:34 15

16 17

(witness reading to himself).

18

it.

19

Q. 235

11:35:56 20

The schedule three for May must have come into

Schedule two amounts to 61,981 and included in the 61,981, Mr. Lynn, is the sum of 22,150.

21

A.

In schedule?

22

Q. 236

3998.

23

A.

Just give me a second, please.

24

Q. 237

Uh-huh.

A.

And the 61,981, the 22,150 is included yes?

26

Q. 238

Yes.

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 239

So when that letter is sent in May of 1992, Monarch are still looking for their

11:36:07 25

29 11:36:23 30

Isn't that right?

strategy consultancy fees, isn't that right? A.

Monarch continued to look for them and eventually were successful in getting Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:36:27

11:36:40

35 1

them recouped.

2

Q. 240

In June of 1992 a sum of 3,000 pounds was added.

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 241

At 3998.

5

You can see that.

Isn't that right?

The figure now has become 25,150.

increase the bottom portion, please.

6

A.

Yeah, I mean, sorry, I can see it, yes, yes.

7

Q. 242

And that apparently was due to a cheque drawn to cash at 7380.

8

very first cheque on the cheque payments book.

9

top of the page, please.

11:37:06 10

And it is the

And if we could increase the

You will see it says "cash 3,000 pounds Cherrywood".

Isn't that right?

11

A.

That's what that says.

12

Q. 243

It was posted to Cherrywood.

13

A.

We don't mind the cheque.

14 11:37:25 15

If you

But how did it -- and was it posted to the? The cheque it's self is at 8544.

Where was it posted? Was it posted to strategy

consultancy? Q. 244

16

It was posted to Cherrywood promotion open days at 7382.

It's a Cherrywood

account.?

17

A.

Was it posted to the strategy consultancy fees.

18

Q. 245

There was no such designation on the accounts?

19

A.

So therefore we don't know whether that three is the same three.

Q. 246

We do know that that three that's in Cherrywood promotion open days because

11:37:39 20

21

it's the cash cheque number and the date is correct, is the same three that's

22

added to the 22,150.

23

fees because there's no such designation in the accounts.

24

What we don't know is how it became strategy consultancy

A.

Sorry, that's ...

Q. 247

If you look at 7382, Mr. Lynn.

26

A.

All I'm saying it.

27

Q. 248

If you look at the document on screen.

11:38:01 25

28 29 11:38:17 30

Just for --

If you could increase the bottom half.

You will see account 7357201 and it's called "promotion open day". A.

Yeah.

Q. 249

And you will see the fifth entry down relates to -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:38:20

11:38:30

36 1

A.

I see 3,000.

2

Q. 250

Cash cheque and the cheque number I think is 822.

3 A.

I've no difficulty in saying.

5

Q. 251

Yeah.

6

A.

In agreeing that the three goes through the books.

7

ended up here.

8

political donations.

All I'm saying is if it

I think that that indicates that there was more than just

Q. 252

Unless --

A.

Applied to this heading.

11

Q. 253

Unless of course that was a payment to a politician.

12

A.

Well.

13

Q. 254

If you look at 3707 you might be able to help the Tribunal.

11:38:43 10

14

relates to the 3,000 pounds cheque we've just seen.

16

And you will see written

beside it "strategy".

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 255

You see that?

19

And you will see that the balance of that list is being

assigned to sundries.

Do you see that?

A.

Yeah sorry I beg your pardon.

21

Q. 256

Yes.

22

A.

I do, yes.

23

Q. 257

And whose writing is that?

24

A.

Well it's not my writing anyway.

11:39:30 25

26

You will see

under the heading of Cherrywood costs there is a cash sum of 3,000 pounds which

11:39:00 15

11:39:14 20

If you look at

8544.

4

9

5822.

On the outside, yes.

You see -- do you see that?

So I -- I presume it's somebody in accounts

but I don't know is the answer. Q. 258

And that would appear to suggest, Mr. Lynn, that the sum of 3,000 pounds drawn

27

to cash in May of 1992 was a attributed to strategy consultancy fee in I think,

28

your document at 3998 under the heading interim May '92.

29 11:39:57 30

A.

Yes, I mean, I'm picking up the three from where it's posted in the accounts.

Q. 259

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:39:57

11:40:11

37 1

A.

I didn't post it.

2

Q. 260

And where you are picking it up from being posted in the accounts is promotion

3 4

open days. A.

5

That's where it's posted in the accounts.

It must have eventually because on the notation there it says strategy.

So

somebody must have posted it to strategy eventually.

6

Q. 261

Yes.

7

A.

I'm surprised you're saying that now but ...

8

Q. 262

So it would appear that there was a need for 3,000 pounds in cash in May of

9

There is no Cherrywood strategy designation, Mr. Lynn, in the accounts.

1992.

11:40:33 10

And can you think of anything that you were involved in at that time

that was relevant to Cherrywood that might have required a payment of 3,000

11

pounds?

12

A.

There was nothing that I was involved in which required any payment.

13

Q. 263

Yes.

14

A.

Of 3,000 or any thousands or any hundreds or any tens or ones.

Q. 264

Were you aware that a motion was lodged with Dublin County Council on the 4th

11:40:48 15

16

of May 1992 in connection with the rezoning of the Cherrywood lands at 7144.

17

A.

The answer to that is yes.

18

Q. 265

Yeah.

19

And do you know whether or not there is any connection between the

3,000 pounds in cash and the motion on behalf of Monarch Properties that was

11:41:11 20

received by Dublin County Council on the 4th of May 1992?

21

A.

There certainly wasn't.

22

Q. 266

As far as you're aware?

23

A.

Well as far as I'm aware there certainly wasn't.

24

Q. 267

And insofar as the 3,000 pounds are being allied with the strategy consultancy

11:41:27 25

fees.

And we know that the other sum that's in strategy consultancy is

26

22,150.

27

suggest to you that it's likely that the sum of 3,000 pounds similarly had some

28

political connection?

29 11:41:45 30

And we know that that represents political donations.

A.

I wouldn't agree with that.

Q. 268

Yes.

I would

Well then will you just tell the Tribunal what the 3,000 pounds was for? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:41:50

11:42:15

38 1

A.

Well I can't advise the Tribunal now either.

2

22,150 you can see how that is made up.

3

it May 1992?

4

that particular motion.

All I can tell you is that the There's some cash taken out in, is

And it is certainly not, to my mind, it has no association with And further than that I can't assist the Tribunal.

5

Q. 269

Do you know who got the money?

6

A.

Absolutely not, no.

7

Q. 270

At 3789.

In July of 1992.

Mr. Eddie Sweeney wrote to Cherrywood -- wrote on

8

behalf of Monarch -- wrote on behalf of Monarch to GRE.

9

that under the heading costs "I note you've approved payments and are checking

11:42:39 10

And he includes in

invoices per schedule 8 which amount to 99,858".

11 12

Now, I think you'd agree that the strategy consultancy fees are included in the

13

99,858.

14 11:42:55 15

They are the subject of discussion.

A.

I accept what you're saying.

Q. 271

Yes.

And then Mr. Sweeney goes on to say "I attach an estimate of further

16

costs which may be incurred on the Draft Development Plan amounting to 63,500.

17

You will appreciate it is necessary, and depending on the outcome of the

18

September meeting, this sum could vary either up or down.

19

are incurred we'll continue to forward same to you".

However, as costs

11:43:16 20

21

Do you know at 8753.

22

for 10,000 pounds for strategy consultancy?

23

A.

24

The projections that he forwards includes a projection

Well again, if it's under that heading and it's August December 1992. it's very similar to what I said to you.

11:43:41 25

That in the event of -- well 10,000 would

suggest we weren't expecting.

26

I would have put it higher than that.

weren't expecting a General Election but certainly if a by-election was called.

27

Q. 272

Yes.

28

A.

You would be making contributions.

29 11:43:58 30

We

Well I presume we'd be making

contributions of at least 10,000. Q. 273

And they're not being described, are they, as contributions. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

They're being

11:44:02

11:44:17

39 1

described as costs which may be incurred on the Draft Development Plan at 3789.

2

That's how they're described.

3

A.

I mean they are described there as strategy --

4

Q. 274

No.

If you just listen now very carefully, Mr. Lynn it says, "I attach an

5

estimate of further costs which may be incurred on the Draft Development Plan".

6

Not on any General Election.

7

estimate of costs amounting to 63,500 pounds which may be incurred on the Draft

8

Development Plan.

9 11:44:41 10

Political contribution.

He's providing an

A.

Of which 10 of the 63 is put down to political donations.

Q. 275

No, no, there is' no political donations mentioned.

11

Is that your point?

there's strategy

consultancy mentioned Mr. Lynn.

12

A.

I thought we were -- Okay.

13

Q. 276

If we deal first of all -- do you agree that what Mr. Sweeney is telling GRE is

14 11:44:56 15

that the costs would be incurred on the Draft Development Plan? A.

I mean, they are very, very similar to what I said at the outset in relation to

16

political contributions.

17

been called to make and would make would be charged back into the recoupment

18

heading to get 50 percent from GRE.

19

10,000 because it didn't matter unless we actually expended it, we didn't get

11:45:26 20

it.

21 22

Any political contribution that Monarch would have

I see no difference in the amount of

Unless we had a covering invoice for it or a covering bit of paper we

weren't able to recoup it. Q. 277

Yes.

If you just answer the question I've asked you now.

Is whether or not

23

what Mr. Sweeney was telling GRE that he anticipated costs of 63,500 I think on

24

the Draft Development Plan.

11:45:49 25

Is that what the letter says or not?

A.

That he -- sorry.

26

Q. 278

Just read it again there.

27

A.

That's an estimate.

28

Q. 279

Yes.

29

A.

A further cost may be incurred.

Q. 280

Yes.

11:45:59 30

Of further -May be incurred.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:46:00

11:46:18

40 1

A.

On the Draft Development Plan.

Not on the 63,500.

2

Q. 281

Exclusive of the project management fee.

This is my third time to ask you

3

now, Mr. Lynn.

Whether or not you agree that what Mr. Sweeney was telling GRE

4

that he the costs he expected might be incurred in connection with the Draft

5

Development Plan amounted in July of '92 to 63,500 pounds.

6

A.

That might be expended and charged to it yes, I would accept that.

7

Q. 282

And that he then goes on to say "You will appreciate this is an estimate only

8

and depending on the outcome of the September meeting" which I suggest to you

9

was an anticipated council meeting, "this sum could vary up and down".

11:46:51 10

11

A.

In other words, it was based on an estimate it could vary up and down.

Q. 283

How could the outcome of a council meeting either increase or decrease the

12

expenses in connection with the Development Plan that Monarch might have to

13

pay?

14 11:46:56 15

16

A.

Could you just give me the date of that letter.

Q. 284

It is the 27th of July 1992.

A.

Yeah well as we know he was -- that would amount -- sorry.

That would depend

17

upon what preparation we had to do, what extra work we would have to do.

18

further plans we may have had to submit.

19

had to engage.

11:47:23 20

called.

What further consultants we may have

And in the event of a by-election or a General Election being

We would have been called upon to make political contributions.

21

Q. 285

Uh-huh.

22

A.

It's very simple.

23

Q. 286

Right.

24

A.

It's not -- I wouldn't be reading too much into it.

Q. 287

Fine.

11:47:32 25

That's matter for the Tribunal.

At 3790 under the heading planning

26

application.

27

"Planning application cashflow: He encloses as requested a schedule of

28

projected costs associated with a planning application."

29

that document, at 3791.

11:47:52 30

This is the second page of the same letter, Mr. Lynn.

And if one looks at

You will see again provision is being made for

strategy consultancy fees at the second last item. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

What

11:47:57

11:48:10

41 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 288

And the strategy consultancy fees that are being projected for the planning

3 4

application are 40,000 pounds. A.

Yes.

Isn't that right?

And again, again, it's the same explanation that in the event of a

5

by-election or a General Election being called, we were projecting to Guardian

6

that there was a possibility that -- a possibility of by-election or a general

7

election being called, and in that event contributions would be called for.

8

So we were making provision for that.

9

saying, that those could go up or down.

11:48:34 10

And I think what Eddie Sweeney was That depended upon in relation to

that particular heading or sub-heading, the extent of the requests that we

11

would have to meet.

12

Q. 289

So if I can summarise your position then --

13

A.

Sorry, I better would not say would have to meet.

14

that.

I could be taken up for

That we would be prepared to meet.

11:48:49 15

16 17

CHAIRMAN: A.

I was just going to take you up on that.

Thanks.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

11:48:59 20

to be met as an expense associated with the -A.

We better not say "have to be met" because.

23 24 11:49:17 25

CHAIRMAN: A.

Well you say --

I've taken that back.

We would possibly meet.

26 27 28

CHAIRMAN: A.

But it was --

I mean, there's no onus on anybody to make a political contribution.

29 11:49:26 30

They

would be identified by you and your colleagues as being outlay that would have

21 22

Irrespective of what sort of words are used to described.

CHAIRMAN:

Exactly.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:49:27

11:49:39

42 1

A.

2

That's what I'm saying.

It would be voluntary.

There's no onus on us ever

to make a political contribution.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

5

estimate presumably based on a realistic expectation that in the event of the

6

September meeting going in a certain way, certain additional sums would have to

7

be expended.

8

compulsion on Monarch to pay these.

9

partners at that time that based on estimated -- based on estimates, presumably

11:50:14 10

They are identified.

This money was being identified as an

Now, that's not to say that there would be some sort of legal But it was -- you were informing your

based on some realistic expectation, you'd have to expend these sums.

11

weren't distinguishing between these sums and other costs that might be

12

incurred, they were all going into the same bill, as it were?

13

A.

14

Yeah.

And you

But some of the costs, should we even call them "costs" because.

Some

of the outlay would be a lot more real than the -- for instance the planning

11:50:45 15

application and planning application fee, the engagement of consultants, all of

16

that jazz.

All of those would be quasi real figures.

17 18 19

CHAIRMAN: A.

Some would be possibly --

More real than others.

11:51:00 20

21 22

CHAIRMAN: A.

More easily capable of assessment.

Yes.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

11:51:09 25

26

In advance.

So there was a certain unknown element in relation to

the political donation. A.

Yeah.

And you could see that because previously I put in 25 a month.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

29

donations, irrespective of the announcement of and allowing for the fact that

11:51:24 30

But it still appears to be the case that these, that the political

they were only estimates, were being viewed by Monarch as expenses associated Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:51:37

11:51:54

43 1 2

with the rezoning and planning process. A.

I wouldn't say -- I beg to differ with you on that.

I mean, I think you're

3

trying to tie a rezoning and the planning process to political contributions.

4

And, I mean, the purpose of this document is to alert our partners that if

5

we're going for a planning application.

6 7 8

CHAIRMAN: A.

This is what it will costs.

Certain costs will follow.

9 11:52:02 10

11

CHAIRMAN: A.

Yes.

And I am asked to put the kitchen sink into the estimate.

And I've to look to

12

say well what can happen.

And if a by-election is called or if a General

13

Election is called will we make contributions.

14

whether we would make contributions, I put in a sum of money.

And if the question is there

11:52:24 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

17

they are voluntary, that there's no legal compulsion to pay them but we see

18

them as an expense that will have to be met if we're to realise our ambition?

19

A.

But were you not saying to GRE that the political donations, while

No, I don't see the connection between one and the other.

11:52:47 20

21 22

CHAIRMAN: A.

All right.

And what I see -- I beg your pardon.

What I see is that in the event of us

23

making political contributions, we will seek to recoup that from 50 percent of

24

that from Guardian.

11:53:09 25

I don't -- I don't see the marriage I think as you are

trying to say that we associated one with the other.

26 27

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

28 29 11:53:18 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Mr. Lynn, could I just ask you.

You answered Ms. Dillon a

few moments ago when she was asking you about the 40,000 strategy consultancy Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:53:22

11:53:38

44 1

fees and projected and referred to Mr. Sweeney's letter.

2

event of a by-election or a General Election being called you'd have to be

3

called upon to make contributions.

4

A.

Sorry, if I did say that.

And you said in the

That view would have to be --

5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY:

7

response to your answer to Ms. Dillon.

8

possible impact would a by-election or a General Election have on a planning

9

application?

11:53:53 10

A.

Absolutely none.

I won't tie you 100 percent but that's the note I took in I just want to ask you, Mr. Lynn, what

There is no marriage between the event of a by-election or a

11

General Election and us meeting requests for contributions and the fact that we

12

are thinking of doing a planning application or doing a rezoning or whatsoever.

13

There is no marriage between the two events save that if Monarch expended money

14

for any purpose, we tried to recoup that from Guardian, 50 percent of that from

11:54:21 15

Guardian.

But there's no marriage between one event and the other event.

16 17

Q. 290

MS. DILLON:

18

A.

Sorry.

19

Can I ask --

I thought I got that across in my earlier evidence.

There is no

marriage between making a political contribution and the hope that that will

11:54:43 20

lend you a favour some way down the line.

You'd be absolutely a fool to

21

believe that one will give rise to the other or give you a favourable result.

22

It's ... it's stupendious.

23

Q. 291

24

these political contributions in the third month after the planning application

11:55:10 25

26

Can you ask you, Mr. Lynn, how you were minded to decide that you'd have to pay

was made? A.

27

Because they're only estimates and estimates are taken from the ceiling. There's no.

28

Q. 292

How do you --

29

A.

There is no scientific -- as you can see from earlier things I put in 25 on a

11:55:23 30

three month which you said amounted to 75, which it doesn't of course. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

And

11:55:27

11:55:45

45 1

here I'm saying in the third month there could be 40,000.

2

are estimates.

3

Q. 293

That's all they are.

It's -- all they

There's nothing --

The amount is estimated; isn't that right? The amount is the estimated but the

4

heading.

5

be necessary because the headings is there, that political payments will be

6

made, isn't that right?

7

A.

The decision is already made that if this comes to fruition it will

It's not necessary.

And Monarch could have taken the decision that they

8

wouldn't make contributions to any further events.

9

board if they wanted to make the decision.

11:56:03 10

estimate.

That was a matter for the

What I was doing was providing an

I was putting the kitchen sink into the estimate.

11

Q. 294

Uh-huh.

12

A.

And if people wanted to accept it or reject it that was a matter for them.

I

13

couldn't foresee whether there would be a General Election or a by-election.

14

I presume a by-election would only occur on the death of somebody, so hopefully

11:56:29 15

we weren't projecting that.

But certainly in a three month period, in actual

16

fact it would be quite low by looking at it today.

17

don't know if we had a General Election this year and you were doing such

18

projections you'd want it make provision for it.

19

Q. 295

11:56:41 20

Looking at it today, I

What we will just concentrate on for the moment now is, how when you came to prepare that document and accepting that strategy consultancy fees is a nomer

21

or a misnomer for political payments, how you came to the view that it would be

22

necessary in the third month of the planning application to shell out 40,000

23

pounds?

24 11:56:58 25

A.

Well first of all it includes political --

Q. 296

Well can we just get that clear, Mr. Lynn.

26

Can you gist indicate what else

other than political contributions --

27

A.

I thought --

28

Q. 297

Just indicate to the Tribunal what else as a matter of fact other than

29 11:57:12 30

political contributions has been included under the heading strategy consultancy fees? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:57:14

11:57:27

46 1

A.

All right.

I went through the brief.

2

Q. 298

Uh-huh.

3

A.

And I came up with the 22,150, came up on that sheet and I saw that.

I saw

4

the 3,000 was added.

I didn't know it was cash.

5

you've explained that.

My recollection, although I can't find it while

6

sitting here, is that the three was removed it was replaced by something else

7

and there's now a figure of I think it's 27, something like that.

8

know what the difference between the 22 and the 27 is, I don't know what it

9

covers.

11:57:48 10

Q. 299

11

I just saw it was added and

I don't

Therefore I'm not able to advise you. I couldn't find it.

You didn't understand the question. I'm asking you from your knowledge and your information --

12

A.

Well the answer to that --

13

Q. 300

-- that on a factual basis Mr. Lynn. If you just wait for the question for the

14

second time.

11:58:02 15

What else other than political contributions do you know, do you

know, are described as strategy consultancy fees?

16

A.

At this moment I don't know.

17

Q. 301

So what we do know is this.

The word "Strategy consultancy fees" is used in

18

internal documentation in Monarch including used by yourself.

19

correct?

11:58:19 20

Is that

A.

Um, well I picked it up from accounts.

21

Q. 302

Yes.

22

A.

But I have then repeated it, yes.

23

Q. 303

And subject to anything that Mr. Sanfey may wish to say, there is no strategy

24

consulting heading the general ledger for Cherrywood.

11:58:37 25

me Mr. Lynn.

26

A.

You're telling me.

27

Q. 304

I'm telling you.

28 29 11:58:48 30

You may take that from

So wherever you got it from you didn't get it from the

general ledger in the accounts. A.

I must have got it from somewhere.

Q. 305

You didn't make it up.

I didn't make it up.

Is it likely then that you would have got it from

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

11:58:52

11:59:08

47 1 2

somebody in the accounting department? A.

That's what I said to you. Those headings came from accounting.

All they

3

were was a reflection of what the accounts had.

But they were put on an excel

4

sheet instead of -- I was -- I was asked, if you like, to try and bring some

5

order on what they had.

6

those headings came from accounts.

And so those headings, I'm absolutely certain that

7

Q. 306

To you.

8

A.

To me, yes.

9

Q. 307

And what you did was you worked then with those headings?

A.

Yes.

Q. 308

But you knew because you put the 21,150 that's strategy consultancy fees meant

11:59:21 10

11 12

political donations at least?

13

A.

At least, yes.

14

Q. 309

You can't and don't know of anything else other than political donations that

11:59:34 15

ever went into strategy consultancy fees?

16

A.

As of this moment. No.

17

Q. 310

As of this moment.

18 19 11:59:46 20

21

And you have all of the documentation, isn't that right,

Mr. Lynn? That you've been provided with that the Tribunal has. A.

Well I don't know that I have everything that you have.

Q. 311

Well you have --

A.

I only have the three boxes of whatever it is I've gone through it.

I've

22

abstracted but as I said to you before, I noticed that the figure of 22 goes up

23

to 27 and I haven't been able to determine the balance.

24

have and you'll tell me.

12:00:08 25

The reason I'm not -- I can't accept that it's

exclusive is that I don't know.

26 27

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

28 29

MS. DILLON:

And I presume you

If you look at 3 --

12:00:13 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:00:13

12:00:36

48 1

CHAIRMAN:

Ms. Dillon I just want to give the stenographer a break so we'll

2

break for ten minutes.

3 4

MS. DILLON:

Yes, Sir.

5 6

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK

7

AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:

8 9

MS. DILLON:

12:18:01 10

11

Mr. Lynn, please.

Good afternoon, Mr. Lynn. Q. 312

If I could just have page 3791, please.

12

And I just want to go back to that issue, Mr. Lynn, that we were dealing with

13

in relation to the strategy consultancy fees of 40,000 pounds that are

14

projected there.

12:18:41 15

being projected there in the event of a General Election.

16

A.

Or a by-election.

17

Q. 313

Or a by-election.

18 19

And I think what you told the Tribunal is that they were Is that right?

Does it mean first of all it wouldn't matter whether it was

a General Election or a by-election the amount would still be 40,000? A.

In that context, yes.

Q. 314

Yes.

21

A.

Well okay it's a projection.

22

Q. 315

Well that's what you've called it you see.

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 316

Planning application cashflow projection Cherrywood Properties Limited, isn't

12:18:51 20

12:19:04 25

I mean, all that is, is an estimate.

Yes, it's a projection.

that right?

26

A.

Yes, I mean, I accept that but it's ...

27

Q. 317

So what the document in fact is as created by Monarch and contributed to by

28

yourself is a document solely in connection with the Cherrywood lands, isn't

29

that right?

12:19:17 30

A.

That's correct, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:19:18

12:19:34

49 1

Q. 318

It's a planning application cashflow projection, isn't that right?

2

A.

Yes, I mean, that's the title of it.

3

Q. 319

And included in your cashflow projections under the heading "strategy

4

consultancy fees", which you agree includes political donations and you can't

5

identify anything else that's included under the heading "strategy consultancy

6

fees", isn't that right?

7

A.

That's correct.

8

Q. 320

All right.

9

A.

That's right, Chairman, yes.

Q. 321

Now, you project that sum as becoming payable on the third month of the

12:19:44 10

11 12

You have projected a sum of 40,000 pounds.

planning application. A.

Um, yes.

no significance in that.

14

fourth month.

It could be the second month or it could be the

There is no significance in it being the third month.

I

suppose all I'm doing there is providing for the possibility, even the remote

16 17

Isn't that right?

I mean, the document says it's put under the third month but there's

13

12:20:06 15

Isn't that right?

possibility, of a by-election or a General Election. Q. 322

And anybody reading that document wouldn't have been informed that in fact when

18

you were talking about strategy consultancy fees payable on a planning

19

application in the third month, you were in reality talking about possible

12:20:29 20

21

General Elections contributions? A.

22 23

No, my counterparts in GRE would have.

They were the only ones that this was

prepared for. Q. 323

24

But for anybody else looking at it, anybody else looking at the document would not have been aware isn't that right, on the face of the document that what

12:20:44 25

you're talking about there are political donations?

26

A.

Could you explain to me who else.

27

Q. 324

Let's say an auditor found it, for example?

28

A.

Well it if an auditor found it and went behind the figures and in the event of

29 12:21:04 30

I mean?

them being incurred he or she would readily see that they were political donations if it had occurred.

Similar to the 22,150.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:21:08

12:21:20

50 1

Q. 325

Yes.

2

A.

Sorry, if that's the correct amount or not.

3

Q. 326

They are classed in the accounts now as general promotions expenses not

4 5

political donations, as you're aware. A.

Yeah.

I'm not familiar with the accountancy functions etc.

All I can say is that in

6

the event of political donations being made and trying to recoup them from

7

Guardian, they would be aware that they were political donations.

8

then sorry behind that then, any auditor coming up behind that would know that

9

these were political donations.

12:21:47 10

Q. 327

Sorry, and

So you're saying that the purpose of calling them "strategy consultancy fees"

11

is so that Monarch in Ireland and GRE in England, will both know that you're

12

talking about political donations?

13

A.

Both knew what the heading embraced, yes.

14

Q. 328

And why didn't you call them political donations then?

A.

I mean, as you can see from the document.

12:22:07 15

I didn't put the title on it.

16

lifted it -- sorry.

17

I wouldn't have any difficulty in calling them what or subgrouping them if

18

there's anything else in them, which I don't know about.

19

in calling them political donations, absolutely none.

12:22:31 20

Q. 329

I lifted that title from the accounts section.

I

I mean,

I've no difficulty

But you elected in making your projection to project that political payments

21

were likely to become necessary in the third month of a planning application

22

under the heading "strategy consultancy fees".

23

says?

24 12:22:49 25

A.

No, no, Chairman, that's not correct.

Is that what the document

Basically all that document there is

doing is reflecting the remote possibility or the possibility that a General

26

Election or a by-election might be called and there might be political

27

donations. As I said at the outset, this was prepared putting everything you

28

could possibly think of into it on the basis that when we made projections to

29

GRE, they would only recoup A, if they had been budgeted for and B, if we had

12:23:16 30

back up documentation to obtain a recoupment. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:23:20

12:23:39

51 1

Q. 330

And at 3790 I just want to draw to your comment on it, Mr. Lynn, what is said

2

about the document we have just been discussing, and it's described as

3

"planning application cashflow:

4

projected costs associated with the planning application."

I enclose as requested a schedule of

5 6

Would you just explain to the Tribunal how a political contribution to a

7

General Election or a Local Election or by-election in the amount of 40,000

8

pounds could properly be described as a cost associated with the planning

9

application?

12:23:49 10

A.

There is no association between a political contribution and a cost associated

11

with either a planning application or a zoning provision or a variation to a

12

plan or anything in the planning.

13

--

14 12:24:08 15

Q. 331

Yes.

A.

-- between a political contribution and the event of making planning

16 17

applications or zoning or whatever. Q. 332

18 19

It is just -- there is no such a marriage

Then why was it included in the your projection at all, Mr. Lynn, if that is the correct position?

A.

12:24:30 20

Because -- because if in -- if the event had occurred and if we had expended monies under that heading i.e. political contributions.

And if it hadn't been

21

included in the budget going forward to Guardian, Guardian would say it's not

22

in the budget so we're not recouping it.

23

there.

24

Q. 333

12:24:49 25

That's the only reason that it is

So would it be fair to say that you were asked to prepare a schedule of costs. And these were costs that were cashflow projections associated with the

26

planning application?

27

A.

No, I'd say what the document there does --

28

Q. 334

3791.

29

A.

Yes, I know.

12:25:07 30

it.

This is how your document describes it. We've had it up.

I have a a hard copy of it but I can't find

All that is doing is indicating potential expenditure or monies being Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:25:17

12:25:36

52 1

paid by Monarch which they might in the future seek to recoup and you provide

2

everything you possibly can think of in it.

3

Q. 335

Yes.

If you just look at the document and if you just listen to the question.

4

Would it be a fair description of your document to say what you were estimating

5

were costs associated with the planning application?

6

A.

Associated with it, no.

7

Q. 336

Right.

Yes or no?

The answer is no.

Therefore when Mr. Sweeney says and describes your document in that

8

fashion, at 3790.

9

projected costs associated with the planning application", Mr. Sweeney is

12:25:59 10

11

Where he says "I enclose as requested a schedule of

wrong, is that right? A.

12

Mr. Sweeney is wrong. legal terms.

And I don't suppose that that letter is written in pure

Basically what my table is indicating are potential expenses.

13

Q. 337

Okay.

14

A.

Or expenditures by Monarch.

12:26:21 15

If they occur we will (document handed to

witness) oh, thank you very much.

If they occur we would be seeking to recoup

16

50 percent of them.

17

As I said to you, if they're not in the budget Guardian had a habit of

18

disallowing.

19

Q. 338

12:26:42 20

If they don't occur we wouldn't be seeking to recoup.

So was this the position.

Monarch knew and GRE knew when you were talking

about strategy consultancy fees you were talking about political expenses?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 339

In both of the projected documents that were prepared by you and which were

23

furnished by Mr. Sweeney in July of 1992 to Monarch Properties -- to GRE, the

24

first in connection with the Draft Development Plan and the second in

12:26:57 25

connection with the planning costs both included a heading for strategy

26

consultancy?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 340

Both of the documents which included a heading for strategy consultancy meant

29 12:27:09 30

political donations? A.

Well they certainly included. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:27:11

12:27:19

53 1

Q. 341

Included political donations.

2

A.

That's correct, that's correct.

3

Q. 342

These documents were never meant to be considered by anybody other than Monarch

4

Is that right?

and GRE?

5

A.

Yes, they were internal documents between Monarch and GRE.

6

Q. 343

And in both of these Monarch are explaining the costs that are likely to or

7

might be incurred first of all in connection with the Development Plan and two

8

in connection with the planning application?

9

A.

12:27:40 10

Plus whatever other costs may arise i.e. political contributions which wouldn't be associated but which might occur within that period.

11

Q. 344

Insofar as --

12

A.

That's the distinction I would make.

13

Q. 345

Insofar as the strategy consultancy element of both documents are concerned,

14

what is happening here is that Monarch are telling GRE is that insofar as the

12:27:58 15

Draft Development Plan for one document and the planning application for the

16

second document is concerned.

17

likely to be paid?

18

A.

19

There will be a strategic consultancy element

No, I think what you're saying to me is in the period that we're projecting. If that event occurs and we do make contributions we will be seeking to recoup

12:28:18 20

50 percent of those contributions.

Can I reiterate that there is no

21

connection between a political contribution and the fact of making the planning

22

application or a variation or a Development Plan.

23

Q. 346

Do you understand the question or will we go through it again, Mr. Lynn --

24

A.

No, no, I think I've answered the question.

Q. 347

You created both of these documents, isn't that right?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 348

Yes.

12:28:42 25

28 29 12:28:55 30

You know that in talking about strategy consultancy fees you're talking

about money that at least includes political donations, isn't that right? A.

That's correct.

Q. 349

Right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:28:55

12:29:05

54 1

A.

I mean, if you take the 40 grand --

2

Q. 350

Just listen to the question.

3

A.

That's correct.

4

Q. 351

In preparing both of these documents you you attribute two amounts of money to

Is that correct?

5

the heading "strategy consultancy" which includes political donations, isn't

6

that right?

7

A.

That's correct.

8

Q. 352

For the planning application that amount is 40,000 pounds, is that correct?

9

A.

40,000 pounds is included in that table.

Q. 353

Under the heading strategy consultancy fee?

A.

To cover the eventuality that in the event of a by-election or a General

12:29:19 10

11 12

Election being called we would more than likely be requested to make political

13

contributions and if they are made we are seeking to recoup 50 percent.

14

Q. 354

12:29:41 15

And your document is in all cases entirely silent about contributions, political contributions, Senate Elections, by-elections, Local Elections or

16

national elections, isn't that right?

17

A.

That's correct, that's correct.

18

Q. 355

All right so that to the uninitiated eye looking at this document there was

19

nothing on the face of either document that would have indicated that what in

12:29:58 20

fact you were telling GRE was that in the course of the planning application it

21

might become necessary if there was an election to pay 40,000 pounds, isn't

22

that right?

23

A.

24

General Election we might be called upon in that event we would be seeking to

12:30:17 25

26

recoup. Q. 356

27 28

Yes.

Now, ultimately, I think insofar as the claim in respect of those fees

were concerned. A.

29 12:30:39 30

I can't agree with the word "necessary" but in the event of a by-election or a

Were they in fact actually paid, the 27,850?

Um, well my understanding is that yes, they were included in a bulk figure eventually.

Q. 357

A wrap up settlement in 1994? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:30:42

12:30:54

55 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 358

But they weren't specifically paid?

3

A.

I'd say the answer to your question is yes, they were specifically paid.

But

4

I couldn't say that they weren't discounted like everything else was discounted

5

in the wrap up fee.

6

Q. 359

Yes.

7

A.

I mean, they were accepted.

8 9 12:31:07 10

11

Anthony Patfield accepted that them as being

something that Guardian should contribute to. Q. 360

And --

A.

Sorry.

Q. 361

If I could just ask you this. When they were included in third party invoices

12

was it the normal position with GRE that they wouldn't pay third party invoices

13

in the absence of an invoice from the person who actually received the money

14

from MPSL?

12:31:22 15

A.

16

For third party invoices.

I'd say other than the political contributions.

I

think that that 22,150 was prepared for them to indicate who had received.

17

Q. 362

That the schedule?

18

A.

The for schedule.

19

Q. 363

The first schedule that was prepared?

A.

Yeah.

21

Q. 364

That was --

22

A.

That was prepared for Guardian to indicate how the 22,150 was made up.

23

Q. 365

And how could the initials assist Guardian as to knowing who had got the money?

24

A.

How cot -- how could they assist.

Q. 366

Mr. Baker is sitting over in London and he gets a piece of paper that says TH

12:31:38 20

12:31:57 25

26

5,000 pounds.

27

pounds was properly paid or who it was paid to or what it is paid for?

28 29 12:32:19 30

A.

How does that assist Mr. Baker in working out whether the 5,000

Well the person I was dealing in the recoupment was Anthony Patfield.

And we

went through all of the members in relation to the political contributions. And indeed all of the members of the council from time to time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

So certainly

12:32:26

12:32:46

56 1

Mr. Patfield was aware.

And on the strength of being aware, Mr. Patfield

2

cleared these for recoupment.

3

Guardian needed --

So he hadn't any difficulty with it.

If

4

Q. 367

Yes.

5

A.

-- further explanation, there's no difference -- there's no difficulty in

6

putting Councillor T Hand.

7

see that we --

I presume it's just an abbreviation that you can

8

Q. 368

3657, please.

9

A.

-- we put the political affiliation alongside of the various initials.

12:33:08 10

So

there's no difficulty with Mr. Patfield or at least Mr. Patfield didn't have

11

any difficulty with it.

12

Q. 369

So this schedule was prepared to indicate to GRE who had received the money?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 370

And is this the back up document that was used in connection with supporting

12:33:24 15

the invoice?

16

A.

That's right, that supported at the stage when it was at 22,150.

17

Q. 371

But they were then prepared to accept your explanation verbally given as to who

18 19 12:33:39 20

each of these people were? A.

Yes.

Q. 372

All right.

21

So other than that, there was no question of going back to

Mr. Hand or going to anybody else looking for a receipt?

22

A.

Oh, absolutely not.

23

Q. 373

No.

24 12:33:53 25

And in general, would it be fair to say that Monarch didn't seek receipts

in respect of the political donations that it made? A.

26

No, certainly not, no.

You don't see them in a business term.

I mean, often

times you would get a letter of thanks but not always.

27

Q. 374

Were political donations ever paid in cash, Mr. Lynn?

28

A.

Not to my knowledge, no.

29

Q. 375

Mr. Barry has told the Tribunal that he believes that he received money from

12:34:17 30

Monarch for the election campaign for -- in 1991 when he in fact lost his seat Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:34:23

12:34:32

57 1 2

and he believed that he was paid in cash? A.

3

Yes, I saw Mr. Barry's evidence record and he eventually goes on to say he's not sure.

4

Q. 376

That's correct.

5

A.

And I think the record indicates -- He indicated that he thought he got 1,000

6

pounds cash and in effect I think the figure was 2,000 by way of cheque.

7

there was subsequent cheques made out to him, to Jim Barry.

And

8

Q. 377

So to your knowledge was anybody ever paid in cash?

9

A.

To my knowledge, nobody was paid in cash.

Q. 378

And would you have any knowledge of any payments that were made of withdrawals

12:34:54 10

11

that were made or cheques made out to cash and what they might have been used

12

for in connection with the Cherrywood lands?

13

A.

Would I have any knowledge? No, no.

14

Q. 379

So that insofar as documents record in the internal accounting of Monarch

12:35:17 15

monies paid out of Monarch and attributed to Cherrywood, which are in effect

16

cash withdrawals or cheques that are cashed.

17

expenses were?

18

A.

19

Do you have any idea what those

I suppose -- this would be -- I can't remember the figure but there's a figure which appears in the -- in these sheets of cash associated with the, if you

12:35:45 20

like, third party costs charged to Cherrywood.

And when I was trying to

21

negotiate a final settlement with Mr. Patfield I didn't have any explanation

22

for the amount.

23

accounts to seek an explanation as regards what these were for and my

24

recollection and you'll appreciate it's quite a number of years ago, is that

12:36:16 25

26

I think it was around 21,500.

So I had to go through

I'd have to look to Somerton for that explanation. Q. 380

So insofar as you came across and had occasion to meet.

We'll look at them

27

later in some slight more detail, to withdrawals that were made to cash or

28

which were attributed as cash in the books of Monarch but are allocated

29

Cherrywood, the only explanation that you ever got was that the answer lay in

12:36:40 30

Somerton? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:36:40

12:36:49

58 1

A.

That's correct.

2

Q. 381

And by Somerton you mean by the private residence of Mr. Phil Monahan?

3

A.

That's correct.

4

Q. 382

Was it your understanding from what you were told that Mr. Monahan was the

5

person with the answer as to where these monies went?

6

A.

Yes, I would have understood that to be the case, yes.

7

Q. 383

Notwithstanding that you were the person on at least one occasion was charged

8 9

with the task of getting recovery of those monies from GRE? A.

12:37:07 10

11

Yes.

And I think the evidence will show that I wasn't successful in making

that recovery. Q. 384

But in the first instance, an application to GRE for the recovery of those cash

12

payments would indicate a belief that those payments had been incurred in

13

connection with Cherrywood, isn't that right?

14

A.

They were certainly charged to Cherrywood.

Q. 385

To Cherrywood.

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 386

And the factual trail of those payments show that insofar as they are

12:37:20 15

18

attributed as being an expense in connection anything.

19

connection with the Cherrywood lands?

12:37:40 20

21

They are an expense in

A.

Well I beg your pardon. They are shown against Cherrywood.

Q. 387

Against Cherrywood.

Is it the case that if you have no information in

22

connection those cash payments and Mr. Glennane has no explanation in

23

connection with those cash payments and Mr. Sweeney has no explanation in

24

relation to those cash payments and Mr. Reilly has no explanation in relation

12:37:51 25

to those payments, and Mr. Murray who gave evidence yesterday, has no

26

explanation in relation to the cash payments.

27

to that money?

28 29 12:38:10 30

A.

That nobody knows what happened

Well I certainly don't know what happened to the money.

And all I can tell

you is, if you like, the rumour or whatever that I was told when I went looking to get back up documentation seeking to recover the amount, there was no such Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:38:16

12:38:28

59 1

back up documentation available and I was told to go look in Somerton if I

2

wanted back up documentation.

3

Q. 388

4

And those I think were the cash payments that were made in November and October and November?

5

A.

Sorry, Chairman.

6

Q. 389

Sorry, I beg your pardon.

7 8 9

CHAIRMAN: A.

Did you go to Somerton?

No, Chairman.

12:38:35 10

11 12

CHAIRMAN: A.

13

Well why not? They would have been perfectly legitimate expenses?

Well if they were perfectly legitimate, I can't say whether they were or not but the accounts section was asked get the back up documentation.

14 12:38:49 15

16

CHAIRMAN: A.

And you were told you'd have to go to Somerton for that.

Yes but it was their job to go to Somerton, not my job.

17

the back up documentation, not me.

18

claim --

They had to provide

All I was trying to do was to unmasse a

19 12:39:02 20

CHAIRMAN:

21 22

But were they saying to you that the answer lies in Somerton but

nobody has the courage to ask or? A.

Well I don't know whether they would be saying that to me but certainly from

23

where I was coming from, it was a matter for accounts to provide the back up

24

documentation.

12:39:19 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

27

wouldn't have pursued it to a point where, all right, if Mr. Monahan had told

28

you to mind your own business, that might be a reason for you to stop your

29

inquiry.

12:39:37 30

But it was a significant item.

So I don't understand why you

I mean, you were simply said the answer lies in Somerton.

But

nobody seems to -- you didn't bother following it up, even though you were -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:39:41

12:39:56

60 1

A.

Well I mean, I wouldn't say I didn't bother.

I didn't follow it up because if

2

that was the -- it was a matter for accounts to provide the information to back

3

up the actual expenditures.

4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY:

6

Isn't that correct?

7

A.

8

But you weren't getting the answers from accounts, Mr. Lynn.

So all I can suggest is that I suggested to them that they get it.

I mean, I

wasn't going to.

9 12:40:06 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

You say that they said go to Somerton.

No, I said the answer --

12 13

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14

Somerton.

12:40:21 15

16

You inquired and the answer you were told the answer lies in

Can I just ask you.

You were the person who was brought in to

project co-ordinator by Mr. Phil Monahan A.

Yes.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

but a -- it was like different to other employees.

12:40:34 20

I think you had

effectively applied for a job later on Mr. Monahan approached you and you got

21 22

And to some extent you had, if you like, I won't say a role

the job? A.

Yes.

23 24 12:40:41 25

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

As to project coordinate?

That's right.

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

and to liaise with GRE, isn't that correct, in relation to third party costs?

29

A.

And part of that job was to make projections and to recover

It certainly involved to, that your honour, yes.

12:40:52 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:40:52

12:41:09

61 1

JUDGE FAHERTY:

2

retained by Mr. Monahan would suggest that there'd be no reason why you

3

couldn't go to Mr. Monahan and say look I'm doing my best to recover these but

4

GRE are not accepting the figures.

5

A.

And so it would suggest that the manner in which you were

And I need some sort of back up.

Yes but --

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

8

didn't go.

9

being told by Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney, well particularly Mr. Glennane and

12:41:23 10

I mean, I can't see.

You were asked bit Chairman why you

And if you weren't getting the answer in accounts.

Mr. Murray, would have reported -- would have been people who wouldn't be as

11

high up, if you like, in the scale of responsibility as you were.

12

understand?

13

Accounts were

A.

14

Do you

Oh, I wouldn't agree with the levels that you're talking about I mean, Mr. Glennane, Mr. Murray etc. would have been at a much higher level than I

12:41:45 15

was.

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY:

18

talking about, was if a junior clerk? Or was is -- Who in accounts told you to

19

go to Somerton

12:41:55 20

A.

When you went to accounts who did you speak to who are we

The person I recollect dealing in accounts at that time was Mr. Ken Lawless.

21

And he was an accountant in there.

22

was a matter for accounts to have the back up documentation.

I told them what

23

I wanted it for.

And I

24

couldn't recoup it unless they provided the back up documentation.

12:42:17 25

And the way I felt about it was that it

I told them the difficulty in trying to recoup it.

It was

their job to obtain the back up documentation, it wasn't my job.

26 27

MS. DILLON:

28

explanation for cash you were to go out to Somerton to Mr. Philip Monahan?

29 12:42:41 30

What you were told was that if you were looking for an

A.

No, I wasn't told to go out.

I was told I should look to Somerton.

Q. 390

And by that you understood that the answer to your query lay with Mr. Philip Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:42:45

12:42:53

62 1

Monahan?

2

A.

That's correct.

3

Q. 391

And what you were enquiring into I think were certain payments that were made

4

in November of 1993?

5

A.

Yeah, I'll accept that.

6

Q. 392

And I think -- we'll come on to look at them in November 1993.

7

But there were

about five payments totalling 21,500 pounds?

8

A.

That's what I recollect, yeah.

9

Q. 393

And you sought reimbursement of those from GRE?

A.

That's correct.

11

Q. 394

And they wouldn't pay without back up?

12

A.

That's correct.

13

Q. 395

You went looking for the back up because if you could get the back up you'd

12:43:07 10

14 12:43:16 15

collect the money from GRE? A.

That's correct.

16

Q. 396

When you went looking for the back up who did you go to?

17

A.

Mr. Ken Lawless was the person who I think was then dealing with it in

18 19 12:43:27 20

accounts. Q. 397

And Mr. Lawless told you to go to Somerton?

A.

He didn't say go to Somerton.

21

He said you could look to Somerton for the

explanation to those amounts.

22

Q. 398

And by that you understood Mr. Philip Monahan?

23

A.

Absolutely, yes.

24

Q. 399

And you didn't take the matter any further?

A.

No.

26

Q. 400

Or conduct any inquiry yourself?

27

A.

No.

28

Q. 401

So insofar as you were ever told by anybody when you were seeking an

12:43:40 25

29 12:43:50 30

explanation for cash payments that had been made or withdrawals that had been made in connection with Cherrywood.

You were told that the answer effectively

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:43:57

12:44:16

63 1

lay with the late Mr. Philip Monahan?

2

A.

That's correct, yes.

3

Q. 402

And insofar as the other -- the other cash withdrawals are concerned and I

4

think the figure is 15,000 pounds in 1992. 41,885 pounds in '93.

5

1994.

6

relation to all of those cash payments which are attributed to the Cherrywood

7

lands be the same?

8

A.

9

49,000 pounds in '95.

And 11,500 in 1996.

42,500 in

Will your evidence in

Well I don't think I dealt with at least I can't find that I dealt with anything -- I beg your pardon, other than the 21,500 but I've heard the

12:44:38 10

evidence of Mr. Glennane.

11

Q. 403

You were here for Mr. Glennane's evidence?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 404

You yourself did not on any occasion withdraw cash attributable to Cherrywood

14 12:44:59 15

And I presume that that was the position.

for Monarch Properties Services Limited and pay it over to anybody? A.

16

I came across just one small amount of 500 pounds which appears to be for a golf outing for I think it's Colm McGrath.

17

Q. 405

Mr. McGrath.

18

A.

Other than that, no.

19

Q. 406

So that insofar as any of these sums are considered or the Tribunal is trying

12:45:17 20

Leaving that aside.

to establish what happened to these monies which apparently were spent to

21

enhance the value of the Cherrywood lands.

22

explanation other than that on the occasion of which you made an inquiry you

23

were told that the answer lay in Somerton, by which you understood the late

24

Mr. Philip Monahan?

12:45:36 25

26

A.

That's correct.

Q. 407

From that, did you deduce that the late Mr. Philip Monahan was accustomed to

27 28 29 12:45:56 30

You can provide no assistance or

dealing in cash? A.

I didn't form any opinion.

I mean, I -- I didn't.

It wasn't part and parcel

of my job to -- I didn't form any opinion as to how Phil conducted his business. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:45:56

12:46:27

64 1

Q. 408

The five sums that you were enquiring into in -- that arose in 1993 were a sum

2

of 6,000 pounds on the 2nd of November '93.

3

2 -- 5,000 on the 2nd of November '93.

3,000 on the 7th of December '93.

4

And 2,500 on the 2nd of November '93.

They are the figures totalling 21,500;

5

isn't that right?

6

A.

7

I'd accept.

5,000 on the 3rd of November '93.

I just can't find it. I have no difficulty in accepting that,

Chairman.

8

Q. 409

We can come to --

9

A.

I should have them in front of me.

Q. 410

They are five sums of money.

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 411

Four of which are drawn on the 2nd and 3rd of November 1993, isn't that right?

13

A.

That's correct. Yes.

14

Q. 412

Now, the 3rd of November was the date on which the meeting was originally

12:46:34 10

12:46:51 15

scheduled to take place in connection with the rezoning of the Cherrywood

16 17

lands? A.

18 19 12:46:59 20

The 3rd November was a special meeting in the County Council dealing with the Development Plan.

It would have been on the agenda but --

Q. 413

And I think if they started?

A.

It was unlikely.

21

Well they started a report -- so I suppose, yes, if the

meeting had gone on fast they may have had.

22

Q. 414

They started consideration I think at map 27?

23

A.

That's right.

24

Q. 415

But they didn't conclude that?

A.

No.

26

Q. 416

And it went into the 11th.

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 417

But it was initially listed to be dealt with on the 3rd of November, isn't that

12:47:12 25

29 12:47:20 30

right? A.

And it could have been listed prior to that the previous planning meeting. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

It

12:47:24

12:47:38

65 1

could have been because what you had there was you had a rolling agenda.

2

if matters fell by the by the wayside or were dealt with expeditiously they

3

could have got to it even before the 3rd of November.

4

Q. 418

But when you?

5

A.

It's doubtful having regard to the, you know, to the number of items that the

6

members had to deal with that they would have got to it any earlier than the

7

3rd of November.

8

Q. 419

9

I beg your pardon.

We'll come to deal with the planning side of it shortly.

But just dealing

with your inquiry in relation to those sums of money for the moment.

12:47:56 10

When you

went to GRE seeking reimbursement of those it was under the heading of

11

"community and PR costs", isn't that right?

12

A.

That's right.

13

Q. 420

That's at page 5201.

14

A.

Sorry, I'll accept.

Q. 421

It should be there. you'll see the sums, 6,000, 5,000 and 5,000, 3,000 and

12:48:08 15

16

2,500 pounds on foot of an L&C cheque?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 422

And there's no designation given to them other than they are apparently cash

19 12:48:23 20

So

sums, isn't that right? A.

That's correct.

21

Q. 423

You sought reimbursement of that money from GRE?

22

A.

That's correct.

23

Q. 424

Now you yourself would have known immediately that those payments appear to

24

have occurred at a critical moment in the zoning of the Cherrywood land, isn't

12:48:37 25

26

that right in November 1993? A.

27

Well had I looked at them it would have become apparent. stage I was dealing with this.

28

Q. 425

You were dealing with this I think subsequent --

29

A.

The last item is 11th of February 1994.

12:48:54 30

I don't know at what

I think it was even after that I was

trying to, if you like, I was re-engaged to recoup whatever was outstanding Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:48:59

12:49:12

66 1 2

from Guardian. Q. 426

While it may have taken place some time later, I suggest to you, Mr. Lynn, it's

3

unlikely that you would have forgotten 11th of November 1993 when the

4

Cherrywood lands were rezoned in the Development Plan.

5

you were working towards since 1989, isn't that right?

6

A.

7 8

Q. 427

And on the document, at 4781, please.

Where these figures are struck out.

think as a result of a disagreement with GRE.

12:49:34 10

A.

Oh, yes.

I mean, I see the date.

right-hand side. Q. 428

14

Yes. Lynn.

12:49:49 15

You will note beside each

That figure on the -- 21,500 on the

That's my writing.

If we could just look at the date of the payment for the moment, Mr. You can see clearly 6,000 is paid on the 2nd of November '93.

on 3rd of November' 93, the 5,000 on the 2nd of November.

5,000

7th of December '93

16

and 31st of December '93 is attributable.

17

the 3rd of November 1993.

18

onlooking at this document that these events appear to have occurred in

19

December 1993, isn't that right?

12:50:12 20

I

payments there's a date?

12 13

Certainly 11th of November 1993 I can clearly recollect but that doesn't say that everything --

9

11

Because that's what

A.

In fact that cheque was drawn on

That 2,500 pounds.

So you would have known

Well had I looked at them in the light of what you're saying the answer is yes.

21

I have no difficulty with that.

22

up documentation to cover it.

My difficulty was that I didn't have any back

23

Q. 429

And you went looking for back up documentation, is that right?

24

A.

That's correct.

Q. 430

And it was for those items you went looking for the back up documentation?

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 431

And it was in connection those cash items that had been paid in November and

12:50:25 25

28

December 1993 that you were told that the answer to your query lay with the

29

late Mr. Monahan in Somerton.

12:50:42 30

A.

Is that correct?

That's correct, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:50:42

12:50:54

67 1

Q. 432

2

And other than that, you took no further step in relation to the matter, is that correct?

3

A.

That's correct, yes.

4

Q. 433

After the first public display.

5

I believe that a decision was made to retain

the services of Mr. Bill O'Herlihy, is that right?

6

A.

That's correct, yes.

7

Q. 434

And that seems to have occurred in or around October, November of 1991?

8

A.

Well I think November 1991, yes.

9

Q. 435

Right.

12:51:12 10

11

And what exactly was to be Mr. O'Herlihy's contribution to the

attempts to rezone the Cabinteely lands? A.

Well, basically what we were faced with in 1991 coming into 1992, was there was

12

a huge campaign against any development of the Carrickmines Valley.

13

enough, we were only interested in the, in the Cherrywood lands.

14

meetings with John Varium, who was, if you like, the leader of the Carrickmines

12:51:44 15

Valley Protection Association.

Naturally

We had had

And he indicated in his house prior to May

16

1991 that they have no difficulty with the proposals for the Monarch lands that

17

were concerned with the upper valley.

18

that.

19

because they felt that if they prevented us from being developed the whole

12:52:14 20

It was concerted and he wrote back from

That a concerted campaign and if you like, a focus against Monarch

valley wouldn't be developed.

21 22

So we had to counteract that.

And for that reason, Bill O'Herlihy was

23

engaged, if you like, to provide the strategy, PR strategy to train up the

24

staff and emanating from that then we had this, we had newspapers, we'd a

12:52:35 25

video, we had various pamphlets, we had the 14 weekends, and that was if you

26

like was what we needed to do was to get the community on our side, such that

27

that they could bring pressure to bear on the members, that the members would

28

then be favourable towards looking at the development of Cherrywood.

29 12:53:02 30

I suppose in all of that, we were happy insofar as that the County Manager Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:53:07

12:53:25

68 1

himself had proposed full development of the Cherrywood lands in October 1990.

2

So that's ...

3

Q. 436

Your problem was two fold, if I can just try and abbreviate it.

First of all,

4

you had to change the councillors view because this decision rested completely

5

with the councillors once the maps came back in.

6

A.

That's right.

7

Q. 437

You had to keep the officials happy.

8 9

Isn't that right?

But you also had to keep the manager -You knew from DP90/123 that the

officials were already not unhappy with your proposals? A.

That's correct.

Q. 438

And the main bone of contention between you was the district centre?

11

A.

Between management, yes.

12

Q. 439

Between management and Monarch.

13

A.

To a degree.

14

Q. 440

Uh-huh

A.

But only because the density had been reduced the manager felt that because

12:53:41 10

12:53:54 15

Isn't that right?

16

there was going to be fewer houses that you couldn't then have a district

17

centre that a more appropriate level would be a neighbourhood centre.

18

Q. 441

19 12:54:12 20

21

And there was a concerted public campaign residents valley association isn't that right?

A.

That's correct, yes.

Q. 442

And I think Mr. Michael Smith who is due to give evidence a at two o'clock

22

would have been one of the main adversaries of Monarch and development general,

23

if I can put it like that, in relation to the Cherrywood valley?

24 12:54:22 25

A.

That's correct.

Q. 443

Now, it's not any function of this Tribunal to decide or to work-out who was

26

right or who was wrong, Mr. Lynn.

27

looking at the merits of the arguments of either side.

28

by you I mean Monarch, the services of Mr. Bill O'Herlihy to put forward the

29

Monarch viewpoint both to the community and was it to include councillors?

12:54:47 30

A.

Well put it to you this way.

So we're not going to spend any time at all But you retained and

I was the person that recommended that he be

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:54:53

12:55:21

69 1

engaged.

And what I was faced with after June 1991 was a new set of

2

councillors, which included Deputy Sean Barrett and Deputy Barrett I think was

3

on record as opposing this development, not in total terms.

4

position the whole time was that he wanted to wait until they came in to, until

5

the --

6

Q. 444

1994?

7

A.

Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council came into being.

8

say that he was against this development.

9

that stage.

12:55:35 10

I think his

So it's not fair to

He was against the development at

So I sought advice in relation to whom -- how could I get --

because he was, when I say refusing to meet me.

11

had congenial conversations on the telephone.

12

seeing me I'm against it.

I would telephone him.

We

But he would tell me no use

I had to try break that down some how.

13 14

So I took advice in relation to how that could be done.

12:55:55 15

And as part of that

overall advice there was a recommendation then made by me that Bill O'Herlihy

16

be engaged on the basis A, that he had Fine Gael connections and B, as I

17

understood and he confirmed it later, he was very close to Sean Barrett.

18

Q. 445

He did in fact set up a meeting with Barrett, isn't that right?

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 446

Which took place in the health club.

12:56:16 20

But mr. Barrett didn't resile from his

21

already publicly stated position; which was that he wasn't going to be

22

supportive of the Monarch proposals?

23

A.

That's unfortunately true, yes.

24

Q. 447

Now, I think that by May of 1992 a number of motions had been listed with

12:56:30 25

Dublin County Council, isn't that correct?

26

A.

That's correct, yes.

27

Q. 448

Can I ask you the nature of your relationship, if indeed you had any, at this

28

time, between 1991 and coming up to May of 1992 with either Mr. Tom Hand or

29

Mr. Donal Lydon?

12:56:42 30

A.

I was quite close to both of them and was quite close to Councillor Hand until Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:56:49

12:57:12

70 1

he unfortunately died.

I still live quite close to Senator Lydon.

2

that stage, I mean, I would have -- I had built up a relationship from meeting

3

him and discussing with him.

4

invaluable to me, insofar as I could make the case of what Cherrywood was all

5

about.

And they gave me plenty of their time, which was

6

Q. 449

Did both Mr. Hand and Mr. Lydon agree to sign a motion?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 450

Seeking the rezoning of the Cherrywood lands?

9

A.

Yes, Chairman, yes.

Q. 451

7144, I think is the motion.

12:57:20 10

And at

The map is at 7145 but the motion at 7144.

11

Now, would you just outline first of all, if you can, Mr. Lynn, who prepared

12

the motion and then the circumstances under which Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand signed

13

it?

14

A.

12:57:39 15

Well the draft of the motion. me.

Well the draft of the motion was prepared by

And I suppose what it is based upon.

If I could ask you to raise 7866.

16

Q. 452

Uh-huh.

This was the submission, is that right?

17

A.

No, no.

This is from Pembroke Public Relations.

18

Q. 453

The PR?

19

A.

Yes.

12:58:09 20

Basically just to show you what.

model made.

As part of our campaign we had a

And the model depicted what we wished to have developed on the

21

site.

22

to Senator Lydon, he felt that what he could back going forward in the

23

knowledge that the manager had already backed the full development of the

24

Monarch lands.

12:58:40 25

And it included, that's where -- it included 956 units.

So in talking

He could back whatever we had had out on the 14 weekends in

public. In actual fact, I'm nearly certain he came to one of those, those

26

outings.

And if you like, that is how -- but the only thing he was conscious

27

of that we were looking for 120 square feet of retail.

28

that back to a neighbourhood sized centre.

He wanted to scale

29 12:59:01 30

I presume I explained to him that that might have an effect on jobs and he said Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

12:59:06

12:59:19

71 1

well let's put in something which will re-create the job losses and that's

2

where the hotel sort of comes into it.

3

Q. 454

4

Right.

So are you telling the Tribunal that this motion was drafted by

agreement effectively between yourself and Mr. Lydon?

5

A.

Yes, and I presume Councillor Hand as well.

6

Q. 455

That's what I was going to ask you.

Did Councillor Hand have any input into

7

the drafting of the motion or was that at a matter that rested between yourself

8

and Councillor Lydon?

9

A.

12:59:37 10

I presume he would have been consulted simultaneously but I mean, you will appreciate that I can't rightly recollect the events going back to 1992.

But

11

I would presume that he was taking, because you couldn't ask a person to

12

counter sign unless they had at least agreed to it.

13

Now maybe he didn't make -- or suggest any changes.

14

this stage.

12:59:57 15

Q. 456

I just can't recollect at

And presumably you would have been aware of a number of matters, Mr. Lynn,

16

coming up to the meeting in May of 1992 and correct me if I'm wrong, one that

17

other motions had been lodged with the council seeking to keep the density of

18

the residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley at one or two per

19

acre?

13:00:13 20

21

A.

That's correct, I mean, they were on the agenda.

Q. 457

And that there were a number of motions going to be debated by the council

22

including your motion?

23

A.

And including the County Manager's proposal, yes.

24

Q. 458

We'll come to that in a second?

A.

Yes, yes.

Q. 459

And you would also have been aware that the manager had proposals in relation

13:00:28 25

26 27

to the Carrickmines Valley and in particular, the Monarch lands?

28

A.

That's correct, yes.

29

Q. 460

And you also would have been aware because you had engaged Mr. Bill O'Herlihy

13:00:52 30

and there had been a protracted public relations campaign that this was going Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

13:00:52

13:00:56

72 1

to be not necessarily the easiest matter to get through the council. Would

2

that be a fair way to put it?

3

A.

That would be correct, yes.

4

Q. 461

And that therefore it was going to be tight in terms of numbers or it could

5

potentially be tight in terms of numbers?

6

A.

It could be tight in terms of numbers, yes.

7

Q. 462

And it was your job to have the numbers in place, is that right?

8

A.

Well it was my job to get the majority support for the --

9

Q. 463

For your proposals?

A.

Well for principally we were going for the manager's proposal.

Q. 464

I'll come to that in a minute.

13:01:12 10

11 12

you had to achieve.

13

supporting your own motion.

14 13:01:26 15

But in terms of an overall principle of what

Whether you are supporting the manager or whether you're What you needed was majority?

A.

That's correct.

Q. 465

So would you just outline briefly to the Tribunal the steps that you personally

16

would have taken to meet with councillors, contact councillors and speak with

17

councillors about these, about your proposals for the Monarch lands.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

Yeah.

At two o'clock.

13:01:41 20

21

MS. DILLON:

22

Mr. Michael Smith is fixed for two o'clock.

23

agreement, to interpose Mr. Michael Smith.

24

fair to say to Mr. Lynn not before a quarter to three.

13:02:00 25

Not now at two o'clock, sorry, Mr. Lynn.

half two.

26 27 28

CHAIRMAN: A.

All right.

Yes.

29 13:02:02 30

MS. DILLON:

If that's all right, Sir.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

And it's proposed subject to your And therefore I think it would be Sorry.

Not before

13:02:04

13:02:08

73 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

And we'll sit for Mr. Smith at two o'clock.

3 4

MS. DILLON:

Two o'clock.

5 6

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

13:02:29

14:02:56

74 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:

2 3

MR. QUINN: Michael Smith, please.

4 5

MR. DULLY: Mr. Chairman, my name is Martin Dully, barrister.

6

to apply for legal representation on behalf of Mr. Smith.

7

Michael Campion & Co. solicitors.

I am instructed

I am instructed by

Mr. McKenna of that firm.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

All right, thank you. Yes.

14:03:13 10

11

MR. O'HIGGINS: Mr. Chairman, my name is Paul Higgins, senior counsel.

12

instructed to ask for limited representation on behalf of Mr. Sean Barrett in

13

respect of Mr. Smith's evidence.

14 14:03:27 15

CHAIRMAN:

Granted.

16 17

MR. O'HIGGINS: Obliged to the Tribunal.

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

I am

14:03:32

14:03:45

75 1

MR. MICHAEL SMITH HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED

2

BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:

3 4

MR. QUINN: Good afternoon, Mr. Smith.

5

A.

Good afternoon.

6

Q. 466

Mr. Smith, you were written to on the 29th of May by the Tribunal and asked to

7

provide a detailed narrative statement regarding your involvement in the lands

8

of Cherrywood.

9

and 8932 of the brief. And I think through your solicitors on the 6th of July

14:04:02 10

And that request and that letter is to be found at pages 8931

2006, you furnished a statement to the Tribunal.

And that statement is to be

11

found at pages 8934 to 8955 of the circulated brief.

12

And again, the exhibits accompanying that statement are at pages 8956 to 9030

13

of the brief.

14 14:04:21 15

Mr. Smith, I think in your statement.

If we could have 8935, you have advised

16

the Tribunal that I think you grew up in the Loughlinstown area of South County

17

Dublin.

Is this right?

18

A.

Yes, I did.

19

Q. 467

And I think in the early -- sorry, the late 19 -- mid June 1989 it came to your

14:04:44 20

attention that these lands in Cherrywood had in fact been acquired by the

21

Monarch Group.

Is that correct?

22

A.

Yes, there was a report in the Irish Times to that effect.

23

Q. 468

Yes, I think at that stage you were out of the area but you were concerned

24

about the possibility of this area being developed and I think you became

14:04:59 25

involved with an organisation that the time, the Shanganagh Protection

26 27

Committee in relation to the objection to the possible development of the site? A.

28 29 14:05:21 30

Q. 469

Yeah.

I think the committee hadn't really been formed.

It was a preemptive

letter.

At that stage it would have been a committee of one really.

And the preemptive letter at that stage had been to the council in relation to any possible rezoning of those lands, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:05:24

14:05:37

76 1

A.

2 3

Yeah, if there was a rezoning to reflect what Monarch were reported as seeking in the newspapers.

Q. 470

Now in, 1990 I think you have advised the Tribunal you were out of the country.

4

But I think you were reasonably familiar with what transpired.

5

publication by the manager of what has become known as DP90/123 and the report

6

of the manager and his staff to the council in late 1989.

7

A.

That's correct.

8

Q. 471

And we see that map at 6936.

9

Namely, the

Isn't that right?

Which effectively was a management proposal

which would have involved the development of this area for industrial and

14:05:59 10

residential purposes.

Isn't that right?

11

A.

That is right.

12

Q. 472

And I think that you may or may not have been aware of it, but on the 6th of

13

December 1990, there was a motion by councillor McDonald and Coffey voted upon

14

in the council which that motion is at and the report of that meeting is at

14:06:20 15

3065, which effectively sought toe limit development to the eastern side of the

16

motorway.

Isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 473

And were you aware at that time that that motion had been debated and had been

19 14:06:32 20

21

voted upon? A.

No, I was unaware.

Q. 474

Okay.

I was out of the country at the time.

Now, I think in early January 1991 at 6964, the manager had taken

22

account of that motion produced maps 26 and 27 revised to take account of the

23

motion.

24

by the council?

14:06:54 25

26

Again, were you aware in January '91 that those maps had been noted

A.

No, I wasn't aware in detail.

Q. 475

Okay.

I don't think I was aware at all.

I think on the 24th of May 1991, the manager brought a report to the

27

council and in that report he effectively concluded by suggesting that a

28

recommending one of three options.

If we could have 7006.

29 14:07:13 30

The minutes of the meeting provide and put forward three options. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

Namely, the

14:07:20

14:07:39

77 1

1983 plan unchanged except for updating to take account of developments to date

2

and adjustment of objectives.

3

moment ago, and then maps 26 and 27 which were considered on the 18th of

4

January '91. And it appears that following a general discussion that the

5

Chairman, whom I think was Tommy Boland, proposed and Councillor Betty Coffey

6

seconded that a vote be taken on the options set out in the Manager's Report.

7

Again, I'm not sure were you present at that meeting?

The DP90/123 which we had on the screen a

8

A.

Absolutely not. No, no, no.

9

Q. 476

Were you aware that that meeting had taken place?

A.

No.

Q. 477

It appears that as a result of that meeting a map, No. 7019, was adopted which

14:07:55 10

11 12

appears to provide that as far as the line of the 1983 line of the motorway

13

that the zoning on these lands would be increased from septic tank at one house

14

to the acre to piped sewage, which I think at the time was ten houses to the

14:08:21 15

hectare or four houses to the acre, isn't that right?

16

A.

That's right.

17

Q. 478

I think in your statement you have advised the Tribunal that it was in October

18

1991 before you realised that in fact that, that increased density had taken

19

place in relation to the lands in question?

14:08:37 20

A.

Yes, because an organisation called the Carrickmines Valley Preservation

21

Association was established and was very active through the, some of the votes

22

that you've just described.

23

meetings which I heard about.

24

valley had been saved from rezoning which is the way that I read it at the

14:09:03 25

And put out literature and even attended some Indicating that -- or implying that the whole

time, even though to my way Shanganagh turned out -- that was not the position

26

because the portion of the lands of the valley that I suppose is known as

27

Cherrywood had in fact been rezoned, yes.

28 29 14:09:28 30

Q. 479

And we can see that from the map on screen. the situation at that time.

I think at 8938, just to take up

I think you have advised the Tribunal as appears

there, that in October 1991 you realised as you say with the consternation that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:09:33

14:09:52

78 1

in fact the Monarch lands had been rezoned.

2

might be termed the monster meeting on 5th of November 1991 which I think was

3

held in Leopardstown, is that correct.?

4

A.

There's just one thing.

And then you referred to what

I was reflecting my contemptment that it seemed like

5

the valley had been saved.

I did put out a leaflet in the name of the

6

organisation called the Campaign for Honesty in Politics before that, which

7

reflected my concern about the general pattern of behaviour on the County

8

Council in the period running up to 1991.

9 14:10:13 10

It was quite an aggressive leaflet, it drew attention to some of the patterns

11

including councillors outside the area voted for rezonings while their party

12

colleagues voted in favour of the rezonings.

13

as I saw it, particularly unsavory re-developments in the general Carrickmines,

14

Shankill, Ballybrack, area.

14:10:47 15

And I think its message was to -- that the people

during the 1991 Local Election should vote out the rezoning parties which I

16 17

And it drew attention to some,

think we or I characterised as the larger parties. Q. 480

Yes.

And you, as you say, drew attention in that leaflet I think in the run

18

up to the election, to the practice whereby motions concerning particular

19

locations were being tabled by councillors outside of those locations.

14:11:18 20

that right?

21

A.

That's correct.

22

Q. 481

You had seen that development and you regarded that -- as a sinister

23 24

Isn't

development? A.

14:11:22 25

I had spoken to some councillors who had advised of that pattern and that 90 percent of the council's business was taken up with rezonings and Section 4s

26

and very little of its business was taken up with what can be described as more

27

appropriate policy measures.

28

vote them out.

29 14:11:44 30

Q. 482

The leaflet was titled Politicians on Fiddle

And I think we distributed 5,000 copies of it.

In that general area of South Dublin County Council or just generally around the county? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:11:45

14:12:03

79 1

A.

2 3

No, in the South County Dublin area.

It was focused on the Local Election and

candidates in that Local Election. Q. 483

And I think then at that meeting in November '91.

You felt you got, unanimous

4

endorsement from several hundreds of people you say present at the meeting to

5

fight the Cherrywood rezoning?

6

A.

Yeah.

7

Q. 484

At this stage it was obvious that the lands were likely to be rezoned or that

8 9

there had been some rezoning contrary to what you had believed? A.

14:12:17 10

I think probably my lack of awareness that the Cherrywood lands had been rezoned was generally shared.

And when I drew the attention of this meeting

11

to the fact that that had happened I think 400 people voted that the

12

Carrickmines Valley Preservation Association should now change its tactics and

13

oppose any rezoning on the basis that the Monarch rezoning was -- or the

14

Cherrywood rezoning was the end of the wedge.

14:12:38 15

16

I suppose the Carrickmines Valley Preservation Association would have been

17

focused in the Carrickmines, Brennanstown part of the area, which would have

18

been a much wealthier part of the area than where I came from.

19

to mobilize residents in that part of the county. But the Carrickmines valley

14:12:57 20

And we tried

Preservation Association were happy to change their policy, and from then on

21

they did campaign against Cherrywood. Although I suppose maybe with a little

22

bit less vim than we did. So we sort of took up the running but they were very

23

good in parallel to us.

24

Q. 485

14:13:18 25

And I think in late 1991 you advised the Tribunal that you set up the group the Shanganagh Protection Committee which we referred to earlier?

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 486

A more formal structure?

28

A.

Yeah, it came to life and I think there was an informal grouping which is why

29 14:13:34 30

they called it a committee.

We did ultimately get some significant democratic

mandates from local residents associations. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

But essentially it was about nine

14:13:41

14:14:02

80 1

or ten young people, most of whom had grown-up in fact the in the housing

2

estate where I grew up in Shanganagh Vale and most of them weren't living

3

immediately near the lands but most of them had an affection for the lands.

4

suppose it was when Loughlinstown is a fairly built up area with few

5

distinguishing features and most of us had affection for the land as being

6

maybe the best thing in that part of County Dublin.

I

7 8

We were driven by not be any sort of vested interest, none of us had property

9

in the area. We were driven by what we considered was good planning both for

14:14:15 10

the site which we felt was proposed for premature rezoning.

We didn't think

11

it complied with the general scheme of the planning regime for the county.

12

felt it was being promoted by the manager maybe because of the sewage system

13

that was going to go through the Carrickmines Valley.

14

as sewerage led planning.

14:14:44 15

We

So we characterised it

Most of us were fairly young.

I think I've

described you as being half starving student types. But I think the calibre of

16

the people involved was quite high.

17

very active in the Green Party, Eamonn Ryan and Deirdre De Burca. I think that

18

was probably to some extent their first outings in campaigning, Green politics.

19

And we --

14:15:06 20

Q. 487

We had two people who went on to become

I think you've told the Tribunal you put out a series of leaflets.

21

could have 8971, please.

22

8972.

23

have circulated that the time, is that right?

24 14:15:27 25

A.

And if we

We see an example of the type of leaflets.

Sorry.

Of the type of leaflet that you've advised the Tribunal that you would

That's right.

I would say that we considered ourselves as being involved in

an exercise to effect the accountability of councillors.

26 27

So characteristically we advised locals who might have been a little bit

28

bamboozled by their rezoning regime, what was going on.

29

about it and I suppose a lot of people feel disenfranchised from that process.

14:15:45 30

What they could do

And then, where possible we would draw attention to the councillors to their Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:15:49

14:16:05

81 1

patterns of voting and in particular we specialised in giving their telephone

2

numbers and encouraging people to tell them what they thought.

3

Q. 488

If we go back to 8939 I think you then go on in your statement to deal with

4

what's referred to as the "road show", which I think the Tribunal has heard

5

evidence about, namely, a series of meetings and events organised by the

6

Monarch Group, highlighting the advantages of their proposed development, isn't

7

that right?

8

A.

9

That right that's right.

That was a huge thing for us. It gave us a vehicle

to marshal our zeal because the Monarch hired out local schools and

14:16:28 10

institutions for I think 11 weeks.

I think on Friday evenings and certainly

11

on Saturday and Sunday.

12

would stand outside, counter propagandising against what the people and the

13

Monarch personnel inside would be saying and you know.

14

Q. 489

14:16:53 15

They mostly excluded us from the premises but we

I think in fact you have advised the Tribunal that up to 15 Monarch personnel could attend those events and I think you say that they were dominated by Mr.

16

Lynn and I think you went on to say that they were also attended by

17

Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Phil Reilly, Mr. Phil Monahan, Michael Cassidy

18

project architect and I think on one occasion Mr. Monahan's son Paul; is that

19

correct?

14:17:15 20

A.

That's correct.

I'm not sure if it was Mr. Monahan's son Paul but certainly

21

one of Mr. Monahan's sons who.

22

Tribunal earlier because it was concerned with how involved Paul Monahan was in

23

Cherrywood or in Monarch Properties.

24

was a son who was roughly my age which I suppose would have been 26-ish at the

14:17:42 25

time.

I know this was of some relevance to the

And I remember that he was a student in Trinity College. I'm not sure

26

if that was Paul Monahan.

27

fitted that description.

Certainly it was one of Mr. Monahan's sons. He

28

Q. 490

I think you identified him as Paul?

29

A.

I said his name was Paul I believe.

Q. 491

Yes.

14:17:58 30

One of his sons attended, and I know it

Okay. I think that the Monarch personnel were -- if we could have 8940. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:18:06

14:18:24

82 1

They were engaging you in relation and you were engaging them in relation to

2

the issues.

3

A.

Yeah.

Isn't that right?

I think we were actually -- I mean.

We were characteristically

4

divided between extreme naivety and extreme sinicism.

5

back on it was probably the appropriate attitude at the time but we were

6

horrified by the lies that were coming out of the road show.

7

point of the road show was to tout a very large size model of what Monarch were

8

allegedly proposing to build on the site.

9

full grown trees.

14:18:56 10

11

The central

But the model came complete with

It didn't have any roads.

it didn't have any cars on it.

Which I suppose looking

Or it didn't have many roads,

Most strikingly it only had a third of the

number of houses that they were actually proposing to build on the site.

12 13

So that was the central lie. They were touting a vision which they were

14

pretending was precise and which they were pretending they could in some way be

14:19:11 15

constrained to build in the detail that they were touting it. And it was

16

literally impossible that they could go ahead with it for amongst other reasons

17

because they were only showing a fraction of the house that is they were

18

proposing.

19

the central distortion.

So that was the central untruth and insofar as we were concerned

14:19:33 20

21

There were a lot of others -- it was very frustrating for us standing excluded

22

in the sites often in the rain and sleet because the road show took place in

23

the early part of the year and it was -- it was frustrating that we couldn't

24

get at everybody who was attending the road show to tell them to watch out for

14:19:53 25

what was going on inside.

But we did get to a lot of them going in and ask

26

them to ask all sorts of questions.

27

manipulation and distortion. In fact we knew that, I don't think there's any

28

denying that.

29

pretended that they were going to get the details that they were touting by

14:20:15 30

We felt that it was an exercise in

Apart from anything else, it would have been impossible, they

applying for an area Action Plan.

But area action plans don't provide for the

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:20:22

14:20:34

83 1

level of detail that they were proposing and so it would be literally

2

impossible to guarantee that you could build anything to the level of detail

3

that they were --

4

Q. 492

Proposing?

5

A.

-- proposing, yeah.

6

Q. 493

And I think one of the things that you advised the Tribunal in the first

7

paragraph there at 8940, is that their employees were claiming that they were

8

working without pay to secure the future of the project.

9

A.

14:20:52 10

Yes, I think there's -- we believed them. The impression at the time.

Is that correct?

I still think that that was true.

Maybe it hasn't come through to the Tribunal.

11

The impression in the newspapers and the impression we had from the personnel

12

in Monarch at the time, was that Monarch was in pro found financial difficulty

13

and that Cherrywood was a make or break scheme for them.

14

your point then.

Just to go back to

14:21:09 15

16

We actually had, we had ambivalent relations with the Monarch personnel.

17

knew what they were doing and we were as aggressive and as vicious in

18

undermining their propaganda.

19

them personally and they were on occasion very generous to us.

14:21:33 20

We were also on quite good terms with most of Not me but

some of the other members of the campaign were on several occasions counted

21

themselves lucky to be offered for example, food from the Monarch canteen

22

inside when they were hungry.

23

friendly.

24

bantering with nearly all of them with one or two exceptions.

14:21:57 25

We

Q. 494

So they were actually very good and very

And we had a relationship which would have been I would say

I just want to take you, if I may, to one of the incidents which may have

26

occurred at this time.

And I think you deal with it under the heading "Phil

27

Monahan on Sean Barrett."

Do you see that portion of your statement there?

28

A.

I do, yeah.

29

Q. 495

And I think you advise there and perhaps the best thing for me to do would be

14:22:17 30

to read that portion of your statement to you and ask you to confirm if it is Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:22:21

14:22:29

84 1

in fact true?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 496

You say that "One of the most interesting incidents of the campaign was outside

4

St. Laurence's college at one of the road shows there before the 1992 vote.

5

The college did not allow us on the grounds. Phil Monahan drove out at the end

6

of the road show in his large Mercedes.

7

rolled down his window and I shouted some mischievous abuse at him.

8

I said something like 'Like you're getting nowhere.

9

the forms from people who are saying no to your scheme.

14:22:45 10

When he came to us at the gates he I recall

You're having to bin all You're not going to

get your rezoning, no councillor is going to vote for it and your company is

11

going it go bankrupt.

You will probably end up in jail.'.

12 13

You say, this riled him and he said that in a bristling and macho way that he

14

would go through -- that it would go through though perhaps only in the final

14:22:59 15

stage.

He said he was paying councillors in particular Sean Barrett.

While

16

voting against the scheme himself, Mr. Monahan said Barrett would ensure that

17

his Fine Gael colleagues from outside the area would vote in favour of it.

18

said he was close to Sean Barrett, who insured his race horses.

19

I talked to about this strange incident and fed the story to the Phoenix

14:23:20 20

He

I told anyone

Magazine which printed I think only the bit about the race horses."

21 22

Now, just in relation to that, is that your recollection of the incident

23

involving Mr. Monahan?

24 14:23:30 25

A.

Yes, it is.

Q. 497

And I think you take responsibility for having given publicity to that

26 27

incident. A.

Isn't that right?

No, I don't.

Well I take responsibility for having scrupulously taken no

28

stance as to the truth of the incident but having furnished the -- or retold

29

the story that you've just outlined to people who might be in a better position

14:23:54 30

to investigate its truth including initially journalists and ultimately the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:24:00

14:24:23

85 1

Tribunal.

2

fact go public with it but I never started the truth of what Mr. Monahan was

3

saying.

4

place.

5

Q. 498

6

But I never went public.

Sorry.

I should say latterly I did in

I scrupulously just repeated the fact that the incident had taken

And Mr.-- you will have read and seen Mr. Monahan or Mr. Barrett's evidence in relation to how the publicity arising from that incident effected him I think?

7

A.

I think so, yes.

8

Q. 499

Now, you go on to say in relation to the O'Herlihy campaign.

9

Mr. O'Herlihy spearheaded an eight page newspaper called "Valley News" which

14:24:47 10

11

"That

was distributed to tens of thousands of people -A.

Could I just go back.

Because it probably is relevant to the Barrett

12

allegations.

13

suspicions in, about Barrett in literature that we published.

14

absolutely -- I considered we were, I'm qualified as a barrister. And I think

14:25:12 15

That I do say in the statement that we never reflected the

we were lawyerly and scrupulous about Mr. Barrett.

16

We were

We never reflected any

suspicions in literature that we published.

17 18

We acknowledged that he had spoken passionately effectively and effectively in

19

support of the stance that we would have liked him to do.

14:25:32 20

which is exhibited in which we state that he had spoken strongly in favour of

21

what we were looking for him to do.

22

Q. 500

If I could have 9012, please.

23

A.

He never behaved suspiciously.

24

Q. 501

Did you ever challenge him in relation to the truth or otherwise of the allegation?

A.

29 14:26:06 30

Not that we

were soliciting meetings with councillors for the most part.

27 28

Although I would say that maybe understandably

he wasn't, he didn't really make himself available to talk to us.

14:25:59 25

26

There's a leaflet

No, I only spoke to him once, I think it may even have been before the incident with Mr. Monahan.

Q. 502

This was fairly serious allegation being made against him. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

Isn't that right?

14:26:09

14:26:24

86 1

A.

Yes, yes.

2

Q. 503

And others were being told about the allegation but you never put the

3 4

allegation to him? A.

5 6

9 14:26:50 10

I wasn't certain of the spirit in which Mr. Monahan had offered

the information. Q. 504

7 8

No, I didn't.

Certainly everything Barrett did and said would have contradicted the assertion of Mr. Monahan.

A.

Isn't that right?

Well everything Mr. Barrett did and said except that ultimately the rezoning did go through.

Roughly speaking, in the way that Mr. Monahan had said that

it would go through, which is to say that councillors from outside the area

11

voted for it at the last minute.

There were a number of key changes in the

12

voting pattern on the part of Fine Gael.

13

the last 13 years that my credulity over that incident has somewhat changed.

So I suppose I would say that over

14 14:27:19 15

That to some extent accounts for the fact that I didn't call challenge him

16

actually at the time.

17

side kick in the Killiney area, a man called Colm Brophy, who would have been

18

very close to Sean Barrett.

19

describe the incident with Mr. Monahan to him.

14:27:45 20

Although I did actually speak to I think he was his

And I did to the best of my recollection, So I suppose on that basis, I

was fairly sure that Barrett would have known that, about the incident with

21

Mr. Monahan and that I was talking about it.

I suppose from my point of view,

22

I still take no stance as to the truth of what Mr. Monahan said.

23

regret that there's been a shadow over Barrett for so long.

And I do

24 14:28:07 25

But what I would hope is that the Tribunal would investigate by talking to Mr.

26

Barrett's colleagues outside the area who changed their mind or in particular

27

with Fine Gael who turned up for the second vote who hadn't turned up for the

28

first vote and I suppose to other Fine Gael Councillors from the time to ask

29

them what Mr, what precisely Barrett said to them about Cherrywood.

14:28:31 30

in the chamber he spoke very well.

Certainly

He was possibly the best speaker in favour

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:28:36

14:28:54

87 1

of retaining the one house to the acre but I suppose the truth or otherwise of

2

what Mr. Monahan said, would to some extent rest with what Barrett was saying

3

to his party colleagues.

4

Q. 505

If we could have 3729, please.

This is an extract from the minutes of the

5

special meeting in May '92.

6

Barrett's motion was that the lands be zoned for residential development at a

7

density not exceeding one house per acre.

8

the text of the meeting.

9

Which relates to Mr. Barrett's motion.

I'm sure you're familiar with this,

A.

Yes.

Q. 506

And we see there the vote of those for and against.

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 507

Okay.

14:29:15 10

Now, if I could also, please, have 7262.

13

to a motion by Councillors Smyth and Buckley.

14

Councillors Smyth and Buckley.

14:29:52 15

Buckley's motion is at 7259.

And Mr.

This is the vote in relation On the 11th of November 1992.

Sorry 1993 apologies.

Councillors Smyth and

And it was that "Dublin County Council hereby

16

resolves that the lands referred to at change 3 and map 27 of the 1993 proposed

17

amendments to the Dublin County Draft Development Plan Dublin 1991 be confirmed

18

as low density housing that is two houses per hectare."

19 14:30:11 20

Now, what I'm suggesting to you, Mr. Smith, is that when you're dealing with

21

the voting pattern of councillors.

22

votes.

The voting on those two motions.

23

A.

The '92 and the '93 one.

24

Q. 508

Yes.

14:30:39 25

What you have to compare are those two

So in other words Mr. Barrett's '92 motion.

And it's the Buckley

Smyth -- or Smyth Buckley motion in '93 which was to confirm the changes

26

brought about the by the Barrett motion.

27

A.

Well.

28

Q. 509

And it would appear first of all that there were only two Fine Gael Councillors

29 14:30:57 30

who changed between the two votes.

That is Councillors Mitchell and

Councillors Morrissey. Councillors Mitchell, I think Olivia Mitchell was in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:31:00

14:31:27

88 1

the Stillorgan ward.

2

ward.

3

A.

And Councillor Morrissey represented the Castleknock

First of all, would you accept that to be the case?

Well we, I suppose we were close to the campaign.

Some of us were close to,

4

had wasted nearly a year of our lives at that stage.

Our impression was that

5

the key motion was again the Barrett motion, which was a variation on the

6

Buckley motion.

7

Q. 510

That was an amendment to the Smyth/Buckley motion?

8

A.

Yeah, that seemed to be treated more seriously because Mr. Barrett was I

9

suppose was looked to and his motion had been successful the last time around.

14:31:44 10

As far as we were concerned that was the key one. It was also a clever motion

11

in some ways because it proposed that the motion should basically be kicked to

12

touch and dealt with by the smaller Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council when it was

13

split off from the council in 1994.

14 14:32:02 15

So on that basis, our feeling at the time was that the two councillors who

16

changed their mind comparing like with like there, were for Fine Gael, were

17

Liam Cosgrave and Olivia Mitchell.

18

Q. 511

Yes.

19

A.

I should say the two from the area.

14:32:21 20

If we could have -We were focused entirely on the area.

We had enough information transmitting message in our leaflets that it didn't

21

seem to make sense mostly to mention people outside the area.

22

concerned with the area and the, I suppose ideally hoping that there would be

23

some electoral impact on people who changed their minds.

24

Q. 512

Councillor Cosgrave didn't vote at all in the 1992 vote.

A.

Um.

26

Q. 513

We can bring it back up on screen, if necessary.

27

A.

Yeah.

14:32:50 25

We were

Isn't that right?

If we could have 3729.

Well there were two key motions in -- sorry to differ from you -- but

28

there were two key motions from you in '92 as well and we may have taken the

29

other motion that you were, from the one that you were referring to.

14:33:20 30

looked to the Lydon/McGrath motion, which was basically -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

We

14:33:26

14:33:42

89 1

Q. 514

3720.

2

A.

The manager's proposal.

3

Q. 515

Map 92/44.

4

This is the -- this is the manager's proposal.

And by Councillor Cosgrave voted against that proposal.

Isn't

that right?

5

A.

Well if that's so, we didn't record it that way I'm afraid.

6

Q. 516

Yes.

7

A.

We record Councillor Cosgrave as having changed his mind.

8

Q. 517

When you say you recorded it as that, you were at the meeting and you would

9 14:33:55 10

have recorded the -A.

Yeah.

The problem for us was I suppose that maybe it was an era of somewhat

11

lesser transparency than now.

12

councillors name on them and we would try to gauge which way they voted from

13

their gruntings in the council one way or the other for the particular motions.

14

Of course there was a very complicated series of difficult motions.

14:34:26 15

But we would -- there were forms with the

put out the leaflets before the minutes of the meetings were confirmed by the

16

council because that could have taken up to a month.

17

councillors to clarify where they'd, which way they voted.

18

our literature before.

19

We had to

Q. 518

14:34:45 20

So the minutes of the We had to put out

So are you telling the Tribunal, Mr. Smith, that whether by accident or otherwise, from your memory, collective memory of the vote in May '92, it was

21

your recollection at the time and your belief at the time that Councillor Liam

22

T Cosgrave had supported the manager's --

23

A.

24 14:35:06 25

No, no, I'm sorry. Maybe I'm being confusing here. Mr. Cosgrave changed his mind.

Q. 519

Okay.

He voted against the manager's proposal?

26

A.

Right.

So yes.

27

Q. 520

That he had in fact voted for the manager's proposal?

28

A.

Well either that or against the Barrett motion.

29

Q. 521

And he didn't vote.

A.

The two are effectively the same.

14:35:21 30

Our impression was that

Our impression was that he changed his mind, yeah.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:35:24

14:35:44

90 1

Q. 522

Yes.

That was your recollection?

2

A.

That is my recollection. Yes.

3

Q. 523

If we look at 3720, which is the page on screen.

Which is the vote on '92/44

4

which was the manager's proposal as proposed by Councillors Lydon and McGrath.

5

Councillor Cosgrave is recorded as having voted against that proposal. That

6

was a proposal I think, which would have effectively benefited Monarch.

7

agreed on that?

We're

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 524

So he is recorded as having voted against that at that time?

A.

Right. Yes.

11

Q. 525

And then --

12

A.

So he voted against Monarch in '92 and voted in favour of Monarch in '93.

13

Q. 526

Okay.

14

A.

Sorry.

14:35:53 10

14:36:07 15

16

Then that confirms the thrust of what we were saying; that he changed

his mind. Q. 527

17

Okay.

And he didn't vote on the Barrett motion.

He voted against the

manager's proposal?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 528

I see.

A.

So we were correct, thankfully.

21

Q. 529

Yes.

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 530

And based on that --

24

A.

Yes.

Q. 531

You felt that he had changed his mind.

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 532

I understand.

28

A.

But I should say that mostly what happened within Fine Gael looking back on it

14:36:15 20

14:36:20 25

29 14:36:38 30

That's your --

was that councillors who hadn't showed up for the '92 vote did turn up in '93 to vote in favour of the scheme.

I think it was, the best to the best of my

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:36:43

14:37:05

91 1

recollection was in terms of Fine Gael in '92 the vote split 7/7 equally.

2

Q. 533

These are 7/7 Fine Gael?

3

A.

Yes, and in '93, 12 vote in the favour of rezoning and five voted against.

So

4

I think that means that five councillors turned up who hadn't turned up before

5

and voted in favour of the rezoning.

6

Q. 534

So --

7

A.

We never noted the names of those people.

8 9

But that was absolutely -- that was

one of the significant phenomenon that made the difference with the vote. Q. 535

14:37:25 10

If we could have 8944, please. 8944.

You're dealing here with -- the bottom of

You're dealing with this 1992 vote.

Isn't that right? And you say

11

that "On the 13th of May I think 1992 a motion from Councillors Don Lydon and

12

Tom Hand proposing the happy valley zoning without of course the guarantee of

13

an Action Plan that is 956 houses, 80,000 square foot of shopping centre down

14

from 120,000, plus a hotel as part of a district centre zoning and park was

14:37:50 15

presented but not voted on.

16

On the 27th of May the manager proposed four house to the acre."

17 18 19 14:38:01 20

That's the vote we just dealt with, map 92/44, isn't that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 536

And that was -- you say that it was vote the down 35/33.

21

And you give the

breakdown between Fine Gael, Fine Gael, Democratic Left and the PDs?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 537

You say that "Councillors Lydon and hand withdrew their motion in turmoil."

24

Presumably assuming it would be lost.

14:38:22 25

May '92?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 538

Sorry, go ahead.

28

A.

Just to clarify.

29 14:38:38 30

Were you present that the meeting in

Sorry.

We described the -- what Monarch were looking for as the

happy valley scheme because it reflected this vision as outlined or shown on their model. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:38:40

14:38:56

92 1

Q. 539

2 3

But just in relation to the actual meeting itself.

Do you recall seeing Mr.

Lynn at that meeting? A.

Yeah, I'm aware that that's in, an issue in controversy.

4

like to say.

5

issue that again, I couldn't swear to it, but we didn't have any relations

6

really with Mr. O'Herlihy because we were appalled by the nature of the

7

campaign that he was spearheading.

8

was driving home after that vote, that we saw Mr. O'Herlihy on O'Connell Street

9

driving home and we didn't hang around long after the vote.

14:39:21 10

I don't have a definitive recollection.

And I just wouldn't

Something on that

But my recollection is that I did, when I

whether that's of any help to the Tribunal.

So I don't know

I just -- I do have a

11

recollection that coincidentally that we happened to be basically beside each

12

other somewhat to both of our embarrassments, in a traffic lane in O'Connell

13

Street after -- I suppose we'd have hung around for half an hour.

14 14:39:43 15

Q. 540

What time was the vote taken?

A.

I can't say that.

16

You could work it out.

We hung around the chamber whereas

I detail later we had some amusing encounters but we didn't really tarry.

17

Q. 541

I think the meeting is recorded as having concluded at 2.05?

18

A.

I would say then that would have definitely been before three o'clock.

19

Q. 542

If we could have 3729, please.

14:40:06 20

And the last vote would have been the Barrett/Dockrell vote.

21

Isn't that

right?

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 543

When you say that the motion of Councillors Lydon and Hand was withdrawn in

24 14:40:23 25

turmoil. A.

What do you mean by that?

Well my recollection is that there were -- that they were definitely -- that

26

there were definitely people from Monarch in the chamber who were communicating

27

with probably both of the people behind that motion.

28

frustrated by what the councillors were doing on their behalf.

29

mean, we saw lots of thing that we considered scandalous. But it seemed

14:40:58 30

And they seemed to be It was -- I

wearing our naive hats outrageous that councillors could be being ostensibly Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:41:07

14:41:36

93 1 2

almost directed by developers as to what they should do in the council chamber. Q. 544

3 4

Are you saying that on this occasion that either Councillors Lydon and/or Hand were being directed in relation to what they were to do with the motion?

A.

5

There was -- they seemed to be -- there was eye contact and there was definitely --

6

Q. 545

Who was the eye contact with?

7

A.

I just can't remember that.

8 9 14:41:37 10

11

I would say the probability is that it was Mr.

Lynn but I can't be sure about that. Q. 546

Yes.

A.

I think Mr. Lynn would have been in the chamber.

Q. 547

Now, you then later at 8945 you go on to deal with the 1993 vote.

He was always very hands on. And you say

12

that "At a meeting of the council on the 11th of November 1993, a series of

13

motions were put."

14

moment ago.

14:42:06 15

And you deal with the first motion which we dealt with a

That's the Smith/Buckley motion.

confirmed Councillor Barrett's motion.

Which would effectively have

And you referred to the proposed

16

amendment to that by Councillor Barrett and Councillor Dockrell, isn't that

17

right?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 548

And again we have dealt with that.

14:42:20 20

amendment was unsuccessful.

21

Councillor Barrett/Dockrell's proposed

And the Smyth motion was itself unsuccessful.

Isn't that right?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 549

Yes. And I think ultimately a motion by Councillor Dunne and Marren and

24

seconded by Councillor Coffey proposing that the manager's recommendation for

14:42:42 25

the Monarch lands, which was to delete the 1993 amendment, was put.

26

Isn't

that right? And we see that motion at page 7263.

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 550

And that was effectively a motion which favoured only the Monarch lands.

29 14:43:08 30

Isn't that right? A.

Yes.

And I do recall being quoted in the newspapers at the time asking why Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:43:14

14:43:25

94 1 2

that was the case. Q. 551

3 4

In other words, it was an issue at the time that this motion had only favoured the Monarch lands?

A.

Yes, yes, I remember both in the Irish Times and the Evening Herald -- sorry.

5

The Evening Press or the Irish Press that certainly I was quoted literally just

6

asking how that could be the case.

7

I have copies of those articles if the Tribunal wants them.

8

Q. 552

9 14:43:49 10

And can I ask you, Mr. Smith.

It was strange and maybe suspicious.

And

Was there confusion at that time or in the

minds of any of the councillors as to what was at issue here? A.

I think there was.

Even we were confused.

We had difficulty getting

11

information, particularly maps which are expensive to purchase.

And we were

12

quite confused as to whether what was being proposed for the rezoning on the

13

different occasions was just the Monarch lands or as I think was the case in

14

fact in most cases the -- I think significantly larger tranche of lands.

14:44:21 15

16

But I do remember that in fact I seem to remember coming to this realisation

17

maybe a couple of days before, possibly the second vote, and I think talking to

18

Frank McDonald in the Irish Times just drawing his attention to the fact that

19

it seemed to be much bigger rezoning than had been understood up to then.

14:44:43 20

I think he published that.

And

And I seem to remember that Councillor Helen Keogh

21

got engaged in a debate about that. It was either in the Irish Times or more

22

probably on Morning Ireland the day before the vote or maybe even the day of

23

the vote when she seemed to have felt that it was a limited rezoning and then

24

became very flustered when it was made clear to her that it was in fact a

14:45:10 25

larger rezoning.

26 27

But she certainly would have been aware.

28

the council would have been aware, partly because it was attracting -- the

29

enhanced size of the propose the rezoning was attracting attention in the

14:45:26 30

media.

And I guess that everybody else in

So I don't think anyone could claim not to have been aware of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:45:32

14:45:53

95 1 2

difference between the Cherrywood lands and the larger area. Q. 553

And at 8946 of your statement.

You go on and you give an incident of what you

3

regard as slightly over familiarity between at least one of the councillors and

4

somebody in support of Monarch at that time.

5

A.

That's right.

6

Q. 554

In relation to the debate.

7

A.

Should I not go through that?

8

Q. 555

Well unless you.

9 14:46:09 10

Is that right?

Can I just return for a moment, if I may.

If you want to.

Do you want me to read out what your

statement in that regard? I mean? A.

Well if you don't mind.

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

Well if it's relevant, yes.

13 14

Q. 556

MR. QUINN: Well Ms. Mitchell would have been circulated with a copy of this.

14:46:18 15

16 17

CHAIRMAN: Q. 557

Well then.

MR. QUINN: Under the heading "Olivia Mitchell" you say that "Another anecdote

18

relates to Olivia Mitchell.

19

Development Plan in 1992 before the start of the final meeting in 1993 I had a

14:46:30 20

21

She had voted against the change to the

row with Councillor Mitchell who claimed we were engineering a great many phone calls to her.

22 23

We were indeed promoting late night calls.

24

that hard-working councillors could be reached.

14:46:52 25

That seemed to be the only time Immediately after the vote in

the council office I caught her hugging one of the developers.

I think it was

26

one of the developers that I was least acquainted with perhaps, Pat Lafferty.

27

I said oh, kissy kissy with one of the developers and she said lucky you don't

28

have a camera.

29

voting on an issue where she was close enough to have a vested interest to hug

14:47:00 30

That seemed to me to be improper.

She should not have been

him in relation to the way the vote in this vested interest had turned out. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:47:04

14:47:13

96 1

Councillors should not be passionate about the interest of developers."

2 3

You say that incident occurred and that that exchange took place between you?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 558

And that it was your view and is your view that that was an unhealthy closeness

6 7

of a relationship between a councillor and somebody representing a developer? A.

8 9

Yes.

And I have a witness to that as well, Gavin O'Sullivan, who was involved

in the campaign. Q. 559

14:47:30 10

And we know that Councillor Mitchell I think, was one of the councillors who appeared to have changed her position in relation to the development, isn't

11

that right?

12

A.

Yes and who received a donation from Mr. Dunlop during the relevant period.

13

Q. 560

Yes.

14

A.

During which she changed her mind.

Q. 561

Can I just go back for a second, Mr. Smith, just in relation to your

14:47:41 15

16

observation in relation to the comparison that the Tribunal should make between

17

the conduct of the councillors who were voting in 1992 and those that were

18

voting in 1993?

19 14:47:56 20

A.

Uh-huh.

Q. 562

Firstly, you say that there is a significance to be attached to those

21

councillors who attended and who didn't attend on either occasion, as I

22

understand your evidence?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 563

And secondly, you say that the comparison in relation to the voting intentions

14:48:08 25

of the councillors is not a comparison between the Barrett motion and the

26

confirmation Smyth/Buckley motion but more the Lydon McGrath proposal that the

27

manager's map 92/44 should be adopted and perhaps the amendment to -- by

28

Councillor Barrett to the Smyth/Buckley motion?

29 14:48:33 30

A.

Yes between --

Q. 564

And I just want you to explain -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:48:35

14:48:55

97 1

A.

Between -- there was a correlation.

There were two.

At either end you had

2

the Barrett/Dockrell motions in '92 and '93 which I think can usefully be, the

3

voting cords can be correlated on those.

4

I suppose which I think was the same in '92 and '93 and voting records on that

5

can be correlated.

6

nightmare of complication but we did try to fairly reflect the spirit of the

7

way councillors had voted.

8

to be fair about the way that ...

9

Q. 565

14:49:19 10

And we put that our out our leaflets.

This is all a

Maybe we would have mingled the two in an effort

It's just that one would have thought that perhaps the fairer comparison

perhaps looking at it objectively might have been the Barrett/Dockrell '92

11 12

No.

And then you had the manager's plan,

motion and the confirmation of that motion in '93? A.

Yes.

That's what I'm saying.

It's an obvious comparison.

And the other

13

obvious comparison is the way councillors voted on the manager's plan.

14

I suppose was the height of what Monarch were looking for -- realistically

14:49:40 15

looking for at the time.

16 17

Which

Whereas the Barrett motion was the height of what

the opponents were looking for at the time. Q. 566

Can I ask you.

Did you know that the Monarch interests were proposing a

18

science and technology park which would probably bring with it some industrial

19

development with it at that time?

14:49:57 20

A.

21

I think it was muted.

I'm not sure whether it was called a science and

technology park or a business park.

22

Q. 567

There was a C zoning.

23

A.

The C zoning district centre.

24

Q. 568

Which was Councillor Gilmore's, O'Callaghan's successful motion.

A.

Yes.

26

Q. 569

In '92 and again in '93.

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 570

But the concept of a science and technology park being located in these lands.

14:50:13 25

29 14:50:26 30

I just want to take --

Did you know that that was being muted? Did you know that in the run up to the '93 -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:50:27

14:50:41

98 1

A.

Did we know that there was a C zoning district centre?

2

Q. 571

No, not the district centre, that had been voted on I think in '92.

But that

3

there was out there in the ether somewhere the concept that there might be

4

located on these lands a science and technology park?

5

A.

I think we did. Yeah.

6

Q. 572

Yes.

7

A.

We followed the media reports which I think would have reflected that.

8

Q. 573

Now, I forgot to ask you.

9 14:51:02 10

11

Just going back to 1991, did you have occasion to

meet with Mr. Lawlor at some stage in relation to the matter? A.

I had that pleasure.

Q. 574

Yes.

I think if we could have 8951, please.

I think here you're recalling

12

an incident or an occasion when you spoke with Councillor Coffey and you were

13

speaking with her, I suspect, in relation to the Cherrywood rezoning.

14

right?

14:51:28 15

A.

That's right.

16

Q. 575

June '91?

17

A.

-- yeah but before the O'Herlihy campaign had begun.

18

Q. 576

Which would have been about October, November '91?

19

A.

I think so.

14:51:49 20

Is that

This was after the Local Election in --

And we hadn't launched into our, into our campaign.

But I guess

that if I was attending the meeting that I was, I think, I can't be sure

21

whether I knew at that time that Cherrywood had been rezoned.

22

been a period when I was in the dark although I think it's more likely that I

23

was aware at that stage.

24

Valley, which is held by An Taisce, with which at the time I had no connection

14:52:14 25

whatsoever.

26 27

14:52:38 30

But I went to a meeting about the Carrickmines

I suppose this was -- I think this was my first -- the first

meeting that I would have attended about the whole -- the whole issue. Q. 577

28 29

It may have

And this was an An Taisce meeting which was attended by Councillor Coffey and Councillor Lawlor.

A.

Is that right or former Councillor Lawlor at this stage?

Yes there were a number of councillors who spoke at it. speak at it.

I certainly didn't

I can't remember whether Councillor Coffey spoke at it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

I know

14:52:42

14:53:01

99 1

that councillor Fitzgerald, Eithne Fitzgerald, to the best of my recollection,

2

spoke at it.

3

Q. 578

And I seem to remember speaking to her after it.

And I think you say in your statement, just to paraphrase it.

That Councillor

4

Coffey introduced to you Councillor Lawlor in the context of Fianna Fail's

5

planning expert.

6

A.

Is that right?

Yeah, I went up to Councillor Coffey who was perfectly pleasant to me.

7

Although she always seemed to be obsessed with how young I was.

8

said wasn't it terrible that they were proposing to, I suppose I must have

9

known at this stage just looking back on it, wasn't it terrible that they were

14:53:23 10

But she -- I

proposing to rezone Cherrywood, that it was very beautiful and all of that.

11

And she said well young man I agree with you.

12

record which wasn't bad, at the time.

And she pointed to her voting

13 14 14:53:43 15

And I'd a pleasant chat with her about the issue and she was I think broadly supportive though probably not very precise.

But then she said you know

16

actually now we're here, I think what would be useful is if you speak to Fianna

17

Fail's expert planning expert.

18

Fianna Fail at the time.

19

council or Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown.

14:54:10 20

Now, Councillor Coffey was a leading figure in

I think she was leader of Fianna Fail either in the She was an eminence in Fine Gael at the

time.

21 22

Anyway, she said we should talk to Fianna Fail's planning expert, who luckily

23

happened to be on the premises.

24

Lawlor emerged.

14:54:23 25

So she beckoned to the shadows and Mr. Liam

Who said he wasn't in favour of rezoning the valley.

fact he had voted against the whole resale when he was a councillor.

And in The

26

funny thing was at that stage he wasn't a councillor.

27

obvious place being at a meeting that was concerned with rezonings in the

28

Carrickmines Valley, which was the subject of the meeting.

29

about more than just Cherrywood it was the general rezonings in the

14:54:46 30

Carrickmines Valley. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

And so he had no

I think it was

14:54:47

14:54:58

100 1 2

So I suppose that just looking back on it, it ties in with some of the

3

suspicions about Mr. Lawlor having involvements with maybe some of the land --

4

Q. 579

That --

5

A.

But in particular, that he was a consultant on the Cherrywood land.

6

Q. 580

That's a submission.

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 581

And I think Councillor Coffey was also instrumental in organising an occasion

9 14:55:14 10

You're just giving a factual account of what happened?

for you to address the Fianna Fail Councillors in Conways, is that right? A.

11

Yes, that's right.

She seemed to be a very influential figure, the key point

person certainly from our point of view.

12

Q. 582

And if I could --

13

A.

And we -- we were -- I and a representative of the Carrickmines Valley

14

Preservation Association, who wisely stayed mostly silent, attended this

14:55:41 15

meeting.

And the presentation didn't go very well.

There was lots of

16

babbling and eating of lunches and crisps and councillors seemed -- we made a

17

worthy but very dull submission about how the future development in Dublin

18

should be in the inner city and in the new towns and most Fianna Fail

19

Councillors didn't seem to be interested in anything so theoretical.

14:56:07 20

remember in the middle of the talk, Councillor Coffey announced that she got my

21 22

drift and that was the end of the talk. Q. 583

Can I just ask you now.

In a general way, just leaving your statement for a

23

moment, Mr. Smith.

24

were involved in the run-up to the '93 vote.

14:56:31 25

You were involved in the run up to the '92 vote.

And you

Was there a difference in

approach from the Monarch perspective in in how they handled the campaigns on

26

both occasions?

27

A.

There was a chasmic difference between the --

28

Q. 584

Would you tell the Tribunal what that was?

29

A.

It made all the difference to us.

14:56:50 30

So I

Because we, for at least six months, some

of us were practically full-time opposing this. And we were riding the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:56:55

14:57:14

101 1

publicity that Monarch were deliberately generating.

I mean, my understanding

2

at the time and we put some of this in our leaflets, was that they had spent,

3

they were spending 800,000 pounds, which is a million Euro, Euro in money was

4

very scarce on the ground -- seeking this rezoning.

5

had these -- they had, well they had the road shows.

6

expensively produced video, they had dinners, I remember there was a big issue

7

in the local newspapers when they invited a lot of councillors to a dinner in

8

the curtilage of the council chamber.

And we tried to -- they They had very

9 14:57:37 10

I remember an editorial in the Dublin Tribunal castigating the councillors who

11

attended that and drawing attention to the fact that residents weren't invited

12

to that.

13

recollection and I've been involved in planning development issues for most of

14

the period since then.

14:57:57 15

But they had extraordinarily -- I've never seen it to the best of my

They had television ads looking for rezoning, inviting

people to attend the road shows and showing their happy valley scheme.

They

16

had radio ads, they had ads in local newspapers.

17

I mean, I think some of the exhibits showed that they put out, I would guess

18

maybe eight or ten different leaflets countering what we were saying.

19

then we would counter counter what they had said.

14:58:24 20

They had lots of leaflets.

And

And so there was a lot of

commotion in leaflets.

21 22

They paid councillors of course.

23

point of view.

24

they gave money to the Ballybrack basketball team and possibly others certainly

14:58:47 25

They also, which is very disturbing from our

They were paying local community groups, including I think

later than that period.

I know --

26

Q. 585

Are we now talking about period in the lead up to the '92 vote?

27

A.

That's the best of my recollection, yeah.

28

Q. 586

Now, in the lead up to the '93 vote what's your recollection or perception?

29

A.

It was a huge issue every where in the Deansgrange, Foxrock, Cabinteely,

14:59:07 30

Loughlinstown, Shankill area.

Everybody in the area was aware of it. There

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

14:59:14

14:59:36

102 1

was this unprecedented campaign.

2

arriving through people's letter boxes.

3

public relations campaign and at the end of if, far from them getting the land

4

up zoned the land was down zoned.

5

spent so much money, they spent an unprecedented amount of money and the land

6

was down zoned.

7

we could do, we didn't have the budget to drum up a campaign of their own.

8

had the budget to ride their campaign. But for the '93 vote things were much

9

quieter.

14:59:54 10

You know, every week new literature would be From our point of view, we rode that

It was absolutely extraordinary.

And then later we rested on our Laurels.

They

There was nothing We

We finished up putting out a couple of leaflets.

Q. 587

That's what you did.

I'm more concerned about Monarch?

11

A.

They did nothing. We didn't --

12

Q. 588

So was there a marked contrast, is that your evidence to the Tribunal, as

13

somebody who was involved in this campaign between Monarch's approach to the

14

'92 vote and Monarch's approach to the '93 vote?

15:00:08 15

A.

16 17

'93 vote it was silence. Q. 589

18 19

Can I ask you.

Did you know that Mr. Dunlop had been retained by Monarch in

the lead up to he to the '93 vote? A.

15:00:25 20

21

It was up to 800,000 pounds worth of noise up to the '92 vote and then for the

I can't remember.

He wouldn't have been a figure of too much significance I

may have heard. Q. 590

22

You would have attended the council meetings I take it and you have given evidence in relation to the meeting on the 27th of May '92?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 591

Did you ever see Mr. Dunlop at those meetings?

A.

To be honest, it is 14 years ago.

15:00:36 25

I have hazy recollection of somebody saying

26

that Frank Dunlop might have been involved.

27

was '92 or '93.

28 29 15:01:01 30

Q. 592

But I can't remember whether that

Now, I think under a heading at 8951, frustrated democracy and bad planning. You set out the bitter disappointed you say that local residents felt as a result of what went on.

Isn't that right?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:01:07

15:01:37

103 1

A.

Yeah.

I mean, we considered that we did -- we were under funded, bedraggled.

2

Idealistic tinged with sinicism.

3

lot of time doing what you're supposed to do with a very small budget counter

4

propaganda.

5

stickers and badges showing picture of Mr. Monahan with a crown on his head and

6

captioned saying "No to Monarchy".

7

appear.

8

actually did. We did everything that democracy tells you that you're supposed

9

to do.

15:02:11 10

But we wasted -- it turned out we wasted a

We ran a gorilla type campaign I suppose.

And we -- anywhere they went we tried to

I think they probably thought that we had a far bigger budget than we

We lobbied and countered what we considered to be lies.

And in the

end, we lost as a result of ...

11

Q. 593

Well you were unsuccessful you feel?

12

A.

We were unsuccessful.

And I suppose, we felt that we were offering planning

13

arguments against that scheme.

14

planning creates losers.

15:02:36 15

We had bumper

And I suppose we -- I still feel that bad

Maybe that's not something that comes across often

enough in the reportage of the Tribunals.

A lot of people make money and are

16

big winners.

17

people.

18

Loughlinstown was this glorious sweeping Arcadian valley.

19

sewerage and planning from the management and dubious planning from the

15:03:03 20

There are losers who I suppose are the public and ordinary

And I suppose I would say as I said before the best thing will And as a result of

councillors, that is now all gone.

21 22

And of course it looks nothing like the happy valley that was touted in the

23

model.

24

at it.

15:03:21 25

It's a very dis-- I can't actually.

I don't usually choose to look

But it's a very poorly planned development that sits on the site at

the moment.

And I suppose also it's notably under served by public transport.

26

And I suppose you could say that it's major contributor to, for example, to

27

grid lock.

28

were concerned and as far as I'm concerned good planning is plan led.

29

would like to have seen the management come up with detailed, in general I

15:03:54 30

But in general, that scheme was developer led and as far as we And we

suppose throughout the county, detailed action plans where rezoning has to take Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:04:00

15:04:16

104 1

place but also we felt that wasn't an area where development should take place.

2

At the time it's difficult to remember back.

3

at inner city.

4

inner city.

5

propose that rezoning should be focused on the inner city and on the new towns

6

which were underdeveloped at the time.

7

critical mass necessary where the infrastructure that was planned for them,

8

could be built. So we considered that this development was very much ad hoc

9

and it's a poor development, poor quality and in the wrong place.

15:04:37 10

Q. 594

11

Yes.

I was living in the inner city, nobody was interested in the

There was no real move on to rejuvenate the inner city.

And we

And in particular hadn't reached the

In fairness to Monarch, the proposals, the various motions had the

support of the manager.

12

A.

That's right but we --

13

Q. 595

And his staff?

14

A.

That's right.

15:04:50 15

At the time nobody was touching

Isn't that right?

But we considered that the manager was maybe unduly influenced

by the fact that I think at that stage they had the out flow for a major sewage

16

scheme in Shankill and I'm afraid we distained the manager's approach as being,

17

as I say, sewerage led.

18

That in the original 1990 scheme where the manager proposed the wholesale

19

redevelopment of the Carrickmines Valley.

15:05:24 20

23

It seems that the proposals of Mr.

McCabe, on behalf of Monarch, were adopted lock stock and barrel.

21 22

But also I just don't see it being the way to go.

And that's

absolutely definitive evidence that the scheme was developer led. Q. 596

Thank you very much, Mr. Smith.

If you answer any questions anybody else may

have for you.

24 15:05:42 25

CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Sanfey, do you want to ask Mr. Smith anything?

26 27

MR SANFEY:

We were proposing that Mr. O'Higgins would go before me I think.

28 29

CHAIRMAN:

Certainly.

15:05:52 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:05:52

15:06:02

105 1

THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. O'HIGGINS AS FOLLOWS:

2 3 4

MR. O'HIGGINS: Well I have very little to ask Mr. Smith. Q. 597

But I appear on behalf of Mr. Sean Barrett.

I just wanted to be sure I was

5

clear about the evidence which you are giving.

6

wanted permission for a large scheme.

I think obviously Mr. Monahan

I think that's right, isn't it?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 598

And you are his most implicable opponent.

9

A.

Well a lot of us were. Yes.

Q. 599

You were one of them?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 600

And my client knew that.

13

A.

Well he would have seen there were being two different strands to campaign.

15:06:25 10

14

He knew that.

Is that correct?

Is that right?

I'm sure he would have imagine end that the Carrickmines Valley Preservation

15:06:43 15

Association was formidable.

16

Q. 601

When he spoke to you?

17

A.

I don't know if he knew I was the most implicable opponent.

18 19

known that we were trenchant in our opposition. Q. 602

15:07:00 20

21

He would have

Yes.

And so you thought that in order to advance his scheme at some point or

other he bribed councillors. A.

I can't say that.

Is that right?

I think that I take a lawyerly approach on it.

I don't

22

know.

23

think I wrote my first letter on in issue in 1989, 17 years ago, was to find

24

out what happened.

15:07:30 25

The thrust of all of my efforts dating back now well 13 years and I

I don't presume to say whether anybody was bribed until

there's a decision reached by somebody who has the authority to take that

26

decision.

27

result of bribery.

28

ago as 1993 we put out a leaflet saying why had councillors changed their mind

29

on this issue.

15:07:54 30

So I don't know whether that, whether the scheme went through as a I know that it was suspicious and we said so as long as

Don't trust them.

said all of that back in 1993.

Don't vote them back.

Money talks.

We

And that was before we knew that I think five

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:07:58

15:08:19

106 1

of the six councillors who changed their mind in the area had been paid money

2

by Monarch or Frank Dunlop during the crucial period.

3

whether there was, whether there was bribery.

4

difficulty ascertaining the veracity that I should attribute to what

5

Mr. Monahan was saying about Barrett.

6

Q. 603

Yes.

But I don't know

I had a great deal of

That's the truth of it.

Mr. Monahan, when he spoke to you at the gate, I think it was.

I

7

suppose to be fair to say he was hardly out to help you, was he, in your

8

endeavours?

9

A.

15:08:38 10

Q. 604

Sorry.

He

I don't know, there was

something a little malevolent about him but he was also good fun.

13 14

But I think he was somebody who probably enjoyed a bit of a fight.

was a man with a mischievous twinkle in his eye.

11 12

No.

And he --

He had a mischievous twinkle in his eye when he told you what he told

you about Mr. Barrett? A.

15:09:02 15

I would say he was in general mischievous. when I shouted at him what I did.

I was obviously being mischievous

I think I described what he said as it was

16

mischievous but there was also an underlying, he was brislings and he was being

17

macho.

18

was trying to provoke him as well.

19

Q. 605

15:09:26 20

And maybe I was, maybe I was trying to be a bit macho.

I'm very sorry.

I suppose I

I don't normally say things like that --

I'm not talking about you here.

I asked you a question,

maybe you'd answer the question about the person about whom I asked you.

21

you think that Mr. Monahan was out to help you --

22

A.

Well --

23

Q. 606

-- in saying what he said?

24

A.

Well I think professionally as regards his pocket he wouldn't have been out to

15:09:42 25

help us.

As I say, he may have been overtaken by a human element and he may

26

have enjoyed the banter.

27

I don't think it was clear that it was all the case that he was trying to do us

28

down.

29 15:10:04 30

Did

Q. 607

So I don't know.

There were two things going on.

He seemed, as I say, a twinkle can be interpreted two ways.

If he was paying money to people.

Do you think you are a person he would

choose to tell that to and tell you who he was paying money to? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:10:08

15:10:24

107 1

A.

2

He seemed to be a man who enjoyed a game.

And he, I just don't know.

He

seemed like an unusual man to me.

3

Q. 608

Well he told you he was paying Mr. Barrett, you say?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 609

Can you think hard now and see if you can think of any reason why he might have

6 7

told you that? A.

Because he enjoyed games where he gives little bits of the truth and maybe

8

intersperses them with other things that are difficult to ascertain the truth

9

of.

15:10:44 10

Q. 610

Could we try a bit harder?

11

A.

I honestly can't try much harder.

12

Q. 611

Was Mr. Barrett a supporter of Mr. Monahan?

13

A.

Well I don't know where he stood on Mr. Monahan as regards other schemes but

14 15:11:03 15

... Q. 612

How much money do you think Mr. Monahan is likely to have lost by virtue of Mr.

16

Barrett's vote on the 27th of May 1992 and his consistent opposition to a

17

scheme?

18

A.

Well, of course ...

19

Q. 613

Could you try and answer my question, please.

A.

The issue wasn't Mr. Barrett's vote --

Q. 614

What you think may have been the issue is a matter for you, Mr. Smith.

15:11:23 20

21

What I

22

would like you -- the issue for you, Mr. Smith, now is to answer my question.

23

And you can talk about what you think --

24

A.

15:11:42 25

26

money by the vote of one person. That's the answer to your question. Q. 615

27 28

How much money do you think Mr. Monahan would loose by failing to get 12 houses per hectare vote and finding instead he was confined to one house per acre?

A.

29 15:12:06 30

To answer your question directly, that Mr. Monahan threatened to risk losing no

That's a different matter to what he risked by losing Mr. Barrett's vote.

I

don't know I think it was spoken of being 10 million or something like that. Q. 616

Did it ever occur to you -- you knew Mr. Barrett was opposed to Mr. Monahan's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:12:11

15:12:26

108 1 2

scheme at this time, isn't that right? A.

3 4

Q. 617

And was a strong advocate and attempted to persuade as many people as he could find to vote against the scheme?

A.

I think that's the issue.

That is the issue.

I don't know if he attempted

7

to persuade as many people as possible to vote against the scheme.

8

suggestion that the Tribunal might look into that.

9

He'd

be much clearer than most people.

5 6

Well he had been very good in indicating the way he was likely to vote.

Q. 618

15:12:43 10

It was my

Well he publicly tried to persuade as many people as possible to vote against the scheme, isn't that right?

11

A.

That's true.

12

Q. 619

Just as you did, isn't that right?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 620

Does it occur to you. Maybe it didn't now, but does it occur to you that it

15:12:52 15

might help Mr. Monahan to seek to discredit those who are stoutly opposing him

16

in relation to this scheme?

17

A.

That's a possibility.

18

Q. 621

Yeah.

19

A.

I think I had an open mind.

15:13:16 20

21

Did it occur to you then? I was flummoxed as to why he was doing it.

I

would have been open to all possibilities, including that I suppose. Q. 622

22

Yeah.

I think you said modestly that you were scrupulous about this

information when you got it.

Is that so?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 623

Because you didn't know whether it was true or not?

A.

Yes.

Q. 624

But scrupulous as you are, it didn't stop you from telling everyone that you'd

15:13:30 25

26 27 28 29 15:13:53 30

been told that, isn't that right? A.

Well I suppose it's certainly -- there are two sides to, who is effected or more than two sides.

It reflects something about Mr. Monahan definitely.

What he said about Mr. Barrett may not be true. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

The fact that he would say it

15:13:57

15:14:17

109 1

says something important about him and it also potentially reflects something

2

about other Fine Gael Councillors.

3

multiple parties reflected by it.

4

I think it's terrible that that this has been circulating for 13 years by way

5

initially of sort of behind the scenes rumours because I would have been

6

telling people about it and then --

7

Q. 625

8 9 15:14:35 10

And I do regret that I genuinely do regret.

You said in your evidence that you never went

public on this; isn't that right? A.

I didn't at the time go public about it.

Q. 626

Yeah.

11 12

I'm not quite clear about this.

So from my point of view there were

Well does telling it to everyone you meet appear to you to be going

public on it or not? A.

Well I spoke to individuals about it.

And I, as I say, it was a with a view

13

to getting it investigated which unfortunately, as somebody taking part in a

14

campaign which we had lost in those circumstances.

15:14:58 15

It was clear that we

needed to enlist the help of others to find out exactly what had happened.

16

Because a lot of what happened was suspicious so we left it in the hands of

17

journalists and we later on we, I think we did our best, within the confines of

18

a democratic system, which is that we offered a reward trying to find out what

19

had happened.

15:15:21 20

And called for the instigation of a Tribunal to find out what

was going on.

21 22

I should say that the reason that, the primary reason that I offered the reward

23

and it was me who offered the reward.

24

1995.

15:15:34 25

15:15:53 30

The prime

Mr. Monahan had said about Mr. Barrett. Q. 627

28 29

It was me who put up the money for the reward in 1995.

reason for putting up that reward was to ascertain the truth of what

26 27

It was my idea to have the reward in

So you then took what some people might consider to be the quite unusual step of telling it in confidence to the Phoenix.

A.

Yes.

Q. 628

Yes.

Is that right?

But you were still scrupulous about not spreading it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

Is that so?

15:15:59

15:16:24

110 1

A.

Well I suppose I ensured that they shouldn't spread it.

To the extent that it

2

was libelous obviously to anyone that I was speaking to have would have to take

3

a great deal of care and the Phoenix probably very wisely took the line that

4

they couldn't print it.

5

and they just printed the store bit about the race horses which I know

6

Mr. Barrett had denied.

So I fed them the story of what Mr. Monahan had said

7

Q. 629

Do you think you didn't show much respect for Mr. Barrett's reputation?

8

A.

I think that to be honest.

9

It showed respect for Mr. Barrett's reputation

because I would have been scrupulous in advising anybody that I spoke to that I

15:16:44 10

had no idea whether what Mr. Monahan had said about Mr. Barrett was true.

11

I think that was as far as I could go.

12

Any time I speak to anybody, I always have that major caveat.

13

obligation to get it, to get it investigated as far as I was concerned. It was

14

suspicious and it definitely said something about Mr. Monaghan.

15:17:07 15

Q. 630

16 17

And I can assure you to this day. But I had an

Isn't that an obligation you could have fulfilled by going to the Gardai or the appropriate authorities and asking them to investigate this serious allegation?

A.

Well during the course of my time involved in the planning of the environment I

18

came across a lot of allegations.

19

The Gardai's efforts ran into the ground regarding planning corruption. The

15:17:27 20

That doesn't seem to be the way to go.

innative that I promoted which should be an instigation of the Tribunal was

21 22

much more successful. Q. 631

Did you take any steps. You see, you were told two things.

One of them I

23

suggest was checkable up on.

24

Mr. Monahan's horses were in fact insured through Mr. Barrett?

15:17:47 25

Did you check any steps to discover whether

A.

No, I didn't.

26

Q. 632

You didn't have the means to do that.

27

A.

No, I didn't.

28

Q. 633

Did you ask Mr. Barrett?

29

A.

No.

Q. 634

Did you ask Mr. Monahan or anyone else with whom his horses were insured?

15:17:59 30

And

I don't think that I had the means to do it -Did you ask Mr. Barrett?

I never spoke to --

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:18:03

15:18:16

111 1

A.

I didn't have to ask him because he'd already told me.

2

Q. 635

So you, because he told you, took it that what Mr. Monahan said was true.

3 4

that right? A.

5 6

I didn't take it that it was true.

I thought that was the whole thrust of

what I was saying. Q. 636

7

Why didn't you check it out.

Mr. Monahan told you. You didn't believe you

say what he said in his road show, isn't that right?

8

A.

That's true.

9

Q. 637

Why didn't you -- why did you believe what he said about Mr. Barrett?

A.

I'd definitive evidence in what he said on his road show, I didn't have the

15:18:30 10

11 12

means to find out whether what he said about Mr. Barrett was true or untrue. Q. 638

13 14 15:18:44 15

Is

So you didn't ask Mr. Monahan whether it was true.

You didn't ask Mr.

Barrett -A.

I didn't have to ask Mr. Monahan because he was the one who told me.

Q. 639

Did you checkup whether it was necessary if you have race horses to insure them

16

and to inform the racing authorities about who they are insured with?

17

A.

No, I didn't.

18

Q. 640

Why is that? Do you think Mr. Barrett's reputation deserves no more respect

19 15:19:01 20

than that? A.

I didn't ever say anything in public about Mr. Barrett.

21

Phoenix to ascertain the truth of that.

22

to exercise a quasi judicial role myself.

23

Q. 641

24 15:19:25 25

26

I left it for the

It wasn't my place.

I don't presume

I think that would be arrogant.

A rezoning was eventually achieved and Mr. Barrett spoke and voted against that at every stage.

Isn't that correct?

A.

That's correct.

Q. 642

But we've heard from you that one of the suspicious things about that was that

27

And we credited him with that prominently in our literature.

Mr. Barrett seemed so innocent.

That's what you said.

Isn't that right?

28

A.

No.

29

Q. 643

Well one of the suspicion things was that Mr. Barrett voted against it all of

15:19:51 30

the time.

And yet it was voted through by councillors other than Mr. Barrett Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:19:55

15:20:11

112 1 2

and not from the local area. A.

3

That's correct.

And one of the other suspicion things is that Mr. Barrett

received a donation from Mr. Monahan or Mr. Dunlop.

4

Q. 644

Well are you saying that Mr. Barrett was involved in this or not, Mr. Smith?

5

A.

I don't -- Involved in what? In corruption, I absolutely couldn't say.

6

Q. 645

Well --

7

A.

I've never said so I'm not going to say it now. I just can't say that.

8

Q. 646

Didn't you spread a story through the system emanating from a known enemy of

9 15:20:29 10

Mr. Barrett's, which has done him great damage over the years? A.

Well not the way I told it because I have been scrupulous to say that I don't

11

talk to -- I can't account for the veracity of what Mr. Monahan said.

12

refer to the fact that he said what he said.

13

Q. 647

14 15:20:53 15

Now, can I put it to you.

I just

That at no time has Mr. Barrett taken the insurance

on any of Mr. Monahan's horses or indeed anything else of Mr. Monahan's. A.

I would not be in a position to counter that.

16

Q. 648

Do you accept that if I say that to you?

17

A.

I have to accept it, yes.

18

Q. 649

And do you accept that Mr. Barrett, as he has stated, had no hand, act or part

19

I take your word.

in encouraging the granting of a permission which he spoke against or a

15:21:17 20

rezoning at every stage of its passage?

21

A.

I can't say that.

22

Q. 650

Do you still have your naive hat or did you get rid of that in 1992?

23

A.

Well twin hats.

24

Q. 651

Can I suggest to you that it would be the utmost naivety to believe otherwise

15:21:49 25

I can't say that.

that Mr. Barrett has behaved straight forwardly in all of this as is plain to

26

see?

27

A.

You can suggest that.

28

Q. 652

And has not been served, Mr. Smith, by the manner in which you have peddled

29 15:21:58 30

I hope that's the case.

malicious rumour about him? A.

Well it wasn't malicious I can assure you. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:22:01

15:22:17

113 1

Q. 653

I'm suggesting it was malicious of Mr. Monahan and that you have peddled?

2

A.

I peddled with the caveat that I have no idea whether it was true or not.

3

Q. 654

And courageously.

4 5

Although you told people about it, would not print it in

any of your literature as you've told us. A.

6

Well that's the way I always behave.

I don't print things when I have no idea

whether they are true or not.

7

Q. 655

So you courage justly don't print them but you tell them to everyone?

8

A.

I tell them to other people with the caveat that they should investigate for

9 15:22:33 10

themselves the truth. Q. 656

If you were anything other than a card on this issue, Mr. Smith, I suggest to

11

you that you would have printed with a caveat what you were prepared to speak

12

with caveat but that you just wouldn't do it?

13

A.

14

I think it that would have been far more cynical. ostensibly the case.

15:22:54 15

We printed what was

We printed that every where we could.

It was only over

the years subsequent to that when things have emerged like that councillors did

16

change their mind and one of the reasons my suspicions have increased over the

17

years is that councillors did change their mind.

18 19

Fine Gael Councillors did change their mind.

15:23:12 20

money on the Cherrywood issue.

It's emerged that people took

It's emerged that Mr. Barrett took money.

21

Q. 657

Mr. Barrett has never changed his mind.

22

A.

That's true.

Isn't that correct?

My suspicions have been heightened over the years.

At the time

23

I was more inclined to believe that what Mr. Monahan was saying was pure

24

mischief.

15:23:40 25

As events have progressed as issues have arisen like that Monarch

targeted lead councillors.

As it's emerged -- this is 13 years ago -- there

26

was no evidence that there was corruption in the council at the time.

27

very little evidence that there was corruption at the time.

28

number of councillors and politicians have been found to have made corrupt

29

payments.

15:24:08 30

There's

Since then a

And since as a result of all of that process, as a result of a sea

change in the public's attitude towards corruption and my own attitude towards Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:24:13

15:24:32

114 1

the prevalence of corruption, my suspicions have been heightened.

2

cannot say and wouldn't say that what Mr. Monahan said was true about Mr.

3

Barrett.

4

to Mr. Barrett's colleagues and what he said to them.

5

Q. 658

6

But I still

I asked the Tribunal to investigate that, in particular by talking

Can I suggest to you Mr. Smith, that this is closer to 1984 than 2006.

I have

no more questions for you, Mr. Smith.

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

9

you sat down and looked objectively at the voting patterns of councillors at

15:24:59 10

the time.

Mr. Smith, just in relation to what Mr. O'Higgins was asking.

Had

Do you think you'd have come to the view that Mr. Barrett was an

11

unlikely recipient of payment from Mr. Monahan? I mean, forget anything that

12

you learnt subsequently about who was paid what but at the time --

13

A.

14

Well prior to my involvement in this campaign there was a notable phenomenon of councillors in the area voting against rezoning while their colleagues outside

15:25:33 15

the area voted in favour of them.

So I don't know if it was unlikely.

16 17 18

CHAIRMAN: A.

19

Just in relation --

He fitted the bill of being a councillor in the area who voted against rezoning or his colleagues outside would vote in favour of it.

15:25:47 20

was unlikely.

That's not likely to say.

So I don't know if he

I don't know if he was an unlikely

21

candidate if Mr. Monahan was looking for somebody to oppose a rezoning but to

22

go along with his party colleagues voting in favour of it, I don't think, it's

23

not clear to me that he was an unlikely candidate to do that.

24 15:26:07 25

CHAIRMAN:

But I think you accepted in response to one question put by

26

Mr. O'Higgins.

27

Mr. Monahan, that Mr. Barrett's stance was costing Mr. Barrett a lot of money

28 29 15:26:36 30

A.

That it would have appeared to you at the time that

No, I failed to accept that.

Mr. Barrett's stance was Mr. Barrett's vote.

And one vote didn't make any difference.

What cost or made money for

Mr. Monahan was the majority on the council. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

And Mr. Barrett's vote would

15:26:41

15:26:52

115 1

have counted for very little if Mr. Barrett was ensuring that his party

2

colleagues from outside the area was voting in favour of the rezoning outside

3

the area.

That's the distinction I was trying to make with Mr. O'Higgins.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

6

voting, at who voted what way.

7

to the interests of Mr. Monahan.

8

A.

Insofar as each vote was worth something.

Just looking at the

Mr. Barrett -- Mr. Barrett's vote was contrary

That's right.

9 15:27:10 10

11

CHAIRMAN: A.

Sorry?

Sorry, Chairman, that's correct.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Sanfey, do you want to ask him?

14 15:27:18 15

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, can I just say for Mr. Smith's benefit.

So that he

16

knows who I represent. I am for Monarch Properties Limited and the Monarch

17

companies.

18

Reilly and perhaps most relevantly the estate of Phil Monahan.

Richard Lynn, Paul Monahan, Dominic Glennane, Noel Murray, Phil

19 15:27:36 20

21

Chairman, I have no questions for this witness.

But I would like to explain

very briefly why.

22 23

Most of Mr. Smith's evidence consists of anecdotes and his opinions in relation

24

to the merits or demerits of the Cherrywood development and I think as

15:27:51 25

Ms. Dillon pointed out just before lunchtime, that's not a matter that concerns

26

this Tribunal.

The Tribunal is not concerned with whether or not it was a

27

good idea or a bad idea to have development in Cherrywood.

28 29 15:28:06 30

The only allegation of substance it seems to me that's relevant it the Tribunal from Mr. Smith's personal knowledge relates to the allegation in respect of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:28:11

15:28:22

116 1

Mr. Phil Monahan.

2 3

Now, obviously Mr. Monahan has passed away.

I can't take instructions in

4

relation to that.

5

cross-examination.

6

to say, Chairman, that I don't want to be taken by the virtue of the fact that

7

I haven't cross-examined Mr. Smith in relation to his various opinions that I

8

in any way accept or acquiesce in the views that he has expressed.

9

With that caveat, I have no questions.

I have taken on board what Mr. O'Higgins has raised in his I have really nothing to add to that. What i really want

15:28:42 10

11

CHAIRMAN:

We note that.

Are there any other parties?

MR. DULLY:

You'll Mr. Chairman.

CHAIRMAN:

You'll be last.

12 13 14 15:28:48 15

16 17

MR O TUATHAIL:

Chairman, I appear for Senate Lydon.

I have no questions.

18 19

MR. DULLY:

15:28:59 20

Just arising out of Mr. O'Higgins' cross-examination, if I could

put one or two questions to Mr. Smith.

21 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. DULLY AS FOLLOWS:

22 23 24

Q. 659

15:29:05 25

I think, Mr. Smith, you made reference in your direct evidence to having a conversation with an individual you have identified as being a close supporter

26

of Mr. Barrett and relaying the conversation that you'd had with Mr. Monahan to

27

him.

Could you identified that individual again, please?

28

A.

He's called Colm Brophy.

29

Q. 660

Colm Brophy.

15:29:25 30

And what, if any, connection did you know existed between

Mr. Brophy and Mr. Barrett? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:29:26

15:29:53

117 1

A.

Well Mr. Brophy was opposing rezonings.

He was Chairman of one of the largest

2

residents associations in the area.

3

Mr. Barrett's election agent and I know that subsequently he was I think

4

election agent for Fine Gael in Dublin in the European Election but he was --

5

he was very close to Mr. Barrett.

6

Q. 661

7

He was also -- he had -- he may have been

And he would have known Mr. Barrett, to your knowledge, personally.

Is that

correct?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 662

Now, could you roughly indicate when this conversation would have taken place.

15:30:06 10

11

Would it have been weeks or months after the conversation with Mr. Monahan? A.

It wouldn't have been many months after their conversation with Mr. Monahan.

12

As I say, I did -- my evidence was that I spoke to a lot of people about this.

13

I suppose I knew that this evidence would be transmitted to Mr. Barrett.

14

Q. 663

15:30:37 15

Do you believe that Mr. Barrett, is there any possible way that Mr. Barrett would not have been aware that you had made these remarks about a conversation

16

you'd had with Mr. Monahan about Mr. Barrett.

17 18

MR. O'HIGGINS: That's surely a matter that should have been put to Mr.

19

Barrett.

15:30:49 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

And it's -- I mean, it's a matter of opinion.

Unless Mr. Smith

22

was told by Mr. Brophy that he had passed on the details.

23

Mr. Smith can say, express the view one way or the other.

I can't see how

24 15:31:10 25

26

MR. DULLY: A.

27 28 29 15:31:30 30

Yes.

To the best of my recollection, Mr. Brophy did say that he had spoken to Mr. Barrett.

Q. 664

Mr. Smith, did Mr. Barrett ever approach you about this particular issue.

Did

he ever in any way suggest to you that he was in any way unhappy with what had been said or he had become aware of the conversation that you'd had with Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:31:34

15:31:53

118 1 2

Mr. Monahan? A.

No, there wouldn't really have been a vehicle for him to do that.

My

3

recollection is that maybe Mr. Brophy expressed major dissatisfaction with the

4

whole situation.

5

bona fides about the incident with Mr. Monahan had taken place.

6

Mr. Monahan once.

7

to be most effective in that we didn't really spend too much time personally

8

engaging with councillors.

9

outside one of the road shows and we had an anodyne conversation about nothing

15:32:23 10

11

in particular. Q. 665

But he certainly accepted what I was saying, accepted my I met

We were mounting a very aggressive campaign.

So I happened to bump into Mr. Barrett once

I'm not actually sure if I was who I was if I was anybody.

That's amazing clarification on this, but I'm not sure if Mr. Barrett is

12

alleging that he isn't or wasn't aware of the particular source of this

13

particular story.

14 15:32:46 15

You're not aware of that, Mr. Smith?

A.

Sorry, could you repeat that.

Q. 666

Were you ever made aware that Mr. Barrett knew that you were the source of this

16 17

And in order

particular story? A.

I think through Mr. Brophy that he would have known.

As I say, I think I must

18

have spoken to Mr. Brophy.

19

think there must have been two conversations with Mr. Brophy.

15:33:11 20

I hadn't intended to give evidence on this but I And during the

send of which he expressed, you know, concern about the incident.

But I don't

21

remember him being that subversive about it, you know, or denying that

22

Mr. Monahan was likely to have said what --

23

Q. 667

Mr. Barrett never approached you?

24

A.

No, he didn't.

Q. 668

And never discussed this conversation with you that you'd had with Mr. Monahan

15:33:35 25

26

at any stage?

27

A.

No.

28

Q. 669

Thanks, Mr. Smith.

29 15:33:44 30

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much, Mr. Smith.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:33:47

15:33:50

119 1 2

MR. QUINN: Thank you, Mr. Smith.

3 4

THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:33:51

15:34:43

120 1

MR. RICHARD LYNN CONTINUED TO GIVE EVIDENCE

2 3

TO MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS: Q. 670

MS. DILLON:

Thank you, Mr. Smith.

Mr. Richard Lynn, please.

4

Good afternoon, Mr. Lynn.

5

I think just before lunch we had come to on to deal with the events in the

6

meeting of May of 1992.

7

heard the evidence of Mr. Smith the previous witness?

Before that can I just ask you briefly.

You've

8

A.

Yes, Chairman, yeah.

9

Q. 671

And just the point that Mr. Smith was making in his evidence to the Tribunal.

15:34:59 10

That he recollected that there was -- there appeared to be a difference in

11

approach by Monarch in the rezoning leading up to the May 1992 meeting and

12

thereafter leading up to the November 1993 meeting.

13

Mr. Smith's recollection that there was a change in approach by Monarch?

14 15:35:21 15

Do you agree with

A.

Yes.

Q. 672

And Mr. Smith appeared to suggest to the Tribunal, and I'm sure I'll be

16

corrected if I'm incorrect in this.

17

There was a road show, there was literature, there was radio ads, television

18

ads leading up to the May 1992 meeting.

19

be none such, a much quieter approach appeared to be taken leading up to the

15:35:46 20

21

That there was a lot more activity.

And that thereafter there appeared to

November 1993 meeting and would you agree with that? A.

Certainly you to the 1992 position and especially the 14 weekends.

We had

22

brought the, our proposal to the attention of every member of the public who

23

wanted to see it, wanted to hear about it in an open forum where we laid

24

ourselves open to be questioned.

15:36:07 25

26

So as far as we were concerned, we had made the public aware as to what our

27

plans were.

28

local communities in the particular area.

29

meetings with a number of residents associations, etc. etc.

15:36:30 30

Thereafter, I think we more or less concentrated upon the actual And I recollect a number of And then also by

direct contact with the elected members, always keeping on board our contact Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:36:35

15:36:47

121 1 2

with the manager and the planners. Q. 673

So would it be fair to say that while leading up to the May 1992 meeting you

3

did have television advertisements, you didn't have any leading up to the

4

November '93 meeting?

5

A.

There was nothing to advertise after that.

6

Q. 674

And leading up to the May 1992 meeting there was apparently radio advertising

7

and newspaper publishments and that that didn't happen leading up to the

8

November '93 meeting?

9 15:37:00 10

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

Q. 675

And that the road show that had been prepared and organised by Mr. O'Herlihy

11

which took place in early 1992 for 14 weeks.

12

unsuccessful meeting in May 1992 leading up to November 1993?

13

A.

14

relation to it.

16

15:37:51 20

So it wasn't that it was totally gone but the concentration

of 14 weekends on a Friday, Saturday and a Sunday. Q. 676

18 19

Well there were occasions when we took out the model and took out the backing material plus the video to advise various local residents, local groups in

15:37:28 15

17

That wasn't replicated after the

Yes.

That wasn't replicated.

And it's also the position, is it not, that Mr. O'Herlihy's services

were not retained after the unsuccessful May 1992 meeting? A.

That is correct.

Q. 677

And is it also the position that in March 1993, leaving aside who would have

21

been the instigator of it, it was decided to retain the services of Mr. Frank

22

Dunlop?

23

A.

That is correct.

24

Q. 678

Would you have known Mr. Dunlop in your efforts around Dublin County Council

15:38:12 25

26

prior to March of 1993? A.

I certainly would have recognised him.

27

wasn't at that stage.

28

people or a number of projects.

29 15:38:20 30

Q. 679

And certainly --

A.

Yes.

I wouldn't be very close to him, I

I would have known that he represented a number of

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:38:21

15:38:37

122 1

Q. 680

-- you were involved in the council on behalf of Monarch from at the latest

2

stage at which you became involved publicly in the council would have been

3

November, December of 1990 when DP90/123 was by the council, isn't that right?

4

You'd have been at those meetings?

5

A.

I was at the October 1990 meeting, yes.

6

Q. 681

And also it would appear from Mr. Dunlop's evidence that Mr. Dunlop was also in

7

business in Dublin County Council in 1991 and would you have seen Mr. Dunlop

8

around the council offices at meetings?

9 15:38:54 10

A.

I certainly would have, yeah.

Q. 682

And would it be fair to say that Mr. Dunlop was engaged in the same type of

11

business that you were, although he was, if I could put it like this a gun for

12

hire although you were committed to one project?

13

A.

Yes, Chairman.

14

Q. 683

You were both lobbiests, isn't that right?

A.

Just part of my function was to make representations and seek support.

15:39:10 15

16

I

never held myself out to be a lobbiest.

17

Q. 684

Did you subsequently or set up in business in later years, Mr. Lynn?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 685

And as part of your function in the business you've set up involved in the same

15:39:26 20

type of activity in seeking to promote development both with the officials and

21

with councillors?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 686

Is that the area of expertise that you practice in?

24

A.

That's part of it.

Q. 687

Right.

A.

But what I do is I take charge of projects as distinct from just an isolated

15:39:36 25

26 27 28 29 15:39:57 30

lobbying for particular support for a particular lands. Q. 688

But would it be fair to say and again correct me if I'm wrong.

While you were

the project co-ordinator for the Monarch project insofar as you've outlined your function to the Tribunal, you appeared to be the person within Monarch who Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:40:00

15:40:11

123 1

had responsibility for face-to-face inter-reaction with the councillors?

2

A.

That's correct, in the main, in the main, yes.

3

Q. 689

And Mr. Reilly had a number of people that he has told the Tribunal he spoke

4

to.

Isn't that right?

5

A.

That's correct.

6

Q. 690

But they would have been in the minority in the overall list?

7

A.

In the overall yes I would accept that.

8

Q. 691

And the major responsibility for the inter-reaction with the councillors rested

9 15:40:18 10

11

on your shoulders? A.

That's correct.

Q. 692

And your job was a numbers job isn't that right insofar as the councillors were

12

concerned Mr. Lynn because what you had to achieve was you had to achieve

13

sufficient councillors voting for Monarch's proposals to achieve success.

14

Isn't that right?

15:40:34 15

A.

16

What I looked for at all stages and on all projects was the maximum support. And if I could get that as a unanimous support I would have accepted it.

17

Q. 693

Yes.

18

A.

So I wasn't just going on a numbers game.

19

Q. 694

Of course but what you needed in order to succeed was one vote more than a

15:40:54 20

split decision.

21

I was looking for maximum support.

Isn't that right? The Development Plan changes on a simple

majority?

22

A.

That's quite correct.

23

Q. 695

It's not like material contravention which at that stage required -- had a

24 15:41:05 25

26

different voting requirement, isn't that right? A.

Subject to corium, that's right.

Q. 696

So in this case what one was looking at, subject to corium as you say, was a

27 28

straight majority? A.

29 15:41:20 30

No, what I always looked for was the maximum support.

If I only got it by one

vote I would have also accepted that, that's right. Q. 697

Again, correct me if I'm wrong.

But the Tribunal has been told that on

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:41:24

15:41:42

124 1

occasion it can be as valuable that somebody abstains as votes against

2

something.

3

would agree to abstain is a valuable commodity?

4

A.

In other words, that somebody would agree not to vote against or

Well I suppose its value is you could have for half a vote you could equate it

5

if they're not voting for you or not voting against you.

6

damaging your position.

At least they're not

7

Q. 698

Whereas if they are voting against you they are damaging your position?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 699

While everybody in an ideal world would like 100 percent support 100 percent of

15:41:55 10

the time for every project that they have.

The reality is in a situation

11

where you involve politicians is that it's very, very rarely will you have a

12

unanimous decision.

I think you'd have accepted it?

13

A.

It's very seldom, yes.

14

Q. 700

So you would have known from the very start and leading into May of 1992 that

15:42:12 15

your job was to get a majority for the proposals that were acceptable to

16

Monarch.

Isn't that right?

17

A.

That's correct, Your Honour, yes.

18

Q. 701

You would also have known leading into the May 1992 meeting that there were 11

19 15:42:31 20

motions plus the manager's map that were going to be debated by the council? A.

Was it 11 or 13?

21

Q. 702

There were 11 motions that were on the 27th of May.?

22

A.

And two of them weren't moving I think.

23

Q. 703

Yes.

24

A.

I --

Q. 704

11 motions were listed.

26

A.

I was aware of all of the motions which were on agenda.

27

Q. 705

And you were also aware of the manager's proposals

28

A.

Yes, Chairman.

29

Q. 706

And you would have been fully armed with the level of difficulty that you could

15:42:41 25

15:42:53 30

have anticipated.

I'm talking about coming up to the meeting now?

Isn't that right? I mean, you'd have taken your soundings

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:42:57

15:43:07

125 1

and --

2

A.

Absolutely.

3

Q. 707

Yeah?

4

A.

You had depend upon the information that you could glean from talking to

5 6

As much as humanly possible.

people, interfacing with people etc. Q. 708

7

Now you couldn't get down on the floor of the chamber and speak for Monarch isn't that correct?

8

A.

That's correct.

9

Q. 709

You had to have somebody down there who was going to do that for you?

A.

I don't think they would be speaking for Monarch.

15:43:17 10

They would be speaking for

11

a project that you would have spoken to the individual councillor who would

12

agree to support it and would agree to move forward with a motion with it.

13

Q. 710

14 15:43:42 15

Let's have a look at 7144. submission item 1117.

I mean, this is the motion that's headed

Do you see the very first thing on that?

A.

Just wait until I get these.

16

Q. 711

On the motion.

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 712

And you know, Mr. Lynn, that item 1117 relates to submission 1117.

19 15:43:54 20

21

right? A.

Yes, yes.

Q. 713

And submission 1117 was the submission you put in to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown

22

County Council on the 2nd of December 1991.

23

A.

Well ...

24

Q. 714

You know the submission?

A.

On behalf of Monarch.

26

Q. 715

Of course.

27

A.

Well it could be.

28

Q. 716

Isn't that right?

29

A.

Yeah.

Q. 717

I think you put it in.

15:44:10 25

15:44:19 30

Isn't that

Isn't that right?

It's your letter that puts it in I think.? It's either myself or Fergal McCabe.

And that was the number that was allocated I think to

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:44:24

15:44:34

126 1 2

Monarch's submission by the council. A.

3

By management, yes, yes.

Isn't that right?

That's the reference.

One presumes that's the

correct reference.

4

Q. 718

That's right isn't it?

5

A.

That's correct.

6

Q. 719

So that when that motion is being drafted it's submission 1117 is what's being

7

considered.

8

of the above submission be zoned in accordance to the attached map and then

9

sets out further proposals, isn't that right?

15:44:51 10

11

Because the motion proposes that we propose the land the subject

A.

That's correct.

Q. 720

So the submission that's being made here and the support being sought for this

12

submission relates only to one submission made to Dublin County Council, which

13

is Monarch's submission?

14 15:45:02 15

A.

In relation to the Monarch lands, that's correct.

Q. 721

And the submission 1117 is the submission put in by you, prepared by your

16

professional team that's put in and the number that's assigned by Dublin County

17

Council?

18

A.

That's correct.

19

Q. 722

So when the motion is being prepared by Mr. Lydon or Mr. Hand or indeed by

15:45:16 20

yourself.

21

It's referred back at all stages to Monarch's submission that was

made to Dublin County Council. Isn't that right?

22

A.

That's right and it relates back to the land, that's correct.

23

Q. 723

So this is a submission or a motion that is in connection with Monarch's lands

24 15:45:30 25

26

isn't that correct? A.

That's correct.

Q. 724

And when this submission goes to the floor if it ever goes to the floor of the

27

chamber.

28

in favour of it?

29 15:45:41 30

The people who signed the submission in the normal course will speak

A.

Yeah, you would expect that, yes.

Q. 725

Right.

So would you have had much discussion with Mr. Lydon about the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:45:45

15:46:01

127 1

arguments he was going to prepare, he was going to make in support of Monarch's

2

position to his colleagues in Dublin County Council?

3

A.

Oh, yes.

I mean, I would have prepared a position paper putting the --

4

forward the arguments in favour of the -- of that proposal. And that would

5

have been distributed to most members of the council

6

Q. 726

And would you have had meetings with --

7

A.

I beg your pardon.

So most -- my way of doing business was that I kept

8

everybody as fully abreast of what we were trying to do as was possible.

9

that if people wanted to make a contribution from the floor and support it or

15:46:23 10

indeed as some of them did, oppose it, they would often use my arguments to

11 12

actually oppose. Q. 727

Insofar as Mr. Lydon is concerned. He's going to have to propose or second

13

this motion, if what's written on the face of the document is to be

14

implemented?

15:46:38 15

16

So

A.

That's correct.

Q. 728

So Mr. Lydon, or Mr. Hand, are going to have to propose it and speak to the

17

merits of it?

18

A.

That's right.

19

Q. 729

That's the way the business operates?

A.

That's correct.

Q. 730

So were you the person who prepared arguments or armed Mr. Lydon with the

15:46:46 20

21 22

information that would enable him to take this to the floor of the chamber?

23

A.

Not alone Mr. Lydon.

24

Q. 731

Of course?

A.

The answer is yes. But he would have got a copy of the bullet points which

15:47:00 25

26 27

would indicate the strong position in relation to the development of the lands. Q. 732

Yes.

And would you have sat down with Mr. Lydon and discussed the merits and

28

otherwise of the Monarch proposal and gone through the points in favour of it

29

or tried to anticipate the arguments that would be made against it with

15:47:21 30

Mr. Lydon? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:47:22

15:47:41

128 1

A.

2

Yes, certainly.

And with any member who would sit down with me, which was

most members.

3

Q. 733

Yes.

4

A.

Yes, it may -- both.

5

And similarly with Mr. Hand, if he was going to propose or second it? Both proposer and seconder and all of the rest of the

council.

6

Q. 734

Yes?

7

A.

They had to be informed as regards what was the content, you know, what was the

8 9

meaning behind the motion. Q. 735

15:47:51 10

Yes.

But the person who is going to make your case for you, if I can call it

that, on the floor of the chamber, is likely to be either Mr. Lydon or

11

Mr. Hand.

Isn't that right?

12

A.

That's correct, that's correct.

13

Q. 736

And of the two, would it be fair to say that it was more likely that Mr. Lydon

14

was the person who was going to have to bring the argument verbally to the

15:48:05 15

16

floor of the chamber? A.

17

Well that he signed the motion first it would appear that he would have moved the motion, providing he was in the chamber.

18

Q. 737

Yes.

19

A.

There's always a difficulty with a Senator signing a motion that he could have

15:48:18 20

been detained in the Senate.

21

Q. 738

But that didn't happen?

22

A.

No, no, that didn't happen.

23

Q. 739

On this occasion.

24

And again Mr. Lydon is a member of one political party

namely Fianna Fail and the late Mr. Hand was a member of a different political

15:48:33 25

party?

26

A.

Fine Gael.

27

Q. 740

Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that it was his view that a motion always had

28

a better chance of success if it was signed by representatives of either of the

29

major political parties.

15:48:45 30

A.

I would.

And would you agree with that?

And in subsequent motions that I was involved in, you would always Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:48:49

15:49:04

129 1

see that I sought to have cross party representations and always more than two

2

people if I could manage it.

3

Q. 741

Yes.

And would that be because as, and again disagree with this if you wish,

4

Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that if you had a member from each political

5

party.

6

members within their own party, as it were?

That person's signature on a motion was a matter of influence to the

7

A.

Well that would depend upon the particular member himself or herself.

8

Q. 742

Of course.

9 15:49:23 10

11

And more particularly, if the member was local to the particular

activity. A.

If you could have got that member to sign, that improves the situation further.

Q. 743

So the optimum position really is somebody from every political party who is

12

the local councillor, who are all local councillors, all supporting the motion?

13

A.

That's correct.

14

Q. 744

And in this particular case you have Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand who are both

15:49:43 15

relatively speaking local councillors. Isn't that correct?

16

A.

That's correct.

17

Q. 745

But they both represent the two major political parties?

18

A.

That's correct.

19

Q. 746

Would you have known of the general practice that certainly appears to have

15:49:53 20

taken place of the party, the political parties having party meetings in

21 22

advance of the full council meeting? A.

I would have known about the Fianna Fail meetings in Conways prior to council

23

meetings.

24

in the council chamber.

15:50:15 25

And I presumed that Fine Gael had similar meetings in their rooms

Q. 747

And while there doesn't --

26

A.

Adjacent to the council chamber.

27

Q. 748

While there doesn't appear to be agreement among all of the councillors who

28

have given evidence on this topic.

29

of the meeting at a minimum would have been to go down through the matter on

15:50:31 30

In general, it is agreed that the purpose

the agenda and discuss it and listen to the views of the local councillor. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:50:35

15:50:52

130 1 2

Would that have been what you understood what have happened at those meetings? A.

3 4

That is generally what would have happened at those meetings.

But again,

you'd have to say providing the member was present. Q. 749

5

Yes.

Would it also be the position that you would not have been in

attendance?

6

A.

No, no, as far as I know nobody save the.

7

Q. 750

Political party?

8

A.

Would have been in.

9

Q. 751

In attendance at those meetings?

A.

That's right.

11

Q. 752

Regardless of whether they were Fine Gael or Fianna Fail meetings?

12

A.

That's right, as I understand it yes.

13

Q. 753

Even if other people attended, you never attended any such meetings?

14

A.

No.

Q. 754

But you would have known of the existence of these such meetings.

15:50:59 10

15:51:07 15

And you

16

would have known one of the factors or features would have been the opinion of

17

the local councillor if they were present, would be canvassed in relation to

18

various motions?

19 15:51:25 20

A.

That would be correct, yes.

Q. 755

Now, would it be fair to say that you would have anticipated leading up to the

21

27th of May 1992.

22

meeting and it was going to be a difficult meeting of the council?

23

A.

24 15:51:38 25

That that meeting was going to be a fairly well fought

Oh, yes, yes, I would accept that. about it etc.

I mean, there had been such a campaign

It was bound to.

Q. 756

It was a high public profile?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 757

Rezoning.

28

A.

Absolutely.

29

Q. 758

And if it's all right with you, Mr. Lynn.

15:51:51 30

Isn't that right? Unless something magical happened and people couldn't turn up.

happened at the meeting first.

I would like to deal with what

And then I'll come back to deal with the

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:51:54

15:52:10

131 1

conversation that may or may not have happened with Mr. O'Herlihy.

2 3

Can I ask you to have a look at DP92/44.

4

And in effect, it I can call it this.

5

the manager's proposals for his variation.

6

he wanted to put before the council.

7203.

This is the manager's map.

While it's a map.

It was in effect

Isn't that right, Mr. Lynn, that

7

A.

I -- yes, Chairman, I think that's -- that is the accurate map, yes.

8

Q. 759

And you will see at the bottom.

9 15:52:35 10

It's quite difficult to reed underneath where

the legend is with the council. You will see DP92/44 isn't that right? A.

Yes, Chairman, yes.

11

Q. 760

And it's described as proposed zoning and motorway changes?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 761

26 and 27?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 762

For the 1991 Draft Development Plan.

15:52:43 15

16

place on the 27th of May 1992.

17

Isn't that right?

And in fact, at the meeting that took

That was the first matter that was voted on.

18

A.

That is correct.

19

Q. 763

Now, would it be fair to say, Councillor Lydon proposed that motion, if I can

15:53:01 20

call it that.

Proposed accepting the Manager's Report?

21

A.

That's correct.

22

Q. 764

Right.

23 24 15:53:15 25

26

Can the Tribunal take it from that, that had that vote been

successful, that Monarch would have been satisfied with that? A.

Yes, Chairman.

Q. 765

What the manager was proposing?

A.

Yes, Chairman.

In advocating support for the Cherrywood lands.

I was asking

27

members to support the County Manager's proposal.

28

Lydon's and Hand's, their proposal was a fall-back position.

29

the process is that you would generally know sometime in advance what way the

15:53:41 30

manager was in relation to various proposals. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

If you like, Councillor In actual fact,

And providing he came forward

15:53:49

15:54:11

132 1

with that, you then sought support for the manager's proposal, I suppose

2

providing you with --

3

Q. 766

Sorry.

You were in agreement -- by "you" do you mean everybody in Monarch was

4

in agreement that what should be supported was its the manager's proposal

5

DP92/44?

6

A.

7 8

So he and I were in agreement with what was acceptable to Monarch. Q. 767

9

Do you know whether the late Mr. Philip Monahan was happy with what the manager was proposing or whether he would have preferred that the Monarch motion would

15:54:32 10

11

The only one I reported in relation to votes and zoning etc. was Eddie Sweeney.

have been proceeded with? A.

Sorry, the answer to that is no.

Phil didn't take any actual personal

12

interest in the goings on of the council.

13

running etc. The person I, as I say, interfaced with, was as I say,

14

Mr. Sweeney.

15:55:01 15

Now, that could be that Mr. Sweeney was advising Mr. Monahan.

I never advised Mr. Monahan in relation to where we were, how we were going and

16 17

And the way the meetings were

what support we had or hadn't got. Q. 768

So you don't know whether or not Mr. Monahan's preference would have been for

18

the motion at 7144, which was signed by Councillors Lydon or Hand, or whether

19

he would have been happy with the manager's proposals, as contained in DP92/44?

15:55:24 20

A.

I would presume -- can I just say that there's very little difference in

21

development terms between what the County Manager was proposing and what, if

22

you like, Councillor Lydon's proposal was.

23

So, if one was happy with what Councillor Lydon was proposing, one would also

24

be happy with what the County Manager was proposing.

15:55:51 25

Q. 769

There's very little difference.

And at 7145, which is the map that's attached to Councillor Lydon's motion.

26

And if you just, if we could just turn that on its side if it's possible

27

please.

28

the matters that was being sought by Councillor Lydon in his motion was a C

29

zoning or a town centre zoning on a portion of the lands?

15:56:17 30

A.

Yes.

And I just want to draw to your attention there that one of

That was similar to what the County Manager had proposed in 1990. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:56:22

15:56:37

133 1

Q. 770

Yes, but on the manager's proposal on DP92/44 I think there's no proposal for a

2

town centre. But the manager in his report says because he's proposing a A1

3

shopping would come up in the Action Area Plan. Isn't that right?

4

A.

5

And the manager I think is in favour of a neighbourhood sized centre.

And I

think if you look at.

6

Q. 771

He is he not ruling out retail?

7

A.

No, it's just the size of retail.

8

Q. 772

And he's not specifying an area on his map on which there will be retail or

9 15:56:48 10

commercial zoning. Isn't that right? A.

No, but I think what the manager is doing is that he's -- if the manager's

11

proposal had been gone through there would have been an Action Area Plan and

12

then they would have decided where the various activities.

13

Q. 773

The neighbourhood activities?

14

A.

Would be placed.

15:57:06 15

in relation to retail, pure retail.

16 17

Well sorry.

Could I just say.

It's not a neighbourhood

That never prevented you having a

district centre capped as eventually happened for the retail capped. Q. 774

In other words, the rezoning of approximately 30 acres to the C zoning, the

18

retail element within that 30 acres was confined to neighbourhood centre until

19

the review took place in 1996.

15:57:27 20

A.

Absolutely.

Commenced in 1996?

Well until that was voted through.

The C zoning gave you --

21

there was a lot of other activities that could take place rather than other

22

than retail.

That would we would have been interested in.

23

Q. 775

It was effectively a commercial zoning?

24

A.

Exactly.

Q. 776

And in the manager's map which the manager was proposed on DP 92/44.

15:57:46 25

You'd have a retail park etc. What he

26

was saying was that any question of commercial or retail should be left over to

27

the area Action Plan?

28

A.

That's correct, that's correct.

29

Q. 777

Now, in the event the first matter that was put to the floor by Councillor

15:58:01 30

Lydon, do I understand was the manager's map and do I understand you that he Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:58:06

15:58:16

134 1

did so with your blessing and indeed on your instructions that you were happy

2

to proceed with that?

3

A.

4

No, no, sorry.

I can't instruct any member of any council.

I can only

request.

5

Q. 778

Yes.

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 779

By proposing the manager's map?

8

A.

That's correct.

9

Q. 780

Now, the effect of the manager's map would have been to increase the area of

15:58:27 10

lands zoned residential and that you would have had the benefit of an Action

11 12

But you would have requested him and he acceded to your request?

Area Plan, in summary? A.

That's correct.

It would have taken in the agriculturally zoned lands into

13

residential and it would have allowed.

14

whether it's here, was the density, I thought that the manager had actually

15:58:44 15

It's surprising -- I don't know

gone for normal density under the -- under an A1.

But I'm sorry --

16

Q. 781

I think that if you were to look at the Manager's Report?

17

A.

It appears on the 13th of May.

18

Q. 782

13th of May '92.

19

A.

Per acre.

Q. 783

Saying that.

21

A.

-- proposing that but I came across it last night.

22

Q. 784

In his report that speaks to DP92/44 he continues with the theme of low

15:59:03 20

23 24 15:59:12 25

He says four houses.

I think I may have said yesterday I never recollected him --

density? A.

He does.

Q. 785

And what he appears to have been proposing on DP92/44 was Action Area Plan and

26

extend the residential zoning but keep the density at four houses to the acre?

27

A.

That's correct.

28

Q. 786

And this was being put forward then to the council by Councillor Lydon and

29 15:59:28 30

seconded by Councillor McGrath. A.

That's correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

15:59:28

15:59:43

135 1

Q. 787

2 3

Can I ask you, did you discuss with Councillor McGrath that he would second the manager's proposals?

A.

No, Chairman. There wouldn't be a need to do that.

4

could have come from anywhere.

5

first one whose voice was recorded.

Any -- that seconding

It was just that Councillor McGrath was the It's not unusual.

6

Q. 788

You didn't make any arrangement with Councillor McGrath?

7

A.

No.

8

Q. 789

That he would support that?

9

A.

You can take it that I made representations to Councillor McGrath in relation

15:59:56 10

to the overall development of the Cherrywood etc.

He would have been au fait

11

with it etc. but particularly the second account, the County Manager's

12

proposal, no, I didn't ask him.

13

Q. 790

14

And can the Tribunal take it, Mr. Lynn, that you would have been aware because the manager's map was being voted first.

16:00:20 15

fours with the Monarch motion.

And it had, while it wasn't on all

It was a slightly watered down version of the

16

Monarch's motion if the manager's map fell then it was likely that your motion

17

would be unsuccessful?

18

A.

Absolutely.

19

Q. 791

And then you were into the vista of all of the motions which had as their

16:00:33 20

object, keeping the residential density most of them at two houses to the acre

21 22

with the exception of Councillor Gilmore's motion. A.

23 24

That was the thinking behind it, yes.

I think they were two houses to the hectare and one house to the acre would have been worse.

Q. 792

16:00:50 25

So would you then have been very aware of the on the 27th of May of the fact that if the manager's map DP90/244 fell you were unlikely to succeed with your

26

motion and that you were then facing a situation where the councillors would be

27

voting on whether to keep the residential density at one house per acre?

28 29 16:01:14 30

A.

Well what I was conscious of and when you look over the motions etc. there was a number of things.

If the manager's fell and we didn't move to -- if

Councillor Lydon didn't move the first motion, what was then sought to do was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

16:01:19

16:01:33

136 1

to defeat all of the succeeding motions save Councillor Gilmore's motion, which

2

was to put a C zoning on it.

3

Q. 793

Uh-huh.

4

A.

Now, I've heard people say it was a disastrous day and it was a terrible day.

5

To give us 25 acres of C zoning, is a remarkably successful day.

6

Q. 794

Uh-huh.

7

A.

We may not have been successful in residential terms but we were successful in

8

commercial terms.

9

would develop and the surprising thing is that the -- I can't -- the first

16:01:55 10

And that decision determined that the Cherrywood lands

number of motions were either one house per acre or two houses per hectare.

11

Some applied exclusively to the Monarch lands and some embraced the Monarch

12

lands and other lands.

13

Councillor Barrett's motion, the very last motion was allowed to be taken in

14

relation to the Monarch lands because the council had already decided that

16:02:21 15

16

And that they were defeated.

I still don't know how

whatever else was to go on the lands one house per acre was not to go on it. Q. 795

Because your argument would be that the council in voting down the other low

17

density motions, some of which included the Monarch lands.

18

included the Monarch plus some other lands?

19 16:02:38 20

Some of which

A.

That's correct.

Q. 796

None of them were exactly on all fours with the acreage on Mr. Barrett's motion

21

but your argument would have been that the council had already made its

22

decision?

23

A.

24

That's it. It was similar.

I think it comes up on the minutes.

Clarification was sought at that meeting that if Councillor Barrett's motion

16:02:54 25

was passed did it effect councillor --

26

Q. 797

Gilmore's motion?

27

A.

Councillor Gilmore's motion.

And the manager assured the meeting that

28

Councillor Gilmore's motion because it was passed, was sacrosanct and it wasn't

29

effected by anything.

16:03:14 30

Despite the fact that Councillor Barrett's motion

embraced the area as to where the C zoning was. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

16:03:16

16:03:25

137 1

Q. 798

And the manager --

2

A.

I beg your pardon.

3

Q. 799

Yes.

4

A.

To the rest of the lands.

5

Q. 800

And I think that subsequently Councillor Lydon at a subsequent meeting

I couldn't understand why the same ruling didn't apply.

6

attempted to reopen that entire issue to the manager in public, isn't that

7

right?

8

A.

He did.

9

Q. 801

And did he do so at your behest and following a discussion with you?

A.

He certainly had a discussion with me and he had a discussion with other

16:03:38 10

11

members of the council who would have been more au fait with standing orders.

12

And I think for a number of meetings the meeting of the, whatever date it is,

13

27th of May.

14

Q. 802

16:03:59 15

I think it was done by Councillor Lydon on your behalf because if you look at the letter I think that indeed you sent to Mr. Gilliese on the 17th of December

16

at 8837.

17

Gilliese of the 10th of June and "would advise the matter we discussed was

18

raised at the council meeting on Friday 12th of June by Senator Don Lydon on

19

our behalf".

16:04:20 20

You will just note there, this is your letter it refers to Mr.

Do you see that?

A.

Yes.

21

Q. 803

So that would mean that when Senator Lydon on the 12th of June?

22

A.

Is this my letter or Eddie Sweeney's?

23

Q. 804

Well you've signed it, at 8838.

24

A.

Oh, yes I accept that.

Q. 805

So it would appear then when Councillor Lydon sought to reopen the entire

16:04:31 25

That's your signature.

26

matter as to whether Councillor Barrett's motion was successful at a subsequent

27

meeting of the council on the 12th of June 1992.

He did so at your request?

28

A.

At my request, yes, yes.

29

Q. 806

So that if you had intended to indicate to the Tribunal a few moments ago that

16:04:55 30

he hadn't done it at your request, that's not the intention you intended to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

16:04:56

16:05:10

138 1 2

convey, that he had reopened it at your request? A.

Well he had reopened it at my request.

But he also I know had had discussions

3

with other members of the council in relation to the protocol that had applied

4

to the particular meeting.

5

Q. 807

Yes.

So that the position that pertained then was that Councillor Lydon

6

signed the motion on behalf of Monarch and thereafter he proposed the manager's

7

motion which was unsuccessful.

8

And then Councillor Lydon, at your request, or on your behalf, reopened the

9

issue with the County Manager at a meeting of the 12th of June '92 and was

16:05:34 10

Councillor Barrett's motion was successful.

again unsuccessful in trying to upset Councillor Barrett's motion, is that

11

correct?

12

A.

And I think even subsequent though that.

13

Q. 808

He would have done so according to your correspondence on the 17th of June 1992

14 16:05:49 15

at your request? A.

Maybe not my exclusive request.

16

Q. 809

On behalf of Monarch?

17

A.

Anything that I did was on behalf of Monarch, yes.

18

Q. 810

So at the meeting, were you surprised by the fact that the manager's map was

19 16:06:03 20

Certainly I requested him to do so.

defeated? A.

I must say I was.

21

Q. 811

Were you --

22

A.

Normally speaking, if the manager makes a proposal, normally speaking, if the

23

manager's proposal will be accepted.

24

occasion that it had happened in relation to the Cherrywood lands.

16:06:20 25

Unfortunately, this was the second If you

look at the whole gambit of the County Council and the various proposals that

26

the manager had, you will find a very high proportion of what the manager's

27

proposals was accepted by the members.

28 29 16:06:40 30

Q. 812

At 3720, please, it's the vote.

Now, you would have done your figures or your

numbers even though you don't like me using the word numbers, on this before the vote took place, Mr. Lynn. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

16:06:42

16:06:56

139 1

A.

2

Well certainly I felt that there was sufficient support for the County Manager's proposal.

3

Q. 813

Right.

4

A.

I was very surprised that the manager's motion was lost.

5

Q. 814

Does that mean that somebody who had promised you support didn't come through

6 7

Now, were you surprised therefore with losing the manager's motion?

on the day? A.

Well you're never sure of anybody's vote until they actually vote, but

8

certainly I reckoned that we had sufficient support in the council throughout

9

that the manager's proposal would be accepted.

16:07:17 10

11

Q. 815

And who do you think let you down?

A.

Oh, Chairman, it's a matter for the councillors to vote whichever way they want

12

to vote.

I can't say who let me down.

13 14 16:07:34 15

CHAIRMAN: A.

Yes.

But who said they would give support and then didn't?

Well, you can't rely upon the people who say I'll support that.

I mean,

16

basically what some people say I will support and some people say I'll look at

17

it.

And some people will say I'll make up my mind on the day.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

16:07:55 20

councillors in particular who indicated they would support but then either

21 22

Well do you recall anyone in particular or any number of

didn't turn up or voted against? A.

I would say, no, Chairman, I couldn't.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

Ms. Dillon, it's ten past four.

16:08:10 25

26

MS. DILLON:

Yes, sir.

We have a little bit of a problem.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

We could sit at ten o'clock tomorrow.

29 16:08:16 30

MS. DILLON:

The difficulty we have.

We have a very elderly witness listed

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

16:08:20

16:08:31

140 1

for half past ten who is over 80 years of age.

2

assurance.

3

breaking at half past ten.

And we have given an

If Mr. Lynn is happy to start at ten and provided he doesn't mind

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

Because that's a fairly short witness.

6 7

MS. DILLON:

Yes but there are four other witnesses listed, one of whom has

8

already been adjourned twice.

9 16:08:39 10

CHAIRMAN:

11

witnesses --

All right. We'll see how we go in the morning.

Some of those

12 13

MS. DILLON:

14

cross-examination, we would be hopeful we could resume and conclude with Mr.

16:08:52 15

Will be very very short.

We would, subject to everything,

Lynn's evidence tomorrow, if we can resume him approximately around 12.30.

16 17

CHAIRMAN:

You mean 12.30?

18 19 16:09:04 20

MS. DILLON:

If we could start Mr. Lynn at at ten and finish the present issue

and resume his evidence around 12.30 we should finish early afternoon with Mr.

21

Lynn subject to any cross-examination.

22

Now, I don't know how that would effect my colleagues.

23 24 16:09:20 25

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, this is, I'm not making any criticism.

slightly news to us.

This is

We have been assured if Mr. Lynn wasn't finished today

26

he may resume next Wednesday.

It may be that Mr. Lynn has commitments for

27

tomorrow. Tomorrow doesn't particularly suit me but I can rearrange things and

28

be here.

29 16:09:32 30

CHAIRMAN:

Well does it matter to us whether, to the Tribunal does it doesn't

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

16:09:37

16:09:47

141 1

matter a great deal whether it's tomorrow or --

2 3

MS. DILLON:

Well it's just it's always preferable to finish the witness that

4

you've started. Leaving that aside and it's not a material matter.

5 6

MR SANFEY:

7

will be some little time with Mr. Lynn.

8

certainly need some time.

9

examine Mr. Lynn.

16:10:06 10

Can I just say also, Chairman.

In ease of Ms. Dillon.

That I

I don't think very long but I'll

Mr. O'Higgins, I anticipate may well want to

I know that Mr. O'Tuathail may also, on behalf of Senator

Lydon, may want it examine so re-examination may take some time.

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

13

Wednesday.

All right. So then, Ms. Dillon, we will a leave it until

14 16:10:15 15

MS. DILLON:

Wednesday, we don't have available to us because Mr. Dunlop and

16

Mr. Fox are especially fixed for Tuesday and have been for some time.

I think

17

Senator Lydon is now fixed and has some commitments that he has to attend to on

18

Wednesday.

19 16:10:29 20

Would Monday be at all a possibility?

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

It's not a possibility.

23 24 16:10:41 25

MR. O'HIGGINS: Mr. Chairman, I won't be I'm sure more than five minutes. doubt I'll be as much as five minutes with Mr. Lynn.

I

But I am keen to examine

26

him when he does give evidence.

I certainly have difficulties as the Tribunal

27

seems to have on Wednesday.

28

do it tomorrow but that seems to be a difficulty for Mr. Sanfey.

29

certainly be able to deal with anything tomorrow that needed to be dealt with.

Certainly, I would be delighted to see Mr. Lynn

16:11:02 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

I would

16:11:02

16:11:16

142 1

MS. DILLON:

2

question.

3 4

A.

If Mr. Lynn was available tomorrow, I suppose that's the first

Is Mr. Lynn available tomorrow?

I have to re-organise.

I have to re organise.

I have some meetings arranged

for tomorrow on the basis that I was supposed to be down for next Wednesday.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

Well then, I think the simplest thing then is to put Mr. Lynn back

7

to next week and see if you can arrange with his counsel and with other counsel

8

a suitable day.

9 16:11:27 10

MS. DILLON:

May it please you, sir.

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

If necessary, we can start very early some morning next week.

13 14

MS. DILLON:

Uh-huh.

16:11:36 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

In order to facilitate everyone.

17 18

MS. DILLON:

19

been made.

If I could indicate you in the morning the arrangements that have

16:11:44 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

Half ten tomorrow without Mr. Lynn.

22 23

MS. DILLON:

That would appear to be the position. Thank you.

MR SANFEY:

Thank you very much.

MS. DILLON:

Thank you.

24 16:11:50 25

26 27 28 29 16:11:52 30

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL FRIDAY 14th JULY 2006 AT 10.30 AM Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

17:05:11

17:05:20

143 1 2

The proceed

3 4

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, Friday, 14th July, 2006,

5

at 10:30 a.m..

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 666

08:47:36

09:48:37

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON FRIDAY,

2

14TH JULY, 2006, AT 9:45 A.M.:

3 4

MR. QUINN: Good morning, Sir.

5

Sean Dunne, please.

6 7

MR. SEAN DUNNE, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED

8

BY MR. QUINN AS FOLLOWS:

9 09:49:06 10

CHAIRMAN:

Good morning, Mr. Dunne.

11

A.

Good morning, Judge.

12

Q. 1

MR. QUINN: Good morning, Mr. Dunne.101If I could have 9052.

Mr. Dunne, you

13

were written to on the 13th of June 2006.

14

provided with a copy of an extract from Mr. Dunlop's interview with the

09:49:23 15

Tribunal legal team.

And you were advised and you were

As you will see there on screen that Mr. Dunlop advised

16

the Tribunal that he made a contribution of 1,000 pounds to Betty Coffey on

17

behalf of Berland Homes.

18 19

Elsewhere he talks about the money being paid on your behalf.

09:49:38 20

He thought in

1991 during the Local Elections, and you were asked for a statement in relation

21

to that.

And at 8852 I think on the 14th of June 2006 you provided a

22

statement to the Tribunal in relation to that payment.

Isn't that right?

23

A.

That's correct, Judge.

24

Q. 2

I wonder could you tell the Tribunal your recollection of the circumstances

09:49:56 25

26

surrounding that payment? A.

My recollection of the payment was that Berland was a company with a number of

27

shareholders.

28

Davy Stockbrokers represented one particular group.

29

Fund represented another group.

09:50:24 30

It was three groups of shareholders who had come together. The Merchant Navy Pension

And I was the third group.

In the Davy

Group was Oisin O'Buchalla, who is a brother-in-law of Betty Coffey's. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

And we

09:50:31

09:50:45

2 1

were approached as a company by Oisin O'Buchalla would we make a payment to her

2

political campaign and we acceded it to that request.

3

Q. 3

And was that a sum of 1,000 pounds?

4

A.

It was, indeed.

5

Q. 4

Now, Mr. Dunlop had a recollection that he actually made the payment on your

6

behalf and recouped the money from you.

7

case?

8

A.

9

Can you recall if that is in fact the

I doubt if it's the case but I wouldn't be certain.

The reason I doubt it's

the case is because as a company structure with three different shareholders

09:51:02 10

and with Davy shareholders there was a board of four.

We had an independent

11

Chairman and every payment over 500 pounds had to have board approval.

So my

12

understanding is that the payment came up at board was approved, was

13

recommended and I therefore believed that the cheque would have been signed by

14

the company.

09:51:21 15

16

The cheque may have been handed to Mr. Dunlop to give to Betty Coffey but I

17

would think it was passed on directly.

18

Q. 5

19

retained by Berland and/or you, to do some PR work in relation to the

09:51:38 20

21

I think Mr. Dunlop has advised the Tribunal that at that time he had been

development. A.

That's right.

Is that right? But Frank Dunlop was never retained by me or never worked for

22

me.

23

relation to St. Helen's House.

24

which was the old Christian Brothers at St. Helen's in Stillorgan in 1989.

09:52:00 25

Frank Dunlop was retained by Berland on some PR consultancy work in When we acquired -- we acquired 70 acres,

There was a local residence group that were very concerned about the

26

preservation of St. Helen's House.

27

waged to save St. Helen's House.

28

publicity because the perception in the press was that we were some how seeking

29

to destroy St. Helen's House.

09:52:24 30

So there was a political campaign being And it was drawing a lot of negative

And on the recommendation of Mr. Mark

Fitzgerald, who was our estate agent at the time. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

He recommended that we

09:52:29

09:52:43

3 1

employ Frank Dunlop.

2

Frank Dunlop never worked for me, if any capacity.

3

Q. 6

4 5

Yes.

So it was the company that employed Frank Dunlop.

And in fact I think in his statement you'll have seen that he says that

you fell out or you had a disagreement himself and yourself. A.

No, no, we never had a disagreement.

6

getting close to a currency crisis.

7

Houses weren't selling.

8

percent between 1990 and 1992.

9

afford.

09:53:07 10

Q. 7

11

Okay.

Is that correct?

People forget that in 1992 we were

The economy was in a very bad state.

I can confirm house prices dropped by about 20 Frank just became an expense that we couldn't

So it would be wrong to say we fell out. And we're talking about a period I think the Local Election in 1991.

June '91, isn't that right?

12

A.

Uh-huh, that's correct.

13

Q. 8

Do you have any recollection of money being given to Mr. Dunlop in relation to

14

Betty Coffey? In other words, do you have any recollection of the cheque being

09:53:23 15

16

given to Mr. Dunlop to be given to Ms. Coffey? A.

It may have happened that way but it could have happened that way.

I wouldn't

17

be sure.

18

that was written and it wasn't a Frank Dunlop cheque that we repaid Frank

19

Dunlop.

09:53:42 20

Q. 9

21 22

09:54:00 25

A.

It came through Oisin O'Buchalla, who was a shareholder of the Davy Group of investors and who is a brother-in-law of Mr. Coffey's.

Q. 10

Thank you very much, Mr. Dunne?

A.

Not at all.

26 27

And the request for the payment didn't come through Mr. Dunlop, it came through another member of the group?

23 24

But I -- if I had to bet I would bet that it was a company cheque

CHAIRMAN: A.

Thank you very much, Mr. Dunne.

Not at all, Judge.

28 29

WITNESS THEN WITH DREW.

09:54:15 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

09:54:15

09:54:26

4 1

MS. O'RAW:

I think Mr. Harvey has representation.

2 3

MR. CAHILL: Chairman, I appear instructed by Mr. Harvey Thomas by Montgomery

4

and sons solicitors of Dun Laoghaire.

5

behalf.

And I would seek representation on his

6 7

CHAIRMAN: Very good.

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

09:54:51

09:55:26

5 1

MR. WILLIAM HARVEY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED

2

BY MS. O'RAW AS FOLLOWS:

3 4 5

MS. O'RAW: Good morning, Mr. Harvey. A.

6 7

Good morning. CHAIRMAN:

Q. 11

Good morning, Mr. Harvey

MS. O'RAW: Thank you very much for coming in this morning.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

This lady here is Ms. O'Raw.

Do you see her there?

09:55:36 10

11

Q. 12

12

MS. O'RAW: Mr. Harvey, I'll be asking you the questions this morning. think you were a county councillors since about 1974; is that correct?

13

A.

That's correct. Yes.

14

Q. 13

And you continued on as a member of the County Council until 1991?

A.

That's right.

16

Q. 14

Is that right?

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 15

And I think you reside at and your constituency was within the Dun

09:55:50 15

19 09:56:01 20

Laoghaire/Rathdown area? A.

Correct. Yes.

21

Q. 16

And I think by profession you are an auctioneer and valuer.

22

A.

I was, yes.

23

Q. 17

So therefore you'd be familiar with property and land and land values.

24 09:56:13 25

26

29 09:56:42 30

Is

that correct? A.

Yeah, more or less.

Q. 18

And would you have had an interest in development, particularly in your own

27 28

I

area? A.

Well, no particular interests.

If it was my own area or in an area that I

didn't represent but some development would come up for planning, I would ask those councillors who represented that area on what they wanted. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

09:56:48

09:56:59

6 1

Q. 19

Yes.

2

A.

And they would, I would chat with them and then I may support it, I may not

3 4

support it. Q. 20

5 6

lands. A.

7 8

Yes.

And the lands that we're dealing with at this present time, the Monarch You would have been familiar with those lands yourself, would you?

Well not terribly because that only came on, like, at the tail end of my time with the council.

Q. 21

9

Yes.

Because I finished in '91.

I see. The Tribunal asked you to provide a statement and you provided a

statement to the Tribunal.

09:57:21 10

If we could have page 8899, please.

And you said

in that statement that you "never had any meetings with any servants or agents

11

of Monarch Properties Limited, Monarch Properties Services Limited or any

12

company in the Monarch Group.

13

servant or agent of the above-mentioned companies.

14

aware that various developers had a habit of congregating outside the council

09:57:45 15

You have never had any direct contact with any But you would have been

chamber during your tenure as a local councillor."

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 22

That's correct?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 23

You said that you "have never had any contact or meetings with Philip Monahan,

09:57:54 20

Richard Lynn, Eddie Sweeney, Dominic Glennane, Philip Reilly, or Mr. Jack

21

Whelan or any individual or company associated with Mr. Monahan or the Monaghan

22

Group and that you have never had any direct contact or meetings with Mr. Frank

23

Dunlop but you would have peripherally known him at the time when he was

24

Government Secretary to Mr. Jack Lynch."

09:58:16 25

26

Is that correct?

A.

That's correct.

Q. 24

And you've also said that you "have never to your knowledge had any payments or

27

benefits from any of the individuals or companies mentioned in the paragraphs

28

that the Tribunal had asked about and -- but you noted in Mr. Smith's letter a

29

payment of 600 pounds."

09:58:36 30

And you say in your statement that you have no

recollection in relation to that payment of 600 pounds. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

And you have no

09:58:40

09:58:58

7 1

records in relation to that.

Is that the case?

2

A.

That's the case, yes.

3

Q. 25

If I could take you very briefly to page 6886, please.

These particular

4

lands, the Monarch lands, in the 1983 Development Plan, they were both

5

residentially zoned and agriculturally zoned.

6

screen there beside you, Mr. Harvey.

There's a document up on the

I'm not too sure if you can see it?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 26

And if we can -- if we can rotate that, please, clockwise.

9 09:59:23 10

11

And if you can see

there, Mr. Harvey? A.

Yes.

Q. 27

That there's a line going through the centre of those lands.

That was a

12

proposed line for the Southeastern Motorway.

13

side of that line, that was zoned for residential development on septic tank.

14

So it had a low density?

09:59:43 15

16

A.

Uh-huh.

Q. 28

The zoning there residential density.

17

And anywhere to the right-hand

And any of the lands to the left-hand

side of that, that was agriculturally zoned?

18

A.

Uh-huh.

19

Q. 29

Can you recall that?

A.

No, I can't really because at that particular time that wasn't my area.

21

Q. 30

Right.

22

A.

I was representing Dun Laoghaire.

23

Q. 31

Yes.

24

A.

And that was outside the Dun Laoghaire Borough area at the time.

Q. 32

I see.

26

A.

That was before the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council came into being.

27

Q. 33

Yes.

09:59:51 20

10:00:04 25

Now, in October of 1990 the manager presented to the councillors at a

28

council meeting, 6930, please.

29

And that was map DP90/123.

10:00:36 30

He presented to the councillors a draft map. This is a meeting at which you attended.

you can see your name on the bottom of that list on the left-hand side. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

I think You

10:00:43

10:01:11

8 1

attended that meeting.

And the manager presented a map at that meeting.

2

we could have 6937, please.

3

I know it's difficult to see, but down at the bottom right hand side there's an

4

outlined version and it is marked with red stripes through it, the Monarch

5

lands.

6

those lands, you can see a dark shade of red within those lines, that dark

7

shade of red was for industrial zoning and there's a lighter shade of red

8

underneath that and that was for town centre.

And this is a copy of that particular map.

If

And

And what was being proposed within that at the time was that some of

9 10:01:31 10

Now, that was what was being proposed by the manager at that meeting.

And

11

there was a discussion about that particular map at a further meeting on the

12

16th of November 1990.

You also attended at that meeting.

13

have page 6949, please.

And if we go to the two last paragraphs of that page,

14

please.

10:02:09 15

And if we could

And again, the manager went through that particular plan, that draft

plan, that map, DP90/123, discussed it with the councillors.

And there was a

16

discussion by the councillors in relation to it.

17

discussion.

18

Your name is mentioned as being one of the contributors to that debate.

19

you recall what your opinion was in relation to those particular lands at that

10:02:37 20

And you contributed to that

If you can see on the third line down in that last paragraph. Do

time?

21

A.

No, I've no recollection, no.

22

Q. 34

Would you in general have been in favour of development on those lands or

23 24

otherwise? A.

10:02:56 25

Well if the councillors represented that area satisfied me that what they were looking for was fair enough, I would support it.

26

Q. 35

Yes.

27

A.

You know, otherwise I wouldn't support it or I would have abstained.

28

Q. 36

Yeah.

29

A.

No, I can't.

Q. 37

What your opinion?

10:03:10 30

But you can't recall at that particular time?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:03:11

10:03:32

9 1

A.

No.

2

Q. 38

Likewise, there was a meeting on the 6th of December 1990.

6952.

3

that map DP90/123 was discussed at that meeting.

4

relation to that map.

5

that the manager had presented.

6

against that particular map.

7

1983 plan with the various changes that had occurred since then.

8

result of that, the manager was asked to prepare further maps.

9

further maps.

10:04:03 10

Again,

And there was a vote in

And the councillors rejected that particular draft map And you were one of the councillors who voted

The motion there at the time was to adopt the

They were maps No. 26 and No. 27.

And as a He did prepare

And they were noted by the

council at a meeting then later in January 1991.

11 12

Then a further map was prepared by the manager.

13

DP90/129A.

14

May 1991.

10:04:38 15

And this was map No.

This was presented and discussed by the councillors on the 24th of And if we could have page 7003, please.

on the 24th of May 1991.

Again, you were present

At this particular council meeting and at that

16

meeting map DP90/129A was presented.

17

amendments, is at 7019, please.

18

there is an increase in the residential density there.

19

outwards in the line of the Southeastern Motorway, a shift further westwards.

10:05:18 20

And also a shift

the motorway or the density of the residential zoning?

22

A.

No, I've no recollection, no.

23

Q. 39

Okay.

10:05:37 25

And you see what the manager is proposing

Can you recall if you had any particular view at that time about the line of

21

24

That map which was the manager's

You did contribute in relation to that particular meeting.

The

manager at that meeting gave various different options to the councillors. The options were that they would go with this new map that he was proposing,

26

DP90/129A.

27

would choose the other maps that he had prepared, maps 26 and maps 27.

28

the first of those options, the option that they would go with this new map,

29

DP/90/129A, was put on a vote to the councillors.

10:06:12 30

That they would go with the old map, DP90/123.

Or that they

And that was rejected or

you voted against that particular motion to go with this DP90/129A. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

It was

And

10:06:19

10:06:33

10 1

accepted by the councillors but you were one of the councillors that voted

2

against.

3

particular map?

You cannot recall, can you, what your view was in relation to this

4

A.

No, but I, I imagine that I had some discussion with the councillors --

5

Q. 40

Yes.

6

A.

-- of the area.

7

Q. 41

Yes.

8

A.

And that's probably why I ...

9

Q. 42

Would you have had a view about the density, Mr. Harvey?

A.

Oh, I would have.

11

Q. 43

On the lands?

12

A.

I would have at that time, yes.

13

Q. 44

At that time?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 45

In general, can you recall were you in favour of increasing density or reducing

10:06:45 10

10:06:50 15

16

And I wasn't too happy of what their response was.

density on the lands or was that led by what you were ...

17

A.

Well I can't remember too well what the councillors of the area had told me.

18

Q. 46

Yes.

19

A.

But they must have put me off somewhere, some way, yes.

Q. 47

They must have put you off, is that what you said?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 48

Yes.

23

A.

Because I couldn't agree with them and I voted against it.

24

Q. 49

Yes.

A.

I did, yeah.

26

Q. 50

Again in June 1991?

27

A.

Uh-huh.

28

Q. 51

And now, if we could have page 3252, please.

10:07:12 20

10:07:23 25

29 10:07:43 30

13. A.

I think you went up for election then for the local government?

If we can concentrate on that.

Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

Half way down that page, at row

10:07:44

10:08:06

11 1

Q. 52

This is from one of the Monarch accounts books.

And within that accounts

2

books they say that there was a payment on the 5th of the 6th '91 to Bill

3

Harvey, Fianna Fail, cheque No. 3612 for 600 pounds.

4

A.

Who's it supposed to come from?

5

Q. 53

This comes from the Monarch's books of accounts.

6

Monarch's books of accounts.

7

Harvey, who I presume would be yourself?

8

A.

Yeah, uh-huh.

9

Q. 54

In June of 1991.

10:08:24 10

yourself.

And according to these

They say that there was a cheque payable to Bill

And that there was a cheque for 600 pounds payable to

Do you recall that at all?

11

A.

No, no, no.

12

Q. 55

Do you recall being approached by anybody from Monarch asking you if you would

13 14 10:08:42 15

16

like a donation in relation to it? A.

No, I didn't seek any finance from them nor did I get any.

Q. 56

Yeah.

A.

No, if I had been offered something I would have said well it was for election

You don't recall getting any?

17

expenses I might have accepted it.

18

coming to me for that amount.

19 10:08:57 20

But I have no recollection of any cheque

Q. 57

I see.

A.

And I have been looking up some records and I can't see -- if I got a cheque I

21

would have lodged it to my account.

And if I went back over records there was

22

no lodgement for 600 pounds around about that time.

23

Q. 58

Yes.

24

A.

Don't recall receiving any cheque, no, no.

Q. 59

Yeah.

10:09:20 25

26 27

10:09:45 30

Is it a case of you don't have a recollection or do you feel that you

definitely didn't receive this cheque? A.

28 29

So do you feel, therefore, that you didn't receive this cheque?

I definitely didn't get any. anybody.

I never looked for any financial aid from

I always -- I always funded my own election expenses.

Q. 60

Um. Do you recall any unsolicited cheques being received by you?

A.

No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:09:46

10:09:59

12 1

Q. 61

No.

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 62

Mr. Harvey, can I ask, in relation to your experience at the council chambers

4

and so on.

Do you recall any payments being made or do you remember hearing

5

of any payments being made to any councillors by any developers?

6

A.

Well, there were all sorts of rumours going about.

7

Q. 63

Uh-huh.

8

A.

You wouldn't believe 'em all.

9

Q. 64

You wouldn't.

A.

Well, some of them I did, yes.

10:10:16 10

11 12

Q. 65

So would it be correct to say that you were aware of payments being made to councillors?

A.

10:10:34 15

16

But they didn't concern me so I just minded my

own business.

13 14

Did you believe some of them?

Well, if -- I heard it from time to time that money passed from hand to hand all right.

Q. 66

17

Yes.

And were you aware that those monies or did those monies come from

developers?

18

A.

Well, I can't see them coming from anybody else.

19

Q. 67

So you are aware of money being paid by developers to councillors --

10:10:52 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

Well he said -- I think Mr. Harvey said he was aware of rumours.

22 23

MS. O'RAW: Aware of rumours.

24 10:11:02 25

CHAIRMAN:

From the actual ...

26 27

Q. 68

28 29 10:11:18 30

MS. O'RAW: In relation to your -- you hearing rumours about payments to councillors, did you ever discuss that with any of the other councillors?

A.

No.

Q. 69

No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:11:19

10:11:41

13 1

A.

No.

2

Q. 70

No.

3

A.

Oh, God now.

And from whom did you hear these rumours about? Because it -- in the late '80s and early '90s, well I wasn't

4

thereafter '91.

5

Exchange.

The lobby in Dublin County Council was like the London Stock

6

Q. 71

Yes.

7

A.

You know, you had to beat your way through the crowd to get into the chamber to

8 9 10:11:48 10

a meeting. Q. 72

Yeah.

A.

And there was so many people there, so many developers and developer's agents

11

and all the rest that I couldn't say where I got the rumours from or where, who

12

told me.

13

Q. 73

Uh-huh.

14

A.

I couldn't say.

10:12:05 15

16

I couldn't point at one individual and say he told me, I

couldn't do that. Q. 74

17

Yes.

Uh-huh.

But you had heard rumours by particular developers paying

particular councillors?

18

A.

Oh, yeah, yeah.

19

Q. 75

Thanks.

10:12:19 20

Thank you very much, Mr. Harvey.

Would you answer any questions the

members or anyone else might have, please.

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

23

Mr. Cahill:

Mr. Cahill, do you want to ask any questions? I don't have any questions.

24 10:12:31 25

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much, Mr. Harvey.

26 27 28 29 10:12:41 30

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

All right. Mr. Cahill:

Thank you.

You're welcome.101THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW. Thank you, Chairman.

101MS. DILLON:

Good morning, Sir.101Mr. Richard Lynn please.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:13:13

10:13:44

14 1 2

CONTINUATION OF QUESTION RICHARD LYNN BY MS. DILLON AS FOLLOWS:

3 4 5

CHAIRMAN: A.

Good morning, Mr. Lynn.

Good morning, Chairman.

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Good morning

8 9

Q. 76

10:13:50 10

MS. DILLON:

Good morning, Mr. Lynn, and thank you for come canning back this

morning.

11

We had been discussing the meeting of the 27th of May 1992, the meeting at

12

which Councillor Barrett's motion was successful and the meeting at which the

13

manager's map was defeated.

14 10:14:04 15

Isn't that right?

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

Q. 77

Now, can I ask you first of all about the decision to withdraw the motion that

16

was signed by Councillors Hand and Lydon.

If I can call it the Monarch

17

motion, just to differentiate it from anything else.

18

A.

Okay.

19

Q. 78

A decision was made by Councillor Lydon to withdraw that motion?

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yeah.

21

Q. 79

Did he do that in discussion with you or in conjunction with you?

22

A.

Well my recollection of it Chairman, is that after the manager's proposal was

10:14:22 20

23

defeated, which came as a bit of a shock to us, Councillor Lydon looked at --

24

he knew I was -- I would be in the audience and looked around and beckoned me

10:14:47 25

to, at the back of the chamber there's the passage way which feeds the press

26

and the public domain and then goes on to feed the chamber itself.

27

beckoned me to the back of the hall.

28

holding up the meeting in that if the manager's proposal couldn't go through,

29

the motion by Councillor Lydon and Councillor Hand wouldn't be successful.

10:15:15 30

And it was done out of courtesy.

So he

And indicated that there was no sense in

There's nothing I could do but if you ask me

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:15:22

10:15:36

15 1 2

politically I would certainly would have agreed with that situation. Q. 80

So that after the manager's motion was to your surprise defeated, you had a

3

conversation with Mr. Lydon as a result of which Mr. Lydon agreed to withdraw

4

the motion and the motion was duly withdrawn?

5

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

6

Q. 81

Now, in relation to the fact that you were surprised by the manager, the

7

manager's motion or the manager's map being defeated.

8

your belief prior to the meeting that the -- that the numbers were in place or

9

you had enough councillors who were going to support or there were enough

10:15:55 10

11

councillors who were going to support the manager's map? A.

12 13

Was that because it was

I certainly believed that we had sufficient support or the manager had sufficient support to have his proposal passed by the council.

Q. 82

14

Yes.

And we had I think been discussing yesterday evening about whether there

was any particular person who surprised you, whose support you thought you had

10:16:15 15

and who didn't come through with that support on the day.

Isn't that right?

16

A.

Yes, it is, yes.

17

Q. 83

And was there any such person, can you remember?

18

A.

No, there was no one particular person or -- I would have felt that the

19

manager's proposal would have been passed with a fairly, not sizeable but

10:16:40 20

21

decent majority. Q. 84

22 23

But you were the person on, for Monarch who was dealing with the

councillors on the ground. A.

24 10:17:06 25

Uh-huh.

So, I mean, there wasn't just one person.

Yes, Chairman.

Isn't that right?

But you can't anticipate what the member is going to do.

member is free to vote whatever way he or she does. Q. 85

Yes.

And that's democracy.

But you were the person who would have been feeding back the information

26

up the line within Monarch as to the level of support or the support that you

27

had or hadn't, as the case may be, in respect of the Monarch proposals?

28

A.

Yes, I mean, I would have tried to measure the support --

29

Q. 86

Yes.

A.

-- that we felt was there for the County Manager's proposal.

10:17:20 30

The

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:17:24

10:17:46

16 1

Q. 87

And can I show you a letter, a draft letter of the 12th of August 1993 prepared

2

by Noel Smyth & Partners at page 8156.

But we actually want to look at 8157.

3

And I want to draw to your attention the fifth paragraph down.

4

A.

Did you say 1993?

5

Q. 88

Yes, it's a draft letter of the 12th of August 1993.

6

A.

Okay.

7

Q. 89

So it's August the 12th, 1993.

So the vote that is taking place is the May

8

1992 vote and there has been no other Monarch vote yet.

9

records "Monarch have been unfortunate insofar as the original vote for the

10:18:06 10

rezoning of the land they were defeated literally by a casting vote of the

11

person whom they thought was supporting them."

12

A.

Well it's totally wrong.

13

Q. 90

Well this letter was drafted by apparently Mr. Noel Smyth.

14

vote of the person whom they thought was supporting them. A.

Well, Chairman, it wasn't defeated by one vote or a casting vote.

17

defeated -- the manager's proposal was defeated 33 - 35.

18

vote.

19 10:18:46 20

21

And he is

referring there to a statement or a belief that they were defeated by a casting

10:18:27 15

16

And in that letter it

There was no casting

There was no casting vote in 1991 as far as I know.

Q. 91

No.

A.

Either so it's totally wrong.

Q. 92

If one looks at 3720.

Just for a moment we contract vote and might what have

22

happened had one person if, say, for example, the vote is 33 - 35.

23

person who votes against changes it becomes 34 - 34.

24

A.

10:19:11 25

You can't even say that, Chairman.

But if one

Isn't that right?

Because depending upon whom that vote

would change, that person by showing support, by indicating support, could

26

bring a number of people with them.

27

Q. 93

Uh-huh.

28

A.

It might depend upon whom the particular member was.

29

Q. 94

Well let's say it's the Chairman, Mr. Stanley Laing.

10:19:29 30

It was

Let's say Mr. Stanley

Laing instead of voting against DP92/44 in fact votes in favour of it and it's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:19:35

10:19:45

17 1

tied at 34 - 34.

What happens then?

2

A.

Well if it was tied.

3

Q. 95

Uh-huh.

4

A.

If, I mean, it would then fall to the Chairman to exercise a casting vote.

5

Q. 96

To vote again.

6

A.

But if you're asking me did I.

7

Q. 97

No, I'm not.

8 9

Sorry, maybe you're not.

I'm just speculating here, if Mr. Stanley Laing had voted in

favour of DP92/44 the vote would have been tied at 34 - 34, isn't that right? A.

Yes, Chairman, yes.

Q. 98

All right.

11

A.

The casting vote of the Chairman.

12

Q. 99

Who in this case is Mr. Stanley Laing.

13

A.

Absolutely, yes.

14

Q. 100

So he gets to vote twice if it's tied and he has already voted?

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 101

And it would be, in the normal course of events in favour one would expect that

10:20:03 10

10:20:14 15

16 17

And if a vote is tied?

he would again vote in favour if he had the casting vote?

18

A.

Normally speaking, yes, Chairman.

19

Q. 102

So can I ask you about Mr. Stanley Laing, had you spoken to Mr. Stanley Laing?

A.

I had, yes, Chairman.

Q. 103

And did you believe that you had Mr. Stanley Laing's support going into that

10:20:27 20

21 22

meeting?

23

A.

No I didn't, Chairman.

24

Q. 104

You hadn't satisfied yourself or you weren't satisfied that Mr. Laing would

10:20:38 25

26

support you? A.

I knew that Councillor Stanley Laing would not be supporting us.

He was a

27

close, as far as I recollect, anyway, he was a close confident of Deputy

28

Barrett.

29 10:20:56 30

Q. 105

And Mr. Liam Cosgrave had you spoken to Mr. Liam Cosgrave before that meeting?

A.

I would have, yes, yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:20:57

10:21:11

18 1

Q. 106

And what was Mr. Liam Cosgrave's attitude?

2

A.

I think Mr. Cosgrave's attitude was at that stage was because Councillor

3

Barrett had taken up a position and he was close to Councillor Barrett he was

4

going along with Councillor Barrett's position.

5

Q. 107

And had you spoken to Councillor Coffey?

6

A.

You can take it that I'd have spoken to all of them.

7

If you want I can answer

yes to all of them, yes.

8

Q. 108

And what was Councillor Coffey's position?

9

A.

Well Councillor Coffey's position was similar to what her position was back in

10:21:37 10

1991, insofar as what Councillor Coffey was looking for was the development

11

of -- that nothing would happen here which would endanger the retail trade of

12

Dun Laoghaire, which would upset the Dun Laoghaire traders.

13

an adjunct to that.

14

that was one of the reasons why Monarch had to get into Dun Laoghaire and start

10:21:57 15

And I suppose as

That was one -- not because of Councillor Coffey -- but

developing the Dominican Convent site and the Pavilion site.

So I knew in

16

advance that Councillor Coffey wouldn't be supporting the development of

17

Cherrywood in 1992.

18

Q. 109

19 10:22:21 20

And presumably, Mr. Lynn, when the meeting was over, you did an analysis of the support you thought you had in comparison to the support you actually got?

A.

Yes, Chairman, yes, yeah.

21

Q. 110

And where would one find that analysis. When you analysed the voting record?

22

A.

Sorry, I mean, that's not the way the system works.

23 24 10:22:41 25

It's not a voting record.

What you have to do is to perceive, you know, where did it go wrong. Q. 111

And where did you think it went wrong?

A.

Well, where it went wrong is that Deputy Barrett was so strong he brought

26

people with him.

27

Deputy Barrett was not against the development of Cherrywood.

28

against the development of Cherrywood at that stage.

29

transferred to await the formation of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council

10:23:07 30

Now, if you listen to Deputy Barrett at the meeting.

He wanted to have it

1994 and he wanted it transferred into that body to deal with. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

But he was

Now, if you

10:23:13

10:23:31

19 1

flip forward to 1993.

You will see on the Smyth, Misteil --

2

Q. 112

He proposed an amendment to that affect which was defeated?

3

A.

You will see what he was seeking there was to have it deferred but he was

4

requesting the manager to have a variation prepared on the Monarch lands by

5

June 1994.

6

some how in favour of only one house per acre.

7

of the development of the Cherrywood lands and other lands, not just our lands.

8

But he want it had do done in the context of the new County Council.

9

Q. 113

10:23:53 10

So in fairness to Deputy Barrett, it's unfair to say that he was He wasn't.

He was in favour

I think what deputy Barrett has told the Tribunal is that he felt that the application was premature?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 114

That the size of the sewer had not been determined and the size of the sewer

13

was the critical factor in his mind in determining the level of density he

14

wanted to maintain, if I can paraphrase Deputy Barrett's evidence, the status

10:24:07 15

quo until the line of the sewer and the size of the sewer had been determined

16

and he wanted it determined by the new Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.

17

A.

Well, I mean, I would accept that that's his evidence.

18

Q. 115

Yes.

19

A.

And I -- I fully accept that.

Q. 116

And Councillor Barrett, in fairness to yourself.

10:24:23 20

I accept. Told the Tribunal he

21

accepted that the Carrickmines Valley would all -- had always accepted it would

22

be developed and it had been zoned for development since 1983.

23

A.

Uh-huh.

24

Q. 117

And he was --

A.

Can I just say in relation to size.

10:24:36 25

26

first lands it hit.

27

lands.

Regardless of the size the sewer, the

The first development lands it hit were the Monarch

28

Q. 118

Uh-huh.

29

A.

So almost, no matter what size the sewer was the Monarch lands were going to be

10:24:50 30

developed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:24:50

10:24:59

20 1

Q. 119

But at the end of this meeting in, so far as Monarch was concerned from the

2

point of view of development, they had achieved a town centre zoning on the

3

lands?

4

A.

Well --

5

Q. 120

A C zoning?

6

A.

Yeah.

7

Q. 121

C zoning on foot of Deputy Gilmore's motion.

8

A.

That's right.

9

Q. 122

And they had the residential lands in the Carrickmines Valley that had been

10:25:08 10

zoned residential in 1983 including the Monarch lands which had been zoned

11

residential in 1983, were zoned at one house to the acre.

12

public display.

To go out on the

13

A.

To go out on the second public display.

14

Q. 123

Isn't that right?

A.

Absolutely, yes, at one house per acre.

16

Q. 124

At one house per acre.

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 125

The Tribunal has been told by a number of the councillors who attended the

10:25:22 15

19

And that was the end result?

meeting that they did not regard the meeting to be primarily about the Monarch

10:25:35 20

lands or that they had no recollection of Monarch being involved or Monarch

21

being the developer.

22

that meeting was about the Monarch lands to a degree?

23

A.

24 10:26:08 25

I beg your pardon.

Do I understand from your evidence that the entire of

It's very difficult for, that people wouldn't know that

the Monarch lands were at least part of that meeting. Q. 126

They were mention in the motions, isn't that right?

26

A.

Absolutely.

27

Q. 127

And they're mentioned in the Manager's Report?

28

A.

And the whole meeting of the 27th, 27th is all about the Cherrywood lands.

29

Q. 128

Yes.

A.

I don't think there was anything else that they actually touched on that day.

10:26:15 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:26:18

10:26:26

21 1

Q. 129

And I think you gave an interview, isn't that right?

2

A.

That's right.

3

Q. 130

And I mean it was on the news that evening?

4

A.

That's correct.

5

Q. 131

And you gave that interview as the representative of Monarch?

6

A.

Of Monarch, that's correct.

7

Q. 132

And also I think it was fairly well carried in the newspapers on the following

8 9 10:26:47 10

day, at 8161.

And Councillor Lydon is quoted and Councillor Coffey is quoted.

A.

Sorry.

Q. 133

And also I think you were putting forward the view that while you mightn't be

11

happy with the residential density.

12

fact that you'd achieved the commercial zoning?

13

A.

14

You were, Monarch were happy with the

Well I personally was very happy we'd achieved the C zoning.

Not only for the

way -- not only that it was achieved but the way it was achieved, in that it

10:27:07 15

was a Councillor Gilmore motion.

16

Q. 134

Uh-huh.

17

A.

That meant that there was a party which invariably voted end block was in

18

favour of the development of Cherrywood.

19

because I was at the meeting at Leopardstown I think that's in the papers where

10:27:25 20

But that came as no surprise to me

Deputy Gilmore also addressed that, and I think he asked the question what's

21

the difference between allowing development on one house per acre or four house

22

or ten houses per acre at the Leopardstown meeting.

23 24 10:27:45 25

Q. 135

And in the newspaper and I'll quote from it.

It says "A spokesperson from

Monarch Properties said the company would now be pressing for the County Manager's proposal allowing four houses per acre."

And then it quotes you

26

"One house per acre would not be acceptable to Monarch.

27

Manager's proposal is more acceptable said project Mr. Richard Lynn."

28

then "He said he was pleased with the village centre aspect of the project

29

comprising shopping centre, hotel, leisure centre and business park had been

10:28:04 30

given the go ahead.

We think the County And

It was the most difficult part and it was confident that

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:28:08

10:28:20

22 1

the County Manager's proposal regarding housing density would be accepted."

2

A.

That's correct.

3

Q. 136

Okay.

So would it be fair to say that Monarch's new starting position at the

4

conclusion of the meeting of the 27th of May 1992, was they were happy with the

5

district centre, the commercial zoning and they were now going to set about

6

achieving a change on the density that had gone out on the second public

7

display?

8

A.

Yes, and I mean.

9

Q. 137

Was the four houses per acre?

A.

Because it had been out on public display the first time.

10:28:37 10

That was the maximum that we could go back to.

And you could only,

11

because of the legal opinion given to the council, eventually I think in

12

September 1993.

13

Q. 138

You didn't necessarily agree with that?

14

A.

And I still don't agree with it.

Q. 139

Legal opinion.

10:28:50 15

And you had discussions with the council about being allowed

16

to put in another submission or variation which wasn't accepted by the County

17

Manager?

18

A.

That's correct.

19

Q. 140

But you had held a different view but the view that prevailed was that the only

10:29:01 20

thing you could now achieve or the optimum you could achieve on the residential

21

density would be back to the four houses per acre that had gone out on the

22

first public display?

23

A.

That's correct.

24

Q. 141

And I think, ultimately whatever might have been your own personal view about

10:29:16 25

26

the rights or wrongs with that, that was the situation that prevailed? A.

That was the situation that prevailed but I eventually was proven correct in a

27

Ragath versus Athy UCD decision in the year 2000, that is why the Planning Act

28

2000, the procedure has changed.

29 10:29:39 30

Q. 142

But anyway that doesn't matter.

You had taken a view and you had given advices to Monarch.

You had gone to

the County Manager with those advices to the effect that you should put in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:29:42

10:29:51

23 1

another submission to the second public display?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 143

Yes.

4

A.

The County Manager actually invited us to make a second submission.

And he

5

said he would seek legal advice, which he did and he gave that legal, I think

6

it was John Gallagher gave the advice.

7

Q. 144

That it couldn't be --

8

A.

And it came before a council meeting in September.

9

Q. 145

But whatever --

A.

Anyway.

Q. 146

The different viewpoints or approaches that were taken and the end result was

10:30:02 10

11 12

that Monarch did not make effectively a new submission, though they did write

13

to the council saying that they were happy with the district centre. So what

14

was facing Monarch as an identifiable problem was how to achieve a change in

10:30:26 15

density between the 27th of May 1992 and the finalisation of the plan?

16

A.

That's correct.

17

Q. 147

Because you were not going to seek to change anything to do with the district

18 19

centre zoning? A.

Except in to secure it.

Q. 148

Other than to hold it, yes, yes.

21

A.

That's correct.

22

Q. 149

So that now what your task is, is having achieved the district centre zoning on

10:30:32 20

Isn't that right?

23

the 30 acres is to try and change the density zoning on the residentially zoned

24

lands, isn't that right?

10:30:46 25

26

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 150

So at this stage you are not making any proposals in relation to the

27

agriculturally zoned portion of the lands.

At this stage?

28

A.

Well, we were with but the manager wouldn't allow us to so we couldn't.

29

Q. 151

Having accepted, once you've accepted the manager's legal advice?

A.

Yes, absolutely, yes.

10:31:03 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:31:04

10:31:16

24 1

Q. 152

Regardless of whether that was right or wrong?

2

A.

We couldn't. We were barred from that.

3

Q. 153

Yes. The focus now from May of '92 to November of 1993, is achieving a change

4 5

in the density on the residentially zoned lands? A.

Well, in that -- no, you're -- because all during 1993 and I think there's a

6

meeting in July 1993 where we were still trying to impress upon the manager

7

that it was open to him --

8

Q. 154

Yes but --

9

A.

-- to re address.

10:31:35 10

It was only in September 1993 that when the advice was

given to the council.

11

Q. 155

Uh-huh.

12

A.

That we had to accept the situation.

13 14

That the manager wasn't going to propose

the science and technology plus the residential. Q. 156

But the manager?

A.

I beg your pardon.

16

Q. 157

I'm aware of the documentation.

17

A.

Between 1993 and September -- sorry.

10:31:46 15

18 19 10:32:01 20

working towards getting the agriculture land included in the rezoning. Q. 158

But --

A.

We felt we could do that but the manager didn't.

21 22

Between 1992 and September 1993 we were

And subsequently didn't.

But did give an undertake that go he would revisit in 1994. Q. 159

Yes.

And in September I think of 1993 by September of 1993, the possibility

23

of a science and technology park had already been floated and discussed with

24

Mr. O'Sullivan, the manager, isn't that correct?

10:32:19 25

A.

That's correct.

26

Q. 160

Yes.

27

A.

Yeah.

28

Q. 161

And what was agreed effectively between Monarch and the manager was that the --

29 10:32:31 30

And with the members.

in view of the advice the manager had, that the question of a science and technology park would be deferred to the new council? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:32:32

10:32:45

25 1

A.

That's correct.

2

Q. 162

In 1994.

And then the focus of Monarch's efforts directed to the council in

3

November 1993 was to change the residential zoning density on the already

4

residentially zoned land?

5

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

6

Q. 163

And no motion, no other attempt was brought by Monarch to either change the

7

density, to change the agriculturally zoned lands or any other change?

8

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

9

Q. 164

Is that right? All right.

10:33:02 10

So that while you might have had a belief that you

pursued between May of 1992 and up to November -- mid 1993, at the end of the

11

day what in fact was done by Monarch was an attempt to change only the

12

residential zoning?

13

A.

And secure the C zoning.

14

Q. 165

Yes.

A.

Yeah, yeah.

Q. 166

And you would have been made aware of all of the motions that came into the

10:33:19 15

16 17

But that meant making sure that there was no variation on the C zoning?

council?

18

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

19

Q. 167

Now, can I take you back again, Mr. Lynn, to the meeting of the 27th of May

10:33:31 20

1992.

21

Can I ask you.

When you went that morning to the council did you go

with Mr. Bill O'Herlihy?

22

A.

No, Chairman, no.

23

Q. 168

Did you travel there -- did you meet Mr. Bill O'Herlihy at the council or at

24 10:33:45 25

any stage that morning? A.

I have no recollection of meeting Bill O'Herlihy on the morning.

I've seen

26

from his evidence that he says he was around the council chamber, which would

27

be a bit difficult unless you were actually signed in you couldn't get into the

28

chamber.

29

for the whole of that meeting on the 27th of May 1992.

10:34:11 30

Q. 169

He may have been there but certainly I was there.

That was a morning meeting, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

And I was there

10:34:13

10:34:25

26 1

A.

It was a morning meeting, yeah.

2

Q. 170

And it finished I think around two o'clock?

3

A.

Yes, there was a -- standing orders had to be suspended to extend the time of

4 5

the meeting to go to shortly after two o'clock, yes. Q. 171

6

And I think that the record of the meeting shows that the final, the meeting concludes at five minutes past two on the 27th?

7

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

8

Q. 172

So what would have been the normal starting time for such meetings?

9

A.

Well the normal starting time -- normally the agenda would put them down around

10:34:43 10

11

I think 10.30 and they would normally start around eleven o'clock. Q. 173

12

So would you -- when you say that you don't recollect Mr. O'Herlihy being there.

You're not disputing that Mr. O'Herlihy was there?

13

A.

No, no, no.

14

Q. 174

Is it that you don't -- didn't have any discussions with him or you don't

10:34:59 15

remember him.

Or are you saying that Mr. O'Herlihy has got it completely

16

wrong with his evidence about what happened in the Royal Dublin Hotel or about

17

meeting you?

18

A.

He is absolutely and totally wrong.

19

Q. 175

All right.

A.

I think -- I suppose to take some part of his evidence.

10:35:12 20

Absolutely and totally wrong.

I think in -- he says

21

that on the 27th of May 1992 prior to the meeting he saw representatives of

22

Monarch making contact with councillors.

23

You can take it that unless you were an elected member you were not on my

24

horizon.

10:35:42 25

26

Q. 176

So on that morning would you have gone to any of the places before the meeting where the councillors normally congregated in advance of the meeting?

A.

29 10:35:58 30

The only ones that I would look to on the morning of the meeting

would be the elected members.

27 28

And I presume he means me in that.

No.

Because a morning meeting they would go in directly.

don't congregate anywhere else prior to a morning meeting. Q. 177

So -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

There's no -- they

10:35:59

10:36:16

27 1

A.

2 3

signed in, in order to get place in the -- in the whatever, the public gallery. Q. 178

4 5

But and what you had to do was to get in early to get your green slip to be

And once you had that green slip, can I ask you, Mr. Lynn, were you free to leave again?

A.

6

Oh, no.

No.

I mean, if you left somebody else would take your place and

then you were ...

7

Q. 179

Even though you had your green slip?

8

A.

No, no, no.

9

now.

10:36:31 10

Once you got your green slip you were told take up your place

If the place started filling up and you didn't exercise your green slip.

There was only, I don't know, there was about 12 to 15 places for the public.

11

It was a very small gallery at the back adjacent and the press were on one side

12

and the public on the other side.

13

was more green slips would be signed than there would be places. 'Cos every

14

member had the right to sign you in, that being that that member was

10:36:55 15

So if you didn't take up your place, there

responsible for your behaviour.

16

Q. 180

Uh-huh.

17

A.

That meant that once the chamber, once the public gallery was filled.

If you

18

stepped outside unless you stood in the door and didn't allow the next person

19

in, your place could be taken.

10:37:07 20

Q. 181

Yes.

21

A.

I've no idea.

22

Q. 182

When you had your discussion with Councillor Lydon about withdrawing the

23 24 10:37:19 25

And who signed you in, can you remember? Whatever member was there when ...

motion? A.

Yeah.

Q. 183

Where did that discussion take place. That discussion took place -- as I've

26

just explained -- maybe I don't do this too well.

27

a corridor.

28

A.

29 10:37:40 30

Off that corridor the first door feeds the press gallery and the public gallery.

Q. 184

You have an outer door and

There's a second double door feeds the council chamber.

Uh-huh. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:37:40

10:38:02

28 1

A.

2

So in that corridor.

So non-members are not allowed into the chamber.

the back and outside the double door is where that conversation took place.

3

Q. 185

Right.

4

A.

No, no.

5

So you were still within effectively what the public gallery area? I was in the corridor outside the public gallery and between the --

between the public gallery and the entrance to the council chamber.

6

Q. 186

And then there's also the entrance to the pressroom.

7

A.

No, no, the entrance to the pressroom and the public gallery is the same.

8 9

So at

Is that right?

It's the same. Q. 187

It's the same entrance.

A.

No, no, sorry the same entrance and public gallery are the same entrance.

11

Q. 188

The same entrance?

12

A.

That's a single door.

13

Q. 189

So you had to leave? Did you have to leave the public viewing place in order

10:38:16 10

14 10:38:31 15

to get to Councillor Lydon? A.

16 17

Yes, but you don't leave -- you don't leave and go out to the lobby, thus indicating that there's a vacant seat in the public gallery.

Q. 190

18 19

And there's a double door for the council chamber.

And before you went to the council chamber that morning where were you, can you remember?

A.

10:39:00 20

Well I would have gone -- I would have been in work first.

And then I would

have gone directly from work down -- there was a little parking spot off Pearse

21

Street.

22

10.15 and 10.30.

23

them and chatting with them and trying to keep them abreast of what was going

24

on, any changes etc.

10:39:16 25

26

And I got in there, got parking into the council chamber between In the hope of A, meeting some the members and talking to

And getting signed in and then taking your place.

Q. 191

Right.

And Mr. Glennane --

A.

Could I just say in relation to that discussion with Councillor Lydon at the

27

back.

28

time in November 1993, when Councillor Marren was amending his motion on the

29

floor, he came to the back of the hall and advised me of what he was doing

10:39:37 30

also.

That wasn't unusual.

In actual fact it happened to me on a second

It's done out of courtesy.

Unfortunately, you don't have much

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:39:42

10:39:52

29 1

influence on it.

2

Q. 192

And can you explain why Mr. O'Herlihy was going down at all?

3

A.

I can't, no, no, Chairman.

4

Q. 193

All right.

5

A.

Certainly not because he wasn't -- Mr. O'Herlihy was never engaged, if you

And that was nothing to do with you?

6

like, to, save with the exception maybe of one councillor.

7

engaged to interface with councillors.

8

councillors on his own.

9

Q. 194

Uh-huh.

A.

So --

11

Q. 195

You don't dispute --

12

A.

He had no.

10:40:10 10

13 14 10:40:19 15

16

But he was never

And certainly not to interface with

If you like, he had no working function.

And I don't think he

expresses that he had a working function. Q. 196

But --

A.

In the council chamber that morning.

Q. 197

I think certainly Mr. Glennane and I think was it Mr. Reilly or -- remembers

17

meeting him in the Royal Dublin?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 198

Right.

10:40:35 20

Mr. Murray.

Who organised -- how did they know, do you know, if he

wasn't with you, how Mr. O'Herlihy was in the Royal Dublin? I mean, was

21

there --

22

A.

Sorry could you give me that again.

23

Q. 199

Was there some arrangement that the Monarch team would meet in the Royal

24 10:40:48 25

Dublin? A.

26

No, no.

I wouldn't have been aware that Mr. Glennane and Mr. Murray were in

the Royal Dublin.

The person that I reported to was Ed Sweeney.

27

Q. 200

Uh-huh.

28

A.

And whereas there may have been -- we would have had an early morning

29 10:41:07 30

discussion on the morning of a meeting. Monarch House that meeting.

I presume we all met at 8.00 in

But I mean, I have no recollection of them saying

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:41:10

10:41:26

30 1 2

we're going down, but I wouldn't be surprised that they would be down. Q. 201

Wouldn't it be most normal thing in the world if you'd had your meeting in the

3

morning and Mr. Glennane or Mr. Sweeney or Mr. Murray all said well we're going

4

down to the Royal Dublin that you'd arrange to meet up or to meet up with the

5

rest of your team or indeed your superiors to discuss how things were going?

6

A.

No.

Because my modus operandi was that I met the members before the meeting.

7

And after the meeting I would meet them again and I would thank those who had

8

supported and those who hadn't support I would try to cajole them well next

9

time out maybe you'd look more favourably on our position.

10:41:49 10

And/or I would be

trying to make further appointments to meet certain people.

11

Q. 202

And where would you normally meet the councillors after the meeting?

12

A.

In the foyer.

13

Q. 203

In the packed --

14

A.

No, no.

Q. 204

Over crowded foyer.

10:41:59 15

16

Did you ever meet any of them in Conways public house for

example?

17

A.

Yes, if I could just --

18

Q. 205

Just stick --

19

A.

That's what I'm trying to do I would initially meet them in the foyer, in the

10:42:13 20

lobby of the council on their way.

The councillors had two ways of going out.

21

They could come out the front door or go through a carpark and out the back

22

door.

23

Conways.

24

Q. 206

10:42:30 25

So you'd meet them first off in the foyer and then you'd meet them in

Did you ever go into the Royal Dublin Hotel for example ever to meet any councillors for any purpose or to meet anybody else when you were down in

26

Dublin County Council?

27

A.

Yes, I have had appointment in the Royal Dublin from time to time.

28

Q. 207

Did you ever go to any of the other local hotels or around Dublin County

29 10:42:46 30

Council to meet councillors or when you were down on Dublin County Council business? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:42:46

10:43:03

31 1

A.

No, I mean, the only other hotel was the Gresham.

2

anybody over in the Gresham.

3

Dublin.

4

Conways, it wasn't just a Fianna Fail pub.

And I don't think I met

So the main two areas would have been the Royal

But the main area was Conways.

I mean, all political parties used

5

Q. 208

We never suggested it was a Fianna Fail pub.

6

A.

O sorry, it is inferred from time to time that it is.

7

Q. 209

Mr. O'Herlihy has told the Tribunal that he had a conversation with you.

And

8

in the course of that conversation with you, in the Royal Dublin Hotel,

9

probably on the 27th of May 1992, you told him that the merit of an application

10:43:23 10

had nothing to do with the application.

He says that you told him that if you

11

wanted to get planning change or a material contravention that it had to be

12

bought.

13 14

He said that -- he says that you said that planning changes and material

10:43:38 15

contraventions were worth around 50,000 a year in the back pockets of

16

councillors.

17

worked and that you told him you would have a lead councillor and you would

18

deal with the lead councillor who then dealt with the other councillors and he

19

asked you had Monarch paid money and you indicated a sum of 100,000 pounds had

10:43:59 20

been paid.

He says that he was staggered by this and he asked you how it

Is Mr. O'Herlihy incorrect in that evidence?

21

A.

He's totally, absolutely incorrect.

22

Q. 210

All right.

23

A.

And --

24

Q. 211

And --

A.

If you want to take the ingredients of it.

Q. 212

There's no need.

10:44:12 25

26

And that statement is total rubbish.

It's just want to get your position.

It's a matter

27

ultimately at the end of the day for the Tribunal.

28

incorrect and never such a conversation never took place?

29 10:44:30 30

A.

Such a conversation never took place. rubbish.

You say that he is totally

A, I wasn't there and B, is total

That type of a conversation couldn't -- couldn't be -- couldn't be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:44:36

10:44:59

32 1

made by anybody who had an ounce of information as regards how the planning

2

process works.

3

mentions planning permissions.

4

Q. 213

Right.

It infers actually that there's bribery to officials when it It's absolute total rubbish.

You say that didn't happen.

Can I ask you this. you would have

5

worked since the previous November to May quite regularly with Mr. O'Herlihy.

6

You had attended large number of meetings with Mr. O'Herlihy.

7

you as a very profession persons and he confirms that he had a significant

8

number of meetings with you.

9

A.

10:45:20 10

Would you agree with that?

I worked very closely with Bill O'Herlihy.

I met him on two or

three occasions per week from the time he was engaged in about November

11 12

Absolutely.

He describes

December 1991, up to whenever we finished the 14 weekends. Q. 214

So it's most unlikely that Mr. O'Herlihy would have made a mistake in

13

recounting something he says was said by you when in fact it might have been

14

said by somebody else?

10:45:39 15

A.

16 17

I would have to be -- to agree with that.

But I still reiterate it's total

rubbish. Q. 215

Did you ever have any conversation with Mr. O'Herlihy about whether it was in

18

the Royal Dublin or whether it was in any other location or whether it was on

19

that date or any other date on which you discussed payments to councillors in

10:45:56 20

21

return for planning or zoning changes? A.

Absolutely not.

I was not aware of such payments.

I'm not aware of such

22

payments and don't want to become aware of such payments.

23

conversation or any like conversation with him or with anybody else.

24

Q. 216

10:46:19 25

And at the time that you were working with Mr. O'Herlihy.

I never had that

That working

relationship with Mr. O'Herlihy concluded with the defeat, if I can call it

26

that, or with this vote in May of 1992.

Isn't that correct?

27

A.

That is correct.

28

Q. 217

And I think subsequently in March of 1993 Monarch retained Mr. Dunlop.

29 10:46:33 30

that right? A.

That is correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

Isn't

10:46:33

10:46:52

33 1

Q. 218

I'll come to deal with some small details in relation to that.

But Mr. Dunlop

2

has told the Tribunal that you made a number of comments to him about

3

councillors including he says you said to him, you think these idiots would get

4

their acts together there's so much money being spent on them.

5

incorrect when he says you said that to him?

Is Mr. Dunlop

6

A.

He's absolutely incorrect.

7

Q. 219

If we just get first of all whether you disagree with Mr. Dunlop?

8

A.

Absolutely.

9

Q. 220

And when Mr. Dunlop says when you also said when you think of the amount of

10:47:08 10

And if you look at -- I mean, when Mr.--

money that's being spread around you'd think these idiots would get their act

11

together.

And where he you also said, You know these are costs so much is Mr.

12

Dunlop completely incorrect in that evidence?

13

A.

He's completely incorrect in that evidence.

14

Q. 221

Now, Mr.--

A.

And the context --

16

Q. 222

Yes.

17

A.

-- I mean in, the period that Frank Dunlop was engaged was a period from March

10:47:21 15

18

'93 to November, December 1993.

19

stage.

10:47:34 20

Q. 223

21

No, if we just concentrate.

And if you look at where Monarch was at that

Really what I'm trying to establish from you, Mr.

Lynn.

22 23

MR SANFEY:

I think the witness has to be given an opportunity to answer.

24 10:47:46 25

CHAIRMAN:

I think he's entitled to ....

26 27 28 29 10:48:02 30

MR SANFEY: A.

Thanks, Chairman.

If you look at where Monarch was in 1993 during the course of Frank Dunlop's engagement.

A, we had -- we had acquired the Dominican Convent and we had

acquired the Pavilion centre.

We had indicated, we it had, if you like,

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:48:08

10:48:25

34 1

satisfied the members of the Borough Council in relation to development in Dun

2

Laoghaire itself to take away the argument that what we were going to do in

3

Cherrywood would harm, would harm Dun Laoghaire.

4 5

We had many meetings with the County Manager.

6

possibility of the science and technology park.

7

favourable to that.

8

land that he felt he couldn't do it in the course of a 1993 review but gave an

9

undertaking that he would bring it in early in 1994.

10:48:52 10

We had instigated the

The manager was fully

He was fully favourable to bringing in the agricultural

To that end, both

Monarch and GRE gave letters of upper taking that they wouldn't dispose the

11

land on which the science and technology park was to be situated.

12

that context was there any -- any necessity to -- for a conversation such as

13

Frank Dunlop has said.

14

Q. 224

10:49:24 15

Monarch retain a PR consultant in 1991 who concludes

his engagement in May of 1992.

18

10:49:43 20

If we just concentrate on these two separate coincidences,

if I can call them that.

17

I didn't have close contact with Frank Dunlop.

I'll come to your contact and the documentary records in relation to it

shortly, Mr. Lynn.

16

19

Yeah.

So where in

with Monarch. A.

That is correct.

Q. 225

Right.

And this PR consultant has no further contact

Is that correct -- Mr. O'Herlihy?

This man, Mr. O'Herlihy, for whatever reason, makes a statement that

21

you told him councillors had to be bribed to achieve planning and rezoning and

22

he gives an amount.

And you deny such a conversation took place?

23

A.

I absolutely refute that.

24

Q. 226

Right.

10:50:04 25

Monarch then retain a second PR consultant, who has nothing to do with

the first PR consultant and it happens a year later, in March of 1993.

As far

26

as everybody is aware, there is no contact between Mr. O'Herlihy and Mr.

27

Dunlop.

28

you made comments to him from which he inferred that you knew councillors were

29

being bribed and he says that you said when you think the amount of --

10:50:30 30

A.

The second PR consultant, Mr. Dunlop, also tells the Tribunal that

Sorry, I beg your pardon.

I don't think he ever said that.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:50:33

10:50:43

35 1

Q. 227

When you think of the amount of money that's being spread around you think

2

those idiots would get their act together.

3

any such comment?

4

A.

That is quite correct.

5

Q. 228

Right.

And you deny that you ever made

Do you have any explanation to offer to the Tribunal as to why two

6

separate and unrelated PR consultants, who are both hired by your employer, to

7

deal with councillors, attribute comments such as this to you?

8

A.

I haven't.

9

Q. 229

Yeah.

A.

Any suggestion to make in relation to it.

10:50:58 10

I haven't learnt the art of

11

bilocation in relation to Mr. O'Herlihy.

12

Frank Dunlop and there's references to it of how I saw Frank Dunlop.

13

not to say that we didn't from time to time meet and discuss.

14

never any close conversations with Frank Dunlop.

10:51:36 15

That's

But there was

So and I think in fairness

to Frank Dunlop, he indicated that if that expression had been made, a

16 17

I didn't have close contact with

different interpretation could be applied to it. Q. 230

Yes.

I certainly have no recollection of having such a conversation with

18

Frank Dunlop.

19

two separate and unrelated persons who are hired to become involved with

10:51:58 20

And can you assist the Tribunal at all as to how it was these

councillors both have record having conversations with you in which you discuss

21

councillors and money, both conversations which you deny ever took place.

22

you assist?

23

A.

I can't assist the Tribunal on that.

24

Q. 231

And your position to the Tribunal is, just to be clear on it, is that insofar

10:52:16 25

as both of these people make these separate and unrelated allegations, they are

26

both incorrect?

27

A.

Absolutely.

28

Q. 232

And your position is that no such conversations with either of these people

29 10:52:27 30

Can

ever took place? A.

That's quite correct, Chairman. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:52:28

10:52:50

36 1

Q. 233

Okay.

That's all right. Sorry.

Now, can I move on then to deal with the retention

2

of Mr. Dunlop.

Can I ask you to deal very briefly with the line of

3

the Southeastern Motorway, Mr. Lynn. Mr. Tony Fox, councillor, told the

4

Tribunal in the course of the Carrickmines 1 Module that he prepared a motion,

5

at 8126.

6

he had with you and a Mr. Lafferty of Monarch at which he was requested to

7

propose a connection with the line of the Southeastern Motorway?

And that this motion he says was prepared following a meeting that

8

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

9

Q. 234

Now, is Mr. Fox correct in that?

A.

He is absolutely correct in that, Chairman.

Q. 235

Yes.

10:53:13 10

11 12

And this particular motion, Mr. Fox says, was signed after he had a

meeting where he walked the lands with you and Mr. Lafferty?

13

A.

That's quite right, Chairman.

14

Q. 236

Now, I think ultimately insofar as the line of the Southeastern Motorway was

10:53:31 15

concerned, while the motion was in fact proposed by Councillor Fox and seconded

16

by Councillor Hand, the manager recommended that the line of the Southeastern

17

Motorway be depicted as a diagrammatical line only pending the outcome of a

18

proper feasibility environmental impact study.

19

council?

10:53:49 20

A.

That's correct.

And that was agreed by the

Could I make a comment on this motion? The important

21

relevance in that motion, Chairman, is to the 156 acres.

22

there was an earlier proposal for an area of around -- circa 130 acres.

23

had had discussions with a local councillor in relation to supporting such a

24

motion.

10:54:25 25

There was an area -And I

And the feedback which came from Sean Galvin was that 130 odd acres

wouldn't afford them the opportunity of doing -- of carrying out, what is

26

mentioned here.

27

golf course.

28

the ultimate line, that the line being proposed by Councillor Fox was moved, if

29

you like, from the first valley into the second valley, thus releasing 156

10:54:53 30

Well it says a golf course but he was wanting a championship

And that is why in the proposal and in the walking of the line,

acres which was deemed sufficient size to accommodate a championship golf Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

10:54:59

10:55:16

37 1 2

course. Q. 237

Right.

And unless you were part of that you wouldn't know it. Did you have discussions with -- and we needn't go into great detail

3

on this, Mr. Lynn.

4

to any strategy to do with the line of the Southeastern Motorway?

5

A.

6 7

10:55:35 10

I didn't discuss anything with Liam Lawlor after May 1991 until I met him in a pub in 1995, '96.

Q. 238

8 9

Did you have discussions with Mr. Liam Lawlor in relation

Did you have any discussion with Mr. Sean Galvin as to whether or not he was agreeable to the contents of this motion?

A.

No, I hadn't any direct contact with Sean Galvin at that stage, no.

Q. 239

And looking at the face of the motion.

It would indicate that it was in ease

11

of or in aid of the Galvin lands on the face of it just reading it when he

12

talks about the 156, releasing 156 acres of uninterrupted land to accommodate a

13

golf course?

14

A.

10:55:56 15

No, Chairman, that is not -- that is not the interpretation you should take from it.

16

Q. 240

That's not the interpretation you would place on it?

17

A.

Well no if you look at the agenda for that particular meeting.

I'm sorry, I

18

just can't remember the meeting.

19

you will find that there was a motion which was being promoted by Sean Galvin

10:56:11 20

If you look at the agenda for that meeting

which sought to remove what the manager -- the manager put the southeast

21

motorway in 1990 on to Sean Galvin's lands.

22

proposing to shift the motorway back onto the Monarch lands and to join them up

23

with the rightful interchange and that -- and I became aware of that and I got

24

up on my bike.

10:56:43 25

There are motions in favour of or

And that is the reason why this particular motion.

an earlier draft of 130 odd acres given to a local councillor, I got word back

26

that that wouldn't facilitate the championship golf course.

27

back out again.

28

the day, was Councillor Fox.

29

if that there was no houses involved to be knocked down.

10:57:06 30

There was

So we had to go

And the only one I could find to come out, and very late in We walked the line.

that line was chosen. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

Satisfied him in relation And that is why that

10:57:08

10:57:18

38 1

Q. 241

2

And I think were you instrumental then in the payment of 1,000 pounds to Mr. Fox on the 29th of January 1993?

3

A.

I certainly -- my recollection is I recommended that.

4

Q. 242

Yes.

5

A.

To Councillor Fox, yeah.

6

Q. 243

Can you explain why Councillor Fox's payment is in January of 1993 and it's

7 8

recorded as being in connection with the General Election of 1992? A.

9

Yes.

Councillor Fox and I and his family -- I got to know him quite well.

And Councillor Fox had had a very good result in the legal Local Elections in

10:57:45 10

1991 and he was being asked by his own Cumann to run in the General Election.

11

And he couldn't make up his mind one way or the other whether he was.

12

recollect talking to both himself and his wife in relation to it.

13

if you're running and you're looking for support, I will recommend support for

14

you.

10:58:03 15

And I

And I said

Q. 244

Were you offering support just to be clear here, to Mr. Fox?

16

A.

I was offering support for his General Election expenses --

17

Q. 245

Were you offered --

18

A.

Had he --

19

Q. 246

Sorry.

A.

Now, my understanding is that he --

Q. 247

Just deal with the moment for the fact from your evidence you appear to now be

10:58:13 20

21 22

telling the Tribunal that you offered financial support to Councillor Fox.

23

Whereas I had understood perhaps incorrectly your previous evidence to have

24

been that Monarch didn't offer support.

10:58:31 25

A.

That they responded to requests?

I don't think that -- what I was saying there is I was offering support.

And

26

in the event he was running for -- if he was running for election, as he was

27

going to do at that stage, that I would recommend support for him.

28

said previously I didn't have a hang up in relation to whether people made

29

application and I have no hang up in saying that I contacted some people and

10:58:57 30

asked them did they want to make an application for support. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

I think I

I've no hang up

10:59:01

10:59:16

39 1 2

about that at all. Q. 248

Now, just in relation to the comment that you made earlier.

Could I have

3

3796.

4

with Mr. Fox's motion.

5

probably familiar already with it.

6

Mr. Galvin lands on July 30th '92, attended by Paddy Spain representing Sean

7

Galvin.

8

"subsequent to the May '92 meeting, Councillor Fox proposed a route for the

9

motorway which would through the Galvin lands north to south somewhat west to

10:59:34 10

That this motion, I had suggested to you that Mr. Galvin wasn't happy I just want to show you the document.

11

Which records a meeting in connection

If you look at the last paragraph on paragraph one.

the September '91 route.

You are

It says

This suggestion would make the Galvin golf course

impossible" and again at 3797.

12 13

Paragraph eight D.

14

Fox proposal would make the golf course impossible."

10:59:51 15

It's recorded that "Mr. Spain expressed the view that the I'm just drawing to your

attention that Mr. Galvin's professional advisors appeared to have been of the

16

opinion at that point in time, that the Fox proposal would make the golf course

17

impossible.

18

A.

19 11:00:06 20

Yeah and for us to actually prove that the golf course could work we did a layout of the 156 acres.

Q. 249

What I'm pointing out to that Mr. Galvin's professional advisors were unhappy

21

with the Fox motion.

22

of the Fox motion it might suggest it was in aid or in ease of the golf course

23

lands.

24

professional advisors were unhappy with the Fox motion?

11:00:26 25

26

And I had been suggesting to you that on a plain reading

And I am simply pointing out to you that Mr. Galvin, the owner's

A.

Yes, I would accept all of that, yes.

Q. 250

Now, I think there was a General Election in 1992.

And I think payments were

27

made isn't that right? To the councillors and to others who were going for

28

election at that time.

29

Sir.

11:00:51 30

1582 I think is the list.

Now, I am now finished,

And I don't know whether this -- with the issue of Mr. Bill O'Herlihy.

And I had indicated yesterday that as Mr. O'Higgins is concerned only with one Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:00:56

11:01:06

40 1

issue.

That Mr. O'Higgins might wish to apply to the Tribunal to

2

cross-examine on that issue if he wishes.

3

not.

I don't know whether he wants to or

4 5

MR. O'HIGGINS: If I might do so very briefly, Chairman.

6 7

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

That's fine.

8 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. O'HIGGINS AS FOLLOWS:

9 11:01:13 10

11

Q. 251

12

MR. O'HIGGINS: Mr. Lynn, would you agree that you had a very good working relationship with Mr. O'Herlihy throughout his time?

13

A.

I did, yes, Chairman, I did.

14

Q. 252

And he with you?

A.

Well I understand that from his evidence and also --

16

Q. 253

Yes.

17

A.

-- I think in my documents I indicated that had I been asked at the period when

11:01:24 15

18

Frank Dunlop was about to be appointed had I been asked for my opinion, I would

19

have recommended that Bill O'Herlihy be further retained.

11:01:41 20

Q. 254

Yes.

21

A.

So I've no difficulty with Bill O'Herlihy in, as a working relationship.

22

Q. 255

Yeah.

23 24

And you'd be aware that he had admiration for the energy and capacity

with which you did your work in Monarch.

Isn't that so?

A.

He has expressed that Chairman, yes.

Q. 256

And I suggest you've no reason do to doubt that.

26

A.

Up until I saw what he actually said about me eventually, Chairman.

27

Q. 257

Well, you see.

11:01:59 25

I just want to get this clear.

Mr. Sanfey, on your behalf,

28

in cross-examining Mr. O'Herlihy accepted that there was no question of

29

Mr. O'Herlihy fabricating what he said.

11:02:24 30

That he was simply mistaken.

is that in truth what was put to Mr. O'Herlihy your view? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

Now,

11:02:29

11:02:44

41 1

A.

Yes, that is my view.

2

Q. 258

Yeah.

So it follows that you would accept that Mr. O'Herlihy has no axe to

3

grind in this matter.

And as he says he is reluctantly saying what he says

4

rather than with any enthusiasm?

5

A.

Well that's as I understand it, Chairman, yes.

6

Q. 259

Well have you any reason from anything you know about Mr. O'Herlihy, to doubt

7

that statement by him?

8

A.

No, I haven't, Chairman, no.

9

Q. 260

Did you ever meet Mr. O'Herlihy in the Royal Dublin Hotel?

A.

I think that Mr. Bill O'Herlihy was with us on what we call the goulash night.

11:03:00 10

11

That was a night when we had the, what do you call it, the model and the video

12

etc. etc. and we asked -- this was a meeting, this was, this coincided with a

13

County Council meeting and we invited the members that we hadn't got to come in

14

and look at the model.

11:03:38 15

16

I've an idea that Bill was there for that.

Q. 261

And that was some months before May the 27th.

A.

Oh, no, no, no.

17

April.

Is that correct?

It would have been nearly I'd say -- I'd say in the month of

There is a receipt somewhere for the Royal Dublin.

18

Q. 262

Or maybe a month before?

19

A.

Yeah.

Q. 263

And are you saying that apart from that, you never met Mr. O'Herlihy in the

11:03:53 20

21 22

Royal Dublin? A.

I've no recollection of meeting Mr. O'Herlihy other than on that occasion in

23

the Royal Dublin.

24

or three times a week during the period when he was engaged from, well

11:04:14 25

I mean, yeah, I fully accept I met Mr. O'Herlihy maybe two

certainly from January and maybe before, maybe December.

26

January up to April.

27

mounted.

28 29 11:04:37 30

Q. 264

Yes.

Certainly from

And that was during the course of these weekends that we

I accept that, Mr. Lynn.

But what I want to just make clear is this.

That if it wasn't the goulash night, with which it would be hard to confuse the night of the occasion which Mr. O'Herlihy talks about? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:04:42

11:04:54

42 1

A.

Uh-huh.

2

Q. 265

Then not only is he wrong about the conversation but he's wrong about ever

3

having a conversation of any description with you or meeting you in the Royal

4

Dublin Hotel for coffee in the morning.

5

A.

That is absolutely correct.

6

Q. 266

So is he has that completely wrong as well?

7

A.

He has that absolutely wrong!

8

Q. 267

The Royal Dublin is next door to the council chamber, isn't that correct?

9

A.

It is, Chairman, yes.

Q. 268

It would be a matter of a minute to get from one to the other or less.

11:05:09 10

11

that so?

12

A.

That would be correct, yes, Chairman.

13

Q. 269

Yes.

14

You see, you say that you couldn't have left.

Because if you left your

seat would immediately be taken and then you'd be in queer street, you mightn't

11:05:26 15

16

Isn't

get it back at all. A.

Is that right?

It's not even about -- you can take it that there's as much chance as the

17

Chairman doing a walk about from this Tribunal, as I leaving the council

18

chamber in the course of a discussion or a debate where any of my -- well in

19

that case where Monarch was involved.

11:05:50 20

council chamber once that meeting started until it completed.

21 22

Q. 270

Can I just take you from the beginning.

A.

I didn't leave the chamber. gallery.

the back of the chamber.

27

lobby part.

11:06:46 30

Q. 271

Yes.

So I'm not in the chamber.

If we want to get pedantic about this.

26

29

First of all, I think you did leave

the chamber when Mr. Lydon called you out, isn't that correct?

11:06:08 25

28

No chance no,

chance!

23 24

There is no chance that I left the

I'm in the public

What we did was I went to

I'm between the two doors.

I don't reenter the

Now, can I suggest to you, first of all, that Mr. O'Herlihy says, I

gather you deny this, that before the meeting began that he was brought in and saw the council chamber for the only time in his life that he's ever seen it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:06:46

11:06:56

43 1 2

Is that so? A.

Well I see that he said that but I would find it very -- in actual fact I think

3

he said he walked around the council chamber.

4

my part.

5

the council chamber.

6

get into the public gallery or the press gallery, you had to be signed in by a

7

councillor.

8

Q. 272

9 11:07:11 10

11

But that might be pedantic on

Non-members -- it was only staff and members that are allowed into To actually get from the lobby to go through the door to

I think he suggests that he was in the building.

I don't know whether the

chamber itself? A.

I thought he said the chamber in his private discussions or ...

Q. 273

Well whether it was the chamber or the environs of the chamber.

Can I suggest

12

to you that again it would be very, very hard to make a mistake about whether

13

you'd been in there for the first time in your life or not.

14

A.

11:07:35 15

prior to the beginning of the meeting.

16 17

Well I'm not in any way suggesting that he wasn't there at the beginning -I'm not saying that.

It's just I've

no recollection of him being there. Q. 274

I think what he specifically said was so "myself and Richard Lynn went in

18

because I was very anxious to see the council chambers just out of curiosity

19

since I'd been working towards achieving some object in there.

11:07:56 20

just saw it at the assembly stage at 11 a.m. in the morning".

21 22

Have you a

reason to doubt that or not? A.

No, I haven't a reason to doubt it.

If Mr. O'Herlihy said he was there. I

23

just have no recollection.

24

sort of is suggesting that we went in together.

11:08:20 25

26

So I sought, I

And you can appreciate why because, save, that it I wouldn't have gone in -- I

had a different agenda. Q. 275

Now what, Mr. O'Herlihy has always said.

And I want to be clear about this.

27

He cannot be specific as to time.

28

he could be wrong about the time and it may have been at some earlier stage in

29

the morning but before the vote when his discussion with you took place.

11:08:40 30

A.

He made an estimate as to time but he says

Well if that's what he's saying that's what he's saying. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

I'm saying that that

11:08:45

11:09:03

44 1 2

discussion did not take place with me. Q. 276

3 4

Yes.

Do you agree that as he says if it had taken place it would be a

memorable conversation? A.

Well I think he went on to say that it could be just two fellas at the bar and

5

he didn't know whether I was taking, I suppose I can't use undiplomatic

6

language, that I was just taking the rag out of him.

7

seriously he would -- I mean, if it had been said in a serious manner by

8

somebody who had knowledge of the planning system, yes, you would say it would

9

be taken seriously.

11:09:24 10

So I don't know how

Q. 277

Well Mr. O'Herlihy --

11

A.

Well I didn't have the conversation with him.

12

Q. 278

Mr. O'Herlihy says that he cannot say whether what you said in its substance is

13

true or not.

But he said I do remember the conversation with Mr. Lynn because

14

it was so extraordinary.

That's his answer at 320 on page 56 of the

11:09:47 15

transcript of his evidence in cross-examination by Mr. Sanfey.

16

that if such a thing was said it would indeed be extraordinary?

Do you agree

17

A.

Yes, I mean, I would agree with that.

18

Q. 279

Particularly having regard to Mr. O'Herlihy's genuine admiration for the way in

19 11:10:05 20

21

which you did your job. A.

Yes, I would accept that.

Q. 280

Now, I know that you say and I'm not necessarily saying that that this is

22

wrong.

23

council chamber on the day of the 27th of May.

24

if you had wished to, that that would be perfectly feasible and get your seat

11:10:28 25

26

back. A.

That you didn't leave the council chamber and wouldn't have left the But I'm suggesting to you that

Is that not correct?

It would be perfectly feasible to go from the council chamber into the Royal

27

Dublin.

28

you that there's absolutely no way.

29

council chamber when the debate -- it wasn't as if there was anything other

11:10:49 30

You wouldn't know that you could get your seat back but I can tell There's no way that I would have left the

than the Monarch proposal being debated at that council meeting. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:10:55

11:11:07

45 1

Q. 281

Well --

2

A.

It was totally Monarch.

3

Q. 282

Were there a long series of speeches by councillors?

4

A.

There was -- all of the contribution were made first.

5

Q. 283

Yes.

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 284

Sorry, yeah.

8

A.

And I was there for that.

9

Q. 285

Yeah.

11:11:22 10

But --

So much so would it be fair to say, that I think as you've pointed out

yourself, standing orders had to be raised to extend the ordinary sitting

11

period of the council meeting.

Isn't that so?

12

A.

That's correct.

13

Q. 286

Can I suggest to you --

14

A.

But there's no indication at any stage of a meeting how many people are going

11:11:33 15

16

to contribute and how long their contribution is going to be. Q. 287

No.

I accept that but on the other hand, if a known supporter or a known

17

opponent is just beginning a speech or something of that kind, I suggest it

18

would be possible to slip out for a second, knowing that you're going to miss

19

anything of importance?

11:11:51 20

A.

No, I wouldn't accept that.

21

Q. 288

I'm not suggesting you did because --

22

A.

Well I wouldn't accept that.

23

Q. 289

Yes.

24

about arranging for someone else to occupy your seat and getting it back from

11:12:05 25

26

But if you wished to do that, there's no problem, I suggest to you,

them by arrangement when you return. A.

27

Isn't that so?

Yeah, that is not so because it's the first person in the queue outside has the right of taking the first place that becomes available.

28

Q. 290

But you can't you put someone in the queue outside?

29

A.

I can't put somebody in the queue outside.

11:12:21 30

what stage.

That depends upon who signs in or

And the doorman and security man or whatever he was, security

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:12:28

11:12:48

46 1

man, whoever it was, it is he who decides who's next in.

2

necessarily be -- well it certainly wouldn't be anybody that I could nominate.

3

I couldn't go out and say I want that guy there to take my place.

4

Q. 291

5 6

A.

No, because I was the only representative of Monarch in the council on that morning.

Q. 292

9 11:13:08 10

No but if you're the next man in the queue so to speak if you had an arrangement with him that could be done is that not so?

7 8

So it needn't

Yes.

Can you remember what time you arrived at the council chambers that

morning? A.

I would have arrived at around 10.15 ahead of the -- ahead of -- I mean, I knew

11

that the place was going to be packed.

12

against it as we heard yesterday.

13

Carrickmines Valley Protection Association would be there as well.

14

I mean, there was a big campaign

And I knew that the representatives of the

Q. 293

Do any councillors take a cup of coffee in the morning before a meeting?

A.

Oh, I'd imagine that they do.

16

Q. 294

It's not an unusual thing for people to do?

17

A.

No, no, no.

18

Q. 295

Perhaps more I'd suggest in the morning than at any other time of day maybe?

19

A.

Well if it's a cup of coffee yes, I'd agree with that, yes.

Q. 296

Couldn't councillors do that in the Royal Dublin?

21

A.

Oh, they could.

22

Q. 297

And if one wished to meet them before a crucial meeting then one might well

11:13:37 15

11:13:51 20

23 24 11:14:06 25

meet them there as well as in the council chamber? A.

If you had a prior arrangement, yes, you could do that.

Q. 298

Or even if you knew that they were likely to be there and thought it would be a

26 27

And I'm sure that they do and did.

good place maybe to have a quick word before the meeting began. A.

No, unless you knew the particular person was going to be there you wouldn't

28

take the chance that somebody would be there that might be of benefit to speak

29

to.

11:14:22 30

Q. 299

Well why not? I mean, it's not much of a chance to take to take a glance into Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:14:27

11:14:44

47 1

the Royal Dublin foyer for a minute before you walk half a minute way into the

2

council chamber, is it?

3

A.

Well no.

In timewise no.

But if you were looking, if you were looking to

4

meet people, these certain -- the certain place to meet would be in the foyer

5

of Dublin County Council.

6

Q. 300

7

Yeah.

And maybe an extra opportunity a little before that perhaps in the

Royal Dublin?

8

A.

No.

9

Q. 301

Wouldn't you?

A.

No.

11:14:53 10

11 12

Because I -- my -- my way of operating was that I went to the council

chamber because you were certain to meet the people there. Q. 302

13 14

Well I wouldn't accept that, no.

Yeah.

Even though some of the councillors whom you wished to meet might be in

the other place and it might be a good place to find them as well? A.

11:15:15 15

Absolutely.

And members could come in, Chairman, at any stage of a meeting.

If a meeting was starting at ten or eleven.

People had jobs to do.

16

the teachers etc, if they couldn't get somebody to appear.

17

appear until half twelve, one o'clock.

18

you were going to meet whom you wanted to meet.

19 11:15:35 20

They may not

So there -- you could never be certain

Q. 303

But --

A.

So you had to have your work done prior to a meeting but you used the

21 22

Any of

opportunity of the morning of a meeting just to remind people that you exist. Q. 304

Yes.

Mr. Lynn, in conclusion, I have to suggest to you, regrettably, from

23

Mr. O'Herlihy's point of view, that the conversation which he suggests did take

24

place, whether at the precise time he thinks is most likely or earlier, and

11:16:06 25

that he just cannot be mistaken on that fact.

26

A.

I absolutely refute that.

27

Q. 305

Yes.

28

A.

Thanks very much.

Thanks very much, Mr. Lynn.

29 11:16:16 30

CHAIRMAN:

Right.

I might take a break now at this stage for ten minutes and

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:16:21

11:16:32

48 1

we'll sit again at half eleven.

2 3

MS. DILLON:

Thank you, Sir.

4 5

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK

6

AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:

7 8

MS. DILLON:

9

I have page 1582, please.

11:34:20 10

Mr. Lynn, please.

to 1992 by Monarch.

This is the list of political donations attributed

And insofar as the names commencing Larry Lohan PD, down

11

to the end of the list is concerned, GV Wright.

12

Lynn, were attributed by Monarch in its books to the Cherrywood development.

13

Do you have any idea as to how those political expenses became to be treated as

14

an expense of the Cherrywood development?

11:34:45 15

All of those payments, Mr.

A.

In the Monarch books.

16

Q. 306

Yes.

17

A.

I mean, save that I would have made recommendation to a number of those but how

18 19

Monarch treated it in the books, I've no knowledge. Q. 307

11:34:59 20

Yes.

And accepting that you would have had an input into some of the payments

insofar as you would have recommended that the payments be made.

21

as when it came to allocate those expenses within Monarch.

22

made to allocate them against Cherrywood?

But insofar

A decision was

23

A.

I wouldn't have any function at all in that.

24

Q. 308

And you can't assist?

A.

I have no knowledge. No, no, absolutely, no.

Q. 309

What I'm trying to establish, Mr. Lynn, it wouldn't have been as a result of

11:35:13 25

26 27

anything you said to anybody in the accounts department that they would have

28

been allocated against Cherrywood?

29 11:35:30 30

A.

Well, it's quite possible that I would, that I would put on a charge Cherrywood.

It's quite possible.

But the actual mechanics of that inside in

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:35:36

11:36:04

49 1 2

the internal mechanics of it in accounts, I wouldn't have any function in that. Q. 310

Right.

And in 19 -- at the time of the election in 1992, two other donations

3

were made one to Mr. John Bruton of 2,500 pounds and one to Mr. Albert

4

Reynolds.

5

Mr. Philip Monahan.

6

paragraph, Mr. Reynolds is being provided on behalf of Fianna Fail with a

7

cheque for 5,000 pounds.

And I just want to show you the letter at 3891, which is signed by And I just want to draw to your attention the second

8 9

And Mr. Monahan says at the second paragraph "As you you are aware, we in

11:36:19 10

Monarch together with our partners, Guardian Royal Exchange London, are in a

11

position to commence a major development in Loughlinstown but are caught in the

12

throws of the County Development Plan which is holding up developments. We

13

have been greatly assisted by your party members on Dublin County Council

14

without whom it is fair to say, we would not have achieved the part zoning

11:36:36 15

which now obtains on the lands".

16 17

You agree with that, that by November 1992, it was the view within Monarch that

18

the part zoning which had been achieved on the Monarch lands presumably in May

19

of 1992 had been achieved, could not have been achieved without the assistance

11:36:55 20

21

of the Fianna Fail members on Dublin County Council? A.

Well, can I say that what was achieved in May 1992 was actually as a result of

22

Deputy Eamonn Gilmore's motion.

23

Gilmore proposing and all the members of his party voting in favour of it, it

24

wouldn't have passed.

11:37:26 25

Naturally enough other people who did vote for it would

be some, some would be members of Fianna Fail.

26 27

And I would more say without Deputy Eamonn

But if you say that it was

exclusive Fianna Fail, I don't think what you're saying that. Q. 311

I'm just asking you was that the view in Monarch that the part zoning that

28

pertained on the lands could not have been achieved without the assistance of

29

the Fianna Fail Councillors on Dublin County Council and that Monarch viewed

11:37:47 30

itself as having been greatly assisted by the Fianna Fail Councillors as is Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:37:51

11:38:20

50 1 2

recorded by Mr. Monahan in this letter? A.

I wouldn't think so, Chairman.

And I certainly wouldn't hold that view.

3

What we had to do on all occasions was get cross party support and every vote

4

was equal.

5

Gilmore proposed the particular C zoning that -- and if you look at the

6

sequence of the various votes that day.

7

compare and contrast that with the Barrett motion, with Deputy Barrett's

8

motion.

9

Q. 312

11:38:40 10

If anything, I would attribute the fact that it was Deputy Eamonn

That that was what got it.

If you

The change in those votes are the Democratic Left votes.

And in 1993, Mr. Lynn, Monarch also made political donations. And just in relation to three of those political payments.

Page 1583.

I just want to

11

draw to your attention the first three payments on that list.

12

Ormonde, Councillor Fox and Councillor Devitt.

13

attributed to the Cherrywood development.

14

decision made by you or a recommendation made by you not the payments now.

11:38:59 15

Councillor

All of those payments are

Was that done as a result of a

The attribution in the books of Monarch?

16

A.

No, I wouldn't have any function in where it goes in the books.

17

Q. 313

And the recommendation to pay Mr. Fox, the 1,000 pounds in January 1993.

18 19 11:39:15 20

That

is the payment to which you gave evidence earlier on this morning? A.

That's correct, that's correct.

Q. 314

Now, in early 1993, Mr. Frank Dunlop was retained by the Monarch Group.

And I

21

want to take you through a sequence of documents.101Could I have 8929, please.

22

And I think if we can work off the screen.

23

documents, Mr. Lynn.

24 11:39:37 25

These are very non-contentious

A.

Okay.

Q. 315

This is an extract from the diary of Mr. Eddie Sweeney which on the 8th of

26

March 1993 records a meeting at 5 p.m. Liam Lawlor, Frank Dunlop?

27

A.

Yes, I've seen this and I've heard Mr. Sweeney's evidence, yes.

28

Q. 316

And that is followed at 4041.

29 11:40:00 30

For the same date of the telephone notation

taken by Mr. Dunlop's office at 9.55 "Liam has arranged a meeting with Ed Sweeney in Monarch House for five o'clock today". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

And at 4.45 at 4042 on the

11:40:08

11:40:20

51 1

same day the telephone attendance records Ann telling Mr. Dunlop's office that

2

Liam won't be able to make the meeting until 5:30.

3

A.

I've seen, that Chairman.

4

Q. 317

And I'd say that that suggests that Mr. Lawlor had some input into the

5

introduction of Mr. Frank Dunlop or the arranging of the first meeting that

6

took place between Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Dunlop.

7

A.

I'd say that, I would accept that, yeah.

8

Q. 318

You were not -- you were not appraised of any decision to introduce Mr. Dunlop.

9 11:40:38 10

11

That's a fair inference.

Isn't that right? A.

That's correct, Chairman, sorry.

Q. 319

And if I understood your evidence correctly this morning, had you been asked

12

you would have recommended Mr. O'Herlihy?

13

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

14

Q. 320

And you would not, I do understand it, have recommended Mr. Dunlop?

A.

Well I didn't know Mr. Dunlop to recommend him or not.

11:40:49 15

I suppose when I said

16

that I would have recommended Bill O'Herlihy.

17

that he personally put in.

18

road shows he actually -- although he apparently can't recollect it. But he

19

actually did come out on quite a number of Saturdays in particular, to the road

11:41:13 20

shows.

21 22

I was conscious of the effort

And I think I said previously that the number of

So he had, if you like, he appeared to me to have a personal

commitment to the actual -- to the development of Cherrywood. Q. 321

Yes.

And insofar as at 4045, please.

This is Mr. Dunlop's diary for March

23

the 9th 1993.

And there is a notation at the top.

24

Richard Lynn.

At 11.30 there is' an entry Eddie Sweeney E Sweeney.

11:41:41 25

there's Richard, Lynn Philip Reilly.

A telephone number 5.15

It's been suggested to the Tribunal, Mr.

26

Lynn, that that is likely to have been the first meeting between yourself and

27

Mr. Dunlop.

28 29 11:41:58 30

A.

Well, I mean, yeah.

I have no difficulty in accepting if that is -- my

recollection was that I first met him in the board room in Monarch House. it's quite possible that that meeting took place but I don't think so. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

But

11:42:03

11:42:15

52 1

Q. 322

2

And I think what you have said to the Tribunal is that you had very limited contact with Mr. Dunlop?

3

A.

That's correct.

4

Q. 323

Now, at this meeting, at your first meeting with Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Reilly was

5

present.

Is that right? Is that your recollection?

6

A.

That's my recollection, yes.

7

Q. 324

And what was the purpose of the meeting?

8

A.

I think it was a briefing meeting.

9

Mr. Dunlop had been engaged and then it was a briefing meeting as regards where

11:42:32 10

we were with the development, what we were trying to do etc. and also what

11 12

I think it was to introduce the fact that

support did we think we had. Q. 325

Mr. Dunlop has outlined to the Tribunal that he formed the view that there was

13

a problem with Mr. Philip Monahan, that people weren't entirely sure what

14

Mr. Monahan was doing?

11:42:52 15

A.

I wouldn't accept that.

I think I said previously, Phil didn't interfere in

16

the day-to-day operation and in actual fact, he, very seldom he asked me, you

17

know, how we were getting on in -- with the Cherrywood.

18

knew Phil, I mean, once Phil bought the land and had decided how it was going

19

to be developed.

11:43:22 20

Unfortunately, if you

He was more or less finished with it until such a time as

sales would come up.

And he would -- he would be getting on with whatever

21

else he was doing.

22

any great interest in relation to the day-to-day running of the Cherrywood

23

venture.

24 11:43:40 25

Q. 326

Presumably --

A.

I beg your pardon.

I had no great recollection of the late Mr. Monahan having

He could have been being briefed by Eddie Sweeney, I

26

wouldn't know that.

27

in and out of the place, he didn't -- I'm not saying he wasn't concerned with

28

that.

29 11:44:01 30

Q. 327

But certainly any time I met him and I would have met him

He just left it to us.

Presumably there was a concern within Monarch that led to the introduction of Mr. Dunlop if the first place? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:44:02

11:44:11

53 1

A.

I would presume so, yes, yes.

2

Q. 328

And presumably that was a concern of which you were unaware.

3

Would that be

fair to say?

4

A.

That would be fair to say, yes.

5

Q. 329

And would it also be fair to say that the introduction of Mr. Dunlop to assist

6

in the endeavours with Dublin County Council came as a shock or a surprise to

7

you?

8

A.

It came as a surprise to me, yes.

9

Q. 330

Leaving aside any element of surprise.

11:44:26 10

Did you sit down with Mr. Reilly and

Mr. Dunlop and work-out what each party or particularly what yourself and Mr.

11

Dunlop were going to do?

12

A.

No, Chairman.

13

Q. 331

So what did you see was Mr. Dunlop's function?

14

A.

My understanding -- A, I didn't know.

11:44:46 15

But B, my understanding was that he was

going to work in the background that I was continuing and the members that Phil

16

Reilly was looking after or looking to, that he was continuing.

17

like, Frank Dunlop was acting as a sweeper to ensure that what we were hearing,

18

that he would be independently hearing.

19

support that and he was hearing differently.

11:45:14 20

Q. 332

And if you

So that if a member said yes, I'll At least we would be aware.

Was this the kind of problem that had been identified by Mr. Smith in his

21

letter in which he said that Monarch had thought they had the support of a

22

particular person and that support didn't materialise on the day.

23

kind of problem that you had identified that Mr. Dunlop was going to deal with?

24

A.

11:45:36 25

Yes because as I said previously, that if a member voted one way he or she could bring a number of votes with him.

So it was important A, to keep the

26

members abreast of what we were doing.

27

that they would have had in relation to the proposal.

28

Q. 333

29 11:45:59 30

And B, to understand or any concerns

Did you know that Mr. Lawlor had had any hand, act or part in the introduction of Mr. Dunlop?

A.

Is that the

No, Chairman, no. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:46:01

11:46:15

54 1

Q. 334

Can I show you 4046, please.

It's a telephone attendance dated the 9th of

2

March 1993.

You needn't worry about.

That's okay.

3

nothing to do with the payment of Mr. Frank Dunlop.

Sorry.

You had

Is that correct?

4

A.

Nothing at all.

5

Q. 335

You never were aware of any remuneration or level of remuneration with Mr.

6 7

Dunlop? A.

8 9 11:46:30 10

11

I don't think so. recoupment.

Unless it -- I don't think it came up in any of the

If it was part of the recoupment.

Q. 336

Other than as part of possible recoupment from GRE?

A.

Yes. Other than that, no, Chairman.

Q. 337

At 4093 know 22nd of March.

In fact at 4094 on the 22nd of March you are

12

recorded as telephoning Mr. Dunlop.

13

insofar as these documents record you making telephone calls that it's likely

14

such calls happened?

11:46:50 15

16

A.

Oh, yes I have no difficulty with that.

Q. 338

Again on the 26th of March 1993.

And may the Tribunal take it, Mr. Lynn,

At 4111.

And on the 29th of March at 4113.

17

And there are two telephone calls on the 29th of March.

18

at 4116, there's another telephone call and on the 31st of March at 4115, you

19

have a meeting apparently according to Mr. Dunlop's diary at 8 or 8.30 in the

11:47:17 20

morning.

Do you see that? For one half hours, 8.30 to ten o'clock?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 339

Did that meeting take place?

23

A.

Well I couldn't be precise about the date.

24

I think I told you before.

were present.

26

Q. 340

Yes.

27

A.

That could have been, that could have been one of them.

28

Q. 341

Yes.

11:47:52 30

I

recollect two meetings with Frank Dunlop in his offices at which he and I only

11:47:35 25

29

On the 30th of March

So certainly between the 9th of March when, if Mr. Dunlop's diary is

correct and the 31st of March you had had two meetings with Mr. Dunlop and five or six telephone calls? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:47:53

11:48:17

55 1

A.

Well, no, no, no.

What I can said is I can recollect having two meetings with

2

him during the period that he was engaged.

3

I can -- on the first occasion I was putting in -- I was put in a waiting room

4

which overlooked the carpark.

5

the carpark on that occasion.

6

discussing Cherrywood, he belly-ragged at this particular politician and said

7

he would never have anything to do with him, did I have anything to do with him

8

blah and blah.

9

Q. 342

11:48:39 10

Right.

And I quickly tell you the reason

And I noticed a particular politician leaving And when I went in to Mr. Dunlop and we start

So are you saying that the two meetings that are recorded for March of

1993 in Mr. Dunlop's diary, that's the 9th of March 1993, a meeting between Mr.

11

Dunlop, Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly.

12

half hour meeting on the 31st of March did not take place?

13

A.

14 11:48:58 15

No, no, no.

And the second meeting which is one and a

What I'm saying is the one on the 31st of March could be the one

I'm referring to. Q. 343

Yes.

16

A.

I can't recollect.

17

Q. 344

Right.

18

A.

That I had a meeting with Phil Reilly, myself and Frank Dunlop in his offices.

19

But it could have happened.

That could have happened.

11:49:09 20

I've no recollection of it.

of meeting him in the board room.

I have a recollection

And I certainly have a distinct

21

recollection of two particular meetings that I had with Frank Dunlop on my own

22

with him in I think it was Lower Mount Street where his office is.

23

Q. 345

Right.

24

A.

No, no, no.

Q. 346

And the purpose of these meetings is, you are focused on one thing with Mr.

11:49:26 25

So you don't dispute that these meetings probably took place?

26

Dunlop and one thing only.

27

councillors?

28 29 11:49:54 30

A.

And that is securing Monarch's position with the

Well I think -- I mean, as I previously said, my job was to get the Cherrywood development acceptable to the vast majority of the councillors.

I was

certainly disquieted from the two meetings that I had with Frank Dunlop. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

I

11:50:00

11:50:23

56 1

felt he wasn't doing any work.

2

relation to where I was with the various members and what was happening and who

3

was supporting or not or what trends were emerging.

4

to Eddie Sweeney.

5

adding anything, workwise, to our team and I still hold that view, by the way.

6

Q. 347

7

I felt all he did was to pick my brain in

And I reported that back

And I complained about the fact that he wasn't having

You don't feel that Mr. Dunlop added value to the Monarch attempts to get their lands rezoned?

8

A.

I could never perceive how he -- how he did add anything to it.

9

Q. 348

And certainly by April of 1993 you're continuing to ring and contact Mr.

11:50:51 10

11

Dunlop. A.

Isn't that right?

It so records.

I mean, a lot of that time and my recollection is that I was

12

responding to calls from him.

13

returned calls.

14

number of occasions.

11:51:12 15

So you may find on successive days that I rang him on a I had been instructed to keep close to or not close to

sorry but keep in contact with Mr. Dunlop.

16 17

And he was very difficult to get and he never

And I presumed that this is as a

result of requests from Eddie Sweeney to find out what he was doing. Q. 349

But you did have contact with Mr. Dunlop throughout -- you certainly seem to

18

have at least had two meetings in March and there are telephone contacts

19

passing between you in April 1993?

11:51:31 20

21

A.

Yes, yes, I accept that. Yes.

Q. 350

And it might be a fair summary of the position simply to say that regardless of

22

your own personal view as to how Mr. Dunlop was conducting his business or not.

23

You were both engaged in the same exercise?

24 11:51:45 25

A.

That's -- I would accept that, Chairman, yeah.

Q. 351

And the purpose of that exercise was to try and reverse the position that

26

related in relation to the Monarch lands on the 27th of May 1992?

27

A.

Plus hold the C zoning.

28

Q. 352

Right.

29 11:52:15 30

So the lands in question went on public display, from the 1st of July

'93 to the 4th of August '93? A.

I'll accept that, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:52:15

11:52:20

57 1

Q. 353

And when the -- these are the changes maps, Mr. Lynn.

And what happens is the

2

public are being given a chance to comment on the proposed changes, isn't that

3

right?

4

A.

Yes, Chairman, yes.

5

Q. 354

And the council members then get to consider that when it comes back in before

6

them to confirm or otherwise the changes that are proposed?

7

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

8

Q. 355

Change three on the map proposed changing the residential density from four

9 11:52:37 10

11

houses per acre to one per acre.

Isn't that right?

A.

Sorry?

Q. 356

The residential density change that was proposed on the map at 7217.

12

that went on public display?

13

A.

Sorry, I beg your pardon, yes.

14

Q. 357

We're talking about the map that went on public display?

A.

It went out one house per acre.

16

Q. 358

But it's called a change, isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes, yes. It's a material change and therefore had to go out on public

11:52:51 15

18 19

The map

display. Q. 359

11:53:05 20

And change three on that map was change from four houses to one house per acre as a result of Mr. Barrett's motion?

21

A.

I accept that, yes.

22

Q. 360

Change 4A and 4B or change 4 relate to the town centre.

23

A.

That's correct, the retail element I think.

24

Q. 361

And the reason it's A and B is tart part of the lands now zoned for town centre

11:53:20 25

had been and agriculture and part had been residential.

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 362

Two changes one from residential to town centre one from agriculture to town

28 29 11:53:29 30

centre. A.

That's right.

And I think that came about because of the change in the link

road. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:53:29

11:53:42

58 1

Q. 363

2 3

It's the line of the Southeastern motorway -- 1983 line that divides the two I think is the --

A.

4

Yes.

I think it came about because of the proposed link road from Wyattville

junction to the proposed Southeastern Motorway.

5

Q. 364

No, though, that came and you're talking about the variation I think, Mr. Lynn.

6

A.

It doesn't matter.

7

Q. 365

It doesn't matter.

8 9

But the purpose of what you were both engaged in was to

hold the town centre if possible? A.

Yes.

Q. 366

And to change the residential zoning on the Monarch lands.

11

A.

That's correct.

12

Q. 367

The only which you could achieve leaving aside the legal advice and all of

11:53:55 10

13

that.

14

motion debated on the floor of the chamber in connection with the change.

11:54:11 15

That you could achieve a change on the density zoning was to get a

Isn't that right?

16

A.

That's correct.

17

Q. 368

So did you set about with Mr. Dunlop on your own preparing a motion for, to

18 19

seek such a change? A.

11:54:31 20

Mr. Dunlop had no hand, act or part in having a draft motion prepared.

no hand, act or part in the approach to the various members who signed the

21

motion.

22

Q. 369

Right.

23

A.

Absolutely.

24

Q. 370

Okay.

11:54:42 25

Was that something you did?

Do you know what Mr. Dunlop was doing in the lead up to the 11th or the

3rd of November 1993?

26

A.

No, Chairman.

27

Q. 371

Right.

28 29 11:54:57 30

He had

Did you have a meeting with Mr. Dunlop and Mr. Patfield on the 13th or

14th of October can you remember 1993? A.

No, I understand that that meeting was cancelled.

Q. 372

Okay. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:54:57

11:55:23

59 1

A.

That meeting had been requested by Mr. Patfield.

2

Q. 373

And can I show you an entry at 4616.

In Mr. Dunlop's diary for the 27th of

3

October.

And there is an entry you see at 11.00 Richard Lynn and it's /BC.

4

Can I ask you, can you remember meeting Mr. Dunlop on the 27th of October and

5

do you know who or what was BC?

6

A.

Again, I can't recollect at this distance.

7

Q. 374

Well can I suggest two possibilities.

8 9

Berkley Court Hotel or it might be a meeting with Betty Coffey. A.

11:55:45 10

11

Can I suggest to you it might be the

No, I certainly never met. council.

Q. 375

12

I never met Frank Dunlop with any member of the

And the Berkley Court.

Now, it could be, I mean, I just can't say.

And certainly it's coming up to the time of the meeting of Dublin County Council?

13

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

14

Q. 376

And at any stage, did you do any analysis with Mr. Dunlop about the level of

11:56:02 15

support that either he felt Monarch had or you felt Monarch had amongst the

16 17

councillors? A.

Well certainly at the meetings that I had with him and we would have gone

18

through the various members where we thought they were and how we could get

19

their support etc.

11:56:28 20

21

Q. 377

And on November the 3rd at 4665. Monarch.

23

8 a.m.?

11:56:54 25

But no great

scientific, if I can put it that way, approach to the particular problem.

22

24

And whether that support was sustained etc.

Mr. Dunlop's diary records a meeting in

Were you at that meeting can you remember on the 3rd of November at

A.

Well I couldn't remember, Chairman, no.

Q. 378

The --

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

you, of yours before council meetings to meet in Monarch House at eight

29

o'clock.

11:57:04 30

A.

Yes.

Sorry, you said earlier, Mr. Lynn, that it was a practice of

Earlier this morning you said you might have been in Monarch.

If there's a council meeting on we would normally ... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:57:08

11:57:12

60 1 2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

And there was a council meeting on on the 3rd?

Yes.

4 5 6

MS. DILLON: A.

That was 2.30.

We started most mornings at half seven to eight.

So it's not ...

7 8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY:

You could have been at the meeting?

A.

I could have been.

Q. 379

MS. DILLON:

It just depends who was at the meeting.

11:57:25 10

11

This is the day, Mr. Lynn, that the Monarch motion is listed

12

first for hearing.

13

likely that if Mr. Dunlop is attending a meeting on the 3rd of November 1993 at

14

Monarch, that's a meeting that you would also have been at because you are both

11:57:42 15

afternoon, the actual vote. A.

18 19

And isn't it

engaged in the same exercise and it is possible that it's going to happen that

16 17

And it's for the meeting that afternoon.

Well, Chairman, I just can't say whether I was at that meeting or not.

I may

have been but I may not have been. Q. 380

11:58:02 20

Now, can I ask you, Mr. Lynn, about any requirement that you are aware of for cash in October or November of 1993?

21

A.

Absolutely none, Chairman.

22

Q. 381

Do you know a sum of 4,500 pounds is debited and attributed to the Cherrywood

23

general promotions account on the 3rd of October 1993.

24

for the transcript are 4627, 4628 and 4629.

11:58:28 25

26

A.

I have no knowledge of those.

Q. 382

On the 11th of October 1993.

27 A.

I've no idea, Chairman.

29

Q. 383

12th of October 1993.

11:58:48 30

So we don't need to put them up?

1, 900 cash is attributed to Cherrywood stock or

Cherrywood General Promotions, at page 4585.

28

The page references

Do you know what that was for?

3,000 pounds cash is attributed to Cherrywood general

promotions, at page 4682. Do you know what that was for? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

11:58:50

11:59:00

61 1

A.

I've no idea, Chairman.

2

Q. 384

1st of November 1993.

3

promotion, at 4784.

2,000 pounds is attributed to Cherrywood general

Do you know what that is from?

4

A.

I've no idea, Chairman.

5

Q. 385

On the 1st -- on the 2nd of November 5,000 pounds is attributed to Cherrywood

6 7

general promotions. A.

No, Chairman.

Do you know what that was for?

You can take it, Chairman, I have no knowledge of any -- I

8

don't know whether you have to go through all of the list.

9

knowledge of any of the cash withdrawals.

11:59:23 10

But I've no

Q. 386

I think --

11

A.

I don't know whether that will help you.

12

Q. 387

For the transcript I think I have to do this.

13

A.

I beg your pardon.

14

Q. 388

On the 2nd November 1993, 3,000 pounds attributed to Cherrywood General

11:59:33 15

Promotions. Do you have any idea what that was for?

16

A.

No idea, Chairman.

17

Q. 389

On 2nd of November 1993.

18 19

Promotions.

6,000 pounds attributed to Cherrywood General

4670, do you have any idea?

A.

No idea, Chairman.

Q. 390

And on the 2nd November 2,500 pounds 8787?

21

A.

No idea, Chairman.

22

Q. 391

On the -- that's the 2nd of November.

11:59:47 20

And did you -- on the 3rd of November

23

there's another 5,000 pounds cash attributed to Cherrywood general promotions.

24

Do you know what that was for?

12:00:02 25

26

A.

No idea, Chairman.

Q. 392

And did you know that Mr. Dunlop on the 3rd of November had been paid 15,000

27

pounds by cheque?

28

A.

No, Chairman.

29

Q. 393

From Monarch?

A.

No, Chairman, I wouldn't be aware of that.

12:00:11 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:00:13

12:00:29

62 1

Q. 394

And do you have any idea or can you offer any assistance to the Tribunal as to

2

why there was this requirement or these funds were debited at that particular

3

period in time?

4

A.

I can't help you on that, I've no idea, Chairman.

5

Q. 395

In view of the fact that all of these expenses or costs are attributed to

6

Cherrywood it would follow, it would have had to have something to do with the

7

Cherrywood development, isn't that right?

8

A.

9 12:00:47 10

I presume it should but I -- I -- I mean, I've heard other evidence which indicates otherwise.

Q. 396

11

Sorry.

You would expect as the co-ordinator of the project.

You see you are

the co-ordinator of the Cherrywood project, isn't that right?

12

A.

That's right.

13

Q. 397

Wouldn't it follow from that then, Mr. Lynn, that if these big expenses are

14

being incurred in connection with the Cherrywood project that you should have

12:01:03 15

16

known about them? A.

Not necessarily, Chairman.

Even, I mean -- I take the import of what you're

17

saying that I should have known about it but I didn't have if you like a

18

budgetary control or not control even, input, in relation to what was charged

19

or not charged to Cherrywood or any other job.

12:01:25 20

That wasn't my function.

My

function was more in the physical sense of trying to gather votes, trying to

21

put together a scheme which is acceptable to management on the planners, trying

22

to get our own team to put that together, doing all of the researches, doing

23

the research on services, doing the researches on the Southeastern Motorway and

24

bringing that forward and keeping it forward and gathering as much information

12:01:48 25

or gathering as much support as was possible for it.

But if there were

26

charges being made, I mean, A, I didn't have any control over it and B, I had

27

no input to it.

28

Q. 398

29 12:02:09 30

But you would have expected -- sorry.

Can I put it like this would you expect

that somebody within Monarch would have known what those expenses were for? A.

Oh, yes, Chairman, I would.

I would expect somebody should know.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:02:14

12:02:33

63 1

Q. 399

Can I show you the motion at page 7226.

Now, Mr. Marren, as you know, has

2

told the Tribunal that he asked you to get this motion typed.

3

fact the reference at the bottom of the page, if you see there?

And I think in

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 400

Is probably your reference?

6

A.

Is a Monarch reference.

7

Q. 401

It's Monarch reference?

8

A.

Yes, yes.

9

Q. 402

And that you obviously met and discussed this matter with Mr. Marren, is that

12:02:42 10

correct?

11

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

12

Q. 403

Now, I want to draw to your attention the only date on the face of the letter,

13 14

the motion, is the 11th of November 1993. A.

12:03:03 15

Yeah.

I mean, I see that but I -- I would be -- the 11th of November '93 is

the date of the meeting.

16

Q. 404

Yes.

17

A.

That motion was submitted well in advance of the meeting.

18

Q. 405

And I'm suggesting to you is it possible that what happened is if it was

19

submitted in advance of the meeting that the date on it refers to the amendment

12:03:15 20

portion?

21

A.

Absolutely.

22

Q. 406

And not --

23

A.

The amendment was written.

24

I was at that meeting.

The amendment was written

and I think I told you earlier that Councillor Marren, it's out of courtesy,

12:03:26 25

and this happens the whole time.

If you're involved in something like that.

26

That out of courtesy if you're there, you'll be advised that there's changes

27

coming to the particular motion.

28

Q. 407

29 12:03:47 30

Right.

Now, the meeting, it would follow from that, that the motion was

lodged prior to the 11th of November 1993, isn't that right, Mr. Lynn? A.

That's right.

I think if you look at -- I don't know whether you have copies

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:03:49

12:03:56

64 1

of the agenda.

2

Q. 408

It's on the agenda.

3

A.

Yeah.

4 5

And it would have been even prior to the 3rd of November and maybe even

prior to that. Q. 409

And you would also have been aware that other motions had been have been lodged

6

which sought to confirm change three in other words keep the residential

7

density at one house to the acre?

8

A.

It would have been, yes.

9

Q. 410

Once you knew those motions came in, you knew there was going to be a vote?

A.

Yes.

11

Q. 411

And it wasn't simply going to be confirmed or whatever?

12

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

13

Q. 412

You would have seen the manager report and seen that the manager was

12:04:10 10

14

recommending change three would have been deleted, which would have brought it

12:04:20 15

automatically back to four houses per acre?

16

A.

That's right, Chairman.

17

Q. 413

And the motion that's drafted, Mr. Lynn, refers only to the Monarch lands,

18 19

isn't that right? A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 414

Whereas the -- all of the lands had been zoned at one house to the acre?

21

A.

Well --

22

Q. 415

All of the residentially zoned lands?

23

A.

Well more lands I suppose, more lands than Monarch's lands.

12:04:31 20

24 12:04:45 25

There's lands to

the west which didn't come in at all. Q. 416

Didn't come into your motion if I can call it that, the Monarch motion.

26

A.

That's right.

27

Q. 417

Now, the manager you knew was recommending to delete change three in its

28 29 12:04:59 30

entirety, isn't that right? A.

I would have seen that on the agenda.

But I wouldn't have -- I mean, I knew

that he was supportive of the Monarch lands being changed from one house to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:05:05

12:05:18

65 1

four houses.

I mean, we knew that in advance.

I didn't know in advance

2

until I saw the agenda the extent of what the manager was proposing.

3

Q. 418

The manager was proposing to delete change three in its entirety.

4

A.

That's right.

5

Q. 419

And change three effected not just the Monarch lands but all of the

6

residentially zoned lands at one house to the acre?

7

A.

That's right. And that would have suited Monarch had that been passed.

8

Q. 420

Yes. But when the amendment is being made, and this is my question:

9

didn't you suggest or did you suggest to Mr. Marren that the correct amendment

12:05:35 10

11

Why

in fact should have been to support the manager's recommendation? A.

Well, no, Chairman.

As I say, Councillor Marren out of courtesy advised me

12

what he was doing.

It's not for me to argue.

13

situation is -- has been addressed, I couldn't be seen to be interfering in

14

other people's lands or the reasons why he was doing it.

12:06:02 15

purely a political decision.

I mean, once the Monarch

I mean, that's a

Certainly from Monarch's point of view.

The

16

more land that would have been zoned for residential development, the bigger

17

the retail and development could have been sustained.

18

Q. 421

19

And certainly insofar as the map is concerned.

7227.

Your motion, the

Monarch motion, relates only to the Monarch lands and not to the balance of the

12:06:32 20

residentially zoned lands.

Isn't that correct?

21

A.

Well that is, that is what Councillor Marren wanted to do.

22

Q. 422

Yes.

23

A.

It is, yes, yes.

24

Q. 423

And The Square in the centre of the Monarch lands, that --

A.

That's the retail.

26

Q. 424

Yes.

27

A.

Sorry the C zoning, yeah.

28

Q. 425

Did you speak with Councillor Lohan, Coffey, Liam Cosgrave and Anne Ormonde?

29

A.

I would say yes, Chairman.

Q. 426

Did you get their signatures on the motion?

12:06:48 25

12:07:00 30

And the dividing line in the centre is the old reservation line?

The C zoning?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:07:03

12:07:14

66 1

A.

2

I don't know whether I actually got their signatures but I got them to agree to support -- to sign with Councillor Marren.

3

Q. 427

You asked them all to --

4

A.

Yes, yes.

5

Q. 428

You were about --

6

A.

It's cross party support is what I said earlier.

7

Q. 429

Yeah.

8

A.

You have two Fianna Fail two Fine Gael and Progressive Democrat.

9

Q. 430

So --

A.

I also asked Councillor Gilmore to sign, but he said that they would have their

12:07:23 10

11

own motions.

12

Q. 431

Right.

13

A.

Unfortunately, yes.

14

Their motions were to the opposite effect, isn't that right?

position.

12:07:40 15

In actual fact, they went away from their previous

In actual fact, my recollection is that Eamonn Gilmore tried to

throw, if you like, put it back into Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.

16

Again, with a request with a variation prior to June 1994.

17

Q. 432

That motion was lost, yeah.

18

A.

So it wasn't that he was going away from this thing but going away from the

19

development of the lands.

12:07:58 20

21

But rather that he wanted it dealt with by the new

County Council. Q. 433

22

And at 7228, you also prepared a motion in connection with the change 4A and 4B?

23

A.

That's correct.

24

Q. 434

Seeking to confirm it but you are having regard to the manager's

12:08:09 25

recommendation.

26 27

You are conceding limiting the retail element to

neighbourhood size? A.

That's Councillor Marren dictating the content of it.

28

have pushed it naturally.

29

if I could.

12:08:28 30

I would have liked to

I was trying to get back up to full district centre

But the manager was recommending and that's what Councillor

Marren wanted. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:08:29

12:08:41

67 1

Q. 435

2

Yes.

And insofar as the other signatures on that are concerned, are you the

person again who obtained those signatures?

3

A.

Yes, yes.

4

Q. 436

So that Mr. Dunlop didn't have any input, if that's your evidence to the

5

Tribunal, in, in the preparation of that Tribunal?

6

A.

That's quite correct, Chairman.

7

Q. 437

Now, I think ultimately the two motions as drafted were passed, isn't that

8 9 12:08:49 10

correct? A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 438

And the motion in relation to the neighbourhood centre.

That was passed and

11

the effect of that would have been while the 30 acres were still zoned C, the

12

retail element was capped at neighbourhood size?

13

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

14

Q. 439

So it was going to effect shopping but not necessarily other sort of

12:09:06 15

development?

16

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

17

Q. 440

Insofar as the residentially zoned lands were concerned the density came up to

18 19 12:09:16 20

four per acre for the Monarch lands only? A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 441

But the balance of the lands residentially zoned lands in the Carrickmines

21

Valley were not effected?

22

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

23

Q. 442

Now, do you know or can you remember which councillors change, if any, changed

24 12:09:31 25

their position from May of 1992 in November of 1993? A.

Well, Chairman, other than putting down the two votes and ticking them off, and

26

even that you can't say.

27

think influences councillors when they come to a vote is A, the support that

28

the County Manager is the paramount.

29

the motion.

12:10:04 30

I mean, what influences -- well at least what I

The second one then, is who has signed

And the third one then is the cross party support.

So in that

the three ingredients were there for both motions, it was easy enough for the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:10:05

12:10:13

68 1

council to go with it.

So you can't just say there was a big change.

2

was a big change what had happened between one period and the other period.

3

Q. 443

Right.

4

A.

And --

5

Q. 444

Can I just ask you about Mr. Lohan?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 445

He was a member of the Progressive Democrats, is that correct?

8

A.

That's correct, yes.

9

Q. 446

If you just look at 7263, which is the vote on your motion.

12:10:25 10

look at those who are recorded there as voting in favour.

11 12

And if you just And can I ask you,

is Councillor Cass was Progressive Democrat, isn't that right? At that time. A.

13 14

There

Well she was in -- she was Fine Gael member and then she joined Progressive Democrats or the other way around.

Sorry, what's the date of this?

Q. 447

This is the 11th of November '93.

A.

Okay.

16

Q. 448

And Mary Elliott.

17

A.

No, no, Mary Elliott is Fine Gael.

18

Q. 449

Who are the other Progressive Democrats on that list?

19

A.

Um.

Q. 450

Well Colm Tyndall, if you start at the bottom --

21

A.

No, no.

22

Q. 451

Uh-huh.

23

A.

I don't know whether Michael Keating was in Fine Gael or was he in the

12:10:49 15

12:11:11 20

24

Was she a Progressive Democrat?

Catherine Keane.

Progressive Democrats at that stage.

12:11:35 25

Helen Keogh, Larry Lohan, Tom Morrissey,

Tom Morrissey was Fine Gael at that stage.

Catherine Quinn -- sorry.

That

26

should have been Cait Keane and Catherine Quinn.

27

yeah, if Tom Morrissey was Fine Gael then Sheila Terry was PD and Colm Tyndall

28

was PD.

29 12:12:00 30

Q. 452

Sheila Terry, I think was

And if you just look on the follow page, at 7264, if you just run down the list voting against.

Are any of the people who voted against the motion, members

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:12:04

12:12:22

69 1

of the PDs?

2

A.

No, Chairman.

3

Q. 453

No.

It would follow then that it was a successful move in putting Mr. Lohan's

4

name on the motion because it would appear for whatever reason all of the

5

members of the Progressive Democrats who voted on your motion, voted in favour

6

of it?

7

A.

That's correct.

And you'll have to look at, I mean, where Councillor Lohan is

8

a teacher by profession.

9

the Cathaoirleach of Dun Laoghaire Borough Council.

12:12:44 10

He was -- in actual fact I'm nearly certain he was And he was one of the

ones who had met various personnel when we were advocating the science and

11

technology park.

12

relation to the future development of the lands, which included the science and

13

technology park.

14

O'Sullivan.

12:13:14 15

He was fully familiar with the proposals that Monarch had in

Had known of the meetings that we had had with Kevin

And I'd imagine for all of those reasons, that he was able to

support the proposal.

16

Q. 454

So --

17

A.

But principally based, I would say not because of what I -- how I persuade him.

18 19

More importantly how the County Manager would recommend him. Q. 455

12:13:31 20

Can I ask you this then.

By November of 1993 after this vote, would it be

fair to summarise the Monarch position as being the following.

There was an

21

agreement in principle with the County Manager in connection with the

22

introduction of a science and technology park, which would take effect or be

23

initiated in 1994 after Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council came into being?

24 12:13:50 25

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 456

In -- there was a town centre zoning on the lands which was confirmed with the

26

shopping or retail element capped to neighbourhood size?

27

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

28

Q. 457

And when something is capped in that fashion it's done so by through the

29 12:14:10 30

written statement. A.

Isn't that right? It's put in as a local objective?

As a local objective, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:14:12

12:14:23

70 1

Q. 458

Right. So there was a local objective, I think No. 6 for map 27 to cap the

2

retail element as neighbourhood size. The residential portion of the Monarch

3

lands were now zoned at four houses to the acre or ten houses to the hectare?

4

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

5

Q. 459

And that would be on piped sewerage?

6

A.

That's correct, yes.

7

Q. 460

Because of the upcoming pipe.

8 9

It was anticipated that the pipe would come on

stream as it were in 1994 or 1995? A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 461

That didn't necessarily happen but it was anticipated at that time?

11

A.

Absolutely.

12

Q. 462

And with the advent of the Carrickmines sewer those residentially zoned lands

12:14:37 10

13 14 12:15:02 15

would become the first available lands for development? A.

That's right.

Q. 463

Right.

And the lands became developed.

You would have had a hope or an expectation that in your dealings with

16

the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council on the science and technology park

17

that it might be possible to achieve a change in zoning on the balance of your

18

lands which were agriculturally zoned?

19

A.

That's quite correct, Chairman.

Q. 464

And that if fact transpired to be the case?

21

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

22

Q. 465

So that at the end of the council meeting in November 1993.

12:15:07 20

23 24 12:15:18 25

Monarch were in a

significantly enhanced position? A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 466

Do you say that that was achieved solely as a result of your efforts and the

26

professional teams efforts excluding Mr. Frank Dunlop?

27

A.

I'd say that, but more importantly, that the County Manager was proposing it.

28

Q. 467

Yes.

29

A.

Well, I mean, I would love to take the credit for it but ...

Q. 468

What the County Manager was proposing in November 1993 was to delete change

12:15:38 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:15:42

12:15:59

71 1

three in its entirety?

2

A.

Well I'm talking about the Monarch lands.

3

Q. 469

Insofar as the Monarch lands.

I think that's the question.

Can you look at that sequence of events, Mr.

4

Lynn, and can you show the Tribunal where the change took place or what it was

5

that caused a change that allowed the Monarch lands to succeed at four houses

6

to the acre?

7

A.

Yes.

I mean, I've already said this to you this morning.

Is that from May

8

1992 to November 1993 is a span of a year and a quarter, a year and a bit.

9

During that period, Monarch had I think we had made an application actually for

12:16:26 10

the Dominican Convent or at least it was in preparation.

So we had acquired

11

the Dominican convent site.

We'd acquired the Pavilion site.

So we had

12

addressed -- it was our case from 1991 that there was retail capacity in Dun

13

Laoghaire and what Dun Laoghaire was doing was that it was refusing access to

14

the market, if you like.

12:16:49 15

16

My recollection is it was the manager pointed out to us that if we wanted to

17

get anything on Cherrywood we had better do something in Dun Laoghaire.

18

think actually he -- it was he who brought that site to our attention. So

19

between May 1992 and November 1993 there was quite a change in relation to what

12:17:10 20

Monarch was doing vis-a-vis the centre of Dun Laoghaire.

And I

There was also a

21

change in the -- insofar as the local community.

22

refer to this, that Loughlinstown Community Council were very much in favour of

23

the development of Cherrywood.

24

into a County Council meeting looking for the members to actually support the

12:17:37 25

proposed development.

And I'm sorry that I didn't

And they were the only community which came

So what we have is we had the manager -- when we said

26

on side now.

27

favour.

28

were in favour and the local community were in favour so ...

29 12:17:59 30

Q. 470

The manager was in favour.

The professional planners were in

It was the proper planning and development of the area. The members

If we just stop with the members.

You see at the end of the day, Mr. Lynn,

what I was asking you about and I'm -- I obviously wasn't making myself clear. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:18:04

12:18:12

72 1

You lost a critical vote in Dublin County Council in May of 1992?

2

A.

In respect of residential.

3

Q. 471

Yes or no.

4

A.

Well yes --

5

Q. 472

You succeed in the a critical vote in November 1993 when you regained the

6

You lost a critical vote?

position?

7

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

8

Q. 473

Now it may not have been where you wanted to find yourself when you embarked on

9

the entire process in 1990 but it was the best possible result you could

12:18:28 10

achieve in the light of the defeat on the residential rezoning in May of '92

11

isn't that correct?

12

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

13

Q. 474

Now, the only people who could make that decision were the councillors. The

14

County Manager had nothing to do with if, local groups had nothing to do with

12:18:41 15

it.

16

In the end of the day, in the chamber the people who vote and the only

people who vote, are the councillors.

17

A.

Yes but the councillor are --

18

Q. 475

They may take all sorts of factors into account --

19

A.

Yeah but they are influenced.

Q. 476

The only people who vote --

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 477

-- Mr. Lynn, as well you know, because this is your business, are the

12:18:52 20

23 24 12:18:59 25

councillors. A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 478

So really the focus at the end of the day for your job and indeed Mr. Dunlop's

26

job for Monarch, is to count the numbers and get the votes in.

27

right?

28

A.

No, it's not to count the numbers to get the votes in.

29

Q. 479

To win you have to have more.

12:19:28 30

Isn't that

One more than the other side who are voting

against? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:19:28

12:19:33

73 1

A.

2 3

That's true.

But in order to achieve that you've a whole lot more to do than

just count numbers. Q. 480

You have to deal with the councillors and you have to persuade the councillors

4

and you have to take the steps that are necessary to persuade the councillors

5

of the merits of your case, isn't that right?

6

A.

Yes but we also have to do things which brings that persuasion to the fore i.e.

7

we had to do the developments in Dun Laoghaire.

8

community with us.

9

sorry.

12:19:55 10

11

We had to bring the local

And without that happening, it wouldn't, you wouldn't --

And you had to keep the County Manager in support of it and without

those three strands, it wouldn't have passed. Q. 481

12

You did have the County Manager in support because the County Manager recommended that change three in its entirety be deleted?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 482

That the residential zoning for all of the residential lands go back to four

12:20:10 15

per acre.

Isn't that right?

16

A.

That's quite correct.

17

Q. 483

And you knew that when you were preparing the motion --

18

A.

Sorry -- I beg your pardon.

19

he had two senior politicians.

12:20:26 20

Council was set up. Q. 484

23 24

He had Deputy Sean Barrett.

And he had

Deputy Eamonn Gilmore proposing no development now, wait until the new County

21 22

It was also open to the County Manager to -- and

This thing is premature.

But you knew what the county manager was proposing when you prepared or typed the motion for Mr. Lynn (sic) because you referred to it.

7226?

A.

Do you mean for Mr. Marren?

Q. 485

Yeah when you typed the motion for Mr. Marren.

26

A.

I --

27

Q. 486

Because the motion records "Dublin County Council hereby resolves to accept the

12:20:42 25

28 29 12:20:53 30

County Manager's recommendation." A.

Recommendation.

That's correct.

Q. 487

So you knew when you were preparing that motion that the County Manager was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:20:57

12:21:05

74 1

recommending that the residentially zoned lands all be changed to four per

2

acre?

3

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

4

Q. 488

So you knew that that's what he was proposing?

5

A.

Yes chairman.

6

Q. 489

You were confining because that's what Mr. Marren wanted?

7

A.

That's right Chairman.

8

Q. 490

The change to the Monarch lands only.

9

A.

That's right, Chairman.

Q. 491

So everybody at that meeting who is voting on this motion, knows that they are

12:21:13 10

11

voting only on one thing and that's your lands the Monarch lands?

12

A.

I would resume so, Chairman.

13

Q. 492

So there's no question of anybody being confused in relation to anything else.

14

The County Manager is saying rezone them all back to four per acre and

12:21:27 15

Mr. Marren with this motion that you've prepared for him, are saying for

16

Monarch lands yes four per acre.

For everybody else's lands one per acre.

17

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes I'd agree with that.

18

Q. 493

Now, this was the best result you could have hoped for if you were to succeed

19 12:21:46 20

21

with it in the light of the decision in May of '92? A.

That's correct Chairman.

Q. 494

Right.

So this is the optimum that you have to achieve.

And the only people

22

who can deliver it for you is not the County Manager, because you are

23

disregarding him here, because you are not going with the County Manager.

24

it's not the local groups?

12:22:00 25

26

A.

Sorry.

Q. 495

Because at the end of the day, Mr. Lynn, the reality is that the only people

27

who have the power to give Monarch four houses to the acre are the councillors?

28

A.

I've accepted that, Chairman.

29

Q. 496

And Mr. Sweeney in September 1993 when he's forwarding budget proposals

12:22:20 30

And

prepared by you to GRE at 4344.

In the second paragraph says "throughout the

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:22:32

12:22:47

75 1

summer, the staff here have kept in contact with members of the council with a

2

view towards holding support and encouraging additional support for the

3

proposal.

4

council against a number of backgrounds and the possibilities of using whatever

5

means or personnel necessary to ensure sufficient support on the day".

We've contentiously reviewed the position of each member of the

6 7

Mr. Sweeney is absolutely crystal clear in September 1993 that in order to

8

succeed in his proposals, it is the members of the council.

9

A.

Yes, we all accept that, chairman.

Q. 497

Isn't that right?

11

A.

We all accept, that Chairman.

12

Q. 498

Right.

12:23:05 10

13 14 12:23:20 15

16

Between May of 1992 and November of 1993 what councillors did you

persuade to change their minds? A.

Well I would hope I persuaded anybody and.

Q. 499

By name, please, Mr. Lynn.

A.

But, Chairman, I wouldn't know that it was I who persuaded the councillor to

17

vote.

18

complaint credit that everybody who voted in favour of the Monarch proposal was

19

persuaded by me.

12:23:42 20

The councillors vote as they deem fit.

So, I mean, I would love to

But I fear --

Q. 500

Did you ever offer ever offer them a bribe?

21

A.

Never.

22

Q. 501

Did you ever discuss money with any councillor?

23

A.

I was never approached by any --

24

Q. 502

Just answer the question --

A.

I want to answer it this way, please. I was never approached by any candidate.

12:23:56 25

26

By any elected member of a local authority.

27

authority.

By any member of Seanad Eireann or Dail Eireann for any untoward

28

payment.

Now does that answer the question?

29 12:24:13 30

Q. 503

Right.

By any official of a local

So did you ever discuss money in any case or any way with Mr. Frank

Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:24:13

12:24:23

76 1

A.

Never!

2

Q. 504

Right.

3

A.

Never.

4

Q. 505

Did you ever offer election contributions to any councillor?

5

A.

Yes, I did, Chairman.

6

Q. 506

Right.

7

A.

Never, Chairman. Save I think I referred to yesterday it was a golf outing of

8 9 12:24:41 10

11

Did you ever offer money to any councillor?

Did you ever make any payments in cash?

which for Colm McGrath there was 500 pounds because the cheque wasn't ready. Q. 507

Uh-huh.

A.

Save that, no, Chairman.

Q. 508

And is it the position then despite this being the focus of your endeavours at

12

that time and despite having analysed all of the documentation to do with the

13

voting record.

14

persuaded or to change their position from May of '92 to November of '93?

12:25:08 15

A.

You cannot name to the Tribunal those councillors that you

You can take it, Chairman, that in relation to all of the members of County

16

Council.

17

to them.

18

the Monarch case.

19

October 1990 position, the January 1991 position.

12:25:35 20

When we say all, the vast majority.

I made continuous approaches

They afforded me their time and what I was able to do was to present I was able to present it against the backdrop of the

where the County Manager was.

What then had transpired,

Where their colleagues were if I knew and where

21

we hoped to eventually go to vis-a-vis the science and technology park etc. and

22

into the future.

23

voted.

24

County Manager's recommendation.

12:26:02 25

That may have persuaded some or all of the members who

I would doubt it.

I would think that the main persuader was the

Q. 509

Well that can't be correct?

26

A.

Why?

27

Q. 510

Because they didn't go with the county managers recommendation as you well

28 29 12:26:11 30

know? A.

They went with the County Manager. I can only speak on behalf of the Monarch lands.

They went with the County Manager's recommendation in relation to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:26:15

12:26:20

77 1

Monarch lands.

2

Q. 511

They didn't go with the County Manager's recommendation in May of 1992?

3

A.

That's correct.

4

Q. 512

They didn't go with the County Manager's recommendation in December of 1991?

5

A.

That's correct.

6

Q. 513

And they didn't with the County Manager's recommendation in November of 1993?

7

A.

Yes but anybody looking at it --

8

Q. 514

Is that the correct position or not --

9 12:26:29 10

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, would the witness be allowed to answer the question.

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

13

you say they voted?

14

A.

Mr. Lynn should be allowed to answer the question.

In what way do

In 1993?

12:26:40 15

16 17

CHAIRMAN: A.

Yeah.

Yes.

In 1993 the motion from Councillor Marren.

You can see -- in actual

18

fact, he wouldn't have needed, as far as I can see, to actually have put in the

19

amendment because the map that he referred to relates only to the Monarch

12:26:58 20

lands.

That's an aside.

It was because the manager was comfortable with

21

four houses per acre in the area in a greater area that that, allowed the

22

members to at least vote for four houses to the acre on the Monarch lands.

23

And I think you heard from Councillor Marren that this was a political decision

24

that he took.

12:27:27 25

That in order to get the -- to ensure that the motion passed,

that he confined it.

And I think he also expressed that he had regard to what

26

his colleague Deputy Barrett was trying to achieve, i.e. to lesson the

27

development.

28

lands, the northern lands were more dear to Deputy Barrett's position than the

29

Monarch lands.

And I think that it must have been the case that the upper

12:27:55 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:27:55

12:28:01

78 1

CHAIRMAN:

2

version?

3

A.

Well are you saying then that it was in line with a slimmed down

Absolutely, Chairman.

4 5 6

CHAIRMAN: A.

Of what the County Manager wanted?

Absolutely, Chairman.

7 8 9

CHAIRMAN:

That's the way you saw the motion as amended.

A.

Yes, Chairman.

Q. 515

MS. DILLON:

12:28:12 10

11 12

In 1994 an area Action Plan was prepared by Dun

Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council, isn't that right?

13

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

14

Q. 516

And I think that was something that had been discussed between Mr. Murray and

12:28:23 15

yourselves in January of that year, that such an Action Area Plan would be

16

prepared, isn't that right?

17

A.

That's Mr. William Murray now?

18

Q. 517

The county planning officer?

19

A.

As distinct from our Noel Murray.

Q. 518

That's correct?

21

A.

Yes, Chairman, yes.

22

Q. 519

And on the 27th of May 1994, Mr. Lynn, 10,000 pounds attributed to general

12:28:35 20

23

promotions was take taken out of MPSL.

24

went?

12:28:51 25

26

Do you have any idea where that money

A.

I've no idea, chairman.

Q. 520

On 15th of June 1994 another sum of 10,000 pounds attributed to general

27

promotions was similarly treated.

Do you have any idea where that money went?

28

A.

No idea, Chairman.

29

Q. 521

On the 16th of June 1994, 7,000 pounds was deducted attributed to Cherrywood

12:29:07 30

general promotion.

And again do you have any idea where that money went?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:29:11

12:29:26

79 1

A.

I've no idea, chairman.

2

Q. 522

Right.

3

In June of 1994, Mr. Eamonn Gilmore brought a motion before the

Tourism Committee of Dublin Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown Council.

4

A.

That's right, Chairman.

5

Q. 523

Were you aware that Mr Gilmore's with going to do that?

6

A.

I wasn't, Chairman.

I wasn't surprised that he would do it because I was in

7

constant contact with him.

8

manager bringing a proposal.

9

proposal would come to the meeting as soon as possible.

12:29:46 10

And I suppose we were trying to ensure that the So it didn't surprise

me that a politician would take advantage of the possibility of something

11 12

We were moving with the County Manager towards the

positive being announced that he would put down a motion. Q. 524

Because on the 19th of May '94, you advised some of the officials of Dublin

13

County Council at 5109.

14

members would be receptive to a proposal from management to change the 66 acres

12:30:17 15

You, RML, that's Richard Lynn, "advised that the

to industrial to facilitate a science and technology park to retain 17 acres of

16

commercial residential and for the residue of the lands to be zoned residential

17

with an A1 density."

18

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

19

Q. 525

So it was your feedback at that stage by May of 1994 that the councillors would

12:30:30 20

be receptive to a science and technology park?

21

A.

That's correct, chairman.

22

Q. 526

Yes.

23 24 12:30:49 25

Certainly, I mean, we knew this in 1993.

And you in fact I think had in fact by May of 1994 the matter had been

discussed by the Tourism Committee, isn't that right? A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 527

And the motion that was brought by Mr Gilmore, on -- was considered on the 29th

26

of June 1994 by the council Planning Development and Tourism Committee, isn't

27

that right?

28

A.

I accept that, Chairman, yeah.

29

Q. 528

And it was passed unanimously on that occasion, the introduction of the science

12:31:09 30

and technology park as indeed was a decision taken on the same date that the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:31:15

12:31:32

80 1

Draft Action Plan be put on display?

2

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

3

Q. 529

Now, in fact I think that what happened because nothing happened.

A motion

4

was brought at page 2371, in view of the decision of the council of the 29th of

5

June to review the zoning of its lands at Cherrywood having regard to the

6

report on the Cherrywood Draft Action Plan.

7

by Councillors Lydon, Liam T Cosgrave and Richard Conroy.

This motion is signed, Mr. Lynn, Isn't that right?

8

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

9

Q. 530

Did you prepare the motion?

A.

I did, Chairman.

11

Q. 531

And did you obtain the signatures of Mr. Lydon, Mr. Cosgrave and Mr. Conway?

12

A.

I did, Chairman.

13

Q. 532

And can you outline the circumstances in which you did so?

14

A.

I think there was a prior meeting to the -- that's 10th of October 1994.

12:31:48 10

12:32:02 15

had had a further meeting with the County Manager.

We

And the County Manager was

16

of opinion or some of his officials may have been of the opinion that the

17

members wouldn't support -- they'd support the science and technology but they

18

would not support the change in zoning of agricultural lands to residential.

19

I knew that not to be the case and I asked the manager did he want a motion.

12:32:27 20

And he said he did and as a result of that I made the approach to these members

21

to put in that motion.

And if you like, that then focused the council into

22

dealing with all of the lands.

23

Q. 533

Uh-huh.

24

A.

And not just the science and technology.

12:32:47 25

If you look at the correspondence, I

don't know whether you'll come on to it or not but you can take it that the

26

Guardian position was that unless the residential lands -- unless the

27

commitment that the manager gave to Guardian and to Monarch in 1993, unless

28

that was being honoured they would not participate in the science and

29

technology.

12:33:08 30

Q. 534

In essence what Monarch and Guardian wanted and thought that they had agreed Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:33:12

12:33:32

81 1

with the manager was that the agriculturally zoned lands would be zoned

2

residential in exchange for the science and technology park.

3

A.

Together with the science and technology park.

4

Q. 535

Together with the science and technology park.

5

And in fact ultimately that's

what came to pass, isn't that right?

6

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

7

Q. 536

Now, do you know where a sum of 6,000 -- 10,000 pounds that's attributed to

8 9 12:33:40 10

Cherrywood general promotion that was paid on the 6th of October 1994 went? A.

No, Chairman, I wouldn't have any knowledge.

Q. 537

Right.

Insofar as the motion by Councillors Lydon, Conroy and Cosgrave was

11

concerned, it was deferred on the 24th of October to the 14th of November,

12

isn't that right?

13

A.

That's what I understand, Chairman, yes.

14

Q. 538

And by the 14th of November '94 the manager had brought his own proposals

12:33:57 15

isn't, that right?

16

A.

That's correct, I mean there was negotiations going on about participation etc.

17

Q. 539

Yes.

18

A.

By the council in the science and technology park.

19

Q. 540

And what the manager was proposing was a variation on the 1993 Development

12:34:09 20

Plan.

21

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

22

Q. 541

And in essence, it was to take the Monarch lands at 7284, please, and what was

23

being proposed here was that the Monarch lands, which was zoned agriculture,

24

which were west of the 1983 line, were to be zoned residential?

12:34:33 25

A.

That's correct, the former agricultural lands, yes.

26

Q. 542

Yes.

27

A.

Normal density, as of that time. It wouldn't be normal today.

28

Q. 543

And on the other side of that line, the already residentially zoned lands were

29 12:34:49 30

With a density of 16 to the acre.

zoned at four to the acre or ten to the hectare. Isn't that right? A.

That's correct, Chairman. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:34:50

12:34:58

82 1

Q. 544

Sorry.

Was it 16 to the acre?

2

A.

No, I think.

3

Q. 545

16 to the hectare?

4

A.

16 to the hectare.

5

Q. 546

16 to the hectare?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 547

The town centre was to be moved slightly northwards, if I can put it like that,

8 houses to the acre.

8

as one northeast, northwest as one looks at the map, to accommodate the change

9

in the Wyattville Road line?

12:35:12 10

A.

That's correct.

11

Q. 548

And the --

12

A.

It was also to be expanded.

13

Q. 549

And the lands south of the proposed Wyattville Road were to be rezoned for the

14 12:35:27 15

16

science and technology, E1 zoning science and technology park? A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 550

The manager brought that before the members of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County

17

Council, isn't that right?

18

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

19

Q. 551

And the members agreed to?

A.

It that's correct, Chairman.

Q. 552

And because it was a variation, Mr. Lynn, it would require a public display as

12:35:35 20

21 22

if it was the making of the Development Plan?

23

A.

It was the mini development plan.

24

Q. 553

So it had to go on public display for a minimum of three months?

A.

That's correct.

Q. 554

And I think that public display took place between 30th of November 1994 and

12:35:46 25

26 27

10th of March 1995?

28

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

29

Q. 555

And in December '94, a sum of 4,500 pounds attributed to Cherrywood General

12:36:00 30

Promotions was deducted.

Do you know with a that was in connection with?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:36:03

12:36:16

83 1

A.

No, Chairman, no.

2

Q. 556

In April of 1995 the variation was confirmed, isn't that right?

3

A.

On the 24th, yes, Chairman.

4

Q. 557

And on the 19th of April a sum of 8,000 pounds attributed to Cherrywood General

5

Promotions was deducted.

Do you know what that was in connection with?

6

A.

I've no idea of that, Chairman.

7

Q. 558

And on the 26th April a sum of 2,000 pounds was similarly treated.

8 9

Do you

know what that was for? A.

I've no idea Chairman.

Q. 559

25th of May a sum of 5,000 pounds can you assist?

11

A.

I've no knowledge of that.

12

Q. 560

I propose to read you a list now of deductions rather than taking them

12:36:27 10

13

individually we might take them collectively.

14

15th of June '95.

12:36:40 15

5,000 pounds.

21st of July '95 a sum of 2,000 pounds.

16

On the 26th of July '95 a sum of 1,000 pounds.

17

On the 10th of August '95, a sum of 1500 pounds.

18

On the 26th of September '95 a sum of 4,000 pounds.

19

On the 27th of September '95 a sum of 5,500 pounds.

12:36:59 20

On the 4th of December '95 a sum of 5,000 pounds.

21

On the 4th of December '95 November 2,500 pounds.

22

On 11th of December '95, 7,500.101Do you have any idea what any of those were

23

in connection with?

24 12:37:15 25

A.

I've no knowledge of any of those, Chairman.

Q. 561

Right.

The variation that was published, 7283, to the 1993 plan.

26

Effectively was the end result of the path that Monarch had embarked on some

27

few years previously because you know had -- you now had a parcel of land, 236

28

acres, which is zoned either E or its zoned residential or town centre?

29 12:37:50 30

A.

Yes, all the lands are now zoned for development.

Q. 562

You've no agriculture? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:37:50

12:37:51

84 1

A.

No agriculture.

2

Q. 563

You've no agricultural lands left?

3

A.

That's right.

4

Q. 564

Your residential density is either four to the acre or six to the acre?

5

A.

No, eight to the acre.

6

Q. 565

Eight to the acre?

7

A.

Four or eight.

8

Q. 566

Four or eight to the acre.

9 12:38:00 10

11

You have a new zoning called E1 science and

technology park? A.

Yes.

Q. 567

And the list of matters that's permitted is quite extensive under science and

12

technology park?

13

A.

Yes, Chairman.

14

Q. 568

It's quite akin to but not quite as precise as a commercial zoning?

A.

Just with the lack of retail.

16

Q. 569

Yes.

17

A.

It's very similar, yes.

18

Q. 570

And you have a zoning for a permitted town centre, isn't that right?

19

A.

But I think we still have --

Q. 571

You have -- yes you already had that.

21

A.

No, no, there's a slight change.

22

Q. 572

The area has increased.

23

A.

Um, the area is increased but also there's a slight change in the notation of

12:38:13 15

12:38:22 20

24 12:38:43 25

But you still -- no?

the -- insofar as it is to service the adjacent neighbourhoods.

It's plural.

Q. 573

Uh-huh.

26

A.

There's the variation.

27

Q. 574

The variation.

28

A.

So it's not only that the area changed but if you like the size of the retail

29 12:39:00 30

This is -- is this -- are you talking about?

compliment also changed because it is now going to service adjacent neighbourhoods as distinct from neighbourhood. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:39:03

12:39:13

85 1

Q. 575

2

Are you saying that was a change to the written statement as a result of the variation?

3

A.

Yes, Chairman.

4

Q. 576

In essence, in conclusion of the variation proceeding at the variation

5

procedure that had been set in place, this was a hugely enhanced asset, isn't

6

that right?

7

A.

Well I suppose, Chairman, we were back to where -- well a bit different than

8

October 1990, but all of our lands are now zoned for development.

9

certainly was an improvement on where we had been, yes.

12:39:30 10

Q. 577

Excuse me for one moment, please, Mr. Lynn.

If I can take you on now, Mr.

11

Lynn, and I'll try and abbreviate it as much as I can.

12

1993 plan.

13

A.

The ordinary review, yes.

14

Q. 578

The ordinary review.

A.

Yeah.

Q. 579

Because the variation was a separate matter.

12:40:08 15

16

And it

For the review of the

Now, I think it would be fair to

17

say that the relationship between the council officials and GRE became strained

18

due to the lack of implementation as the council officials saw it as the

19

science and technology agreement?

12:40:25 20

21

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

Q. 580

And it would appear that the blame for that was being laid, be it right or

22

wrong, at the doors of GRE?

23

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

24

Q. 581

And that had an effect on the relationship between Monarch and the council

12:40:40 25

26

officials because Monarch were on the ground and GRE weren't? A.

27

Yes, chairman.

And I think the script say we weren't able to get Guardian to

sign up I think that caused a bit of a headache.

28

Q. 582

And it caused a certain feeling of lack of faith, if I can put it like that?

29

A.

Yes, chairman.

Q. 583

Between the council officials and as they perceived it, Monarch?

12:40:59 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:41:04

12:41:14

86 1

A.

Uh-huh.

2

Q. 584

Right.

3

A.

Because there was opportunities being lost by not being in the field.

4

Q. 585

Uh-huh.

5 6

Absolutely.

And certainly by the time the review of the 1993 plan came, nothing

had happened in relation to the science and technology park. A.

That would be correct but not only physically had nothing happened.

Which it

7

probably couldn't have happened because the Southeastern Motorway wasn't there

8

and the connecter with the Wyattville.

9 12:41:38 10

There was no actual detail plan even.

Q. 586

Uh-huh.

A.

So even though we may not have been able to build anything, we should have been

11

in the planning stage.

12

Q. 587

In other words, nothing had progress?

13

A.

Nothing was, yeah.

14

Q. 588

And therefore, from the council's point of view.

12:41:50 15

They could see no sign of

progress?

16

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

17

Q. 589

And that caused it's own difficulties because the County Manager appeared to

18

and I think has told the Tribunal regarded the science and technology park as a

19

great feather in the cap of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council?

12:42:03 20

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

21

Q. 590

So things had been promised and they hadn't materialised?

22

A.

That is correct.

But only on one side, if you like.

Monarch always stood up

23

to its end of the bargain but we weren't able to bring our partner with us, for

24

whatever reason.

12:42:18 25

Q. 591

And in 1997.

In 1996 the council commenced in 1997 I should say -- the

26

council commenced a review of the 1993 plan which at this stage now has the

27

variation already in, isn't that right?

28

A.

That's correct, Chairman, yes.

29

Q. 592

And Monarch made a number of submissions to Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County

12:42:40 30

Council.

In the course of that review.

Isn't that right?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:42:40

12:42:55

87 1

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

2

Q. 593

They made representations.

Were you the author of these representations can I

3

ask you or were you still, if I show you.

4

Mr. Fergal McCabe.

5

A.

6

They come in through the name of

2561.

You can take it that anything that Fergal wrote he wrote himself but I would have been aware of it.

7

Q. 594

By August of 1997?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 595

Were you still with --

A.

Oh, yes, yes, yes.

11

Q. 596

You were still with Monarch?

12

A.

Yep.

13

Q. 597

And Monarch are making these submissions?

14

A.

That's right.

Q. 598

And it continued to be submissions in the name of Monarch throughout the making

12:43:03 10

12:43:09 15

16 17

of this plan, isn't that right? A.

No.

It changed in 1998.

It changed for the actual confirmation.

In 199 --

18

I forget the date I think it's September 1997 that Monarch disposed of

19

Cherrywood to Dunloe Ewart -- to maybe Dunloe first or whatever.

12:43:31 20

Ewart plc.

21

So I think in the confirmation in 1998 it would have been a Dunloe

Ewart project but more or less with the same team still around it.

22

Q. 599

Yes.

23

A.

The same team was still around it.

24

Q. 600

Yes.

12:43:48 25

26

29 12:44:04 30

And this particular representation sought the extension of the science

and technology park zoning? A.

27 28

To Dunloe

I think you would need to say, you know, that Monarch had bought in additional land because that is not.

Q. 601

That evidence has already been given to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal is aware

of the fact that these lands had been purchased or had been agreed to be purchased effectively across what would have been the Wyattville Road. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

If you

12:44:08

12:44:26

88 1

look at the map at 2563.

And if we just turn that map, please.

Adjacent to

2

the science and technology park lands is the line or the layout for what will

3

be the Wyattville Road?

4

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

5

Q. 602

And across --

6

A.

The additional lands were the Galvin lands.

7

Q. 603

The golf course lands?

8

A.

The former golf occur course lands.

9

Q. 604

And where the No. 3 appears on that map at page 2563, the proposal from Monarch

12:44:39 10

was to extend the science and technology zoning across the road?

11

A.

That's right.

12

Q. 605

Into the area marked three, which were the former Galvin golf course lands?

13

A.

That's correct Chairman.

14

Q. 606

Now it had been a stated objective under the 1993 plan to develop a public golf

12:44:54 15

course on those lands?

16

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

17

Q. 607

And the desire to build the golf course was a matter that was apparently of

18

importance to the council in 1993.

19

council then to have a public golf course on those lands.

12:45:12 20

21

It had been a unanimous decision of the And a motion I

think was brought, Mr. Lynn, in connection, at 6474. A.

Could I just say even though it was passed unanimously.

I never sensed that

22

there was -- in actual fact a lot of people who voted or -- I don't know

23

whether it went through unanimously without a vote or whatever.

24

people I was speaking to couldn't see the merit of having golf course lands in

12:45:41 25

an area which was capable of being services serviced by the Carrickmines Valley

26

sewage scheme.

27

it was something that the County Manager had to have regard to.

28

Q. 608

29 12:46:01 30

A lot of the

But it certainly was an objective of the Development Plan and

And the members in -- would have had to regard to it once it became part of the written statement?

A.

Well the manager had to have regard to it even in formatting his new Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:46:07

12:46:16

89 1

Development Plan.

The members could then change it.

2

Q. 609

Yes.

3

A.

Whichever way they wanted to change it.

4

Q. 610

They had voted unanimously whether you think mentally or not they were

5

unanimous. The reality is that ---

6

A.

Oh absolutely. I have no difficulty with that.

7

Q. 611

Right.

8 9

And this motion was brought seeking to extend the E1 zoning across the

road into the what had been the golf course lands, isn't that right? A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 612

And that motion is signed by Councillors Lowry, Matthews Cosgrave and Conroy?

11

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

12

Q. 613

And an amendment was proposed to that motion, at 6480.

12:46:29 10

And that is without

13

prejudice to the advancement of the council's decision I think it is to develop

14

a public golf course on the balance of the lands.

12:46:51 15

A.

I beg your pardon.

16

Q. 614

Isn't that right?

17

A.

That's correct, Chairman, because we demonstrated that you could fit a golf

18

course.

19

Manager's Report subsequently he acknowledged that he was satisfied that the

12:47:16 20

And we did a layout and we gave that to the manager.

And in the

objective could still be obtained.

21

Q. 615

That on the balance of the lands that had been zoned --

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 616

-- for the golf course when one took out the new lands that were going to be

24

zoned science and technology, a golf course could still be built on the balance

12:47:20 25

of the lands?

26

A.

That's correct.

27

Q. 617

Notwithstanding whatever the manager wanted, certainly these councillors were

28

anxious that the existing decision of the council that there would be a golf

29

course on the lands be maintained, isn't that correct?

12:47:33 30

A.

That's correct, chairman. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:47:34

12:47:45

90 1

Q. 618

And that was the motion that was ultimately passed, isn't that right?

2

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

3

Q. 619

So that the councillors continued to have a concern that at a minimum there

4

would be a public golf course on the balance of those lands?

5

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

6

Q. 620

And can you tell the Tribunal was a golf course ever built?

7

A.

No, Chairman.

8

Q. 621

No.

9

A.

Well, I must say I don't know.

12:48:00 10

What's on those lands now?

Cherrywood lands.

After 1998 I'd no further contact with the

But my understanding is that well certainly in the time of

11

Noel Smyth was the head of Dunloe Ewart plc, he was trying to reposition the

12

golf course lands in a different location because anybody looking at the value

13

of lands and how you should utilise lands, these lands were capable of being

14

serviced.

12:48:32 15

the objective.

16 17

And as long as a golf course came into the area, was going to meet But I couldn't even say today that there's a public golf

course in the area. Q. 622

I would very much doubt it.

And insofar as the second submission, was concerned at 2564.

18

submission seeking to extend the district centre zoning.

19

if we could just turn this map.

12:48:58 20

2566, please.

And

From the area marked 1 into the area marked

2, isn't that right?

21

A.

That's right, Chairman.

22

Q. 623

So that would in effect double the size of the C zoning lands.

23 24

This was a

These were the

lands that had formerly been zoned for the district centre in 1993? A.

Double the size?

Q. 624

Well increase the size?

26

A.

Increase the size.

27

Q. 625

Can I ask you?

28

A.

Yeah.

29

Q. 626

At that stage, was it in any way developed the already existing town centre

12:49:14 25

12:49:23 30

lands? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:49:23

12:49:45

91 1

A.

I don't think so, Chairman.

I think the first development of the lands was

2

the actual science and technology.

Sorry -- would have been the residential

3

first.

4

be peculiar that you would hold back the town centre zoning until such a time

5

as you had some mass there feed to, to service.

6

on, one would anticipate that part of the district centre would commence.

And then separate to that, the science and technology.

So as the housing would go

7

Q. 627

But nothing had happened by this stage?

8

A.

Well my understanding is even today nothing has happened.

9 12:50:08 10

It wouldn't

And since then the

council on the proposal of the manager has increased that now to a town centre. Q. 628

And at 6476 if I can just show you, Mr. Lynn.

11

A.

Yeah.

12

Q. 629

A motion seeking to extend the town centre zoning into the adjoining lands

13 14 12:50:21 15

16

signed by Councillors Lowry, Matthews, Cosgrave and Conroy? A.

That's correct.

Q. 630

Did you prepare the motion and did you obtain the signatures?

A.

I did, Chairman.

And if I could just tell you how that came about.

But how

17

the -- the increase in the area -- what happened was that when in 19 -- I don't

18

want to get it wrong now.

19

motion.

12:50:49 20

maps.

In 1992 when Deputy Gilmore was proposing his

In relation to the district centre.

They, you can see from the

They re-positioned the district centre from east of the Harcourt Street

21

rail line to west of the Harcourt Street rail line.

22

was they got the existing maps and they cut out the district centre from the

23

east and pasted it on to the west.

24

coming across.

12:51:19 25

something else.

And the way they did it

But they didn't -- they shortened the area

And it reduced the overall area from 25 acres down to And then more land was then lost by the repositioning of the

26

Wyattville extension.

27

correcting the repositioning of the Wyattville extension and putting us back to

28

where Deputy Gilmore thought he had done in, was it May 1992.

29 12:51:49 30

Q. 631

Okay.

So effectively all that 11 acres there was doing was

And the third motion I want to draw to your attention was the motion to

remove the cap on the retail element, at 2587. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

And again, can I ask you, did

12:52:00

12:52:22

92 1

you arrange this and did you obtain the signatures?

2

A.

I did, Chairman, yes.

3

Q. 632

So these came to be considered by the council, isn't that right?

4

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

5

Q. 633

In January of 1998?

6

A.

I'll accept, yes, Chairman.

7

Q. 634

And the 40 acres were rezoned to E1?

8

A.

That's correct, yes.

9

Q. 635

The former golf course lands.

12:52:23 10

The town centre zoning was extended by 11

acres?

11

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

12

Q. 636

And the cap on retail element was removed in the form in which it had

13

previously been drafted and replaced with a new draft as suggested by the

14

manager?

12:52:33 15

A.

That's correct, chairman.

16

Q. 637

And ultimately, those changes were confirmed, isn't that right?

17

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

18

Q. 638

And the map that ultimately went on public display at 7292, please.

19 12:52:58 20

21

the final map.

That's

The 1998 Development Plan map.

A.

As adopted, yeah.

Q. 639

And in January of 1996 a sum of 5,000 pounds and on the 29th of January another

22

sum of 5,000 pounds.

23

attributed to general Cherrywood General Promotions. Do you know what those

24

expenses were in connection with?

12:53:16 25

And in March 1996 another sum of 1500 pounds was

A.

I've no information on, that Chairman.

26

Q. 640

Did you ever pay any councillor to sign a motion?

27

A.

Never, Chairman.

28

Q. 641

Did you ever pay any councillor for their support in connection with any

29 12:53:27 30

endeavour on behalf of the Monarch lands? A.

No, Chairman. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:53:28

12:53:47

93 1

Q. 642

Can you explain on behalf of Monarch, where the funds went that were allocated

2

to the Cherrywood development and which have been discussed by the -- here in

3

the Tribunal for the last two days?

4

A.

5 6

No, Chairman, I can't help you.

These I take it are the various cash

payments? Q. 643

If you just give me one moment, please, Mr. Lynn.

7

matter I should have asked you about.

8

prepared in June of 1994.

9

prepared.

12:54:11 10

Sorry.

There is one

There was schedules and projections

This is a document at 5167, Mr. Lynn, that was

We've had portions of this document.

But there's a few parts of

that document that I want to draw to your attention and at 5178.

11

You I think

or are said by others to be the author of this portion of the document?

12

A.

Yes, Chairman.

13

Q. 644

And you agree that that is so?

14

A.

That's correct, Chairman.

Q. 645

And can I ask you about the name that you have given to the document under the

12:54:31 15

16 17

heading general promotion. A.

18 19

What's meant by general promotion?

Well it's not architectural or it's not planning applications.

It's a general

just general -- I suppose. Q. 646

12:54:52 20

And under the heading general promotion.

You include in the first instance

estimated figures for political contributions for upcoming elections?

21

A.

Yes, Chairman.

22

Q. 647

And you will know because you've seen it in the brief that all of the political

23

donations that are attributed to Cherrywood and all of what I can call the

24

missing money where nobody knows where it went have all been attributed to an

12:55:11 25

account called Cherrywood General Promotion.

You've seen that in the brief?

26

A.

Yeah, I will accept that, yeah.

27

Q. 648

And it would appear it that the heading general promotion in the books and

28

records of Monarch Properties Services Limited appears to be a heading that's

29

given to include at a minimum political donations?

12:55:29 30

A.

Yes, I'll accept that, Chairman, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

12:55:31

12:55:45

94 1

Q. 649

And under the heading general promotion on this document you proceed to set out

2

what you think will be the political contributions that will be made in an

3

upcoming election, isn't that right?

4

A.

5 6

Well I'm certainly making provision for contributions in actual fact looking at it I think they're a bit low.

Q. 650

7

The point I'm making to you is that what you're estimating here or what you think will be political donations that might have to be made?

8

A.

Yes, I'm making provision for those, yes.

9

Q. 651

And you are doing so under the heading general promotion?

A.

Yes, Chairman.

Q. 652

Would be fair to take from that, that in general political payments are treated

12:55:58 10

11 12 13

under the heading general promotion? A.

14 12:56:10 15

They were included under the heading general promotion.

They were included

under that yes. Q. 653

Also under the heading strategy consultancy fees?

16

A.

Yes, Chairman, yes. I think we had that yes.

17

Q. 654

We had that yesterday, isn't that right?

18

A.

That's correct, yes.

19

Q. 655

And they were in -- well -- it was your assessment, Mr. Lynn, in June of 1994

12:56:24 20

that a General Election in 1996 one could anticipate paying up to a sum of

21 22

56,000 pounds? A.

Yes, I was making provision that in the event of a General Election being

23

called at any stage between that period that we would be called upon to make

24

political contributions and if they were made we were then -- we would then be

12:56:55 25

26

seeking 50 percent reimbursement from our partners GRE. Q. 656

27

And in the Seanad Election, the figure is of the order of 31,000 and that would make a total estimated figure just of the order of 87,000, isn't that right?

28

A.

Yes, Chairman, that is an estimate, yes.

29

Q. 657

Of what you anticipate you might have to pay.

A.

Well it's an estimate.

12:57:05 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

Is that right?

12:57:06

12:57:30

95 1

Q. 658

It's an estimate of what you might have to pay.

Is that right?

2

A.

Well it's -- there's no scientific approach to actually putting, to making up

3

the estimate.

4

that in the event of a General Election and Senate Election we would get

5

applications for assistance and we probably would respond.

6

I'm doing there is alerting GRE to the fact that this might occur and we would

7

be calling upon them to reimburse by 50 percent.

8

Q. 659

9

What I'm doing there is making I suppose an outer provision

And if so, what

Now, I just want to show you what happened two years earlier in November of 19 -- well less than two years earlier, in November 1992, at 1582.

12:57:56 10

And the

total amount that Monarch have told the Tribunal they paid attributable to the

11

general and Seanad election in November 1992.

Amounts to a sum of 33,850 of

12

which 2,500 was paid well before the election was called.

Do you understand?

13

A.

I do, yes, chairman, yeah.

14

Q. 660

So that in November 1992 a sum of the order of 30,000 pounds is paid out by

12:58:20 15

Monarch for the General and Seanad election?

16

A.

Yes, Chairman, yes.

17

Q. 661

And in June of 1992, some 19 months later, at 5178.

18 19

The figure estimating is

87,000 pounds. A.

Yes Chairman.

Q. 662

You don't disagree with that?

21

A.

I don't disagree but I see no difficulty with it.

22

Q. 663

So can you explain why the amount that was previously paid 18 months earlier

12:58:34 20

23 24 12:58:55 25

I wouldn't ...

was of the order of 30,000 pounds and you are now estimating 87,000 pounds? A.

Because there's no relationship between the two. estimate.

All the thing in 1994 is an

And estimates are generally plucked from the ceiling.

All I'm

26

doing there is alerting GRE to the fact that there might be a General Election.

27

And if there is, we will be calling, probably would be called upon to make a

28

political donation and if so we would be recouping it.

29

and the amount of the number of people who would make approaches to us couldn't

12:59:24 30

be known in advance.

The amount and extent

So you can see, Chairman, from the list there.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

That

12:59:29

12:59:42

96 1

they're all have I round figures.

2

Q. 664

Yes.

3

A.

I mean, there's absolute no science put into it.

4 5

Q. 665

It was your assessment in June of 1994 as to the maximum that might have to be paid?

A.

8 9

There's no consideration

given to the total or the amount.

6 7

And --

I wouldn't even say that but all that was put down was round figures and you can see we didn't even total them.

Q. 666

13:00:02 10

And under the heading zoning costs at 5180, in the same document. think prepared by you.

11

Again I

Under the heading of zoning costs, there's a figure

for success bonus and yourself for 100,000 pounds?

12

A.

Yeah.

13

Q. 667

Did you prepare this document?

14

A.

No, I think Mr. Sweeney prepared this one.

Q. 668

Were you in fact paid a success?

16

A.

I wasn't no, Chairman.

17

Q. 669

You were never paid a success by -- were you paid a success fee by Guardian

13:00:18 15

18 19

I don't think I became aware.

Royal or by Monarch? A.

13:00:32 20

I was earlier paid a success fee but this related to going forward into the variation and then to the --

21

Q. 670

Thereafter.

22

A.

The next phase thereafter.

23

Q. 671

And in general, do you know was it part and parcel of the culture within

24 13:00:45 25

26

Monarch to pay success fees? A.

No it wasn't, Chairman.

Q. 672

All right.

27 28

And do you have any information as to why Mr. Whelan as that's

apparently his initials, are there included with you? A.

29 13:01:01 30

No I didn't get a success fee of 100,000.

I haven't Chairman because he certainly wasn't doing any similar work to what I was doing.

Q. 673

It would suggest that the author of the document is comparing -- it would Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

13:01:06

13:01:24

97 1

suggest that Mr. Whelan had either -- it will be agreed to give Mr. Whelan a

2

success fee or he'd already got a success fee?

3

A.

I think that that -- I don't know but I think what that relates to is wasn't

4

there an invoice of his for 100 plus VAT.

5

that is reflected but I don't know.

6

Q. 674

And I'd imagine that that is how

And can I ask you, finally, Mr. Lynn, about the culture that existed in Dublin

7

County Council.

8

review of the '83 Plan.

9

indeed in this module, that people were talking about corruption.

13:01:45 10

In particularly -- I suppose in the earlier review.

The

The Tribunal has been told by in other modules and There were

articles in the newspapers and there were Garda investigations and matters such

11

as that sort. Did you ever hear any discussion, good, bad or indifferent about

12

bribes to councillors or matters such as that sort?

13

A.

14

No, chairman.

I mean, I was aware of the newspaper reports.

reading those and they were the topic of conversation.

13:02:10 15

We're all

But I never had any

discussion with any member where it was even suggested that A, B, C or D was at

16

any --

17

Q. 675

Did you have any general discussions?

18

A.

No, no.

19

Q. 676

Did you --

A.

Save as I say discussions about what was appearing in the newspaper.

13:02:23 20

21 22

was taken with a huge grain of salt, I must say. Q. 677

23 24 13:02:38 25

And did you ever hear of any incident or any allegations involving any members of the council?

A.

No, chairman.

Q. 678

Right.

26

And did you ever hear even of the apparently the Trevor Sergent

incident?

27

A.

I was there for that.

28

Q. 679

Right.

29

A.

I was there for that.

13:02:51 30

And it

cheque at a meeting.

And in actual fact -- I mean, that was -- he raised a And I think the cheque was for 100 pounds.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

I was

13:02:55

13:03:14

98 1

sitting the -- the man who gave him the cheque was sitting alongside me in the

2

audience that day.

3

given him to was to get the Green Party to actually read his submission.

4

my understanding from him was that he had paid that in or sent that in, in

5

about November of the previous year.

6

meeting in it's either January February or the following year.

7

question you should ask is what was he doing with cheque all of that time, he

8

didn't bring it to the floor.

9

Q. 680

13:03:34 10

A.

And Trevor Sergent raised this in a And the

Would it be fair to say, Mr. Lynn, that your involvement with Dublin County

No, Chairman.

What I was given -- I was -- I had the task of meeting and

making representation to the members. Q. 681

13:03:54 15

And bringing that back and --

Well will we call you a representer, if you don't like the word lobbiest, Mr. Lynn?

16

A.

That's correct.

17

Q. 682

But your job was to interface with the councillors?

18

A.

Absolutely.

19

Q. 683

And it was to achieve a result from your employer, in this case Monarch?

A.

Part of y job. Yes, yes is the answer yes.

21

Q. 684

And you were the front man, if I can call you that?

22

A.

That's correct chairman.

23

Q. 685

For Monarch.

13:04:02 20

And

councillors on a daily and regular basis?

13 14

The only reason he had

Council was effectively as a lobbiest, as a person involved in dealing with

11 12

He nearly died of embarrassment.

24

And it is your evidence to this Tribunal that you were unaware

of any suspicion of corruption in relation to any councillor with whom you ever

13:04:16 25

had dealings?

26

A.

That's correct chairman.

27

Q. 686

Thank you, Mr. Lynn.

If you'd answer any -- I understand the position that

28

Mr. Sanfey, Mr. Lynn isn't available to us beyond this moment.

29

available next week but not now.

13:04:29 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

I mean he is

13:04:29

13:04:34

99 1

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

2 3

MS. DILLON:

So that Mr. Sanfey has to unfortunately defer his

4

cross-examination.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

Well we can make arrangements then to have Mr. Lynn come back.

7 8

MS. DILLON:

9

understand that Mr. Cosgrave is here and he's willing to start his evidence if

13:04:46 10

I will do that with Mr. Sanfey immediately.

But the Tribunal I

the Tribunal wishes to sit through lunch as I understand from Ms. O'Raw that

11

it's anticipated Ms. Cosgrave will finish I suspect within an hour or so.

12

Yeah.

Within an hour.

13 14

CHAIRMAN:

Well.

13:04:58 15

16

MS. DILLON:

So it's a matter for the Tribunal.

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

Well I think it will -- will we can take a shorter lunch break and

19

come back at a quarter to two.

13:05:07 20

21

MS. DILLON: May it please you Sir.

As you wish.

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

Are there other parties who want to cross-examine Mr. Lynn?

24

Mr. Lydon's counsel

13:05:15 25

26

MS. DILLON:

Mr. Lydon's counsel was here this morning.

27 28

MR HUMPHREYS: I'm happy that the matter was clarified.

29

questions

13:05:22 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

So I've no further

13:05:22

13:05:31

100 1

CHAIRMAN:

Well they can do so when Mr. Lynn comes back if they wish to do so.

2 3

MS. DILLON:

We hope to be able to arrange that for next week.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

So we'll sit at a quarter to two.

6 7

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

13:05:49

13:50:04

101 1

THE TRIBUNAL THEN RESUMED ASSES FOLLOWS AT 1:45:

2 3

MS. O'RAW: Mr. Cosgrave, please.

Liam Cosgrave.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

Good afternoon, Mr. Cosgrave.

6 7

MR LIAM COSGRAVE HAVING BEEN SWORN WAS EXAMINED

8

BY MS. O'RAW AS FOLLOWS:

9 13:50:08 10

Q. 687

MS. O'RAW: Good afternoon, Mr. Cosgrave and thank you for being here today.

11

Mr. Cosgrave, the Tribunal wrote to you.

12

in relation to this particular module.

13

statement from you in relation to the module.

14

A.

13:50:27 15

16

It's probably correct.

And I think it requested a statement

I don't think we've received a Is that correct?

I mean, I've had a lot of correspondence, resources

but I'm here to answer any question. Q. 688

Thank you very much, indeed, Mr. Cosgrave.

Just in relation to this

17

particular module.

18

there's no criticism in relation to that.

19

that you may have had with various people from Monarch Properties and their

13:50:49 20

representatives.

One of the -- because we don't have a statement and We're not quite sure of the contact

Likewise, we don't have specific details in relation to any

21

funds that may have been provided to you by Monarch or any representative by

22

Monarch.

23

your evidence today.

So I'll be asking you questions in relation to that as we go through

24 13:51:05 25

Now, can I just show you a document, document No. 9041, please.

26

coming up on the screen beside you there.

27

name down is your name there.

28

the Tribunal and what it shows is contact or indications of contact by

29

Mr. Richard Lynn with various different County Councillors.

13:51:40 30

It should be

And if you have a look, the fifth

This document is a table that was generated by

And that's

derived from various documents that the Tribunal had in-house and put through Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

13:51:46

13:52:04

102 1

the brief.

And it would show a particular document.

So underneath would be

2

a page No. 4720, for example, is the page in the brief.

3

meeting or some contact between yourself and Mr. Lynn, for example.

4

what this document is about.

And that indicates That's

5 6

Now, in relation to that document.

7

in general he agreed with the contents of that or didn't dispute that.

8

relation to this particular document, your name, the fifth one down there,

9

these again indicate possible contacts between Mr. Lynn and yourself.

13:52:27 10

11

That document was put to Mr. Lynn. In

Would

you have any great disagreement in relation to that? A.

12

Well, I mean, it's a general document so I take it as some sort of a memo. But I've --

13

Q. 689

Yeah.

14

A.

-- I've no specific details of that but certainly I had plenty of contact with

13:52:49 15

16

And

Mr. Lynn, to answer your question. Q. 690

Yeah.

In relation to the documents that the Tribunal used in order to

17

generate this document, those documents would indicate that of the various

18

different councillors listed and this document runs through a number of pages

19

with a number of different councillors.

13:53:10 20

But of those councillors listed, you

appear from these documents to have the greatest amount of contact with Mr.

21

Lynn.

Would that surprise you?

22

A.

Well I -- I wasn't aware of that at all.

23

Q. 691

Yeah.

24

A.

I'd plenty of contact with Mr. Lynn is what I'm saying.

Q. 692

You'd plenty of contact with him.

26

A.

Uh-huh.

27

Q. 693

If I could turn for a moment, please, to document No. 207.

13:53:25 25

28

extract from the Fine Gael report.

29

critical of this particular report.

13:53:42 30

And this is an

Now, I understand perhaps you were

But there's just a couple of things in

relation to this that I'd like to ask you about. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

13:53:44

13:54:04

103 1

In the fourth paragraph down there it lists various different payments which

2

according to this report you had received or various different monies you had

3

received from Mr. Dunlop.

4

different amounts 2,000, between 5,000 and 1,000 and another 5,000 there.

5

That comes to a total of between 3,000 and 3,500?

And I think if we add together the various

6

A.

You mentioned 5,000 did you mean 500.

7

Q. 694

Sorry 500 excuse me.

Yes, certainly.

Between 500 and 1,000 and 500 there.

8

that's what's recorded in this document here.

9

that that would not be an accurate representation, having considered further

13:54:30 10

documentation that you have provided to the Tribunal.

11 12

That that total figure

wouldn't be accurate? A.

13 14

Would I be correct in saying

Well, while I don't really and I'm sure there's been enough written about that report.

I really don't want to go into it in detail.

Q. 695

Certainly.

A.

Unless you want me to.

16

Q. 696

No.

17

A.

Obviously at the time you were trying to recollect.

18

Q. 697

Yeah.

19

A.

And while that report states certain things, I would have -- it didn't state

13:54:44 15

13:54:57 20

21

But then we could be here for a considerable time.

some of the things I said at the meeting and I'll leave it at that. Q. 698

Certainly.

And at page 251.

This is a narrative statement you have provided

22

on a different occasion to the Tribunal.

23

figures there of donations that you had received from Mr. Dunlop.

24

total there, it's quite different to the total that's -- that could be

13:55:20 25

calculated from that Fine Gael report.

26

If we just have a look at the You say the

So I think it would be fair to say, is

it, that that is not a correct representation in that report?

27

A.

Well, as I say, given what I said and other things I said to the report.

28

Q. 699

Uh-huh.

29

A.

And at the best you were acting from -- I mean, the bottom line was records --

13:55:40 30

well certainly for a good part of that period were not kept. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

13:55:43

13:56:00

104 1

Q. 700

Okay.

2

A.

So you were acting on memory or maybe some documentation, if you still had it.

3

Q. 701

Yeah.

So the total therefore, Frank Dunlop was between 3,000 and 3,500 and

4

the total in that later statement that you provided to the Tribunal in '03 was

5

around about 6,000.

6

there comes to around about 600 (SIC) and I think there might have been other

7

figures discussed in another module.

8

The figure there from Frank Dunlop wouldn't be accurate?

9

A.

13:56:24 10

If we add the 2,000, the 1,000, the 2,500 and the 500

No, it wasn't the accurate figure.

We're saying that that Fine Gael report.

And as I -- I don't want to labour the

point.

11

Q. 702

Yeah.

12

A.

But I was going on -- you were asked.

13

Q. 703

Certainly.

14

A.

There just on the spot and you're trying to recollect.

Q. 704

So a couple of paragraphs down then.

13:56:31 15

You also -- or the report gives an

16

indication that you believe you received 500 or 1,000 in '97.

17

from Monarch Properties.

18

A.

Where's that sorry?

19

Q. 705

Sorry.

And 500 in '99

Would you recall --

In that report at 207.

13:56:51 20

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY: Q. 706

207.

MS. O'RAW: Again, that's the extract from the Fine Gael report.

It says "He

23

also believes" it's two paragraphs down from the one we just read "He also

24

believes that he received 500 or 1,000 in '97 and 500 in '99 from Monarch

13:57:07 25

Properties".

26

Would you say that is an accurate reflection of the monies you think you

27

received from Monarch Properties or any representative?

28

A.

It may be an estimate.

29

Q. 707

An estimate.

A.

Oh, yeah.

13:57:22 30

Okay.

So there may be inaccuracies there?

I mean, I accept that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

13:57:24

13:57:37

105 1

Q. 708

All right.

Okay.

Well perhaps as we go through your evidence you might be

2

able to recall.

If we go kind of on a year by year basis what the more

3

accurate figures might be if you have a greater recollection.

4 5

If I can take you, please, to a document at 7019, Mr. Cosgrave.

6

map -- a draft map that was put forward by the manager in May of 1991.

7

this particular map shows the Monarch lands outlined in red.

8

these particular lands, would you have been a local councillor?

9

A.

13:58:11 10

I wouldn't have been a councillor for that exact area.

And

In relation to

I was a councillor for

the Dun Laoghaire ward, which is basically Monkstown up to Dalkey if you know

11

and inland a bit.

12

there's a road, Abbey Road.

13

other side of the road is another area.

14

they approach you but --

13:58:30 15

This is a

So they're not a million miles away.

But you know,

And one side of the road is one area and the So you deal with people probably as

Q. 709

Yes.

16

A.

-- but I wasn't an actual councillor for that --

17

Q. 710

For that particular area?

18

A.

-- for that area.

19

Q. 711

Would you have had familiarity with those particular lands?

A.

I would, yeah.

Q. 712

And in relation to that particular map, what you can see being suggested or

13:58:38 20

21 22

advocated by the manager in this particular map, is an increase in the

23

residential density on those particular lands.

24

Monarch lands.

13:59:08 25

And lands further north of the

You can see that in the 1983 plan the residential zoning was

for on septic tank.

So therefore it had a low density.

But what's been

26

advocated here is a density AP.

27

something like four to the acre or ten to the hectare.

28

proposed by the manager here in relation to this particular map, is an increase

29

in the density but that's not just in relation to the Monarch lands.

13:59:34 30

So therefore, the density would be greater, So what is being

It goes

further north as well, if you can see, further north of the Monarch lands. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

An

13:59:39

13:59:55

106 1

increase in the density there.

Would you agree with that?

2

A.

Well I can see the map all right, yes.

3

Q. 713

So you agree that's what the manager is proposing in this particular map here,

4 5

to increase the density? A.

6

Yeah, I mean, I don't obviously have reports other than what you're showing me on the map but I'm taking what you say is correct.

7

Q. 714

All right.

8

A.

Yeah, I suppose yes AS1 or AP or I don't know, I forget the terminology now but

9 14:00:07 10

Well would that indicate what the manager's --

... Q. 715

Yes.

AS1 there would be septic tank.

And that would be one to the acre.

11

And EP is on piped sewage, and that would be four to the acre, I understand.

12

So that was in May 1991.

13

ran for that election, is that the case?

14 14:00:28 15

A.

That's correct.

Q. 716

Grand.

Now, there was a Local Election in June 1991.

And just in relation to -- could I have 2661, please, for a second.

16

This is a list of the various different elections.

17

go through it.

Local Election June '91.

And just very quickly, to

You would have stood for that, yes?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 717

There was Seanad Elections and Dail Elections in November '92.

14:00:52 20

Did you go for

those?

21

A.

Dail '92 and Seanad '93.

22

Q. 718

Dail '92 and Seanad?

23

A.

Well it's '92/'93 if you know what I mean.

24

Q. 719

'92/'93.

14:01:09 25

Right.

And then after that then there was a Local Election in 1994

in relation to the boroughs.

26

Do you recall or were you involved in any of

that?

27

A.

1994?

28

Q. 720

In 1994.

29 14:01:23 30

You

If you have a look in the paragraph that says local Government

election. A.

That didn't apply to that area. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:01:25

14:01:39

107 1

Q. 721

2

Right.

And then I think the next one then would be the Dail Elections in May

1997 and the Seanad Elections in May 1997 again?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 722

You would have stood for all of those?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 723

And if I can show you a document, please, at --

7

A.

Sorry.

8 9

I'm wrong.

Seanad. Q. 724

14:01:55 10

I didn't stand for the Dail in '97 I only stood for the

Sorry.

No, not at all.

And then if I can show you a document at 3248, please.

This

is a list of payments that Monarch has provided to us in relation to payments

11

they had made for Local Election expenses for in relation to various

12

representatives in 1991.

13

1991, the time of the election.

14

count properly, there are around about 39 councillors listed there. You're not

14:02:24 15

And you can see they're listed around May, June If my calculations are correct, if I can

listed as one of the councillors on that particular list.

Do you recall did

16

you receive any payments from Monarch Properties at all around about the time

17

of the June 1991 election?

18

A.

19

I don't recall receiving any payments. know, I see I'm not on the list.

14:02:47 20

Now, I don't know is the honest answer.

list, I don't see me name there.

22

Q. 725

Yes.

23

A.

Um.

24

Q. 726

Around about the election time or?

A.

Very hard to put dates on.

26 27

I

mean, it's always possible but, I mean, if that's meant to be the definitive

21

14:03:09 25

It doesn't mean I didn't but I, you

Do you recall meeting anyone from Monarch Properties in the period 1991?

I mean, I met various people from Monarch over the

years but I can't say 1991 or, you know, put any date on it. Q. 727

Uh-huh.

And if we have a look then at document 7021, please. Now, this is a

28

map that was put on public display between the 2nd of September '91 and the 3rd

29

of December '91.

14:03:43 30

And the area marked in yellow there is where there's a

proposal to increase the zoning on these lands, the residential zoning on these Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:03:49

14:04:06

108 1

lands.

And you can see it's not confined just to the Monarch lands, it goes

2

further north.

Would you agree with me on that?

3

A.

I see that, yes.

4

Q. 728

This was following the adaptation of the DP90/129A which I had just shown you

5

previously in May 1991.

6

what has been proposed here is the rezoning of these lands, such that the

7

density, the residential density is being increased.

8

view in relation to the density of the zoning there at that particular time?

9

A.

14:04:40 10

And what the manager following that DP90/129A and

Do you recall having any

Well I think I've given evidence here in a previous module about this general area and I think everybody was of -- everybody was of the opinion that there

11

was going to be development.

It was a case of, I suppose, a couple of

12

questions when and then what type and what mixture and whatever else.

13

Q. 729

Uh-huh.

14

A.

So that's, that would be -- I mean, my view would be like that sooner rather

14:05:06 15

than later you didn't have to be, it wasn't rocket science that there was going

16

to be development in this area.

17

materialise is obviously another day's work.

18

it and also the management I think in their report I think it was in 1990 had

19

indicated that that was the case.

14:05:26 20

Q. 730

All right.

Now, it was a case of what way it would But I think most people realised

Well if we have a look at the minutes then of the meeting.

21

of all, on the 13th of May 1992.

3675, please.

22

particular meeting, according to the minutes there.

You were present at that

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 731

And at that meeting, the manager presented a further map, DP92/44.

14:05:52 25

page 7203, please.

First

This is at

And what is being advocated or proposed by the manager

26

here is a greater amount of residential zoning on these Monarch lands here that

27

are going out further, the line of the Southeastern Motorway that had been

28

proposed in the 1983 plan is that dark black line that is in, that is almost

29

bisecting the Monarch lands.

14:06:31 30

outwards in that line.

And the manager is proposing a possible shift

And increasing the area on the Monarch lands that

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:06:37

14:06:57

109 1

could be therefore rezoned for residential purposes.

2

that's what's happening on that map? If you have a look there's a B zoning

3

being proposed change to A1P.

4

A.

5 6

Would you agree that

Yeah, I'm not very good at reading maps but I take it, I accept what you're saying.

Q. 732

Okay.

And we have the manager also proposing that the AP would be changed to

7

A1P.

8

relation to an area Action Plan where, when a planning permission would be put

9

in, at that stage the zoning density could be decided by the officials rather I

14:07:25 10

And I don't know whether you can recall what that means.

That's in

think than perhaps by the council, that it wouldn't be zoned with a specific

11

number at that stage.

12 13

So we're talking about quite probably a higher density than the septic tank

14

density that had been in the '83 Plan.

14:07:43 15

Are you happy with that? Would you

agree with that?

16

A.

Well I think to that extent.

17

Q. 733

I think also on that particular day, the 13th of May '92.

If we can have

18

3677.

19

they agreed to consider was the representation by Monarch Properties

14:08:06 20

It was agreed to consider the following items and one of the items that

representation 1117.

And if we go to the page 3681.

The various different

21

things that were being requested by Monarch.

22

requested by Monarch were mentioned to the meeting there.

23

that the low density residential zoning be changed to normal density.

24

the residential zoning boundaries be extended south wards.

14:08:36 25

centre zoning be introduced on the lands and so on.

26

the councillors at that meeting.

27

A.

That's correct. Yeah.

28

Q. 734

All right.

29 14:08:56 30

The changes that were being

Okay.

paragraph.

And they included That

That a district

So that was outlined to

Is that all right with you?

And if we go to 3684.

You'll see at the second last

The minutes note that slides illustrating each of the motions

relating to item 3(1)A of the agenda representation on behalf of Monarch were Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:09:02

14:09:18

110 1

shown.

So you can disagree with me.

But I think -- perhaps that indicates

2

that some detail was gone through in relation to Monarch was requesting?

3

A.

Well I accept that, yes.

4

Q. 735

Now, if we have a look then at the minutes of the meeting on the 27th of May

5

1992.

6

again they mention the Monarch representation.

7

Manager's Report and the amendments to the draft plan recommended therein and

8

illustrated on DP92/44 and motions in relation to Section 3 (1) A of the agenda

9

relating to that representation would be discussed together and voted on

14:09:49 10

3718.

And at -- again you are present at that meeting.

And at 3719

And it was agreed that the

separately.

11 12

Now, if you have a look at page 3720.

13

Councillor Lydon and seconded by Councillor McGrath.

14

to the Manager's Report and the proposed amendments to the draft plan

14:10:10 15

And we see there's a motion proposed by

recommended therein shown on DP92/44.

And that is in relation

You recall that that plan DP92/44 is

16

the one that I showed you there where the manager is talking about the

17

increased residential zoning on the lands and going from AP to A1P.

18

relation to that particular motion, this is one where the councillors,

19

Councillor Lydon and McGrath, wished to adopt and approve that particular plan.

14:10:45 20

You have voted against that particular motion.

21

you have a look down at the votes.

Do you agree with that? If

Votes against --

22

A.

Yeah, I see it.

23

Q. 736

You voted against that.

24

A.

Yeah.

Q. 737

Now, in relation to the -- if we have a look at page 3722.

14:10:57 25

In

And we see it was

26

agreed to take the following motions together.

27

Gordon and seconded by Councillor Reeves that Dublin County Council hereby

28

resolves that the lands at Cherrywood marked AP outlined in red on the attached

29

map, which has been signed for identifications purposes by the proposer --

14:11:27 30

A.

Sorry, that's not up on my -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

It was proposed by Councillor

14:11:29

14:11:58

111 1

Q. 738

Sorry.

3723.

This is the particular motion at the very top here.

The

2

first paragraph.

3

zoning.

4

hectare on septic tank.

5

Breathnach and Smyth.

6

motion by Councillor Breathnach and Smyth the council resolves to retain low

7

density residential zoning one house per acre on the Monarch lands.

And if we

8

have a look at the vote there.

So

9

you're voting in favour of low density residential development on the lands.

14:12:24 10

And this motion is advocating low density residential

Okay? That it would go back to AS2, which would be two to the So there is also another motion by Councillor These two motions are taken together.

Again the

You vote in favour of those motions.

Is that correct?

11

A.

Um, I'm just trying to follow it.

12

Q. 739

If you have a look at the votes for that motion or for those two motions.

13

A.

I see it now, yes.

14

Q. 740

Those two motions are for low density residential.

14:12:39 15

Sorry a second.

You vote for those

motions.

16

A.

Yep.

17

Q. 741

Those two motions.

There's also a motion by Councillor Eithne Fitzgerald and

18

Councillor Jane Dillon Byrne.

19

motion looking for low density residential development on those lands.

14:13:01 20

vote again in favour of that motion.

21

density residential development.

22

A.

That's correct.

23

Q. 742

Right.

24

Councillor O'Callaghan.

Is that correct?

This is the

The motion by Councillor Gilmore and

And this is for a C zoning on part of those Monarch

26

lands.

27

vote against that motion.

28

particular lands.

14:13:46 30

You

So you're voting again in favour of low

And then if we have a look then at page 2727, please.

motion in favour of -- or sorry.

14:13:26 25

29

Again, on page 3724, and again, this is another

So this is for a district centre to be put on those lands.

And you

So you're voting against a district centre on the

Is that correct?

A.

That's correct.

Q. 743

You'd agree with that there?

Okay.

Now, you consistently throughout that

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:13:52

14:14:06

112 1

meeting are voting in favour of motions that are for low density residential

2

development.

Would that be correct?

3

A.

That's correct, yes.

4

Q. 744

There's nothing that would suggest otherwise in that meeting?

5

A.

Not that I could see from what you've shown me so far.

6

Q. 745

And also in that meeting you're voting against the district centre?

7

A.

That's correct.

8

Q. 746

We then see on page 3729.

9

Councillor Dockrell.

14:14:27 10

There's a motion proposed by Councillor Barrett and

Again, this is a motion, this was a successful motion

where the other motions for low density residential had not been successful.

11

This motion here, which again looks for low density residential and it's a

12

motion proposed I think by one of your colleagues, your party colleagues,

13

Councillor Barrett.

14

colleague of your's?

14:14:51 15

16

A.

Yes, we're from the same party.

Q. 747

Yes.

And in this particular one that looks for low density residential

17

development.

18

Is that the case?

19

Would I be correct on that, Councillor Barrett is a

It doesn't appear that you are present for that particular vote.

A.

Um.

Q. 748

You don't appear to be listed --

21

A.

No, I don't appear to be there.

22

Q. 749

-- as having voted.

14:15:07 20

23 24

present for that particular vote? A.

14:15:23 25

No, I mean, I obviously can't.

I see the meeting concluded at two o'clock,

which meant that it went through lunch.

26 27

Can you recall why it was that you mightn't have been

I could have had, you know, family

business, commitments, I honestly can't recall. Q. 750

Would it be fair to say do you think looking through those particular minutes

28

and all of those motions, that you voted for, that someone looking at those

29

minutes could have a clear indication that you are not in favour of increasing

14:15:52 30

the residential density on that.

That you are against increasing the

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:15:53

14:16:14

113 1

residential on the Monarch lands?

2

A.

Possibly at that time, yes.

3

Q. 751

Okay.

Now, the second public display which commenced on the 1st of July 1993.

4

If we have a look at that map there.

5

here again in relation to the residential density.

6

lands, the zoning density there was because of Mr. Barrett's motion, if I can

7

call it that.

8

lands was low.

9

tank development.

14:16:46 10

Okay.

7217.

We have this stretch of yellow In relation to the Monarch

The zoning density for residential development on the Monarch It was back to what it was in 1983.

Which would be two to the hectare or one to the acre.

Would you agree with that?

11

A.

Yeah, I think that's the position, yes.

12

Q. 752

Okay.

Now, if we move on then to page 7226, please.

13

that was dealt with on the 11th of November 1993.

14

have signed this particular motion.

14:17:18 15

The same as the septic

And this is a motion

And here, Mr. Cosgrave, you

And this motion says "Dublin County

Council hereby resolves to accept the County Manager's recommendation and

16

delete the 1993 amendment in respect of the lands outlined in red on the

17

attached map.

That the balance of the land remain at two houses per hectare".

18 19

Now, what the manager had recommended was that change, change three that had

14:17:45 20

occurred on the Monarch lands, that had reduced down that zoning.

That that

21

would be removed and here you are proposing -- well putting your name to a

22

motion where if that change was removed, as the manager was recommending.

23

that change was removed, then the zoning density, as I understand it, in

24

relation to the Monarch lands, would go back up to that level of AP.

14:18:20 25

26

right in that? A.

27 28 29 14:18:46 30

Am I

Um, I accept what you say.

I'm just trying to follow it, sorry.

Okay I

agree then. Q. 753

So this particular motion brings -- if successful, would bring about an increase when compared, say, with the 1983 plan, on the residential zoning -an increase in the residential density zoning on that plan. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

That would be

If

14:18:52

14:19:13

114 1

correct?

2

A.

That's correct, yeah.

3

Q. 754

Can I ask you what it was that changed your mind between May 1992, where you

4

have consistently voted in favour of every motion that has gone for low density

5

development on those lands and where you have voted against increasing the

6

density.

7

against higher density to now actually putting your name on a motion to

8

increase the density on the lands.

9

A.

14:19:44 10

What was it that changed your mind where you have consistently voted

Well I suppose time had moved on in that period. realistic.

And I suppose being

It's easy in hindsight to look back in time now.

I suppose a

11

better usage of land and higher densities and I think also added to that there

12

was some better things were happening or were mooted for Dun Laoghaire down

13

centre and that so.

14

Q. 755

14:20:05 15

Okay.

That's about what I can recall.

Well time had moved on but the manager hadn't changed his tune from

what I understand.

The manager had been singing the same hymn from May 1991

16

to increase the density on these lands.

17

According to your voting pattern then you were not advocating an increase in

18

the residential density.

19

A.

14:20:29 20

22

You try and get the result for the area.

Q. 756

But what I want to find out, please, Mr. Cosgrave, is what was your reason for changing your mind?

A.

14:20:51 25

Well I honestly don't recall, you know, the different votes.

reason -- it was probably not one specific reason.

27

reasons that you'd factor into the equation.

29 14:21:17 30

So, I mean, it's

just -- you're talking about, what, 13 years ago, so I don't recall what the

26

28

So I accept if I've

changed me mind it was for the better.

23 24

Well, I mean, from time to time the manager changed -- councillors changed their opinion.

21

You had said no back in May 1992.

Q. 757

I'm sure there's many

Well can you give us some indication of what those many reasons may have been. It doesn't appear that the manager has changed his tune at all. consistently looked for higher residential density on it. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

He has

You consistently in

14:21:21

14:21:45

115 1

May of '92 voted against the higher density and here we're not just talking

2

about in favour of a higher density.

3

motion that is advocating higher density on the lands.

4

been something that swished -- that made you do this U-turn if I'm allowed to

5

use that expression, in your voting, in your opinion.

6

you do a U-turn in your voting? Can you recall any reason at all?

You're actually putting your name on a

7

A.

I've no specific reason that I can recall.

8

Q. 758

To do a complete U-turn in your vote.

9

A.

Well I wouldn't say it's a complete U-turn.

14:22:08 10

So there must have

What was it that made

I mean, it's a bit like saying if

you're going from two or four houses per acre to eight houses per acre.

11

an increase.

I wouldn't call it a total U-turn.

12

Q. 759

Well --

13

A.

I mean, you may call it a U-turn.

14

Q. 760

Well if it's unfair, please, you ...

A.

Well, I know ...

Q. 761

It appears that you had voted against a motion increasing the residential

14:22:27 15

16 17 18

A.

Q. 762

Well whatever about time moving on.

However time would effect your opinion,

were there any other influences that caused you to change your opinion? A.

14:23:06 25

No, I think we were -- there was talk about further development down in Dun Laoghaire centre which I think possibly dovetailed into that there was going to

26

be a different situation up in Cherrywood. Q. 763

28

14:23:28 30

I mean, it's grand

aspects.

23

29

I mean, times move on.

what you changed, I mean hindsight's a great thing as we've seen in many

21

27

Uh-huh well this was 1993.

looking back from here in hindsight 13 years ago and what you did one day and

14:22:43 20

24

You've used the word U-turn.

density back in '92?

19

22

It's

Did you have any meetings at all with representatives from Monarch Properties or anyone associated with Monarch Properties in and around this time?

A.

Which year are you talking about?

Q. 764

This is November 1993. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:23:31

14:23:38

116 1

A.

Oh, I'm sure I did.

2

Q. 765

You're sure you did?

3

A.

Uh-huh.

4

Q. 766

In relation to the signing of that particular motion.

5 6

Can I ask you the

circumstances in which you signed that particular motion? A.

Well I don't recall.

I mean, knowing my colleague and my colleague of the

7

ward, Councillor Coffey and Councillor Marren.

8

either how I came to sign it but I would have no problem signing it.

9

plenty of motions in me time.

14:24:01 10

I mean, I don't exactly recall I signed

Q. 767

Did a representative from Monarch Properties hand you the motion to sign?

11

A.

I don't recall that but it's possible.

12

Q. 768

It's quite possible.

13 14

And what representative, if a representative did, would

have done that? Who were you meeting with at that time? A.

Well I mean, the person I would have met would have been Mr. Lynn.

I'm not

14:24:24 15

saying he -- I don't know whether he did it or not, but it was more likely him

16

than possibly -- I must in me time have met at least three or four people out

17

of Monarch from time to time.

It's more likely to have been Mr. Lynn.

18

Q. 769

Were you meeting Mr. Lynn frequently around about this time?

19

A.

I don't know.

14:24:51 20

But I don't

know often I was meeting him but it's quite possible. Q. 770

23 24

I mean, I used to meet Mr. Lynn

regularly and he'd either phone me or, you know, or whatever.

21 22

I've -- I have no record.

Did Mr. Lynn, do you recall, discuss with you the zoning on these particular lands at this time and discuss with you this particular motion?

A.

I don't specifically recall it, but in all probability, he would have.

Q. 771

In all probability he would have discussed it?

26

A.

Well most likely shall we say.

27

Q. 772

Do you think anything that Mr. Lynn might have said to you or any other

14:25:16 25

Or more than likely.

28

representative from Monarch Properties might have said to you would have

29

encouraged you to sign this motion?

14:25:34 30

A.

Well obviously you listen to the various points put forward and then you form a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:25:40

14:25:55

117 1

judgement and you either sign or support or vote against or say you're not

2

voting for something.

3

your own opinion.

4

Q. 773

Depending on what's put forward and you have to form

Do you think -- you've said there were a number of reasons that changed your

5

mind.

6

representative, but you said the person that you met most frequently.

7

something that was said by Mr. Lynn that encouraged you to change your mind on

8

the voting?

9

Do you think it was something that was said by Mr. Lynn or another Was it

A.

Not necessarily so.

Q. 774

It may have been a factor?

11

A.

Uh-huh.

12

Q. 775

Can I ask you whether or not you received any monies in either 1992 or 1993

14:26:14 10

13 14

It may have been a factor.

from Monarch Properties or any representative of Monarch Properties? A.

I honestly don't know.

Q. 776

Were you receiving many payments around about 1992 and 1993 from developers?

16

A.

Are you talking of pollical donations?

17

Q. 777

Any payments at all, political donation, coming up to an election, Christmas

14:26:37 15

18 19

time ... A.

I would have got donations from various people.

Q. 778

You would have got donations.

21

A.

Uh-huh.

22

Q. 779

Would you have got many donations from developers in '92/'93?

23

A.

I'd say a couple maybe.

24

Q. 780

A couple.

A.

No I said -- a couple could mean.

14:27:00 20

14:27:15 25

26

So it would be one or two you think in '92/'93? Well, I mean, I don't know the number is

the honest answer.

27

Q. 781

Right.

28

A.

It could be one, it could be three, it could be five.

29

Q. 782

Yes.

A.

Or, I mean, it could be six or it could be four.

14:27:27 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

Okay?

So ...

14:27:31

14:27:37

118 1

Q. 783

So some figure you were in receipt of --

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 784

-- of funds?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 785

Do you think Monarch Properties were one of those contributors to you or one of

6

their associated companies or representatives?

7

A.

They may have been.

8

Q. 786

So it may have been the case that you received a payment?

9

A.

A political donation.

Q. 787

A political donation.

11

A.

Because, I mean, I've been through the mill over all sorts of things so.

12

Q. 788

I understand.

13

A.

And you -- I mean, I'm not saying you're suggesting by --

14

Q. 789

Certainly not.

A.

-- by either innuendo or inference but I've seen even as late as today I read

14:27:57 10

14:28:09 15

16 17

I don't have records here.

the papers and you know. Q. 790

You might understand, Mr. Cosgrave you said there were a number of reasons why

18

you may have changed your mind.

19

why it may have been the case --

14:28:26 20

And all I'm trying to do is try to tease out

A.

It had nothing to do with political donations.

21

Q. 791

You're saying you --

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 792

-- nothing to do with political donations?

24

A.

No, it would have been on planning grounds, reps from local residents groups,

14:28:40 25

merit, benefit for the area.

26 27

14:28:55 30

Nothing

else. Q. 793

28 29

That's the way it would have been.

Yeah.

But you cannot recall a specific payment around about 1992/'93 but you

may have received it? A.

That's correct.

Q. 794

A political donation? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:28:57

14:29:10

119 1

A.

That's correct.

2

Q. 795

In 1992/1993 from Monarch Properties?

3

A.

Yeah well I ran in two elections there within three four months.

4

Q. 796

Okay.

5

And in relation to the magnitude of any payment that you may have

received around about that time.

Would you have any idea?

6

A.

No.

7

Q. 797

Would you recall if it was in the thousands or would that be ...

8

A.

No, I'm not going to start second-guessing.

9 14:29:26 10

line. Q. 798

11

Well would it be unusual for you to receive payments that were in the thousands?

12

A.

You'd get a few.

13

Q. 799

You'd get a few.

14 14:29:38 15

I don't recall is the bottom

Would it be unusual for you to receive payments in the

thousands from Monarch Properties? A.

Well I don't recall getting any specific payment.

I'm just giving a general

16

figure that at any election from sums from 25 pounds probably up to 1,000 or

17

around that mark, 2,000 I would have got from a few sources, mainly family.

18

Q. 800

19

I see.

Can we have a look at 7228, please.

you signed.

14:30:14 20

This is a further motion that

And this is in relation to changes No. 4A and 4B that "Dublin

County Council hereby resolves to affirm changes 4A and 4B having regard to the

21

County Manager's recommendation to limit the retail element to neighbourhood

22

centre size only."

23 24

This is in relation to district centre on the Monarch lands.

14:30:32 25

would go to neighbourhood size only.

And that it

And previously in 1992 you had voted

26

against a district centre on these lands.

27

this is a motion that was put up at the same time 11th of November '91. Here

28

also you are also voting or you're putting your name to a motion in relation to

29

a district centre on these lands?

14:30:56 30

A.

Here and now you are also signing,

What date is that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:30:57

14:31:14

120 1

Q. 801

That was another motion that was put forward on the 11th of November 1993.

2

The same time as the other motion that we had looked at in relation to the

3

residential zoning.

4

A.

Okay.

5

Q. 802

And in relation to those minutes of the meeting in November 1993.

Again, you

6

voted obviously in favour of your own motions, those to increase the

7

residential density and that motion that is in relation to the town centre.

8

So it appears and again, correct me if I'm wrong.

9

in your view for various reasons to go from low density residential and no

14:31:53 10

district centre to voting in relation to a district centre and increasing the

11 12

That there is this U-turn

residential density on the lands. A.

Is that correct?

Well I think as I've said, the debate had moved on in relation to this area.

13

There was I think discussions had already begun mooting the science and

14

technology park, various other matters and there was also I think some progress

14:32:18 15

in some of the things that we wanted down in Dun Laoghaire town.

16 17

So that may

have been a factor in my -- in voting the way I did. Q. 803

Yes.

In the 1994 period, we're aware that Monarch Properties were considering

18

a science and technology park in relation to their lands.

19

science and technology park on their lands.

And putting a

At 5202, please.

14:32:48 20

21

This is an appendix to a memo that was prepared by Monarch Properties in

22

relation to work that would have to be done.

23

have to be done in order to try and achieve the science and technology park on

24

those lands.

14:33:13 25

5202, please.

Work that would

And one of the things that is said in this appendix to that

particular report on the science and technology park is the political strategy

26

that would have to be used.

27

motion from the floor in June '94 would be beneficial calling on the County

28

Manager to prepare a draft variation to the Development Plan which would allow

29

for new zoning and the residential development to go -- sorry.

14:33:41 30

And one of the things that's noted is that a

and technology park to go ahead. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

The science

14:33:44

14:34:01

121 1 2

And at the end if says "action specific members should be approached on the

3

basis of moving and supporting such a motion from the floor".

4

following page, 5203, please.

5

RML, which I think are Mr. Lynn's initials.

6

by Mr. Lynn in relation to moving a motion or supporting a proposed variation

7

for these lands?

8

A.

I don't specifically recall.

9

Q. 804

Yes.

14:34:30 10

11

And on the

Your name is written there, and the initial Do you remember being approached

I mean, it's more than likely I was approached.

Can you remember advocating or trying to promote the science and

technology park? A.

Yeah, 'cos I think at one stage, I haven't got the details now with me but I

12

think I certainly raised it either by way of question or raised it in some

13

other forum, maybe the Seanad.

14

it.

14:34:48 15

16

Q. 805

Yes.

So I certainly was active and interested in

If we have a look at that document, 9041.

And to save time I don't

want to go through.

17 18

MR. ABRAHAMSON:

19

second time this document has been put on the screen.

14:35:04 20

Chairman, I don't want to interrupt my friend but that's the I think if it's going

to be use in the this way, the comment should be made that while it was put to

21

Mr. Lynn very briefly at the beginning of his evidence in a very broad way.

22

He was never asked to go through any of these or -- I don't think the

23

impression should be given to the witness that Mr. Lynn has in fact said that

24

each of these auto meetings necessarily took place.

14:35:22 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

Well I understood that the purpose of this was to indicate the

27

significant level of contact between Mr. Lynn and Mr.-- I think Mr. Lynn

28

accepted that there was that level.

29 14:35:34 30

MR. ABRAHAMSON:

Yes, Chairman.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:35:35

14:35:40

122 1

CHAIRMAN:

Not necessarily going through each.

2 3

MR. ABRAHAMSON:

That was accepted in a general way.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

That's all it indicates.

6 7

MS. O'RAW: My understanding was Mr. Lynn's evidence was this was a minimum of

8

contact that he had.

9 14:35:47 10

MR. ABRAHAMSON:

That was the other point I wanted to make.

It was put to

11

this witness that his name appeared on this more often than anybody else.

I

12

think Mr. Lynn indicated that he would have had many many more meetings with

13

each of the these people that appear on this particular list.

14 14:36:01 15

CHAIRMAN:

That point is taken.

16 17

Q. 806

MS. O'RAW: Just in relation to it and to save time instead of going through

18

each of the documents listed there, 508 etc. etc.

19

appears to be quite an amount of contact between yourself and Mr. Lynn.

14:36:17 20

In the 1994 period there

even if --

21

A.

Sorry, could I just query.

22

Q. 807

Certainly.

23

A.

Those pages.

24

Q. 808

Yes.

A.

Are they the Tribunals or are they from Monarch Properties?

26

Q. 809

They are from the Cherrywood brief that have been circulated to you.

27

A.

Well exactly.

28

Q. 810

Certainly.

14:36:23 25

29 14:37:00 30

But

Could you just put up one as an example to maybe shortcut it.

If we can turn, please, to -- if we can turn to page 5119.

And

this is an expenses claim form put in by Mr. Lynn for the week ended the 13th of May 1994.

And underneath "company" it says Cherrywood Properties Limited.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:37:07

14:37:27

123 1

Then nature of expense.

2

Cosgrave 12.85".

3

something and may have ...

4

A.

5 6

It could a be a drink, a sandwich.

I don't think even back then you'd have

got too much of a lunch for it but anyway ... Q. 811

Certainly.

In relation to just an earlier example that I can show you of

those particular ones.

8

11th of May 1993. A.

14:37:49 10

11

If we have a look back again at that motion for the

Well there's no need to -- I was just wondering what was behind.

There's no

need to go into all of these unless you really want to. Q. 812

There is there's another one.

4720 for the week ending Friday the 19th of

12

November 1993.

13

motions signed by you.

14

Lynn had some kind of a meeting.

14:38:17 15

You remember this particular meeting where there were two This document here would appear to indicate that Mr. Your name appears I think the third name

down.

16

A.

Uh-huh.

17

Q. 813

That he had some kind of a meeting --

18

A.

Uh-huh.

19

Q. 814

-- with you or contact with you.

A.

I don't know, I mean, is the position.

14:38:23 20

And it appears to say "L

Now, that could possibly be he met you for a drink or

7

9

Draft Development Plan.

Or my answer.

I mean, I may well

21

have and I'm not disputing what's up there.

22

coffee, a drink, a sandwich, whatever, I don't know is the honest answer.

23

don't think you'll get it anywhere going into all of those.

24

may have met him and I may have met him on many occasions.

14:38:46 25

Q. 815

26

It may have been, you know A, I

I accept that I

Certainly we'd be here all day if we went through all of the various different ones.

But just that's where this table derives from?

27

A.

I just wanted that for clarification, yes, thank you.

28

Q. 816

This document here, the 19th of November 1993 would tend to indicate some

29 14:39:10 30

contact between yourself and Mr. Lynn in the period, say, between the 12th of November '93 and the 19th of November '93 because this is for the week ended Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:39:17

14:39:33

124 1

Friday the 19th of November '93.

2

there.

So it appears to indicate some contact

Would you agree with that?

3

A.

Yeah.

4

Q. 817

All right.

Now, after that period the 11th of November 1993.

Can you

5

remember, Mr. Cosgrave, in relation to these Cherrywood lands, was there ever

6

an occasion where you're on the record of voting against anything that Monarch

7

had proposed at meetings or where there were motions in favour of things and

8

Monarch wanted at these meetings.

9

taken a stance against what Monarch are proposing to do with their lands?

14:40:00 10

A.

No.

Are you aware of any meeting where you have

I mean in, general terms I would have been supportive but obviously I

11

might have put the point of view and maybe got changes done prior to a meeting

12

or tried to get them over to, if they were proposing something, to try and

13

maybe either get it amended or improved if I thought that was the case.

14 14:40:22 15

Q. 818

Yes.

A.

Well I accept what you say.

16 17

I see.

But you're not on record in relation to -I don't have all of the records here.

I accept

what you say if that's what you say. Q. 819

There is also some correspondence between yourself and Mr. Lynn.

7928, in

18

relation to the Pavilion site and Mr. Lynn being in contact with you later in

19

the week in relation to Cherrywood.

14:40:51 20

Do you think there was ongoing contact

between yourself and Mr. Lynn?

21

A.

Oh, I mean, I think I've already made that clear.

22

Q. 820

Yes.

23

A.

Well ongoing, frequent, whatever words you like to ...

24

Q. 821

Do you think you had more contact with Mr. Lynn than any other developer at the

14:41:09 25

26

Frequent.

time? A.

I don't know is the honest answer.

I mean, my door was open seven days a week

27

to people.

28

I can't put, make comparisons about.

29

made their case.

14:41:29 30

Q. 822

Okay.

All sorts of people came and spoke to me so, you know, I'm not --

At 2371.

Anyone who wanted to see me saw me and

This is a motion in relation to the draft variation.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:41:36

14:41:53

125 1

Again, this is a motion which you have signed.

2

A.

I see that, yes.

3

Q. 823

Its something that again Monarch were hoping to achieve to allow for the E

4

zoning on the lands for the science and technology park as well as other

5

changes there and you have signed that.

6

which you signed that particular motion?

Can you recall the circumstances in

7

A.

Well no, not -- I mean, it's -- when was it? 1994.

8

Q. 824

You can't.

9

No, I can't.

It is, Mr. Sweeney in his evidence on day 663, page 26.

Said

that those three councillors who signed that motion did so at Monarch's

14:42:26 10

instigation.

Mr. Lynn has accepted that evidence.

Do you recall being

11

approached by Mr. Lynn or any other representative of Monarch Properties with

12

that motion and asking you to sign that motion?

13

A.

No.

14

Q. 825

On page 7543, please.

14:42:54 15

As I say, I don't specifically recall but it's certainly quite possible. This is from the minutes of the Planning Development

and Tourism Committee on the 24th of October '94, and you're asking the manager

16

questions in relation to the science and technology park.

17

manager to examine the feasibility of it.

18

particular development, to examine every avenue to provide job creating

19

activities and will he make a statement on the matter.

14:43:23 20

the science and technology park.

21 22

And you ask the

And then in relation to the

So you're asking about

Why do you think you raised that question?

Were you asked by any Monarch representative to do so? A.

No.

As I say, I was always -- I mean, I think with reps from local people

23

looking for possibly employment etc. in the area.

24

been interested but I'd say, I mean, having regard to that, that's my motion.

14:43:51 25

Q. 826

The proposed variation was successful.

26

page 5624, please.

27

Lynn.

28

May 1995".

29

in May '95?

14:44:23 30

A.

And I would certainly have

If I can ask you to have a look at

This is another letter from yourself this time to Mr.

And you say to Mr. Lynn "I'm in receipt of your letter of the 2nd of Can you recall what Mr. Lynn might have been writing to you about

No. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:44:24

14:44:50

126 1

Q. 827

Was there much correspondence between the two of you?

2

A.

No.

I mean, most contact was phone or personal meetings.

So I don't -- I

3

mean, it looks like it's in relation to the development maybe that science and

4

technology park and that but I don't know what the letter I'm replying to.

5

Q. 828

Okay.

And you go on in the second paragraph to say that "from my recent

6

inquiries I understand that Eddie Sweeney, development director, has received

7

an invitation but I am making inquiries regarding Dr. Michael Ryan and

8

Mr. Kevin O'Sullivan, the County Manager.

9

would be particularly appropriate that Mr. O'Sullivan who has been involved for

14:45:13 10

a long time in relation to the Cherrywood sites would receive an invitation".

11 12

I should think however that it

Can you recall what is that about? A.

I can't being honest.

It may have been -- I don't know whether Monarch at

13

that stage were doing some -- I don't think that had arrived.

14

it? 1995.

14:45:33 15

What date is

Q. 829

This is 1995.

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 830

So, I mean, an invitation to what?

18

A.

Well it could have been a promotion regarding something, I honestly just don't

19 14:45:47 20

Now, Mr. Sweeney had received an invitation.

know is the honest answer. Q. 831

Well Mr. Sweeney would be unlikely to receive an invitation from Monarch.

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 832

Was there an exhibition in relation to science and technology parks abroad or

23 24 14:46:06 25

I don't know.

It could be ...

... A.

I think I recall that there was talk about going to, I don't know whether it was France or something now.

I'm just trying to recall.

We went a few times

26

on, what do you call it, visits to see what, you know, say, in relation to the

27

marine I think at the time we visited Portsmouth and to see what they done and,

28

you know, it's possible that there might have been somewhere, I don't know if

29

there was something in relation to going up to Belfast.

14:46:34 30

honest answer. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

I'm not sure is the

14:46:35

14:47:10

127 1

Q. 833

There are further motions then during the review of the 1993 plan at 7286.

2

And if we put 2587 up as well.

3

put your name to again in relation to the lands which would also effect the

4

Monarch lands.

5

A.

No.

6

Q. 834

No.

7

Again, these are further motions that you have

Can you recall being approached in relation to these?

Can you recall the circumstances under which you signed these motions?

These are 1997 motions now.

8

A.

Being honest I can't.

9

Q. 835

You can't.

14:47:33 10

companies.

I mean, I mean, I can't is the answer.

In relation to monies that, or payments from Monarch or related According to the Monarch accounts, 1586, please.

There is on the

11

12th of April 1996 a payment of 400 pounds in relation to a Fine Gael golf

12

outing. Do you recall that?

13

A.

Where is it there sorry?

14

Q. 836

On the 12th of April.

14:48:23 15

This is about half way down the page.

It's

highlighted now in yellow.

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 837

"Golf Liam Cosgrave 400 pounds."

18

A.

I don't.

19

Q. 838

There are also other amounts from, coming through Dunloe in December '98 and I

That's in 1996.

14:48:30 20

can put up the documents, 1374.

And December '99, 1373.

21

and they, on their Christmas list.

There isn't a specified amount on that.

22

With you your name is on both of those lists there.

23

May there's monies coming through Dunloe.

24

can highlight.

Sorry.

These are Christmas

And also on 1376.

In

May '99, for 500.

If we

It's at No. 28 there, please.

14:49:15 25

26

Now, according to the Monarch documentation.

27

unspecified amounts.

28

unspecified amounts in December '98 and December '99.

29

there and a payment of 500 in May '99.

14:49:42 30

Sorry.

Those figures of 400, 500 and

There's the Monarch 400.

There's the Dunloe Unspecified amounts

They are the only ones that are

indicated from the Monarch and Dunloe documents coming in but you think that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:49:49

14:50:09

128 1

you may have received monies other than those at an earlier period from

2

'92/'93.

3

A.

Is that the case?

The position is I don't -- I don't know.

And I mean, I think Monarch I think

4

are on record as saying I think that they were all, you know, I think these

5

are -- I presume are these all cheques here or?

6

Q. 839

These would be cheques.

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q. 840

Did you ever receive a cash payment?

9

A.

No.

Q. 841

Did you ever meet with any other representative other than Mr. Lynn from

14:50:19 10

11

Monarch Properties?

12

A.

At any time?

13

Q. 842

At any time.

14

A.

I met with I think the late Mr. Monahan once.

14:50:34 15

a, something in Dun Laoghaire.

When he was out I think opening

I met Mr. Sweeney.

And I think I met

16

Mr. Reilly, I don't know whether, I may well have -- I could have been

17

introduced if there was a promotion on to somebody else, but those are the

18

people that I would have ...

19

Q. 843

14:50:53 20

You have said that you have, from the beginning of your evidence there.

There

have been a number of elections that you have stood for?

21

A.

That's correct.

22

Q. 844

Did you approach Monarch at any stage in relation to any of those elections

23 24

seeking a contribution? A.

14:51:13 25

I don't recall but it's -- the way it -- you know, people who either contributed from time to time, they'd know an election was either coming up or

26

was ongoing, or whatever.

27

at election time you'd probably write to a few supporters looking for support.

28 29 14:51:52 30

Q. 845

And I don't recall but it's quite possible, I mean,

Can we very quickly put back on screen, please 3248 and 3571.

Okay.

These

are the list of payments to various political Local Election expenses payments to councillors in '91 and 1992.

Monarch say that these were paid as a result

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:52:00

14:52:41

129 1

of requests by these various different entities.

2

quite a large number of political payments.

Given that you signed motions

3

that were of benefit to Monarch Properties.

Given that Monarch Properties had

4

in 1991 and 1992 made quite a number of political payments here.

5

Gilbride has given evidence about if being discussed in the council chamber

6

about the number of payments and the number of councillors who had received

7

political payments from Monarch Properties.

8

never approached or you don't recall approaching Monarch Properties?

9 14:53:08 10

11

You can see that there are

And Mr. Sean

Why was it the case that you

A.

Well, I mean, I think the list you have up there in 1991 and '92.

Q. 846

Uh-huh.

A.

I was elected to -- elected firstly in 1985 to -- well I served on both Dun

12

Laoghaire Corporation and Dublin County Council at the same time.

13

Q. 847

Uh-huh.

14

A.

Now, where my ward was and where my, shall we say, best support was, was along

14:53:35 15

the coast.

I wouldn't have -- I don't know whether or when or where I met.

16

I may not have even known anyone from Monarch in 1990, 1991.

17

did, maybe I didn't.

Now, maybe I

18

Q. 848

Well from 1993 onwards then.

19

A.

Well I got I think you've listed one or two donation there is haven't you?

Q. 849

They are from 1996.

21

A.

Right.

22

Q. 850

Were you ever refused funds by Monarch, if you sought contributions?

23

A.

Not that I recall, no.

24

Q. 851

And given that there is a long list here from '91 and '92 and here are further

14:53:57 20

14:54:27 25

Well, I mean, I honestly.

I don't know is the answer.

lists and they've all been circulated to you in the brief of other

26

contributions by Monarch in '93, '94 and so forth.

27

anywhere until 1996.

28

a political contribution in any time prior to 1996 in circumstances where you

29

have been useful, it would be useful for Monarch, seeing as you're advocating

14:55:07 30

or promoting.

Your name doesn't appear

Do you think it's odd that you wouldn't be provided with

Do you think it's strange that they would not support you in

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

14:55:09

14:55:32

130 1 2

elections in any time prior to April 1996? A.

Well that's a matter of opinion.

I don't recall.

I mean, I don't know when

3

I first got to meet some of the Monarch people.

4

them once but I don't know when I met them first so I just don't know is the

5

honest answer.

6

Q. 852

7

You don't know.

I mean, you might have met

Can you recall any specific payment at all in

'92/'93/'94/'95?

8

A.

No.

9

Q. 853

Thank you, Mr. Cosgrave.

Will you answer any questions.

14:55:46 10

11

CHAIRMAN:

Do you have any questions for Mr. Cosgrave?

12 13

MR. ABRAHAMSON:

No.

14 14:55:50 15

16

CHAIRMAN: A.

Do you have any questions? Thank you very much, Mr. Cosgrave.

All right.

17 18

THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.

19 14:55:58 20

CHAIRMAN:

Tuesday at half ten.

21 22

MR. QUINN: Yes, Sir.

Tuesday at half ten.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you.

14:58:14 25

26

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,

27

TUESDAY, 18TH JULY, 2006, AT 10.30 A.M.

28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 667

09:41:58

10:36:28

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON TUESDAY,

2

18TH JULY, 2006, AT 10.30 A.M.:

3 4 5

MR. QUINN: Good morning, Sir.

6 7

CHAIRMAN:

Good morning, Mr. Quinn.

8 9

MR. QUINN: Mr. Frank Dunlop, please.

10:36:35 10

11

Continuation of questioning of Mr. Frank Dunlop as follows:

12 13 14 10:36:49 15

CHAIRMAN: A.

Good morning, Mr. Dunlop

Good morning, Chairman, Judges.

16 17

CHAIRMAN:

There are a number of parties here I understand to cross-examine

18

Mr. Dunlop.

I don't know whether there is agreement as between you as to the

19

order in which you will cross-examine Mr. Dunlop.

10:37:02 20

21

So is there some agreement?

22 23

MR GORDON: Good morning, Chairman.

24 10:37:07 25

I appear for Mr. Tony Fox instructed by Sean Costello & Co. Solicitors. And I

26

would be anxious to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop this morning, if that's all right

27

with the Members of the Tribunal.

28 29

CHAIRMAN:

That's all right.

10:37:20 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:37:20

2 1

MR. GORDON: I don't know whether ...

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

No, I think Mr. O'Dulachain is happy that you would go first.

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:37:31

10:37:35

3 1

CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING OF MR. FRANK DUNLOP AS FOLLOWS:

2 3

Q. 1

MR. GORDON: Good morning Mr. Dunlop.

4

A.

Good morning.

5

Q. 2

Mr. Dunlop, in the past I have asked you to answer the questions that you are

6

being asked.

At the outset this morning I'm going to ask you again to listen

7

carefully to the question asked and to answer exactly that question and not to

8

give the answer to any question you're not being asked.

9 10:37:52 10

In that way, Mr. Dunlop, we'll make efficient use of the time we have this

11

morning and hopefully that will assist the Tribunal.

12 13

Now, in this case, in this Module, at least, Mr. Dunlop you have implicated my

14

client, Mr. Fox.

10:38:10 15

And you have stated in evidence that you made to him a

payment in the sum of 2,000 pounds; isn't that so?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 3

Now, what I want to ask you is this.

In private session in May 2000, in fact

18

on the 25th of May 2000, you were asked about your involvement in this

19

particular Module, your dealings with Monarch Property and you gave to

10:38:30 20

Mr. Hanratty and to Mr. Gallagher an account of what you say occurred at that

21

time; isn't that so?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 4

And in that account you implicated Mr. Tom Hand and Mr. Don Lydon?

24

A.

Yes.

Q. 5

Is that correct?

26

A.

Correct.

27

Q. 6

And you gave to Mr. Hanratty and to Mr. Gallagher detail supporting the account

10:38:41 25

28 29 10:39:00 30

and your implication; isn't that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 7

And looking back over the transcript of the interview in private session on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:39:09

10:39:19

4 1

that date, you did not at all implicate nor indeed did you mention Mr. Tony

2

Fox; is that correct?

3

A.

Correct.

4

Q. 8

Now, can I ask you, I don't know whether you have available to you there, Mr.

5

Dunlop, page 573.

6

you will see a note of the proceedings there, a note of the questions that were

7

asked of you and the answers that you gave.

8

we're both operating from the same document, the page I have in front of me at

9

the moment here is a page which starts with the words "public relations work"

10:39:56 10

That's Tribunal page 573.

And on page 6 of the transcript

And just so that we're using,

do you see that?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 9

And that page, which is page No. 5 at the bottom appears to end with the words

13 14 10:40:08 15

"which I will deal with", do you see that? A.

Yes.

Q. 10

Just go back up about six lines and you will see a sentence as follows, this is

16

a reply given by you in answer to a question asked and it is as follows.

17

was March 1993.

18

was in the minds of other people, I do not know.

19

you can take it as certain that notwithstanding the fact that they may have

10:40:28 20

What my role in the context of coming in at that late stage I cannot account for but

been in receipt of monies from other people, I did give money to Lydon.

21

"It

Hand

was already on the books, if you describe it"

22 23

Now, I know it's awfully difficult to read out the spoken word but that's what

24

you said at that time in answer to the question asked; isn't that so?

10:40:48 25

26

A.

Yes.

Q. 11

If you turn now to the next page, page 6 of the transcript.

27

reference page 574.

28

refer to starts with the word "road map" top of the page.

29 10:41:04 30

Page 7 of the book.

Tribunal

And the passage that I want to Do you see that?

A.

Yes.

Q. 12

You go down about ten lines from that you'll see this "whatever Hand would have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:41:08

10:41:21

5 1

got from me he would have been getting on an ongoing basis but he was crucially

2

involved", do you see that?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 13

I definitely gave money to Lydon in relation to Cherrywood?"

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 14

So, in this account that you were giving to Mr. Hanratty and to Mr. Gallagher,

7

you maintain that there was a crucial involvement on the part of Mr. Hand;

8

isn't that so?

9 10:41:36 10

A.

Yes.

Q. 15

Now, you now give a completely different story in open public session to the

11

Members of the Tribunal.

12

correct?

In fact, you implicate Mr. Tony Fox.

Isn't that

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 16

How does that happen?

A.

I gave a statement to the Tribunal, a further narrative statement to the

10:41:53 15

16

Tribunal.

17

Q. 17

This is in October?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 18

Yes?

A.

And I stated that I gave two individuals, on request, monies in relation to

10:42:06 20

21

And again in September of 2005.

Monarch.

22

Q. 19

Yes.?

23

A.

One, Mr. Fox.

24

Q. 20

The question I asked you is how do you give an account to Mr. Gallagher and to

10:42:22 25

Mr. Hanratty when you're asked questions about this particular Module in a

26

particular context and then change your evidence and give a completely

27

different account to this Tribunal in open public session.

28

happen? How did that happen, I want to know.?

29 10:42:44 30

A.

How does that

Well, I've explained on being asked this question on a number of other occasions ... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:42:45

10:42:59

6 1

Q. 21

2 3

I'm asking you the question now, Mr. Dunlop.

I want to know the answer. How

did it happen? A.

We know what you want to know.

We don't need any grand standing.

The

4

private sessions took place immediately after the public sessions in April/May

5

of 2000.

6

documentation as possible in relation to what occurred vis-a-vis votes, motions

7

etc. at Dublin County Council.

8

statements and then repeated them here in open court.

9

Q. 22

10:43:25 10

I was then asked for further statements, having requested as much

Subsequent to that, I made the other

I'm afraid, Mr. Dunlop, that doesn't answer the question.

You implicate

Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand in this affair in the context in which you were asked?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 23

And not only do you implicate them, but you say that there was a crucial

13 14 10:43:37 15

involvement by one of the parties that we have mentioned? A.

Yes.

Q. 24

You do not at all mention Mr. Fox.

And now in this Module you give a

16

completely different story whereby you now implicate Mr. Fox and you move away

17

from Mr. Lydon and Mr. Hand.

18

happened.?

19

A.

10:44:00 20

Explain that.

I want you to explain how that

It is readily explicable and that is that I got it wrong in the private session.

21

Q. 25

Uh-huh.

Well, what was operating on your mind in private session?

22

A.

Well, we were dealing with a huge raft of matters that had arisen as a result

23

of various statements that I had made in public session in April and May

24

including the provision of lists of names and amounts.

10:44:20 25

And I had repeatedly

requested the Tribunal for as much documentation as possible in relation to the

26

events of the County Council so that I could provide more detailed

27

explanations.

28

Q. 26

That wouldn't explain why you say somebody was crucially involved?

29

A.

Well, the person that you're referring to, Mr. Hand, was involved.

Q. 27

Well, was he crucially involved?

10:44:42 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:44:44

10:44:55

7 1

A.

Yes, he was crucially involved.

2

Q. 28

So you say that that account that you gave to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher

3 4

was in fact correct? A.

5

Well Mr. Hand's involvement, as has been evidenced by others in this Module, was substantial.

6

Q. 29

Was it crucial?

7

A.

Well, it was crucial in his terms. He presented himself as crucial.

8

Q. 30

Well, these are your terms, this is your statement?

9

A.

Yes.

Q. 31

You say that the was crucially involved. Do you say that now today?

11

A.

Yes, he was crucially involved.

12

Q. 32

Well, was Mr. Fox involved?

13

A.

Yes, he was.

14

Q. 33

Was he crucially involved?

A.

He was crucially involved -- he was involved in the context of his -- as I've

10:45:07 10

10:45:16 15

He was an important cog in the wheel.

16

given evidence already and in my statement that he wanted to be more aggressive

17

than other people in favour of Monarch, what Monarch wanted and was willing to

18

be aggressive in demanding from the planners and from the officials that

19

Monarch be supported.

10:45:50 20

Q. 34

21 22

And why didn't you give that information to Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher at the time when he were you were being asked about this?

A.

Well, I think, without repeating myself, Mr. Gordon, I've said already that I

23

was mistaken in the outline of the events that I gave in private session but

24

that subsequently on the provision of all of the documentation and recollection

10:46:18 25

26

that I made the statement I did and stand over it. Q. 35

Well, what documentation assisted your recollection which brought you from a

27

place whereby you say that two particular individuals were involved, one

28

crucially involved.

29

now nominate Mr. Fox and you seem to put a distance between the others and

10:46:39 30

You don't nominate at all Mr. Fox, to a place where you

their involvement in this matter.

How does that happen? There is a huge

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:46:44

10:47:00

8 1

disparity you'll have to accept between the account you gave then and the one

2

you're giving now.?

3

A.

No, it's not the one I'm giving now.

It's the one that I gave consistently

4

since the private sessions.

5

private session.

6

through in detail all of the minutes and meetings of Dublin County Council

7

during the course of the Development Plan.

8

Q. 36

9 10:47:19 10

I see.

I've already said to you I was mistaken in the

That I was assisted in recollecting the events by going

Well what exactly was it that assisted you.

That's what I want to

know.? A.

Well, that I cannot tell you.

11

Q. 37

To bring about the change.?

12

A.

That I cannot specifically tell you.

13

Q. 38

You can't remember?

14

A.

No, that I cannot specifically tell you what specifically brought about the

10:47:30 15

16

change. Q. 39

This was at a time, Mr. Dunlop, 25th of May 2000 I think.

This was there or

17

thereabouts a month after you had confessed to this Tribunal the error of your

18

ways in the past; isn't that so?

19 10:47:45 20

A.

Yes.

Q. 40

This is at a time when you had maintained a particular position, you had been

21

committing acts of perjury.

22

session and give to all concerned the impression that you are going to tell the

23

truth from that point forward?

24 10:48:02 25

You were caught and you now you come into private

A.

To assist the Tribunal as much as possible, yes.

Q. 41

Surely in light of all of that you would have addressed your mind and would

26

have been careful to ensure that you are giving at that particular time the

27

Tribunal correct/accurate information?

28

A.

In so far as possible, yes.

29

Q. 42

One month after all of this the information you gave was inaccurate or to use

10:48:18 30

your words this morning, you were mistaken? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:48:21

10:48:32

9 1

A.

I was mistaken.

2

Q. 43

Do you see that? Just I want to know again how you feel about this.

3

see that as a significant mistake staying or is it a trivial or irrelevant

4

mistake?

5

A.

6 7

Not in the context of the culture of the private sessions and what had occurred in the immediate weeks and days beforehand.

Q. 44

8 9

Do you

But you gave to Mr. Hanratty and to Mr. Gallagher a detailed account of the involvement of these two councillors without mentioning at all Mr. Fox?

A.

Yes.

Q. 45

So in light of that you don't see that as significant?

11

A.

No.

12

Q. 46

You see, Mr. Dunlop, it just seems to me from looking at the evidence that

10:48:49 10

13

you've given here, insofar as Mr. Fox's interests are concerned.

14

relation and in relation only it this Module, that you've just said to this

10:49:14 15

Tribunal you gave him 2,000 pounds.

And again in

You don't remember a whole lot about that

16

transaction and so be it, make of it what you wish. That's effectively what

17

you're saying. That's a fair assessment of what you're doing now today.?

18

A.

19

Well, what I'm doing today and what I've done already is to say that in the context of my being employed by Monarch, I had contact with your client, we had

10:49:39 20

an exchange.

He said something to the effect "you'll have to give me

21

something for this", I said "what?" and he said "what are you offering?" and I

22

offered him 2,000 and he took it.

23

Q. 47

24 10:49:58 25

26

Put it another way. on detail.

It's top heavy in terms of allegation but it's very short

Isn't that it?

A.

No, I wouldn't accept that.

Q. 48

You don't accept that you're giving very little detail of this purported

27

transaction to the Members of the Tribunal here?

28

A.

No.

29

Q. 49

You saying I gave him 2,000, I don't remember where I gave it to him, how or

10:50:12 30

what the mode or manner of payment was, where it was given, the time at which Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:50:16

10:50:41

10 1

it was given etc. etc. and you say that you are giving a detailed account of

2

that transaction to the Members of the Tribunal.

3

A.

Are you saying that?

What I'm saying is that in the context of this Module, that I was asked for

4

money by two individual councillors.

5

paid them.

6

Q. 50

Well, now that you've -- sorry.?

7

A.

Sorry.

Your client and another.

And that I

And in the circumstances of my relationship with your client, to whom

8

I had given money previously, on a number of occasions, quite a number of

9

occasions, in cash, in a variety of locations and at a variety of times.

10:51:12 10

Q. 51

Is that the best account you can give of that transaction?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 52

In this context to this Tribunal?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 53

You cannot at all improve on that today, can you? Can you give a better

10:51:23 15

account?

16

A.

No.

17

Q. 54

Now that you've had time to think about it?

18

A.

No.

19

In the dealings that I had with

your client I had to the best of my ability, in this Module, told what I

10:51:41 20

21

I mean, the issue is relatively simple.

recollect of the events. Q. 55

You see Mr. Dunlop, what you're saying here is that when you were interviewed

22

in May 2000 you gave an account.

23

were then supplied with documents or details which you say assisted you in some

24

way to tell the story you tell today. Right? Now what I ask you is bearing in

10:52:08 25

It was erroneous, it was mistaken.

You

mind the assistance that you appear to have gotten, how does that not assist

26

you then to give a better account of the bribe you say you gave to Mr. Fox?

27

A.

That I cannot answer.

28

Q. 56

You can't answer that either?

29

A.

No.

Q. 57

You see, Mr. Dunlop, if you just come in here and say I gave Mr. Fox 2,000

10:52:16 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:52:24

10:52:43

11 1

pounds, so be it, make of it what you wish.

2

about this to see where the truth lies.

3

be a case of where you say I did and I say you didn't.

4

have to ask you about the circumstances and you were asked about the

5

circumstances by the Senior Counsel for the Tribunal.

6

about the source of the payments and you were asked about circumstantial

7

matters and you remember all of that yourself. And when you were asked about

8

the source of the monies you got that wrong as well.

9 10:52:59 10

We have to ask you questions

Do you follow? And it's not going to Do you understand? We

In fact, you were asked

Isn't that so?

A.

When?

Q. 58

Well, weren't you asked where the money came from and how much money you were

11

given.

I think you gave to the Members of the Tribunal an account starting

12

with a payment of the sum of 25,000 pounds.?

13

A.

Sorry, I misunderstood you, Mr. Gordon, you're correct, yes.

14

Q. 59

And what you did then was, that suddenly became 85,000.

10:53:23 15

account you gave.

So the initial

You got that wrong also?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 60

So when we move away from the transaction and look then at the circumstantial

18

matters that I'm speaking of.

19

got the money, what it was for and how much was involved.

10:53:40 20

21

The source of the money.

Where you might have You even got that

bit wrong? A.

22

Certainly, in the initial statement that I made to the Tribunal on and I supplied the remittance notices that we had received from Monarch of 25,000.

23

Q. 61

You got that wrong didn't you?

24

A.

Yes, I did.

Q. 62

25,000 became 85,000.?

26

A.

I didn't.

27

Q. 63

So the first obvious question that you're asked then in relation to this

10:53:54 25

28

transaction is okay well where did the money come from, how much was involved.

29

You say 25 but then it's established when documents are put to you that it's

10:54:10 30

85.

You got that bit wrong? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:54:11

10:54:24

12 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 64

In other words the answer to the first obvious question.

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 65

Now, Mr. Dunlop, you followed in that regard a particular pattern, haven't you?

Do you understand?

5

Because you got that particular issue wrong in a lot of other Modules as well

6

isn't that so? In fact, you got it wrong in the Lissenhall Module didn't you?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 66

You originally started off there by saying to the Tribunal that you got a

9

payment of 2,000, that became 27,625, right? And I think in the Ballycullen

10:54:42 10

Module, I won't go through them, you got 17,500 according to your initial

11

evidence and that then became, over the passage of time, 60,000 pounds.

12

the one obvious question that will be asked in relation to each of those

13

Modules you again get that question wrong?

14 10:54:59 15

A.

Initially, yes.

Q. 67

So, your evidence on those particular issues in terms of the circumstances, or

16

circumstantial matters, you get it wrong in each case?

17

A.

Initially, yes.

18

Q. 68

Initially.

19

A.

Well, everybody has done their audits.

10:55:18 20

I did my audit.

The Tribunal has

There are some differences of opinion about small amounts,

but by and large, yes. Q. 69

23 24

And you say now you have it right now; is that so?

done its' audits.

21 22

So

Do you remember, first of all, giving evidence about my client Mr. Fox in relation to the Carrickmines Module?

A.

Yes, vaguely, yes.

Q. 70

Well, I won't go through the detail of it?

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 71

When you were implicating Mr. Fox in that Module you said you made a payment to

10:55:31 25

28

him.

29

circumstance.

10:55:50 30

You fixed a time of the payment, you fixed a place, you fixed a And you also told the Tribunal some detail of a conversation

that you had with him? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:55:51

10:56:06

13 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 72

But in addition to that story that you told to the Tribunal, you supplied for

3

their benefit, a notebook entry.

4

it, it's neither here nor there at the moment?

5

A.

A diary entry?

6

Q. 73

Yes, a diary entry.

Do you remember that? I'll remind you of

And you'd some sort of a scribble in your diary.

You

7

pointed to it and said there you are, there's the date, there's the amount,

8

there's the reference to Mr. Fox.

9

don't know why you did but you may have offered it as evidence of consistency

10:56:26 10

of account.

And you offered that to the Tribunal, I

Right? Can I ask you about your diary entry for this payment?

11

A.

There is none.

12

Q. 74

There is none?

13

A.

No.

14

Q. 75

Why is there none?

A.

There wasn't normally as I gave evidence in the Carrickmines Module.

16

Q. 76

There wasn't normally?

17

A.

Not normally.

18

Q. 77

You supplied lots and lots of references from your diary to the Tribunal to put

10:56:33 15

19 10:56:47 20

21

matters into context? A.

Yes in context but you are speaking in relation to payment.

Q. 78

Why would you make an entry in your diary in the context of the Carrickmines

22

Module and not make one here?

23

A.

I can't answer that question.

24

Q. 79

That was the only written account at that time of the making of a purported

10:57:06 25

payment by you to Mr. Fox; isn't that right?

26

A.

Yes, I think you're right, yes.

27

Q. 80

There is no written account supporting your evidence now?

28

A.

No.

29

Q. 81

In fact, there is no account at all, as I see it, correct me if I'm wrong, a

10:57:20 30

payment in or payment out that you can point to? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:57:22

10:57:26

14 1

A.

In accounts?

2

Q. 82

Yeah?

3

A.

That's correct.

4

Q. 83

Or otherwise?

5

A.

Correct.

6

Q. 84

That includes obviously your diary?

7

A.

Correct.

8

Q. 85

Can you explain that? I mean, why it is you have an entry in your diary, a

9 10:57:39 10

particular system of working at that time that no longer exists at this time.? A.

11

Well, it only occurred, I think, in relation to your client on one occasion, and that was that occasion.

12

Q. 86

Well why would you put that --

13

A.

In the Carrickmines Module.

14

Q. 87

Why would you put it into your diary at that time and not put it in at this

10:57:52 15

time?

16

A.

Sorry, I can't answer that question.

17

Q. 88

That's another question you can't answer?

18

A.

If I can't answer it I can't answer it, Mr. Gordon.

19 10:58:02 20

It's not a question of

supposition. Q. 89

Do yourself see that as peculiar?

21

A.

No.

22

Q. 90

Pass remarkable in any way?

23

A.

No.

24

Q. 91

Again, I'm just asking in a general way Mr. Dunlop, about the approach you've

10:58:17 25

taken to Mr. Fox.

It seems and I think you've said it this morning, that you

26

made inter alia, many, many payments to him.

27

challenged you about that.

28

insofar as Mr. Fox was concerned.

29

we? You are taking any and every opportunity you can get to lay off money on

10:58:40 30

And I have in the past

And you said that you were just turning up the gas We've had this discussion before haven't

Mr. Fox? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

10:58:40

10:58:47

15 1

A.

No.

2

Q. 92

You deny that?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 93

And to put another way perhaps, you have been pouring the petrol but you are

5

just looking for the opportunity to light the match?

6

A.

I don't quite get the analogy but ...

7

Q. 94

Haven't you maintained to this Tribunal in the context of this module or in

8 9

indeed in any other one that Mr. Fox was a major player? A.

Yes.

Q. 95

You have maintained that?

11

A.

That he was a player of some significance in various Modules.

12

Q. 96

In fact, in this particular Module you go so far as to say and you make the

10:59:03 10

13

point that you never dealt with Mr. Fox without him making a request for a

14

payment; isn't that right?

10:59:20 15

A.

Hardly ever, yes.

16

Q. 97

No.

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 98

Can I ask you, Mr. Dunlop, so that we'll be clear about this.

19

654.

10:59:45 20

That's what you said?

To look at day

Page 107, question 688.

You see the question asked there "have you ever gone to Mr. Fox on your

21

evidence in any other Module in any other development that he hasn't asked you

22

for money?" and the answer is "no"?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 99

So, you did say that?

A.

Yes.

26

Q. 100

And that's your up-to-date position, so to speak?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 101

And can I ask you to look at the evidence you gave on day 355.

11:00:15 25

29 11:00:41 30

question 182.

Starting with

This incidentally, I won't spend too long on this, Mr. Dunlop.

This is the evidence that you gave in relation to the Carrickmines Module. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:00:45

11:01:06

16 1

And it was evidence specific to your dealings with Mr. Fox.

I'll just wait

2

for it to come up on screen so that you have an opportunity to look at it and

3

again, this will perhaps read in a disjointed way.

4

down in the transcript but we'll do our best with it.

It's the spoken word taken

5 6

Q. 102

Question 182 Mr. Dunlop.

It was a question asked by me at the time and it is

7

this.

8

time.

9

behalf of the company in which this person was concerned and you have confirmed

11:01:46 10

"Insofar as Mr. Fox was concerned he was a County Councillor at the He clearly had an interest in representations that you are making on

that all of those interests insofar as Mr. Fox was concerned are legitimate",

11

this was in relation to a particular issue.

12

yourself?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 103

A: Yes.

11:01:57 15

I think you'll remember this

Q: And can I take that to mean that he was legitimately representing his

16

locality.

17

A:

Yes, you can

18

Q:

And interest in the welfare of the people with whom or other people whom

19

he represented at the time?

11:02:08 20

A:

Yes

21

Q: In fact wasn't it clear and mustn't it have been clear to you that if

22

matters were brought to fruition that the English registered company of which I

23

am speaking about would have brought considerable employment to the area?

24

A:

That's correct

11:02:19 25

Q:

Do you remember discussing that with Mr. Fox?

26

A:

Yes, I do.

27

Q: Do you remember him asking the questions about that

28

A:

Yes, I do

29

Q:

Did he seem to show any interest about it?

11:02:30 30

A:

In the employment? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:02:32

11:02:39

17 1

Q:

Yes?

2

A:

Yes, he did.

3

Q:

Was that an issue of his, so to speak?

4

A:

Yes, it was".

5 6

Now, I want you to just park that for the moment.

7

to day 356.

8

see what you said about Mr. Fox in the past.

9

what you said at that time with the evidence you are giving about him in

11:02:59 10

And we'll turn, if we may,

Again, this is in relation to the Carrickmines Module.

Just to

We'll make a comparison with

relation to this time. Do you follow?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 104

While we're waiting for it to come up on screen.

Day 356 was in relation to

13

the Carrickmines Module.

14

And you were giving evidence in relation to the contour of the Southeastern

11:03:22 15

You were cross-examined by me on this occasion.

Motorway, the line there, it's page 25.

16 17

Question 134.

18

between the motion and Monarch Properties and Mr. Fox?

19

A: Yes.

11:03:41 20

Q:

Here you're asked as follows.

"There is a clear association

And it follows from that evidence, Mr. Dunlop, does it not, that my

21

client's business in relation to this matter was entirely legitimate if they

22

were unconnected with you, that's question 144, sorry.

23

A:

24

interest in this matter, namely the Southeastern Motorway, were anything but

11:04:03 25

I have no reason to suspect and I have never alleged that your client's

legitimate.

Please point me to any place I have said so".

26 27

Now, bearing in mind what you say today and what we've just seen on the screen

28

as the evidence you gave in the past.

29 11:04:19 30

How does one square with the other?

A.

Well --

Q. 105

You say now to the Chairman here, in fact, the Chairman asked you about this, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:04:23

11:04:39

18 1

about a week and a half ago.

2

dealings with Mr. Fox in circumstances where he had never asked for money?" and

3

the answer to that was "no". How does that square with what you had said early

4

on in time.

5

A.

Yeah.

You were asked "did Mr. Fox or did you ever have

Can you explain that?

I think we spent some time on this before, Mr. Gordon but

6

notwithstanding that.

7

was Texas Home Care, which was outside the Development Plan.

8

gave you then and the answer I give you now is that Mr. Fox represented himself

9

as a local representative for the local community interested in employment and

11:05:04 10

In relation to the first issue that you raised, which

did not ask me for money.

It was a planning issue.

The answer I

It was outside of the

11

Development Plan.

12

the company to give him a political donation during the course of an election.

13

But that came to nothing, as it turned out.

14

outside of the course of the Development Plan, yes.

11:05:28 15

He did request subsequently that I make representations to

So in that particular instance, The answer is as I've

said before, he did not ask me for money.

16

Q. 106

Uh-huh?

17

A.

Okay? The second instance in that you allude to in relation to the

18

Southeastern Motorway.

19

any money from anybody in relation to the Southeastern Motorway.

11:05:50 20

21

I have no idea, I've no knowledge that Tony Fox got And it's the

same evidence that I gave on whatever day it was in relation to that question. Q. 107

22

The difference between Texas and the Southeastern Motorway was the involvement of Monarch?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 108

Monarch were involved in the Southeastern Motorway?

A.

Yes.

Q. 109

When you were giving that evidence Mr. Dunlop about the Southeastern Motorway

11:06:04 25

26 27

and you were given an opportunity or an invitation at that stage to say

28

something about Mr. Fox.

29

that time was that he was entirely legitimate in his dealings because you were

11:06:20 30

You never took it.

forced and faced with the paperwork involved.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

In fact what you were saying at

11:06:23

11:06:42

19 1

A.

No, that is not true.

The only -- I was not employed by Monarch at the time.

2

I was not dealing with Monarch.

3

with Monarch at the time in relation to the Southeastern Motorway.

4

evidence in relation to the particular motion that was put forward for -- by

5

your client in relation to the Southeastern Motorway.

6

inconsistency.

7

Q. 110

is you were asked about Mr. Fox.

9

Motorway.

I did give

But no I don't see any

You see, there are two issues and you obviously don't see them.

8

11:07:03 10

I don't know what relationship Mr. Fox had

The first one

You were asked about the Southeastern

There was a context there.

never in that context implicated Mr. Fox.

The involvement of Monarch.

And you

You had an opportunity to tell the

11

Tribunal yes, in relation to this his dealings with were entirely honourable.

12

I see that from the paper.

13

I can implicate him in relation to Cherrywood.

14

Why did you not say that at the time?

11:07:24 15

16

I can't move away from that.

However, he was and

We'll hear about that again.

A.

We were dealing with a completely different Module.

Q. 111

Why is it that you accepted that the dealings at the time were entirely

17

honourable but did not take the opportunity to point out to the Tribunal that

18

his dealings with Monarch in their totality were not entirely honourable, as

19

was suggested there?

11:07:42 20

A.

Well, it is relatively simple in my mine mind.

One is that I had no knowledge

21

about what occurred between anybody and your client in relation to the

22

Southeastern Motorway whereas I do have in relation to Monarch.

23

Q. 112

You see, you said that you had a suspicion about Monarch paying Tony Fox?

24

A.

Yes.

Q. 113

Why did you say that?

26

A.

Tony Fox made a comment to me in relation to Monarch being quite mean.

27

Q. 114

Why didn't you say that at the time?

28

A.

Why didn't I say that during the Cherrywood.

29

Q. 115

When you were giving this evidence on this day?

A.

During Cherrywood.

11:08:00 25

11:08:13 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:08:14

11:08:29

20 1

Q. 116

Yes?

2

A.

Sorry, not Cherrywood during Carrickmines the Southeastern Motorway.

3

different Module.

4

relation to the Southeastern Motorway.

5

time.

6

Q. 117

7 8

My association with Mr. Fox at that time, I explained it in

The context wasn't right.

I wasn't working for Monarch that the

You perhaps didn't think of it at the time.

You

were focussing your attention on that particular issue. A.

9

Let me put it to you another way, Mr. Gordon.

If you feel that I should have

done that on that occasion, well then there is no Module in this Tribunal which

11:08:46 10

would not find itself dealing with a huge number of issues in relation to

11 12

It's a

councillors. Q. 118

You see, I just wonder why when you're asked in general terms about things or

13

you say in answer to questions that look, I have to deal specifically on some

14

occasions and generally on others and I'm switching from one Module to the next

11:09:10 15

etc. etc..

You're specifically asked about this in answer to questions or by

16

questions asked by Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Hanratty and you get it wrong; isn't

17

that so?

18

A.

In private session.

19

Q. 119

You're then asked in open session here questions by me about Mr. Fox.

11:09:29 20

And

questions in relation to his involvement with the Southeastern Motorway.

21

context is Monarch.

22

In fact what you're saying there is that he was entirely honourable in your

23

dealings with him?

24 11:09:43 25

26

The

And you never said anything about a payment made to him .

A.

No.

Q. 120

I just don't understand how that happens?

A.

We're dealing with the Southeastern Motorway.

I gave evidence in relation to

27

the Southeastern Motorway.

28

the source of that motion, and we were not dealings with Cherrywood per se.

29

We were not dealing with Monarch's involvement in Cherrywood.

11:10:01 30

Q. 121

In relation to a particular motion.

But that might answer that question.

The genesis,

But it doesn't answer this one, Mr.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:10:05

11:10:28

21 1

Dunlop.

Because the question you were asked on day 654, for the avoidance of

2

any doubt, it was question 688.

3

evidence in any other Module in any other development that he didn't ask you

4

for money?" and the answer is "no"?

"Have you ever gone to Mr. Tony Fox on your

5

A.

Uh-huh.

6

Q. 122

So that is not consistent with the answers that we've seen on screen already in

7

relation to --

8

A.

Well I don't accept that.

9

Q. 123

It is.

A.

No.

Q. 124

You were asked that question in relation to any other Module or in any other

11:10:37 10

11 12

It's in black-and-white?

development?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 125

And you said no.?

A.

So what Module are you talking about?

Q. 126

So what you're saying to the Tribunal on this day is that any dealings you had

11:10:43 15

16 17

with Mr. Fox involved a scenario whereby Mr. Fox would make a request for a

18

payment?

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 127

But that is not so when you look back at the evidence you gave earlier?

21

A.

In which one?

22

Q. 128

The evidence that we've just looked at in relation to the Southeastern

11:10:55 20

23 24 11:11:10 25

Motorway? A.

I had no involvement with your client. involvement.

Sorry, I shouldn't say I had no

I gave evidence in the context of the Southeastern Motorway and

26

your client in relation to a particular motion.

27

source of that motion.

28

to that particular motion and the people proposing that motion or interested in

29

that motion and your client's arrangements with them.

11:11:33 30

And what I suspected was the

I had no -- I had no evidence whatsoever in relation

Monarch Module now. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

We are dealing with the

11:11:38

11:11:51

22 1

Q. 129

You say that that answers that question?

2

A.

Well, certainly insofar as I'm concerned.

3 4

I know the dealings I had with your

client. Q. 130

5

You don't think that that's in any way misleading when you were asked that question to say no?

6

A.

No, I don't think so.

7

Q. 131

You don't think so and you don't wish to revise that in light of the evidence

8 9 11:11:59 10

that we've seen on screen now? A.

No.

Q. 132

That's the evidence that you gave a long time ago about your tellings with

11

Mr. Fox?

12

A.

No.

13

Q. 133

What about Texas Home Care then, Mr. Dunlop?

14

A.

Yes, what about it?

Q. 134

Well, were your dealings with them entirely honourable?

A.

I've already given evidence to that effect.

11:12:12 15

16

Whatever day it was, in answer to

17

questions from you.

18

sorry.

19

Texas Home Care and what he did on behalf of Texas Home Care prior to the

11:12:40 20

Other than him, your client, making representations to --

Other than I making representations to your client in relation to

Development Plan were completely honourable and legitimate insofar as I'm

21

concerned.

22

might be something negative.

23

ask Texas Home Care for a political contribution, which was refused.

24

Q. 135

11:13:05 25

There was a request from your client to me to

Maybe it's a case Mr. Dunlop, that you do not understand the point being made here.

26

Other than, not other than, that gives an implication that there

You are making the case in response to the question asked that my

client in his dealings with you made requests for payments?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 136

That there were no dealings between you and my client that did not involve a

29 11:13:21 30

request are request for payment? A.

I've already -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:13:23

11:13:38

23 1

Q. 137

I ask you now to reconcile that with the evidence that you gave earlier on in

2

time where there was clear dealings between you and my client that did not

3

involve any such request.

4

want the answer to.?

5

A.

Yes.

That's what I point out to you and that's what I

I've already given evidence previously over a year ago to you and to the

6

Tribunal in relation to Texas Home Care.

7

have no difficulty whatsoever about that evidence.

8

excuse me.

9

client, there were requests for money and monies were paid.

11:14:02 10

And I stand over that evidence. And in the course of --

In the course of the Development Plan my relationship with your

Q. 138

On each and every occasion?

11

A.

On the ones that I have listed.

12

Q. 139

So that we can take that the more up-to-date evidence given by you.

That is

13

the evidence given on day 654, is a more accurate, more reliable account of

14

your dealings between --

11:14:20 15

A.

Yes.

16

Q. 140

By comparison with the evidence given earlier?

17

A.

Well, there is no confusion or contrast.

18

Care it is quite simple.

19

evidence that I gave.

11:14:37 20

21

I mean, in relation to Texas Home

You've already put it up on screen.

relation to your client, in relation to Texas Home Care. Q. 141

Dealing more specifically, Mr. Dunlop, with your purported dealings with Mr. Fox and in relation to this particular Module.

23

paying him for?

11:14:51 25

26

That is the

And that the is the evidence I will continue to give in

22

24

I

What exactly were you

A.

Sorry, I can't hear you.

Q. 142

What exactly were you paying him for?

A.

Well, when I approached him after being brought on board by Monarch, I spoke to

27

him about the issue.

28

Q. 143

What issue did you speak to him about?

29

A.

The proposal that would have to be put before the council as a result of what

11:15:17 30

happened, I think it was May 1993, where there had been quite a considerable Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:15:22

11:15:51

24 1

amount of confusion and a motion had been lost, notwithstanding the fact that

2

it was being proposed by the manager, by the officials and there was a lot of

3

anger about that, both among the councillors themselves and in Monarch itself.

4

And that he would support what was in the best interests of the company and

5

what could be got.

6

Q. 144

7 8

what did he say? A.

9

Well, he was, I suppose annoyed is not the right word.

But, I mean, he was a

little bit put out by what had occurred in May of 1993 in relation to the Lydon

11:16:20 10

11

Well when you outlined the details of your plans and your brief to Mr. Fox,

McGrath motion. Q. 145

Is this not 1992.

12 13

JUDGE FAHERTY:

It is.

14 11:16:24 15

A.

16

Sorry, I beg your pardon.

It's just 1992.

there when he was mentioning the date.

17

Q. 146

MR GORDON: This is the Barrett motion?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 147

The so-called Barrett motion?

A.

Yes.

11:16:39 20

That's why I was just pausing

And quite a considerable amount of confusion resulted.

Notwithstanding

21

the fact that your client, among others, I mean, we're just dealing with your

22

client, among others, was very supportive of the Monarch proposals and was

23

anxious and appeared to me subsequently to be anxious to do everything possible

24

to support the Monarch proposal.

11:17:06 25

And given what had occurred between Monarch

and myself in relation to trying to bring some reality to the situation and to

26

go for what would be acceptable, your client agreed to do that; to help in that

27

way.

28

Q. 148

My client, Mr. Fox, had voted against the Barrett motion in 1992?

29

A.

Yes.

Q. 149

Isn't that the position?

11:17:26 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:17:26

11:17:39

25 1

A.

Yes, as most of the Fianna Fail people did.

2

Q. 150

But you didn't come into the picture until 1993?

3

A.

March 1993.

4

Q. 151

So what then were you doing with Mr. Fox at that time?

5

A.

Before March 1993?

6

Q. 152

Yeah?

7

A.

In relation to Monarch?

8

Q. 153

Yeah.?

9

A.

Nothing.

Q. 154

Nothing?

11

A.

No.

12

Q. 155

What did you do after March 1993?

13

A.

I went and I saw -- I met him.

11:17:45 10

14 11:17:55 15

I spoke to him about Monarch and the need for

his continuing support. Q. 156

Where did you meet him?

16

A.

I met him on many occasions in many locations.

17

Q. 157

Where?

18

A.

In relation to this particular thing I cannot tell you.

19

Q. 158

Do you know approximately when you met him?

A.

Well, after being appointed by Monarch I would say a very short time

11:18:05 20

21

afterwards, a week or ten days.

22

Q. 159

How many councillors did you meet with at that time?

23

A.

Well, I went down through the list of those that I did approach and lobby in

24

relation to Monarch during the course of Mr. Murphy's examination.

11:18:25 25

I can't specifically tell you how many.

26

But I listed the ones that I did.

I

have in fact, I think we've got them here.

27

Q. 160

Just broadly speaking, how many did you meet?

28

A.

Well I think ... we'll count them.

29

Q. 161

It would be better if we got detail from you, Mr. Dunlop.

11:18:50 30

I can't --

Would that be better?

the detail Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

So please give us

11:19:07

11:19:53

26 1

A.

Um. Yes.

I think on day, well I don't have the actual day.

2

the 15th of June 2006.

At page 118.

3

identify the ones if there are any --

It's Thursday

Question 732 by the Chairman.

Can you

4 5 6

CHAIRMAN: A.

654.

It's day 654.

Sorry, I don't have the day.

The number day, yeah. "Can you identify the

7

ones if any of the Fianna Fail Councillors who you did not approach seeking

8

support?" and then I began to list the ones I did not approach.

9

take those away from the rest of the Fianna Fail Councillors then they are the

11:20:23 10

11

people I did approach. Q. 162

12

MR GORDON: So you subtract one from the other and get the people that you approach; is that right?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 163

Just so that we're clear about this.

11:20:35 15

The motion, the Barrett motion, was a

1992 motion; isn't that correct?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 164

You came into the frame March thereabouts 1993?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 165

You can't fix a time at which you say you met with my client?

A.

Yes.

Q. 166

Now, what you do say is that you had a conversation with him.

11:20:44 20

21 22 23

A.

I'm not making that annoyance exclusive to your client.

He was one of the

many people who were annoyed at that time. Q. 167

All right.

26

A.

No.

27

Q. 168

When did you make the payment.

28

A.

After the vote.

29

Q. 169

When was the payment made exactly?

A.

I cannot tell you.

11:21:13 30

You say that

some annoyance was expressed by my client at that time.?

24 11:21:04 25

And if you

Can I ask you did you make the payment at that particular meeting?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:21:14

11:21:18

27 1

Q. 170

When was the vote?

2

A.

November 1993.

3

Q. 171

November 1993?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 172

You see, that doesn't make any sense Mr. Dunlop, at all.

And it's again

6

wildly inconsistent, not with what you said in the past but what you said in

7

your statement in relation to this case, this particular Module in your

8

Statement. Mr. Dunlop, you -- this is the statement that you made on the 15th

9

of September 2003.

11:21:41 10

statement.

11

The last page of it you give -- it's quite a detailed

And for our purposes the -- this morning we don't need to go into

the detail that came before.

Page 426.

12 13

And it's on that page that you seek to implicate Mr. Fox.

14

Perhaps I'll just wait for it to come up on screen.

11:22:08 15

accurately the exact timing of these payments.

And you say this.

"I cannot recollect However, in each case the

16

payment was made after the vote in Dublin County Council (which allowed for

17

zoning in the Cherrywood area at one house to the acre with other facilities)

18

was taken.

19

accounts were Councillor Colm McGrath was in one or other of the locations

11:22:33 20

The payments were made a short time after the vote.

which I have made and payments etc. etc. etc.".

The payment

Do you see that?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 173

Now, what you do there in that statement is you fix and associate the payment

23

that you say you made to Mr. Fox with a particular motion.

24

the motion that brought about the zoning in the Cherrywood area at one house to

11:22:54 25

an acre with other facilities.

That in fact was the motion in 1992.?

26

A.

Yes, yeah.

27

Q. 174

So you got that wrong; didn't you?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 175

How -- explain that?

A.

Well, I can't explain it but it is correct.

11:23:03 30

That is to say,

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:23:06

11:23:15

28 1

Q. 176

There's something else you can't explain?

2

A.

Well, we can't explain everything, Mr. Gordon.

3

But the simple answer is no, I

can't explain it.

4

Q. 177

You weren't even involved?

5

A.

No, I wasn't.

6

Q. 178

You weren't even in the picture at that time, on your own evidence?

7

A.

Not until March.

8

Q. 179

What you're doing in a statement here is you're telling the Tribunal in writing

9

that you are making a payment to Mr. Fox in relation to a very specific issue

11:23:29 10

in respect of which we now know you had no involvement whatsoever?

11

A.

Yes, but that's completely out of context.

12

Q. 180

Do you not think that's serious --

13 14 11:23:40 15

CHAIRMAN: A.

Wait now.

Let Mr. Dunlop ...

That's completely out of context.

Because the whole statement is in --

16

leading up to that is giving a history of my involvement with Monarch, which it

17

is palpably clear to everybody, including from evidence from Monarch themselves

18

and officials from Monarch, that I was not involved until March of 1993.

19

Q. 181

11:24:05 20

Uh-huh.

But what you're doing is -- whatever about the timing of your

involvement ...

21

A.

Well, the timing is very important.

22

Q. 182

But also the association of the payment, to whatever happened on foot of it is

23 24 11:24:13 25

important as well I would imagine, Mr. Dunlop? A.

Yes.

Q. 183

What you do is you associate the payment that you say you made to Mr. Fox with

26

a particular motion.

27

payment?

28 29 11:24:31 30

A.

No.

And we now know that you could not have made any such

The payment was made in relation to the motion that took place in Dublin

County Council subsequent to my involvement with Monarch. had no association with Monarch prior to that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

It could not -- I

I had no dealings with

11:24:35

11:24:43

29 1

Monarch.

I did not lobby on behalf of Monarch.

2

client in relation to Monarch.

I did not speak to your

3

Q. 184

We know that, Mr. Dunlop.?

4

A.

Thank you.

5

Q. 185

It's an error in your statement of a significant nature?

6

A.

It's an error in the context of one house to the acre instead of four.

7

Q. 186

It's an error?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 187

In relation to that motion.

11:24:56 10

certain sum in respect of a particular motion that you never made?

11

A.

Completely out of context.

12

Q. 188

No it's not out of context.

13 14 11:25:11 15

16

That you are saying in the statement.

A.

No, I'm telling you that what is within brackets is an error.

Q. 189

Can we withdraw what's in brackets from your statements?

A.

However, in each case the payment was made after the vote in Dublin County Council.

Q. 190

19

We'll deal with this step-by-step, Mr. Dunlop so we'll get this right and the record will be right then.

11:25:26 20

Can we withdraw any part of that statement as

being erroneous?

21

A.

You can withdraw the word "one."

22

Q. 191

The word one?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 192

Acre?

A.

House.

Q. 193

Okay.

11:25:32 25

26 27

So we can't assume therefore from the statement that you made that you

were referring in that statement to the 1992 motion?

28

A.

No.

29

Q. 194

You said you were a moment ago?

A.

I did not.

11:25:42 30

Do you

withdraw that statement?

17 18

You say that you made a payment to my client in a

What I said was the context of the statement made on the 15th of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:25:46

11:26:01

30 1

September 2003 was the history of my involvement with Monarch which began in or

2

around March of 1993.

3

Q. 195

Uh-huh?

4

A.

I had no contact with your client in relation to Monarch and their Cherrywood

5

development prior to that time, although I was aware of what was going on, as I

6

say in my statement I was aware of what was going on because I was a constant

7

attender in Dublin County Council.

8

myself or with your client and myself prior to March 1993 in relation to that

9

matter.

11:26:20 10

There was no involvement with Monarch and

Q. 196

Uh-huh?

11

A.

Namely, Cherrywood.

12

Q. 197

This was a prepared statement made by you isn't that right?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 198

You had time to think about it, you had documents I assume at your disposal.

11:26:31 15

You had the comfort of perhaps making the statement in your own environment.

16

More importantly, you had time to think about what you had to say?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 199

And if you were minded to implicate anybody, I'm quite sure that you would set

19

about the task of giving accurate information in your statement to the

11:26:48 20

Tribunal.

We see here that the information that you gave is inaccurate?

21

A.

In relation to one issue.

22

Q. 200

In relation to one issue? No. You clearly in that statement, Mr. Dunlop,

23

whatever way you want to add or subtract this.

24

associate a payment given by you to Mr. Fox with a motion that had long since

11:27:09 25

In that statement you

passed and in respect of which you had no involvement whatsoever.

And we now

26

know from the evidence and the record tells us this, that that couldn't have

27

happened.

28

serious business for my client, Mr. Dunlop.

29

an answer to that?

11:27:32 30

A.

Couldn't have happened.

So what do you say? This is a very, very It may not be for you.

I want

It's a very serious business for everybody, Mr. Gordon, including you and your Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:27:36

11:27:59

31 1

client.

You've got your answer.

The answer is the statement was made in the

2

context of my involvement with Monarch, which began in March of 1993.

3

could be no way that I was involved with your client.

4

involvement with your client and myself prior to March 1993 in relation to

5

Monarch.

6

Q. 201

We know that now.

7

A.

No, you've known that all the time.

8

Q. 202

The evidence tells us that?

9

A.

Uh-huh.

Q. 203

In October the 15th -- sorry.

11:28:07 10

11

There

And there wasn't any

The evidence --

The 15th of September 2003 you are giving a

completely different account to the Tribunal?

12

A.

That is not correct.

13

Q. 204

It's there in black-and-white.

14

It's there in black-and-white, Mr. Dunlop.

You have now already, in answer to questions put by me this morning, withdrawn

11:28:22 15

part of that?

16

A.

The word "one" yes, one acre.

17

Q. 205

How does that improve the situation by withdrawing the word "one"?

18

A.

It relates --

19

Q. 206

How does it improve the statement by withdrawing the word "one."

11:28:34 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

22

look at --

23

MR GORDON

Sorry, Mr. Gordon.

I think if you -- I mean, you have to I think

Yes.

24 11:28:44 25

CHAIRMAN:

In the context.

26

starts from March 1993.

27

MR GORDON:

I mean, he is clearly, the statement clearly

Uh-huh.

28 29

CHAIRMAN:

So, I mean, I think if he is going to be pressed on this, which is

11:29:00 30

fair enough.

It has to be in the context of the overall statement.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

But it

11:29:04

11:29:23

32 1

seems to be an error in relation to the "one" should read "four". But I don't

2

see -- I think it has to be seen in relation to the -- in the context of the

3

overall statement which clearly starts in March 1993

4 5

MR. GORDON: I certainly have no difficulty with that, Chairman.

6

point I made to Mr. Dunlop is that the statement as we see it there would give

7

to the reader the impression that Mr. Dunlop was referring to a particular

8

motion in respect of which he could not have had an involvement and now we know

9

the situation was otherwise.

11:29:43 10

I'm just asking him to accept that.

Because the

Nothing

further.

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

13

on a date in 1993.

14

context of the overall statement, which would appear to support his view or his

11:30:00 15

Well it clearly is a reference to a motion which didn't take place But his explanation has to be in the context, given the

contention that it was an error as to the number of houses per acre and nothing

16

further than that.

17 18

MR. GORDON: I have no difficulty with that.

19

far as Mr. Fox was concerned.

11:30:19 20

But it's a statement specific so

And I have just brought that particular passage

of the statement into focus because Mr. Fox is implicated there by Mr. Dunlop.

21

And I just want Mr. Dunlop to correct the error.

22

can.

23

what you're saying, Mr. Chairman, but that gives to the reader, as I say, the

24

impression that it was the Barrett motion in 1992 and not the motion to which

11:30:40 25

And if he can't, he can't.

And if he can explain it, he

I appreciate it and I understand exactly

Mr. Dunlop was referring to now.

That's all I say.

26 27

Q. 207

28 29 11:31:05 30

Do you accept that? We will be fair about this, Mr. Dunlop.

It would give to

the reader the impression there on the facts given there? A.

Not in the context of the totality of the full statement, a four page statement I think, sorry, five-page statement.

If you read it from the beginning and my

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:31:05

11:31:20

33 1

involvement with Monarch.

2

Q. 208

Leave it at this.

3

A.

An error and another error?

4

Q. 209

Well, I pointed out a number of errors to you this morning.

5

It contains an error and another error.?

This statement

contains an error therefore it's another one?

6

A.

That is an error, yes.

7

Q. 210

Of course.

Mr. Dunlop, back in 2000, April 2000, you were giving evidence to

8

this Tribunal which as it happened was wildly inconsistent with the truth.

9

And I want to ask you now.

11:31:45 10

Do you see your position today as any different to

your position at that time?

11

A.

In what way?

12

Q. 211

Well, it's been suggested to you not just by myself but by a number of other

13

legal representatives here that it appears that your evidence is wildly

14

inconsistent with evidence given in the past with documents produced to you.

11:32:02 15

In fact, indeed, this has been pointed out to you at length by Counsel for the

16

Tribunal?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 212

All I want to do is to ask you for your own impression.

19 11:32:19 20

Do you see your

position today as any different to your position in April 2004. A.

In fairness, I would have to say that yes, in the year 2000 in the fraught

21

circumstances that were, that existed at that time, and the evidence that I

22

gave in public session followed by the private sessions, followed by repeated

23

additional information statements, followed by public evidence.

24

been instances, some of which you have pointed out to, quite correctly, this

11:32:49 25

There have

morning, that there have been inconsistencies and mistakes and errors.

In the

26

circumstances, I have readily admitted to those inconsistencies and mistakes.

27

And if someone else points another inconsistency or mistake to me and it's

28

correct in him or her doing so, I will readily admit to it as well.

29

the only difference.

11:33:17 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

That is

11:33:17

11:33:27

34 1

Everything that I have done so far is to give assistance to the Tribunal in the

2

investigation into the matters that they have been given the remit by the

3

Oireachtas.

4 5 6

There will be inconsistencies and there will be mistakes Q. 213

You see, Mr. Dunlop, we can accept, just for the purpose of this question,

7

we'll accept that's a simple mistake as appears in your statement.

8

corrected now and it's on the record.

9

account clarified by you.

11:33:49 10

It's

And that gives us a more accurate

Right? We'll put that down, for the purpose of the

question, as a mistake or an error.

But that does not at all explain the

11

evidence that you gave earlier this morning when you were asked about the

12

difference between what you told Mr. Hanratty and Mr. Gallagher about the

13

payments made by you in this Module.

14

inconsistency that's readily explicable in the way that you've explained this.

11:34:15 15

What I point out to you is that you are faced with a position where you can't

16

explain it.

17

position you were in in 2004?

18

That's not a simple error or an

A.

19

That's why I ask you, is your position today any different to the

Well, I don't know what you're getting at Mr. Gordon.

I've tried to answer

your question in fairness as best I can in the way that you asked it.

11:34:36 20

As we

proceed in this Tribunal, we are now in the sixth seventh year and by the time

21

we get to the 14th, doubtless you will be putting questions to me in a similar

22

vein about something that was said today.

23

you is that on each occasion, to the best of my ability, to the best of my

24

recollection, I have given an account of events.

11:35:03 25

there are mistakes.

26 27

If there were mistakes,

I do my best on every occasion to correct them.

And

that's it. Q. 214

You see Mr. Dunlop, I can readily appreciate human nature lends itself to the

28

making of mistakes.

29

mistakes will of course occur.

11:35:26 30

The only thing that I can say to

We're dealing with highly complex matters in here and And to that extent, you have my understanding.

I can understand how a mistake of the type we've just looked at, can be made. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:35:31

11:35:50

35 1

But what I don't understand is how you can give a graphic account of your

2

involvement with Monarch, the payments that were made in private session and

3

give a completely different account in public session.

4

session nominate and implicate my client.

5

That's not a mistake.

6

A.

7

And in that public

That's what I don't understand.

What do you say about?

Well I think we dealt with that, did we not, at the outset of your cross-examination --

8

Q. 215

Is it a mistake then on a different level?

9

A.

I did point out to you that after giving evidence in public in May, April, May

11:36:07 10

I think it was of 2000, in rather charged circumstances, followed immediately,

11

virtually immediately by private session, yes, a broad brush picture account of

12

what had occurred during the course of the Development Plan in Dublin County

13

Council took place.

14

documentation in relation to minutes, motions, attendances, etc, at Dublin

11:36:38 15

County Council should be provided so as to provide a road map as to what

16 17

occurred. Q. 216

18 19

On each occasion with an admonition from me that all

Well, can we strike from the record the evidence that you gave in private session as being inaccurate?

A.

It's already been struck from the record.

Q. 217

Okay.?

21

A.

In cross-examination by Mr. Lydon's representative.

22

Q. 218

Uh-huh. And can we accept or can you accept, Mr. Dunlop, the implication of

11:36:53 20

23 24

that, in terms of the mistakes that you are prepared to own up to? A.

11:37:20 25

No, I don't.

I accept responsibility for myself and myself only.

say and what I cannot say.

26

Q. 219

Do you yourself not find it curious?

27

A.

What curious?

28

Q. 220

Let me put it this way, Mr. Dunlop.

29 11:37:38 30

And what I

between you and I.

Just in case there's any misunderstanding

When you were the principal in Dunlop & Associates, we

know that you had a secretary and presumably you had a receptionist? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:37:42

11:37:58

36 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 221

If that receptionist were to say to you on any given day that Mr. X called to

3

see you at three o'clock and he'll be back at five and if in fact Mr. Y came in

4

at five o'clock, you would wonder what had happened in terms of the

5

communication between you and your secretary; wouldn't you?

6

A.

Yes, that sounds logical.

7

Q. 222

And if that happened on the following day or the day after you'd begin to

8

wonder more about it.

9

the information being given by your secretary to you about appointments that

11:38:17 10

In fact you'd begin to wonder about the reliability of

were being taken and made by other people; wouldn't you? If that was

11

happening.

That simple scenario?

12

A.

In the hypothetical scenario.

13

Q. 223

What's the difference between that hypothetical simple scenario and what you

14 11:38:32 15

did here? Would you not wonder? A.

No.

16

Q. 224

What do you understand the word "reliable" to mean, Mr. Dunlop?

17

A.

Well give me the English dictionary definition and that's what I understand it

18 19

to mean. Q. 225

11:38:48 20

Do you say that there's a reliability in account given on this issue here. That is your implicating Mr. Fox.

21

Do you say yourself that there's

reliability here?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 226

And do you say that that's reliability in the face of what you said in private

24 11:39:04 25

session by comparison to what you're saying in public now? A.

Yes.

26

Q. 227

Even though the two don't compare?

27

A.

Correct.

28

Q. 228

You understand that to fit into the English definition?

29

A.

Yes.

Q. 229

In the dictionary.

11:39:13 30

You see, just in the ordinary world, Mr. Dunlop in, the

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:39:21

11:39:39

37 1 2

real world, somebody might be forgiven for thinking that you are hallucinating. A.

3 4

I think that's in the context of what we're at, Mr. Gordon, I think that's a rather ungracious remark.

Q. 230

5

Well it's not, Mr. Dunlop. You implicate my client.

Because let's be serious about this, Mr. Dunlop. You say that you made to my client a bribe.

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 231

My client, his character is effected by that.

He is deeply offended by this.

8

And he has been spending the last six years defending his good name in here.

9

It's serious matter for him.

11:39:58 10

about this issue that doesn't implicate him.

11 12

You give a story to the Tribunal when asked

You can't explain that. A.

And you don't think that's serious at all?

Well, nobody can account for the effect on your client's reputation other than

13

himself.

14

was egregious in the extreme.

11:40:22 15

16

You say now he was involved.

And in the context of the relationship that he had with me, which And perhaps you might put that to him the next

time you're talking to him. Q. 232

Even if you leave your evidence aside, Mr. Dunlop, leave the inconsistencies

17

aside, leave the mistakes aside, minor, serious as they may be.

18

wildly inconsistent accounts aside.

19

the demeanour or the hallmark of a witness telling the truth?

11:40:45 20

Leave the

You don't even have, I suggest to you,

A.

Again, I suggest to you that's an ungracious remark.

21

Q. 233

How is it an ungracious remark.

22

A.

We know you have a job to do, Mr. Gordon.

We know you do it every day of the

23

week, you know.

But there are certain boundaries

24

that you can and cannot cross as far as I'm concerned.

11:41:04 25

11:41:25 30

The fact of the matter I suggest

that you discuss that with your client. Q. 234

28 29

So you're doing your job.

is that what I'm telling you in relation to your client is correct.

26 27

Leave the evidence aside altogether?

Do you think that your demeanour in giving evidence to this Tribunal is a matter in respect of which the Tribunal don't have to take into account?

A.

What the Tribunal have to take into account is neither your nor my business.

Q. 235

It is actually -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:41:26

11:41:38

38 1

A.

No, no --

2

Q. 236

Just bear with me, Mr. Dunlop.

3

A.

Egregious.

4

Q. 237

Your evidence is important to this Tribunal.

5

You have used the word egregious?

They'll make their mind up about

it?

6

A.

Correct.

7

Q. 238

But not only is your evidence important.

The presentation of your evidence is

8

important also.

9

evidence and any assessment of that is a matter that can be taken into account

11:41:52 10

And it is a fact that your demeanour in the giving of that

by the Tribunal when they are weighing up the scenario.

That's what I'm

11

asking you about.

I suggested to you and I want you to answer this.

12

don't have, I suggest, the hallmark of a witness who is telling the truth.?

13

A.

And you, you are representing a client who does?

14

Q. 239

Well, let me put it to you this way, Mr. Dunlop.

11:42:12 15

You

You have come in here in

circumstances where you have perjured yourself.

I won't go through all of

16

this.

You come in here in 2000, the day after which you say I'm now going to

17

tell the truth.

18

evidence with enormous arrogance, Mr. Dunlop, I suggest to you.

19

cheap shots --

You don't display any humility whatsoever.

You give your You've taken

11:42:32 20

21 22

CHAIRMAN: A.

These are all ...

Comments.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

The demeanour of a witness is important from our point of view.

11:42:39 25

26

JUDGE KEYS:

Making comments is not.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

29

demeanour of the witness to the witness, really goes nowhere.

11:42:51 30

Putting comments -- what really in effect is comments about the

demeanour is there for us to see and to identify. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

I mean, the

And certainly it's a matter

11:42:55

11:43:03

39 1

which could be raised by you properly

2 3

MR. GORDON: I wouldn't have raised it only for the comment that he made about

4

my client.

I have to say that.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

7

that.

8

clearly -- his opinion as to what his demeanour is isn't of great assistance to

9

us.

11:43:25 10

Well, that's fine, I have no difficulty with you dealing with

Comments specific to his demeanour.

It's an area which the witness

We see his demeanour and we experience it.

And certainly it's a matter

for submissions to be made in relation to any witness that his or her demeanour

11

was such and such.

But it's a difficult issue for Mr. Dunlop to deal with,

12

your suggestion that his demeanour is this way or that way.

13

have to explain what you mean by when you use those terms so that he can see it

14

as a question and make an answer to it.

First of all, you

11:43:48 15

16

MR. GORDON: Well, I was just about to do that.

And I think that the Tribunal

17

offered a view that perhaps I shouldn't go into that territory.

18

it alone, Chairman.

I will leave

19 11:43:58 20

What I'm trying to do with this witness is to extract from him.

It's really

21

the only question I want answered today.

Is an explanation for the account

22

that he gave in private session by comparison with the account that he has

23

given.

24 11:44:11 25

CHAIRMAN:

Absolutely.

26 27

MR. GORDON: And the two of them.

28

to explain it and he won't.

You can't square the circle but I want him

29 11:44:18 30

CHAIRMAN:

Absolutely.

He has given an explanation.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:44:20

11:44:25

40 1 2

MR. GORDON: And --

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Whether it is a sufficient or satisfactory explanation, is really

5

for us to assess at the end of the day.

6

to the Tribunal that Mr. Dunlop not just added names to those that he

7

implicated in his statement, but that he in fact substituted names.

8

a matter of huge significance.

I mean, it is of great significance

So it is

9 11:44:44 10

You are now repeating a question to the witness asking him for an explanation.

11

He has given an explanation.

I'm not expressing a view as to whether or not

12

it's a satisfactory one.

13

it is a matter of great significance.

14

house per acre as against the four houses.

We have heard his explanation.

But it is a very --

And you have made reference to the one And that is ...

11:45:13 15

16

MR. GORDON: I'll accept that.

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

19

into insignificance.

11:45:26 20

That is compared to the substitution of names, that really pales We would certainly see that as a matter of great

significance.

21 22

MR. GORDON: But my difficulty with Mr. Dunlop this morning is that the same

23

distinction is not being drawn by --

24 11:45:31 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

Your difficulty is that you can't get from Mr. Dunlop an

understandable explanation.

27 28

MR. GORDON: Yes.

29 11:45:36 30

CHAIRMAN:

But he has given an explanation.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

And obviously, he -- his

11:45:42

11:45:58

41 1

evidence will stand or fall on that explanation insofar as this issue is

2

concerned.

3

valuable one or an acceptable one.

It's a matter for us to determine whether that explanation is a But I don't see how you can ...

4 5

MR. GORDON: I'm very grateful for that.

That certainly narrows the issues

6

that I wanted to discuss with Mr. Dunlop this morning.

7 8

Q. 240

9

Mr. Dunlop, if we can perhaps conclude.

Just in a general way I want to ask

you about a number of peripheral matters.

11:46:21 10

experience here with you.

And again this involves my own

In particular at the start of the Tribunal, at the

11

start of the inquiry by the Tribunal into my client's purported dealings with

12

you.

13

You gave an amount of payment.

14

a description of the place at which the payment was made.

11:46:43 15

I suggest to you that what you did was you gave an account of a payment.

description of the circumstances.

You gave a description the payment.

You gave

You gave a

And you put a context on it.

You offered

16

to the Tribunal written evidence in support.

And by that I mean that you

17

offered the Tribunal your diaries and so on and so forth.

18

there was some detail to the allegation that you made at the outset.

In other words,

19 11:47:02 20

What has been happening and I just make this observation and I ask you then to

21

comment on it.

Over the passage of time you continue to implicate Mr. Fox.

22

You continue to make reference to him.

23

him.

You continued to lay payments off on

But the detail is shrinking as time goes by.

24 11:47:23 25

26

Can you explain that? A.

Well the only answer that I can give to you, Mr. Gordon, is that in view of the

27

relationship that I had with your client, that I have given evidence about on a

28

number of occasions and will again give evidence about and the nature of the

29

relationship, the number of times I met him, the type of conversations that I

11:47:48 30

had with him, the requests for monies and the payment. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:47:53

11:48:04

42 1

Q. 241

So what's the answer?

2

A.

That is the answer.

3

Q. 242

I want an answer to the question I asked you, Mr. Dunlop.

I want an answer.

4

The first thing I asked you this morning was to answer the questions you were

5

asked.

6

provide you with another opportunity to answer it otherwise I'm going to ask

7

the Tribunal for a Ruling.

8

invoke their powers under the Act. I want an answer to that question?

9 11:48:24 10

11

And that is not an answer to the question I've asked.

If you want me to, Mr. Dunlop, I'll ask them to

A.

I give you the same answer again.

Q. 243

Which is?

A.

The relationship with your client.

12

context of the Development Plan.

13

him.

14

and in my payment to him.

11:48:43 15

And I'll

In my telephoning him.

The number of times I met him. In my lobbying him.

In the

In my meeting with

In my talking with him, in requests for money

That is the relationship that I've had with your

client in essence, in summary, during the course of the Development Plan.

I

16

have had no other relationship with your client.

17

you made allusion to -- that you alluded to previously a year and a half ago or

18

two years ago in relation to Texas Home Care, in relation to, broadly speaking,

19

planning and development matters.

11:49:11 20

Q. 244

Other than in the one that

Just bear with me for one moment, Mr. Dunlop.

21 22

Mr. Chairman, I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask the Tribunal for a Ruling on

23

this.

24

concerned --

This is an important matter insofar as my client's interests are

11:49:24 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

Can you ask the question precisely again.

27 28

MR. GORDON: What I'm interested here, Mr. Chairman, is an answer to this

29

question.

11:49:32 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:49:32

11:49:48

43 1

I point out to Mr. Dunlop that at the start of his evidence, insofar as it

2

relates to Mr. Fox.

3

Tribunal of the making of a payment.

4

nominates a place.

He makes an allegation.

He gives evidence to this

He puts that in the context.

He

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

Uh-huh.

7 8

MR. GORDON: He describes a conversation that he had him.

9

dealings that he had with him at the time.

11:49:57 10

He described

And he supported the evidence at

the time with a diary entry or written materials.

11 12

In other words, if you compare what he was saying four years ago about Mr. Fox

13

with the evidence that he is giving now in relation to Mr. Fox.

14 11:50:12 15

CHAIRMAN:

Yeah.

16 17

MR. GORDON: And just take the detail that he gives insofar as it relates to

18

the transaction.

19

of time is shrinking.

11:50:25 20

I'm just suggesting to him that the detail over the passage And I'm asking him to explain that.

And he's not

explaining it --

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

Well --

23 24 11:50:32 25

MR. GORDON: And I'm asking the Tribunal to direct Mr. Dunlop to answer the question.

26 27

CHAIRMAN:

Well --

28 29

MR. GORDON: To provide the explanation.

11:50:34 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:50:34

11:50:44

44 1

CHAIRMAN:

Yes.

Well you are seeking an explanation as to why he was able to

2

give great detail three or four years ago --

3 4

MR. GORDON: Exactly.

And he won't answer the question.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

And why he can't give that detail now.

7 8

MR. GORDON: Yes.

9 11:50:47 10

CHAIRMAN:

I mean, isn't that -- and then Mr. Dunlop has said in response to

11

that, that he can't give any more detailed an explanation than he gives, which

12

is a much less detailed one than he gave in similar circumstances three or four

13

years ago.

14 11:51:05 15

I mean, how can -- I mean, if that's what Mr. Dunlop says in evidence is

16

then -- isn't that a matter for submission by you at the end of the day in

17

relation to the weight that we should attach to evidence given in this Module?

18 19

MR. GORDON: Uh-huh.

11:51:20 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

By Mr. Dunlop insofar as it effects your client.

22 23

MR. GORDON: Perhaps.

24 11:51:24 25

CHAIRMAN:

He's not refusing to answer the question.

He is simply unable to

26

give you a more detailed explanation, such as he was able to do three or four

27

years ago.

28 29

MR. GORDON: Okay.

11:51:35 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

11:51:35

11:51:51

45 1

CHAIRMAN:

That's a matter which would -- which certainly reflects on the view

2

the Tribunal should take of his evidence on this occasion.

3 4

MR. GORDON: Just if I may then, and I'll conclude with this, Chairman.

5 6

Q. 245

Mr. Dunlop, can I ask you and just this is just in the interests of clarity,

7

have you taken a deliberate approach in that regard, to supply detail early on

8

in time and to keep the detail tight at this time?

9 11:52:06 10

A.

No.

Q. 246

No.

No further questions.

Thank you.

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

We are going to take a ten minute break.

13 14 11:52:41 15

16

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:13:42

12:13:51

46 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

Now, Mr. O'Dulachain, do you want to?

3 4

MR DULACHAIN:

Thank you, Chairman, I appear with Mr. David Burke, instructed

5

by Vivian Matthews, Solicitor.

6 7

We appear for the family of the late Tom Hand.

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:13:56

12:14:07

47 1

THE WITNESS WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. O' DULACHAIN:

2 3

Q. 247

4

Mr. Dunlop, I hope not to detain you too long, but there are a number of details I want to discuss with you.

5 6

You placed great emphasis on the change of accounts as between May 2000 and

7

subsequent accounts on the access you obtained subsequently to documentation.

8

What you've referred to as the road map.

9 12:14:24 10

A.

Yes.

Q. 248

But I assume prior to you first giving evidence at the Tribunal in 2000 that

11

you gave the matter some thought.?

12

A.

I gave which matter?

13

Q. 249

Well your involvement in lobbying in respect of planning during the Development

14 12:14:42 15

Plan.? A.

Yes.

16

Q. 250

And I suppose you gave it some significant thought?

17

A.

I gave it some thought.

18

Q. 251

And you gathered whatever papers you had relating to it.?

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 252

And you consulted with lawyers about your impending appearance?

21

A.

Correct.

22

Q. 253

So when you appeared to give evidence, it wasn't as if you were caught on the

12:14:54 20

23 24 12:15:11 25

Sorry, I beg your pardon, yes.

hop in relation to what questions might be asked.? A.

No.

Q. 254

You knew those particular developments in which you had had a professional

26

involvement?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 255

And you had an opportunity of reflecting prior to giving evidence on what

29 12:15:29 30

monies you had received? A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:15:30

12:15:57

48 1

Q. 256

And you had time to reflect on what any -- how you had dealt with that money?

2

A.

Broadly speaking, yes.

3

Q. 257

All right.

And when it came to making disclosure or admissions in that

4

period, in 2000, in the course of giving oral evidence you were able to

5

construct names of individuals?

6

A.

Sorry, I missed? I was able to construct.

7

Q. 258

A list of names.?

8

A.

Yes, yes.

9

Q. 259

All right.

12:16:13 10

And you were able to then put figures to those names, in terms of

monetary figures?

11

A.

Generally, yes.

12

Q. 260

All right.

13 14 12:16:22 15

So are we to take it that that wasn't on the basis of pure guess

work? A.

Not totally, no.

Q. 261

Are we to take it that you, prior to giving evidence on those days, had tried

16

to recollect what you had in fact disbursed to councillors?

17

A.

In relation it one particular Module, yes.

18

Q. 262

And not generally?

19

A.

Generally it was peripheral.

12:16:50 20

Not peripheral but there was one issue in

particular that the remit of the Tribunal seemed to be concentrating on.

21

Q. 263

And what Module was that?

22

A.

The one that has never been opened.

23

Q. 264

Well that's a few...

24

A.

Quite.

Q. 265

A big one.

26

A.

Quarryvale?

27

Q. 266

Yes. So when we then come subsequently to --

12:17:01 25

28 29 12:17:13 30

CHAIRMAN: A.

That has been opened.

Sorry, it has been opened but it has been ... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:17:16

12:17:31

49 1 2

MR O DULACHAIN:

Paused.

3

A.

We are awaiting judgement.

4

Q. 267

You then say that subsequently in trying to assist the Tribunal and being, if I

5

might put it more accurate, you then have the benefit of the minutes of the

6

council meetings and the motions.

Isn't that basically it?

7

A.

Yes, a type of aid memoire, yes.

8

Q. 268

And in relation to the minutes, they help you identify the appropriate date on

9

which a matter was before the council and a date on which a motion was disposed

12:18:01 10

of?

11

A.

In general terms, yes.

12

Q. 269

And then in terms of the motion, it helps you identify who signed the motion,

13 14

who proposed it effectively? A.

12:18:23 15

Yes, this is subsequent of course to my making available to the Tribunal any documentation that I have in relation to matters like this.

16

But that wasn't

total.

17

Q. 270

But in terms of the road map.

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 271

And all that does for you is identify dates, identify people who voted for, and

12:18:39 20

What you're relying on is the council record?

who voted against?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 272

And it identifies people who proposed motions?

23

A.

In broad terms, yes.

24

Q. 273

So the benefit to you, obviously, is that if someone voted against a motion in

12:18:53 25

which you had an interest of it being passed, you could avoid embarrassing

26

yourself by attaching that individual to your list?

27

A.

Well not really, not if I had a relationship with them.

28

Q. 274

Well it would -- you could avoid a contradictory statement.?

29

A.

Well, hypothetically, yes.

Q. 275

Isn't that the high point of it, in the sense that because someone voted for a

12:19:19 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:19:27

12:19:37

50 1 2

motion doesn't confirm anything? A.

3

Oh, the fact that somebody voted for a motion, that I did or did not have a relationship with, means nothing.

4

Q. 276

All right.?

5

A.

The fact that somebody voted against a motion that I had a relationship with or

6 7

did not have a relationship with means nothing. Q. 277

8 9

Well, if someone voted against it would mean that it would be entirely inconsistent with your assertion that they were within the loop or engaged?

A.

Well ...

Q. 278

In supportive action on your behalf?

11

A.

Not really.

12

Q. 279

And prior -- during your earlier evidence, at the earlier stage, you did have

12:19:56 10

13 14

I don't accept the logic of that, Mr. O'Dulachain.

your diaries available to you when you first gave evidence.? A.

No.

Q. 280

In May?

16

A.

Well, I certainly had my diaries but I did not have them here with me.

17

Q. 281

No.

18

A.

Yes.

12:20:19 15

19

When I first gave evidence in April/May.

When you went into private sessions you had your diaries.? But if my recollection is correct, and subject to correction by the

Tribunal officials, I don't think there was much reference to diaries during

12:20:44 20

the course of the private sessions.

We did have a -- the answer to the

21

question is we always had the diaries available to us.

22

them or not is a moot question.

23

Q. 282

Well if I might just stick with the diary issue.?

24

A.

Uh-huh.

Q. 283

Just by way of example.

12:21:02 25

26

Whether we alluded to

During the private sessions on the 11th of May.

And

I think it's page 885 of the private session.

27 28

I don't know whether that page is accessible.

29

WF/RED

12:21:34 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

It's volume 2 Dunlop, Frank;

12:21:34

12:21:46

51 1

MR. QUINN: Unless it's part of the circulated brief, Sir, it's not something

2

that can readily be called up on screen.

3 4

If the reference is to an extract of Mr. Dunlop's diary which has been

5

circulated as part of the Carrickmines brief, then it should be capable of

6

being ...

7

A.

I think it is.

If I might just put the extract to you.

CHAIRMAN:

Yeah.

8 9 12:21:57 10

Q. 284

It's part of the transcript of your private session.

11

in relation to -- I think it's Councillor Butler.

12

transcript, which is page 885 of the book.

13

question.

And there's a discussion

And page 53 of the

You reply as follows to a

14 12:22:34 15

Mr. Gallagher: He asked you for money and you gave him and there's a figure

16

mentioned.

17

Mr. Dunlop: I did.

18

Mr. Dunlop: I can't actually tell you that.

19

track of.

12:22:43 20

Mr. Hanratty: Was that for the 1992 election.

Mr. Butler: Here we have it.

It is very difficult to keep

On the 28th of the 5th 1993 I gave him 500.

21

On the 20th of the 7th '95 I bought a fundraising ticket for some function he

22

was running.

On the 22nd of the 6th 1996 I gave him 250 pounds"

23 24

But -- and you proceed.

12:23:08 25

these private sessions in relation to each councillor?

26

A.

No, you cannot take that.

27

Q. 285

Right.

28 29 12:23:28 30

Am I to take it either that you had an aid memoire at

So insofar as that type of specific detail was emerging, at private

sessions, was it from your diary or from some other documents? A.

Well, again I haven't seen the extract.

And the only answer I can give you to

that, Mr. O'Dulachain, they appear -- they sound to me to be references to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:23:34

12:23:48

52 1

amounts that are easily identifiable by cheque form or cheque stub form.

2

the absence of the actual context and the documentation, but that's the only

3

answer I can give you.

4

Q. 286

In

Well is it fair to say that at the private sessions when you're giving

5

evidence, you are not limited by the absence of access to the council minutes

6

or council motions.

You're able to give detailed evidence in private session?

7

A.

In certain -- yes, in certain circumstances, yes.

8

Q. 287

All right.

9 12:24:24 10

And in the circumstances relating to this particular development.

We have seen that you identify Tom Hand and you identified Don Lydon? A.

Yes.

11

Q. 288

At that stage?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 289

All right.

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 290

Now, is there anything in the minutes of the County Council meeting that would

12:24:34 15

16

And you change your mind in relation to that?

have encouraged you to change your mind in relation to naming Tom Hand?

17

A.

Well, in the -- no.

18

Q. 291

Is there anything in respect of the motions?

19

A.

I can't point to anything specific in relation to the council meetings.

Q. 292

Or the motions?

21

A.

No.

22

Q. 293

So what in the road map gives rise to Mr. Hand no longer being involved?

23

A.

Sorry.

12:25:01 20

I cannot -- I can't -- sorry.

I beg your pardon.

Well, I think as I answered earlier, in the

24

context of the totality of what occurred during the course of the Development

12:25:33 25

Plan and the relationships that I had with various people during the course of

26

the Development Plan, elected representatives, including your client, I named

27

your client.

28

Q. 294

29 12:26:03 30

Now, I think we've heard evidence that when you were engaged by Monarch your focus was to be on the Fianna Fail Councillors?

A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:26:04

12:26:31

53 1

Q. 295

Now, that was something which was central to your engagement, from March 1993?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 296

And in those circumstances, how could it ever arise that you could name a Fine

4 5

Gael councillor as being a person you approached and involved in this process? A.

Yeah.

Well it is easily answerable, insofar as I'm concerned.

And that is

6

that your client became aware or was aware or was told or that I was involved.

7

And I did approach him but he was aware that I was involved.

8

somebody in Monarch.

9

virtually every proposal during the course of the Development Plan.

I presume by

But I did approach him and I did, because I discussed I'm not

12:27:07 10

saying all but I'm saying virtually every proposal during the course of the

11

development plan with your client and I had a close association with your

12

client.

13

Q. 297

14

You see, can I go to what you have told the Tribunal about this development. And there was one session in private in which you gave graphic description

12:27:35 15

about your difficulties in obtaining money from Monarch.

16

Do you recollect

that?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 298

And it's the type of detail that sometimes has the ring of truth about it.

19 12:27:53 20

It's a minuet, it sticks in one's mind; isn't that correct? A.

Yes.

21

Q. 299

You had no reason to make it up in the private session?

22

A.

No.

23

Q. 300

And it referred to a sum of 25,000?

24

A.

Well, I don't know that it referred to a specific sum.

12:28:04 25

But correct me if I'm

wrong, Mr. O'Dulachain, and I don't have the private sessions in front of me.

26

But, yes, I did give evidence then and now, subsequently, that there was a

27

difficulty with getting payment in relation to ...

28

Q. 301

All right.?

29

A.

A payment or some payments from Monarch.

12:28:30 30

with representatives of Monarch. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

And that I did discuss the matter

12:28:30

12:28:44

54 1

Q. 302

Well, is it not likely that that was what occurred in March of 1993? That in

2

March of 1993 you were looking for service -- payment for services already

3

rendered?

4

A.

Oh, no.

Oh no.

Oh, no.

I wasn't involved prior to March 1993.

5

Q. 303

Well you had met Mr. Monahan prior to March 1993?

6

A.

Yes.

I think without even referring to my statement or my diaries, I think

7

there is -- there are two diary entries for -- in Mr. Monahan's name in my

8

diaries in 1992.

9 12:29:12 10

Q. 304

I think on the 11th of November 1992, the following week?

A.

And what I've said is that I've absolutely no recollection of any such meeting,

11

notwithstanding the fact that it does appear in my diary twice or what the

12

content was, if any.

13

Q. 305

14

session, that having carried out work for him in November 1992, that by March

12:29:39 15

of 1993 you are getting anxious to collect funds from Monarch, for whatever

16 17

services had been rendered? A.

18 19

Well, wouldn't it be consistent with your earlier evidence in the private

Well, that would be logical if it were true.

But I didn't do any work for

Mr. Monahan. Q. 306

12:30:02 20

And isn't it somewhat inconsistent to try and indicate that your initial meeting in March 1993, that your first payment would be broken into two

21

cheques; 15 and 10.

22

That's an unusual manner to obtain your first stage payment.?

23

A.

24

One on the 11th of March and one on the 12th of March.

Yes, well there are two sides to the coin of course.

One is my -- if you

forgive me for putting myself first and then the client, Monarch.

12:30:29 25

are no invoices extant in relation to that payment.

Now, there

The only evidence that we

26

have in relation to that payment, there are two things.

27

the very beginning, that I got 25,000 and the remittance notices from Monarch

28

in two different items.

29 12:30:56 30

My statement from

One for 10 and one for 15.

Q. 307

Isn't there a mystery about these payments in March 1993?

A.

Well, I don't think there's a mystery. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:30:58

12:31:05

55 1

Q. 308

Why --

2

A.

I think the payments were made.

3

Q. 309

Well, no, when we look at the communication from Monarch to GRE?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 310

They refer to a retainer commencing in May 1993?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 311

Isn't that correct?

8

A.

Yes.

9 12:31:15 10

Well I can't be responsible for any communication between Monarch and

GRE. Q. 312

And then we have this extraordinary cheque in May of 1993 which appears to end

11

up associated with Mr. Lawlor but a cheque made out to Frank Dunlop &

12

Associates?

13

A.

Correct.

14

Q. 313

And something of which you weren't aware when you were seeking payment in July

12:31:40 15

of 1993?

16

A.

I wasn't aware of what.

17

Q. 314

Of that cheque of 10,000.?

18

A.

Well, certainly consistent with the evidence that I have given in the

19 12:31:59 20

identification of -- there was always a question over this issue of 10,000. Q. 315

No, no, there was no question.

21

A.

Correct.

22

Q. 316

Okay.?

23

A.

We then, and I gave the circumstances when I was being examined by Mr. Murphy

24

You had no knowledge of it?

That's the point I'm making.

for the Tribunal, where we got a copy of the cheque and my forged signature was

12:32:17 25

on the back of it.

26

Q. 317

Well --

27

A.

And then there is an invoice which is not in the font from Frank Dunlop &

28 29 12:32:28 30

Associates. Q. 318

Well let's take the -- if it were the case that you were having difficulty obtaining payments and you were pressing for payment then in July of 1993, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:32:32

12:32:51

56 1

surely someone from Monarch would have said "look Frank, we gave you 10,000 at

2

the end of May"?

3

A.

I don't recollect any such conversation.

4

Q. 319

And no such discussion taking place when you were paid in September 1993 or

5

November 1993?

6

A.

No.

7

Q. 320

Or December 1993?

8

A.

Not that I recollect.

9

Q. 321

Okay.

12:33:01 10

private session when you were referring to difficulties obtaining payment, go

11 12

So doesn't that lead us back to whether your evidence, initially in

right back to the first payment in March of 1993? A.

Well, forgive me for saying this to you, Mr. O'Dulachain, and I would be like

13

to be and I would like to be as co-operative as possible but I mean you

14

certainly have lost me in the context of any logic to that question.

12:33:22 15

Where --

how can you add those two and two and get four? I mean, I really genuinely

16

don't understand that.

17

Q. 322

Very good.

18

A.

If you want to explain why it might be inconsistent I will cooperate with you

19 12:33:48 20

Well, we'll leave it there.

and try to answer it. Q. 323

21

But I don't see any connection whatsoever.

Now, if I might move on then.

You gave the impression of being actively

engaged in this matter from March of 1993 in lobbying on behalf of Monarch?

22

A.

Yes, in talking to councillors, yes, yes.

23

Q. 324

Yeah.

24 12:34:12 25

But the -- was there anything to be done before the public display in

July of August? A.

Before the public display probably not a great deal before the public display.

26

It's subsequent to what happens after the public display and the vote that

27

counts.

28

Q. 325

Right.

29

A.

We knew what was going on public display.

Q. 326

And the matter wasn't going to be on the council agenda in any shape or form

12:34:28 30

So --

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:34:32

12:34:46

57 1

until after the public display?

2

A.

Oh, gosh no.

3

Q. 327

And I assume in March and April while the matter -- while other matters were

4 5

still progressing, you had other -- other projects to advance with councillors? A.

6

Yes, again in the context of the public display and again in the context of ongoing contact.

7

Q. 328

No, no, in terms of matters still before the council?

8

A.

Sorry.

9

that year, July I think it was. Q. 329

12 13

A.

That's an interesting point.

I'd have to stand corrected on that.

absolutely 100 percent certain on that.

12:35:41 15

relation to the invoices.

16

I'm not

I don't know what the wording is in

I know the invoice that was questioned in relation

to the 10,000 does refer to Cherrywood. Q. 330

18 19

Am I correct that all the invoices to Monarch, in none of them is there any reference in fact to this particular development.?

14

17

Until whatever time the council finished its

extraordinary meetings in relation to the Development Plan in the summer of

12:35:07 10

11

I beg your pardon, yes.

Can I put it to you that your difficulties in recollection aren't limited simply to questions concerning your dealings with councillors.?

A.

Oh, you can put it to me.

Q. 331

Well would you agree or disagree?

21

A.

No, I wouldn't agree.

22

Q. 332

Would you agree or disagree that you have a difficulty in recollecting events

12:36:07 20

23 24

which are now 13 years old? A.

12:36:23 25

26

Yes, there is -- there are difficulties in recollecting as accurately as you might wish everything that occurred 13 years ago.

Q. 333

27

And particularly, you've difficulties recollecting what your business was with one of the major developers in Dublin in November of 1992?

28

A.

You --

29

Q. 334

Particularly Mr. Monahan.?

A.

Yes, I have to -- again, I said in my statement, and I repeat it to you here

12:36:43 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:36:49

12:37:13

58 1

and now.

2

diary, I have no recollection of a specific meeting with Mr. Monahan about any

3

specific issue.

4

not have a recollection of a specific meeting with him about a specific

5

subject.

6

Q. 335

7

That I have, other than the reference to Mr. Monahan twice in my

aware of what political donations Monarch had made? A.

Yes.

9

Q. 336

To councillors?

A.

Correct.

Q. 337

All right.

11

I do

In your discussions with Monarch, I think you gave evidence that you weren't

8

12:37:27 10

I met Mr. Monahan socially on a number of occasions.

12

So you'd no knowledge as to what, if any, payment had been made to

Mr. Hand?

13

A.

None.

14

Q. 338

No.

12:37:52 15

And when you come then to the proposal in November of 1993 in relation to

Cherrywood.

What councillors are off side?

16

A.

What councillors are off side? I mean, they're not supportive.

17

Q. 339

Who are you concerned -- what councillors do you need whom you are having

18 19

difficulty persuading? A.

12:38:22 20

Well, I never suggested that I had any great difficulty in persuading any councillor.

I did a list for -- at the request of the Chairman, the people in

21

both Fianna Fail and Fine Gael and others that I had contact with in relation

22

to this matter.

23

could and could not be done or what ought or ought not be done.

24

included the people who supported the original manager's proposal in relation

12:38:57 25

There were a variety of views expressed in relation to what

to the Lydon McGrath motion in 199 -- May 1992.

And that

And if you wish me to be

26

particular, I think I've already given evidence to the effect that, to the fact

27

that councillor Betty Coffey was quite cautious, was urging caution.

28

think that was contingent on a heavy lobbying campaign that was being conducted

29

against any development in the Cherrywood area.

12:39:34 30

Q. 340

And I

Was there any sense of panic before the meeting that the motion wouldn't be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:39:38

12:40:05

59 1 2

passed? A.

3 4

Well, I think panic is a strong word, Mr. O'Dulachain.

People were watching

their Ps and Qs and making sure that everything would go okay. Q. 341

You see, having I think received 85,000 pounds or 85,000 pounds having been at

5

least moved from Monarch Properties either to you or to others, the amount you

6

actually say you disbursed to councillors was 4,000?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q. 342

And to two councillors.

9

was involved if payments were required at all, surely you had to bring more

12:40:39 10

11

Just sort of surprised to see that that's all that

councillors on board? A.

Well, the circumstances change and are different in relation to each particular

12

proposal or development.

13

particular instance.

14

Q. 343

12:41:01 15

And these are the circumstances that apply in this

So, it isn't a matter that's consistent at all, in the sense of councillors demands vary; is it? Per proposal.?

16

A.

Well, yes, councillors demands did vary.

17

Q. 344

All right.

If I might bring you back again to November 1992 and page 7870 of

18

the ... again, I'm just interested in the accuracy of your recollection.

19

This is on the 11th of November 1992, the General Election has been called?

12:41:37 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 345

And it appears from the diary that and the evidence that you've given, and I

22

think it's been confirmed by Pat Rabbitte, that you were on the road with

23

political donations?

24 12:42:00 25

A.

Sorry, it was confirmed by what, by whom?

Q. 346

I think Mr. Rabbitte confirmed that you met him at -- that you went to his

26

house?

27

A.

Correct.

28

Q. 347

So, I think it's reasonable to assume that you were on the road with political

29 12:42:11 30

donations to make? A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:42:13

12:42:28

60 1

Q. 348

And I think we had a detailed description of the meeting you had in

2

Mr. Rabbitte's home.

And then at eleven o'clock you've previously given

3

evidence that you were to meet Tom Hand at his home.?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 349

And at 11:30, do I take it that that's MJC and the Marine Hotel?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 350

And would I be right in assuming that's on the far side of Dublin?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 351

In Sutton, or thereabouts?

A.

Correct, Sutton Cross.

Q. 352

Right.

12:42:46 10

11 12

And then at one o'clock you are to meet Cathal Boland at DCC, Dublin

County Council?

13

A.

CB at DCC, yes.

14

Q. 353

And then at 2:30, Liam T Cosgrave is in at Newtownpark Avenue?

A.

Yes.

Q. 354

And they are all what you might refer to as non-fianna Fail political

12:43:07 15

16 17

contributions?

18

A.

They are all non-fianna Fail people, yes.

19

Q. 355

Right.

12:43:26 20

And I assume you had a reason why you were only distributing money in

that manner on that particular day?

21

A.

There was a General Election on.

22

Q. 356

But you were effectively providing money to one side, a potential coalition of

23 24 12:43:43 25

one side; isn't that correct? A.

Logically, yes.

Q. 357

All right.

26

Now, and I think you previously -- I think this Module, Mr. Boland

has furnished evidence that he did receive money from you?

27

A.

Yes, he has.

28

Q. 358

And you -- you've challenged that.?

29

A.

Well it's not a question that I've challenged it.

12:44:06 30

I have said that I do not

have a recollection of -- I did give a contribution to Mr. Cathal Boland on an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:44:14

12:44:41

61 1

occasion for a party political function but I do genuinely have a difficulty in

2

according with Mr. Boland, what Mr. Boland says.

3

Q. 359

All right.

4

A.

Sorry?

5

Q. 360

Well, do you agree or disagree with Mr. Boland's assertion?

6

A.

No, I have no recollection of giving the amount of money that Mr. Boland

7 8

And I think some other witness has confirmed Mr. Boland's account?

suggests that I gave to him and the circumstances in which he has described it. Q. 361

9

I think on the 4th of February 2003 you were questioned about this matter by Mr. O'Higgins, in the context of him asking questions on behalf of Liam

12:45:13 10

Cosgrave.

11 12

And on, I think day 358.

You gave evidence.

13

it was at question 275 on day 358.

14

or accessible.

And if I might just -- I think

I'm not sure whether that is in the system

12:45:45 15

16

You gave evidence in relation to Mr. Boland.

17

election.

18

relation to Mr. Cosgrave in which you said he was a candidate in the election.

19

He actually lost in the election and subsequently ran in the Senate Election

12:46:07 20

Sorry.

Sorry.

He was a candidate in the

Well if -- first of all, you gave evidence in

the following January for whose campaign I gave him a donation.

At one

21

o'clock I met a councillor at Dublin City Council who ran in the election at

22

whom I gave money.

23

Newtownpark Avenue.

At 2:30 your client appears at the appointment at

24 12:46:29 25

On that occasion do we take it that you were saying that Cathal Boland did

26 27

receive money on that from you? A.

What I've said Mr. O a' Dulachain, is I have no recollection of giving

28

Councillor Boland the amount of money that he said in his statement in the

29

circumstances that he said.

12:46:43 30

There is -- it's unquestioned that Mr. Cathal

Boland appears in my diary for that time on that date. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

It is -- I -- it

12:46:51

12:47:10

62 1

cannot be again said that I met him but I do not have a recollection of giving

2

him the amount of money that he suggests I gave him.

3

I add, that I would give him the amount of money that he suggested.

4

Q. 362

But in relation to your dealings with Tom Hand.

It is inconceivable, may

We can establish that on the

5

same day that you were making a contribution to Mr. Hand, you were making a

6

political contribution to Mr. Rabbitte, you were making a political

7

contribution to Mr. Boland?

8

A.

And to Mr. Cosgrave.

9

Q. 363

And to Mr. Cosgrave.

A.

Again, in the context of Michael Joe Cosgrave.

12:47:29 10

And in terms of Michael Joe Cosgrave then? I did make a contribution to

11

Mr. Michael Joe Cosgrave by cheque.

12

both in statement and in public session in relation to both a General

13

Election -- in relation to a Local Election I think it was and a General

14

Election.

12:47:52 15

Q. 364

16 17

And those donations, those distributions on that day were for political purposes?

A.

Those donations were given in the context of the General Election with --

18

certainly in two circumstances.

19

Council were specifically referred to.

12:48:17 20

Q. 365

21 22

12:49:11 25

Where issues relating to Dublin County

Well, aren't you trying to tie things together at this stage? Either they were political contributions with a General Election in being or they weren't?

A.

23 24

And I have given evidence to this effect

Well they were political contributions made to people in the context of issues before Dublin County Council.

I've already given evidence to that effect.

Q. 366

Do you recollect meeting Michael Joe Cosgrave on that day?

A.

I -- I certainly -- well I met Michael Joe Cosgrave on many occasions and in

26

that location and in his home and in other more central locations.

27

say that I specifically do, no.

28

Q. 367

29 12:49:48 30

In -- if we return then to Mr. Hand, who you said had a crucial involvement initially in this project.

A.

I cannot

That wasn't accurate.?

Why not? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:49:51

12:50:12

63 1

Q. 368

Well, what was crucial?

2

A.

Well, I think somebody else has given evidence to the effect, I think somebody

3

on behalf of Monarch.

4

I'm wrong.

5

Monarch official's eyes as being crucial -- as being central, sorry, to the

6

Cherrywood Development.

7

Q. 369

8 9 12:50:32 10

I haven't read the exact transcript, so correct me if

That Mr. Hand had successfully managed to pull the wool over

No, let's deal with your state of knowledge in 2000.

Not on the basis of what

someone has said since. A.

Oh,.

Q. 370

Is it the case that you were trying to stitch it into Mr. Hand because he was

11

dead?

12

A.

No.

13

Q. 371

And wasn't this a continuation of what you had been at when you first gave

14 12:50:47 15

16

evidence? A.

No.

Q. 372

And it -- hasn't it been your consistent practice that whenever any counsel for

17

a councillor puts you under pressure you come back with an insult against the

18

councillor?

19

A.

With a what?

Q. 373

With an insult against the councillor?

21

A.

That is incorrect.

22

Q. 374

Isn't that what happened this morning? With a flare of language, phrases like

12:51:07 20

23 24 12:51:19 25

egregious? A.

Egregious.

Q. 375

In other words, the mechanism that you try to use to try and distract attention

26 27

from the question is to enlarge on the allegation against the councillor? A.

Perhaps it has escaped your notice, Mr. O'Dulachain but I am quite entitled

28

when I am being asked questions in specific fashion by a counsel for a client

29

to answer it as I see fit.

12:51:42 30

Whether that is correct or not, is a matter for

the Chairman of the Tribunal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:51:42

12:51:56

64 1

Q. 376

2

Can I put it to you that what you've been engaged on is an attempt to reconstruct your memory.?

3

A.

No.

4

Q. 377

That you've no clear recollection of what was paid to whom and when.?

5

A.

I know what your client got.

6

Q. 378

No, you've no clear recollection?

7

A.

I know.

8

Q. 379

As to what was paid, to whom or when.?

9

A.

No.

Q. 380

You kept no record at the time.?

11

A.

There's no records.

12

Q. 381

You kept no record?

13

A.

No records.

14

Q. 382

No original black book?

A.

No reference.

16

Q. 383

No means of knowing with any degree of accuracy how much you paid to anyone?

17

A.

Question? Are you making a statement?

18

Q. 384

Yes.?

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 385

So are we dealing with one particular day such as the 11th of November 1992.

12:52:05 10

12:52:20 15

12:52:25 20

21

From the outset, there is even a dispute as to how much was paid to

22

Mr. Rabbitte.?

23

A.

24 12:52:41 25

Well that's a matter for Mr. Rabbitte.

I have given my evidence in relation

to Mr. Rabbitte. Q. 386

You don't know how much was paid in relation to Mr. Boland?

26

A.

I dispute what Mr. Boland is saying.

27

Q. 387

You don't know whether or not you met Michael Joe Cosgrave?

28

A.

I said I met Mr. Michael Joe Cosgrave at that location on in a number of

29 12:52:54 30

occasions. Q. 388

In relation to Tom Hand, we're to believe having spent a time discussing Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:53:00

12:53:21

65 1

politics with Mr. Rabbitte, you switch across town, call in to meet Mr. Hand

2

and then go right across town to meet Michael Joe Cosgrave and then back into

3

town and out the other side to meet Mr. Liam T Cosgrave?

4

A.

You find that difficult to comprehend.

5

Q. 389

I think anyone travelling the city even in '92 would find that difficult to

6

comprehend.

In terms of this reconstruction of memory.

7

you that it's selective?

Can I put it to that

8

A.

No, I don't accept that, Mr. O'Dulachain.

9

Q. 390

And finally.

If we just look at this particular project, the Monarch

Properties.

The funds you received seem to be divided; one between funds

12:53:41 10

11

legitimately recorded in your business; isn't that correct?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 391

All right.?

14

A.

Sorry, sorry ...

Q. 392

One, Frank Dunlop & Associates receives payments from Monarch Properties?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 393

Two, Frank Dunlop himself takes a swathe of those payments?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 394

Three, Liam Lawlor now takes a swathe?

A.

That we now know of.

Q. 395

And four, you then attribute 4,000 paid out to councillors some time after the

12:53:56 15

12:54:12 20

21 22

passing of a motion to two councillors, 2,000 each?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 396

Of which there is no record, no date, no time, no place?

A.

Correct.

26

Q. 397

Thank you, Mr. Dunlop?

27

A.

Thank you, Mr. O'Dulachain.

12:54:28 25

28 29 12:54:40 30

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

Thank you, Mr. O' Dulachain.

parties who want to cross-examine Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

Are there any other

12:54:44

12:54:52

66 1

MR CREGAN: I'm Connor Creegan, Counsel for Cathal Boland.

2 3

I would just like a couple of questions with Mr. Dunlop, if you don't mind.

4 5 6

THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. CREGAN AS FOLLOWS:

7 8

Q. 398

9

MR. CREGAN: Can I have page 7870 back up, please. Now, Mr. Dunlop, I just want to clarify a few matters pursuant to Mr. O'Dulachain's cross-examination

12:55:13 10

of you.

11 12

Can I take it that the 11th there in your diary, the CB at DCC entry.

13

when Mr. O'Dulachain was questioning you on donations you were handing out at

14

this time.

12:55:34 15

Now,

You referred to any contributions you made as being in the context

of issues before Dublin County Council

16

A.

Yeah but I didn't include them all.

17

Q. 399

That's what I'm trying to clarify as to which ones we're talking about here?

18

A.

In relation to the meeting at one o'clock.

19

Q. 400

Uh-huh?

A.

First of all --

Q. 401

Can we just go to the ones you mean when you say contributions.

12:55:46 20

21

I was --

22

can isolate the one you didn't mean.

23

top of the one o'clock meeting?

24

Are we talking about any of the three on

A.

Well in relation to?

Q. 402

To contributions made in the context of?

26

A.

Of?

27

Q. 403

Of Dublin?

28

A.

Well the first one, Mr. Rabbitte.

29

Q. 404

All right.?

A.

And Mr. Hand.

12:56:03 25

12:56:12 30

And then we

The last one Mr. Cosgrave.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

12:56:14

12:56:26

67 1

Q. 405

2

Okay.

So I can take it that with reference to you meeting with Mr. Boland.

It had nothing to do with the issues before Dublin County Council?

3

A.

For clarity.

4

Q. 406

Yeah?

5

A.

I should like to say, that I rarely lobbied Mr. Boland.

6

Q. 407

Yeah, I'm about to put to you.

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q. 408

I'm about to put to you evidence that you gave to my colleague, Mr. Murphy,

9

If you just wait for my question?

when he put some of Mr. Boland's statement to you on the 14th of June during

12:56:44 10

some of this Module and I will read it to you directly.

11 12

"Cathal Boland never appeared on the radar screen as far as I'm concerned.

13

relation to matters we're dealing with in this Tribunal.

14

he never asked for and I never gave him any money in relation to anything

12:56:58 15

In fairness to him,

relating to the Development Plan in Dublin County Council".

16 17

A.

Correct.

18

Q. 409

That would sum up your evidence to the Tribunal?

19

A.

Absolutely.

Q. 410

Now, this is just a matter, this clarification.

12:57:05 20

Just a matter of identifying

21

an issue which is a contradiction essentially between your memory and

22

Mr. Boland's?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 411

Okay?

A.

Yes.

Q. 412

And for the purposes of clarifying that.

12:57:16 25

26

We have Mr. Boland's statement to

27

the Tribunal.

And I would like to just read a portion of it to you to give

28

you a sense of it. I think it may well have been read before.

29

you a sense of it.

12:57:31 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

Just to give

In

12:57:31

12:57:53

68 1

"Frank Dunlop phoned me and arranged to meet me in the council after lunch.

2

am unclear as to what date it was.

3

This was subsequent to his being elected as a candidate or proposed as a

4

candidate on Sunday the 8th, I think of, bear with me, the 8th of November of

5

1992.

I

But this... " I'll just interject here.

So we're talking about the week afterwards.

6

A.

Right.

7

Q. 413

Of which the 11th would be the Wednesday.

"I was in the FG room, that's the

8

Fine Gael room and Frank came in.

9

might happen, he gave me a contribution which was in a sealed envelope and he

12:58:08 10

We had a chat about the election, what

told me it was provided by four or five individuals.

When I asked him for

11

their names he told me they were happy to make a contribution and it was not

12

necessary that they be acknowledged.

13 14

Now, I read that out to you as his account of what happened.

12:58:22 15

We have a diary

entry that you did indeed meet him at some stage on the Wednesday at one

16

o'clock subsequent to his being proposed as a candidate.

17

money here that is legitimate.

We're talking about

18

A.

If it was paid, yes.

19

Q. 414

I'm in the unique position of being a man who is insisting with you that you

12:58:39 20

gave money and you insisting that you didn't.?

21

A.

Legitimately.

22

Q. 415

All I want to do is put all of Mr. Boland's evidence to back up his

23 24 12:58:49 25

26

allegations? A.

Yes.

Q. 416

That the money indeed changed hands as against your memory.

But that's all.

Just to clarify it.

27 28

If I could have Mr. Boland's pages in the brief.

29

118.

12:59:11 30

Excuse me, Chairman.

somewhat illegible.

I think it's pages 94 to

But the script in these pages of the brief is

I think it's page 113, if we could have it.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

It's a

12:59:16

12:59:38

69 1

lodgement to Mr. Boland's account.

If it's not 113 we'll have to just scroll

2

through until we can get to his lodgement business.

3

going back.

4

scroll backwards from Mr, I'll just try and track it down.

5

and again -- no, no it's -- yeah.

6

apologise, Chairman.

If you could just try

My memory escapes me as to which page it is.

So if we can just

Yeah.

Hang --

Can you just bring it forward again.

I

7 8 9

CHAIRMAN:

It's all right.

12:59:49 10

11

MR. CREGAN:

12

please.

I'm trying to see.

That's 47.

Sorry.

Can you just go back one page,

Forward again, please.

13 14

JUDGE KEYS:

That's it, Cathal Boland.

16

MR. CREGAN:

It's not.

17

...

13:00:02 15

I'm looking for a figure of 3030 it might help the

18 19 13:00:12 20

CHAIRMAN:

It's now just gone one o'clock.

So over lunchtime you might be

able to identify it.

21 22

MR. CREGAN:

It's the last, Chairman, business I have with Mr. ...

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

That's fine.

13:00:19 25

26

MR. CREGAN:

So.

Could we roll forward again.

27

it.

28

just put it to Mr. Dunlop and then we can sort matters out.

It is there, Chairman.

Perhaps we could wait until after lunch and I'll

29 13:00:43 30

CHAIRMAN:

Okay.

No, I'm afraid I can't find

Two o'clock then.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

13:00:45

70 1 2 3

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

13:03:06

14:06:02

71 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2:00 P.M.:

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

Now, are there ...

4 5

MR. CREGAN:

6

Mr. Dunlop.

Chairman, there is just one final thing I have to establish with

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

9 14:06:08 10

MR. CREGAN: I think if we could have the page called up again. Thank you,

11

Chairman.

12 13

Now, Mr. Dunlop.

14

recollects you giving him 4,000 pounds. We've established that his

14:06:30 15

Just one final portion to this clarification.

Mr. Boland

recollection of a meeting with you is clarified -- is in your diary?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 417

I just point to this page here, page 108 of the brief.

You can see it's

18

lodgements by Mr. Boland.

19

'92, which would be just subsequent to when he says you gave him 4,000 pounds.

14:06:54 20

21

A.

That would be the Friday, yes.

Q. 418

And I put it to you that that also backs up Mr. Dunlop's -- or excuse me,

22 23

Mr. Boland's version of events.? A.

24

Well, simply.

I don't know.

I don't know.

I'm not making any allegation

to the contrary, other than to say that I have no recollection of giving Cathal

14:07:16 25

Boland that substantial amount of money ever.

26 27

And you can see 3300 there on the 13th of November

And he never asked me for

anything of that nature. Q. 419

Thank you very much, Mr. Dunlop.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

28 29

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

Mr. Murphy, do you have any questions?

14:07:29 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:07:29

14:07:33

72 1

MR. MURPHY:

I haven't, no, Chairman.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

Do you have any questions, Mr. Redmond?

4 5

MR. REDMOND: No.

6 7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Mr. Dunlop, I just have one matter I want to ask you about.

Certainly.

9 14:07:41 10

JUDGE FAHERTY:

You gave evidence I think it was on the first day to

11

Mr. Murphy.

12

think you accept you got and there's an issue about the 10,000 cheque

13

A.

And you were talking about the 85,000, at least 75 of which I

Yes.

14 14:07:54 15

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Mr. Murphy I think was putting to you and I think you agreed,

16

that of that amount 35, 000 didn't go through the books of Frank Dunlop &

17

Associates

18

A.

Yes, I think that is correct, Judge, yes.

19 14:08:07 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Yes.

Yes.

And Mr. Murphy was asking you and I think in

21

fairness Mr. O'Dulachain put the same issue to you today.

22

you say, or you allege, you paid out to two County Councillors?

23

A.

That only 4,000,

Yes.

24 14:08:24 25

JUDGE FAHERTY:

And I just want to ask you the response to which you gave

26

Mr. Murphy back on day whatever it was, 652.

27

You say only 4,000 went out to politicians due to the circumstances of the

28

particular instance?

29

A.

Yes.

14:08:44 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

When he asked you about this.

14:08:44

14:09:00

73 1

JUDGE FAHERTY:

2

at the time to dictate to you that you -- when you say you only paid 4,000,

3

which you allege?

4

A.

And I just wanted to ask you.

What circumstances prevailed

Yes.

5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY:

7

morning also.

8

A.

I know Mr. O'Dulachain pursued this to some extent this

And that's really my question.

Okay.

9 14:09:12 10

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11 12

What were the circumstances which dictated this -- the limit,

if you like A.

Yes.

13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14:09:26 15

in other Modules or other developments you allege that you pay a greater number

16 17

To giving -- I think which you've already acknowledged, that

of people than you allege here. A.

Correct.

Well, the circumstances in this particular case, in this particular

18

Module, is that they are the people who asked me in the discussions that I had

19

with them and I think in reply to a question from the Chairman, some time ago,

14:09:51 20

in relation to this.

I said, you know, that they were the circumstances.

In

21

other instances, in other cases, in other Modules, there were other requests.

22

In this one, not.

23 24 14:10:08 25

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I see.

Thank you.

Thank you, Judge.

26 27

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much.

28 29 14:10:16 30

MR. GORDON: Just before Mr. Dunlop leaves. one question arising out of the answer given? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

I wonder if I might, Mr. Dunlop

14:10:19

14:10:21

74 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

3 THE WITNESS WAS QUESTIONED BY MR. GORDON AS FOLLOWS:

4 5 6 7

Q. 420

If that was the circumstances, Mr. Dunlop, which gave rise to the payment which

8

you state, how would either of the two concerned have known what your business

9

was?

14:10:30 10

A.

Well, the business was -- I discussed the Monarch proposal with them.

11

Q. 421

You said in answer to the question asked by the Judge?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 422

They asked you?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 423

How would they have known what your business was?

A.

Because I approached them.

14:10:40 15

16 17 18

We had a discussion with your client and another

councillor in relation to the Monarch proposal. Q. 424

19

Is that to say that you approached a number of councillors, informed them of the proposal or the business at which you were at and only two asked you for

14:11:03 20

money?

21

A.

Correct.

22

Q. 425

Is that a serious account, Mr. Dunlop?

23

A.

Well by that I presume you mean you're shocked that no other councillor asked

24 14:11:13 25

me for money. Q. 426

Yes.?

26

A.

You are shocked.

27

Q. 427

Yes.?

28

A.

I see.

29

Q. 428

You say, Mr. Dunlop, the only ring of truth about the evidence that you have

14:11:21 30

So you do accept that councillors did ask me for money?

given it seems from start to finish, and I see you find it funny but the only Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:11:24

14:11:36

75 1

evidence as far I can see and I suggest to you that has a ring of truth is that

2

you corrupted people, the question is who did you corrupt?

3

A.

No, no, the question you asked me was whether or not of the people I made

4

contact with or spoke to about this development, were they the only two.

5

the answer was yes.

6

Q. 429

7

Yes.

So you say now that you went to a body of councillors, informed them at

the time of what business it was you were about and only two asked you?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 430

Thank you.

14:11:47 10

11 12

CHAIRMAN: A.

All right.

Thank you, Mr. Dunlop

Thanks again, Chairman.

13 14 14:12:02 15

16

THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW.

17 18 19 14:12:02 20

21

And

MR. QUINN: Mr. Tony Fox, please.

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:12:02

14:12:33

76 1 2

MR. TONY FOX, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED

3

AS FOLLOWS BY MR. QUINN:

4 5 6 7

CHAIRMAN: A.

8 9 14:12:41 10

Good afternoon, Mr. Fox.

Good afternoon, Chairman. MR. QUINN: Good afternoon, Mr. Fox

A.

Good afternoon, Mr. Quinn.

Q. 431

Mr. Fox, I think you were a member of Dublin County Council between 1985 and

11

December 1993 and thereafter I think you became a member of Dun

12

Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council; isn't that right?

13

A.

That's right.

14

Q. 432

And I think maybe in the period 1996 '97 you were Cathaoirleach of Dun

14:12:59 15

Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council; isn't that correct?

16

A.

That's correct.

17

Q. 433

And I think you were written to by the Tribunal in the context of the

18

Cherrywood Module.

19

which is to be found at pages 7627 and 7628 of the brief; isn't that right?

14:13:17 20

21

And you, through your solicitors, furnished a statement

A.

That's right, yeah.

Q. 434

Now, you have already given evidence to the Tribunal in relation to some of the

22

matters which touch on the Cherrywood Lands; isn't that right? Particularly, I

23

think we touched on some of these issues back in the Carrickmines Module in

24

2003; isn't that correct?

14:13:34 25

26

A.

I think so, yeah.

Q. 435

Now, just in relation to the Cherrywood lands.

27

You are familiar with these

lands; isn't that right?

28

A.

That's right, yeah.

29

Q. 436

And I think you are reasonably familiar with the planning or zoning history of

14:13:51 30

the lands; isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:13:53

14:14:03

77 1

A.

Yeah.

2

Q. 437

The lands, I think, in question were zoned partially agriculture and partially

3

one house to the acre on septic tank in the 1983 Development Plan; isn't that

4

right?

5

A.

I think so, yeah.

6

Q. 438

And I think in late 1990 the manager brought proposals to the chamber.

If we

7

can have 6936.

8

industrial and residential development.

9

that map and the Manager's report in relation to it in October/November 1990.?

14:14:25 10

11

That the area would be opened up for development with both And you may or may not recall seeing

A.

I remember it came up in 1990 but ... yeah.

Q. 439

And I think there was a meeting at 6952 on the 6th of December 1990, which you

12

were marked as being present at but in respect of which you did not vote on a

13

key motion by councillors McDonald and Coffey. And we see that motion at 6953.

14 14:14:47 15

Do you recall being present when that motion was being debated, Mr. Fox?

16

effect of that motion, I think, was to limit development to the eastern side of

17

the proposed Southeastern Motorway line.

18

A.

That's right, yeah.

19

Q. 440

At that time.

The

If we could have 6954.

14:15:05 20

21

You're not recorded as having voted on that motion.

22

A.

I mustn't have been there at the time, I presume.

23

Q. 441

You were there earlier in the day but you weren't there for the vote; isn't

24 14:15:16 25

26

that right? A.

If I didn't vote for it I must have had to go somewhere, I mean.

Q. 442

Okay.

27

But in any event, did you know that that vote had effected the Monarch

lands at that time?

28

A.

I couldn't be positive about it, yeah.

29

Q. 443

Okay.

14:15:34 30

Did you know that, for example, Mr. Monahan and the Monarch Group had

acquired these lands in Cherrywood in 1989/1990? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:15:40

14:15:58

78 1

A.

I don't off the top of my head recall that.

2

Q. 444

Okay.

3

What's your first recollection of the Monarch interest having an

involvement with the lands in the Cherrywood area?

4

A.

It was around the 18 -- or 1990s, '91 like that time.

5

Q. 445

Okay.

Well, it would appear that this successful motion of Councillors

6

McDonald and Coffey had the effect of limiting development to the eastern side

7

of the proposed motorway line, that is to say the line as proposed by the

8

manager in 1990.

9

January 1991, at 3086.

14:16:24 10

And the matter came before the council again on the 18th of We see that you are recorded as having been in

attendance at that special meeting.

11 12

And if I could have 6964, please.

13

introduced to the meeting on that occasion.

14

in red the Monarch lands.

14:16:40 15

This is a map.

Map 27.

Which had been

And you will see there outlined

Do you see those, Mr. Fox?

A.

Yeah, inside the red.

16

Q. 446

Yeah.

17

A.

Yeah.

18

Q. 447

And you will see a line running through the -- almost dividing the red in

19

The red lands are the Monarch lands?

circled lands and then to the south of those lands you'll see a further line of

14:17:00 20

squares.

Do you see that?

21

A.

Going across?

22

Q. 448

Yes.?

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 449

And that was, I think, the line running through or dissecting the Monarch lands

14:17:14 25

was the 1983 proposed line of the motorway and the line to the south?

26

A.

Was that the Harcourt Street line was it or?

27

Q. 450

I think it's sometimes referred to as the Harcourt Street line.

And then the

28

line to the south was the 1990 proposed line of the motorway.

29

Councillor Coffey McDonald's motion on the 6th December 1990 that the manager

14:17:30 30

I think taking

had come back to the County Council on the 18th January 1991 with proposals Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:17:35

14:17:44

79 1

that everything east of that line be zoned for residential development; isn't

2

that right?

3

A.

Yeah.

4

Q. 451

And that map was noted at that meeting?

5

A.

That meeting was noted, yes.

6

Q. 452

That was on the 18th of January 1991.

Had that remained to be the position,

7

it would appear that the 1991 draft plan would have zoned for residential

8

development on piped sewage at four houses to the acre, everything east of the

9

new proposed line, that is the 1990 line, of the Southeastern Motorway; isn't

14:18:05 10

that right?

11

A.

It was only a proposal at that time, that's right.

12

Q. 453

In fact it was 1997 before a line was actually constructed; isn't that right?

13

A.

There was no environmental study done.

14

Q. 454

These were all proposed lines at this stage?

A.

Yes.

Q. 455

But it was the case deriving from the Coffey McDonald motion, that only lands

14:18:19 15

16 17

to the east of whatever the line was to be, was to be zoned for residential

18

development; isn't that right?

19 14:18:32 20

A.

That's right, yeah.

Q. 456

So the further south one pushed the line, the more land that was within the

21

take for residential development; isn't that correct?

22

A.

Just repeat that?

23

Q. 457

So if we take -- what I'm suggesting is that the further west?

24

A.

West.

Q. 458

One pushed the line?

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 459

Then the more line land that lay to its east and therefore lay within the area

14:18:46 25

28 29 14:18:57 30

for residential development? A.

That would be on the proposal but I mean ...

Q. 460

Yes? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:18:57

14:19:13

80 1

A.

The line hadn't been decided so it wasn't decided until 1997 so.

2

Q. 461

That's correct?

3

A.

So, I mean, it was all, whatever, you know, it was just a proposal.

4

Q. 462

Yes.

But if you were representing the Monarch interest there was a huge

5

difference between the '83 line and the 1990 line, as we see it on that map,

6

from the point of view of what might be developed; isn't that right? If we

7

were to stick strictly to the result?

8

A.

I wasn't representing the Monarch interest.

9

Q. 463

I'll come to deal with your association with the Monarch Group.

14:19:31 10

But just

generally as a councillor and as a councillor at that meeting you would have

11

known?

12

A.

We were making a Development Plan.

13

Q. 464

Yes?

14

A.

So we were trying to get a plan together that hadn't been there since 1983.

Q. 465

Yes.?

16

A.

So that's what my purpose was.

17

Q. 466

Yes?

18

A.

And the purpose of the council.

19

Q. 467

Yes.

14:19:42 15

14:19:52 20

For the moment now we'll just look at it from the point of view of the

developer.

From the developer's point of view his land or his interest is

21

going to be effected by the vote of the councillors; isn't that right? Because

22

their vote is going to determine the zoning on his land; isn't that right.

23

A.

24 14:20:12 25

26

that into consideration who was what or what. Q. 468

Yes?

A.

You were trying to make a development land so that's what happens in

27 28

Development Plans. Q. 469

29 14:20:26 30

As I said, there was quite a big plan there in whatever, you wouldn't be taking

Yes.

But taking the position as of December 1990.

McDonald motion? A.

Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

Following on the Coffey

14:20:26

14:20:39

81 1

Q. 470

The position within the council was that there was to be no development west of

2

the motorway line, wherever the motorway line was to be situated; isn't that

3

right?

4

A.

Yeah, there was a decision, as you said there.

5

Q. 471

Yes?

6

A.

Yeah.

7

Q. 472

So therefore if the motorway line ran to the top of the Monarch land as we see

8

it there.

9

line there would be no development west of the line.

14:20:54 10

Then since the balance of the lands would be to the west of the Whereas if the motorway

line ran to the west of the Monarch lands then obviously it would be within the

11

area that it was contemplated that there would be development; isn't that

12

right?

13

A.

That was the proposal.

14

Q. 473

And then I think on the 24th of May 1991 at 7003.

14:21:10 15

at a special meeting of the council.

You were also in attendance

Where the manager produced a report.

16

And at 7006 we see that he made a recommendation that one of three options be

17

adopted for the purposes of the display of the Draft Development Plan.

18

the first of those options was the 1983 plan unchanged except for updating to

19

take account of developments to date and adjustment of objectives.

14:21:35 20

And

And I

think that that was represented on a map 90/129 A; isn't that right? Do you

21

recall that

22

A.

The No. 1 there; is it?

23

Q. 474

Yes?

24

A.

Yeah. That was the first --

Q. 475

If we could have 7019.?

26

A.

Yeah, I see it there.

27

Q. 476

And that effectively provided that there would be an upgrade in relation to

14:21:48 25

129.

28

some of the Monarch lands from one house per acre on septic tank to four houses

29

per acre on piped sewage; isn't that right?

14:22:08 30

A.

Four houses to the acre. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:22:10

14:22:21

82 1

Q. 477

Yes.?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 478

But that didn't cover all of the Monarch lands.

It only covered that portion

4

of the Monarch lands which were east of the proposed -- one of the proposed

5

motorway lines; isn't that right?

6

A.

That's the new plan that the manager brought back in, yeah.

7

Q. 479

Yes.

8 9 14:22:30 10

And that was one of the three options.

And it was voted upon; isn't

that right? A.

Yeah.

Q. 480

And if we go back to 7007.

We see the Chairman proposed and Councillor Coffey

11

seconded it that a vote be taken.

And in relation to that vote, you were

12

recorded as having voted against that option one; isn't that right?

13

A.

Yeah, absolutely, yeah.

14

Q. 481

And why, can I ask you, did you vote against option one?

A.

Well, I mean, it wasn't -- there was no progress on it in relation to doing a

14:22:52 15

16

Development Plan.

17

which was completely out of date.

18

was made, that had been made in that term.

19 14:23:10 20

21

What we were doing was just putting back out the 1983 plan, And I think there was just the changes that

Q. 482

And if I --

A.

I didn't think that was ...

Q. 483

If we go back to 7006 and we take the other two options that are listed there.

22

That is option two, which was the 1990 plan?

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 484

And option three, which was the map I had on a moment ago, which was noted at

14:23:25 25

the meeting on the 18th of January '91.

26

Which of those option were you

supporting?

27

A.

The written proposal. It would have been between No. 2 and No. 3.

28

Q. 485

So either No. 2 or No. 3 would have been acceptable to you; is that right?

29

A.

Yeah, I mean, I was in favour of the plan for out there.

Q. 486

Sorry?

14:23:43 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:23:44

14:24:03

83 1

A.

I was in favour for a plan for out in -- we were doing the County Development

2

Plan so it would have been -- definitely not No. 1, because, I mean, we had

3

that since 1983.

4

Q. 487

But No. 1 had changed in that area which was proposed for residential zoning

5

had now increased from one house to the acre on septic tank to four houses to

6

the acre on septic tank; isn't that right?

7

A.

Yeah, well it wasn't, you know, it was a plan for the next number of years, ten

8

years, whatever period of time, for that particular area which there was a lot

9

of houses needed and jobs needed and all that end of it.

14:24:23 10

Q. 488

So you would have voted for options 2 or 3 at that time; is that right?

11

A.

I would think so, yeah.

12

Q. 489

And then I think that the manager -- the draft -- the draft 1991 plan went on

13

public display.

14

been at a special meeting of the council when the draft plan was being

14:24:45 15

On the 27th of May 1992 at 7205 you're recorded as having

considered; isn't that right? And at 7207 we see that Councillors Lydon and

16

McGrath proposed that the manager's recommendation be accepted.

17

DP92/44.

That's at

If we could have that, please, on screen.

18 19

That's 7203.

14:25:04 20

21

Now, do you see that map on screen, Mr. Fox? That's now the manager's proposal

22

in May 1992 in relation to this area.

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 490

And do you see that he's extending slightly the area for residential

14:25:26 25

development?

26

A.

Is that over the motorway line there or?

27

Q. 491

It's over the 1990 motorway line.

28

A.

Not completely, yeah.

29

Q. 492

So the only difference I suggest to you between that map and the map which went

14:25:45 30

But not completely over it.?

I see it there, yeah.

on display is that area, as you look at the map, which has the reference down Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:25:51

14:26:01

84 1

on the bottom right B - AP.

Do you see that?

2

A.

Down?

3

Q. 493

You see between the two lines?

4

A.

BA is it?

5

Q. 494

B to AP.

6

That's the only additional area that's being proposed now for

residential development; isn't that right?

7

A.

I see that, yeah.

8

Q. 495

Albeit that there is a recommendation that the residential development ought to

9 14:26:17 10

11

take place on an Action Area Plan? A.

That's right, yeah.

Q. 496

But the entire of the Monarch area isn't being recommended for residential

12

development?

13

A.

I Take it what you say there.

14

Q. 497

Sorry?

A.

I take it that that is like, you know what I mean.

Q. 498

Yet I think you were voting in favour of that proposal; isn't that right? If

14:26:27 15

16 17

we look at 7207.?

18

A.

I'd say I would have been, yeah.

19

Q. 499

Well, if you were as concerned as you say you were in 1990 to -- and in early

14:26:47 20

1991 to ensure that there would be a maximum area developed for residential

21

purposes, why weren't you either first of all, voting against that proposal or

22

alternatively, bringing your own proposals to the chamber that there would

23

be -- that the entire of the Monarch lands or the entire of the area

24

encompassed by the new proposed 1991 proposed line be zoned for residential

14:27:13 25

26

purposes? A.

Well, I wouldn't be bringing a motion myself because, I mean, the local

27

councillors out there were in favour of this.

28

gather, how many was it for, 31 - 35 against it was?

29 14:27:34 30

And it was, well from what I

Q. 500

It was 33 - 35.

The proposal was lost 33 - 35?

A.

And the plan was after being out on display and it came back in; isn't that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:27:39

14:27:47

85 1 2

right. Q. 501

3 4

That's correct, yeah.

You weren't happy with the plan that had gone on

display? A.

You're doing a Development Plan and this is what the next, it was going into

5

the second draft or into the second part which was the final end of the, you

6

know, the Development Plan.

7

Q. 502

You were unhappy with the plan that had been put on display; isn't that right?

8

A.

Well, it wouldn't have been me first choice.

9

Q. 503

You voted against it isn't that right?

A.

I'm not saying that I wasn't unhappy.

14:28:02 10

11

I'm just saying as doing a County

Development Plan and ...

12

Q. 504

You had voted against that plan; isn't that right?

13

A.

That's right.

14

Q. 505

You had voted against the first option because it didn't encompass sufficient

14:28:19 15

Well you had three options there so you had a choice, you know.

land for residential development; isn't that right?

16

A.

That's correct.

17

Q. 506

And you voted in favour of this plan even though there was only a marginal

18 19 14:28:33 20

increase in lands for development; isn't that right? A.

Yeah, it was increased, yeah.

Q. 507

I think at this time also you had on the 4th of May tabled a motion in relation

21

to the line of the motorway; isn't that right?

22

A.

That's correct, yeah.

23

Q. 508

We dealt with this before; isn't that truth?

24

A.

That's right, Mr. Quinn.

Q. 509

If we could have 8216?

26

A.

We had that before, yeah.

27

Q. 510

Now, I think your evidence in the past was that this was a motion that you

14:28:47 25

28 29 14:29:02 30

signed at the request of representatives of Monarch; is that right? A.

That's right.

Q. 511

And I think you identified, I think, Mr. Lynn and was it Mr. Lafferty; is that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:29:08

14:29:17

86 1

correct?

2

A.

That's correct, yeah.

3

Q. 512

And would you again remind the Tribunal of the circumstances under which you

4 5

say you came to sign and propose that motion? A.

6

Well, I -- one of them called, I mean, out to walk the line and have a look at the line.

7

Q. 513

Which of them called to you?

8

A.

Mr. Lafferty.

9

Q. 514

Yes.

A.

I would have known him from Nutgrove.

11

Q. 515

Yes.

12

A.

Yes, that's correct.

13

Q. 516

And was Mr. Lynn with Mr. Lafferty, either when he called to you or when you

14:29:35 10

14 14:29:54 15

Had you known Mr. Lafferty? The Nutgrove Shopping Centre.

And he brought you out to look at the line?

went to see the line? A.

When we went out.

We met him out there.

16

Q. 517

You met Mr. Lynn out there?

17

A.

And what were they showing you in relation to the line. They were showing the

18

section of ground, a line that was -- that there was a proposal that they had,

19

you know, to do with a golf course.

14:30:15 20

Q. 518

If we could have 8127.

I think this was the map that accompanied that motion;

21

isn't that right? And I think the golf course we see there is the Galvin

22

lands; isn't that right?

23

A.

That's right, yeah.

24

Q. 519

There was a proposed course on the Galvin lands?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 520

The proposal was that you would push the line of the motorway further west;

14:30:28 25

26 27

isn't that right?

28

A.

To facilitate the golf course.

29

Q. 521

But neither Mr. Lynn nor Mr. Lafferty had anything to do with the golf course;

14:30:41 30

isn't that right? Because the golf course was the property of Mr. Galvin; Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:30:47

14:30:59

87 1

isn't that correct?

2

A.

That would be true now.

3

Q. 522

And wasn't this a strategy to increase the amount of land that would be east of

4 5

the new proposed motorway line; isn't that right? A.

Well it could be.

But, I mean, I'm saying that or I was told was in relation

6

to the golf course.

7

there, yeah.

8

Q. 523

9

To facilitate a golf course but it would as you say

And it was designed.

It was a strategy designed to increase the lands which

would be east of the motorway line and therefore increase the amount of land

14:31:19 10

that might be available for residential development having regard to the

11

restriction or desire of the council that no lands west of the proposed

12

motorway line would be developed at that time; isn't that right?

13

A.

14 14:31:35 15

Well it wasn't on my mind in relation to it.

Whether it was their strategy or

not. Q. 524

16

Well, just in relation to it, Mr. Fox.

You knew you weren't facilitating

Mr. Galvin; isn't that right?

17

A.

No, I didn't, no.

18

Q. 525

Because he hadn't got to you?

19

A.

No, I did not.

Q. 526

Did you think that Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lafferty were representing Mr. Galvin when

14:31:45 20

21 22

they came to you? A.

No, they put it to me or one of them put it to me or whatever.

23

me that Mr. Galvin needed a championship golf course.

24

championship golf course was to this particular line.

14:32:05 25

Q. 527

26

It was put to

And to accommodate a

Did you know that -- you knew that Mr. Lafferty, at least from your meetings with him in relation to Nutgrove, represented Monarch; isn't that right?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 528

And did you know that Mr. Lynn represented Monarch?

29

A.

Oh, I would have at that time, yeah.

Q. 529

So you knew that both gentlemen that you were dealing with represented Monarch?

14:32:20 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:32:24

14:32:32

88 1

A.

Yeah, yeah.

2

Q. 530

And you knew that Monarch had lands other than Galvin lands; isn't that right?

3

In this area?

4

A.

Yeah.

5

Q. 531

And you knew from your experience as a councillor that only lands east of the

6

line of the motorway would be available for zoning; isn't that right?

7

A.

That was the proposal, yeah.

8

Q. 532

And the further west you were pushing the line, then the more lands that were

9 14:32:51 10

being made available for zoning; isn't that right? A.

As I recall there was three motions.

11

Q. 533

Yeah.?

12

A.

There was three motions and I think you might call it yourself.

13

Q. 534

Yes?

14

A.

And it was to do with the golf course and there was different lines on them

14:33:03 15

three.

So there was three motions, might be similar lines but they were three

16

motions to do with the line of the motorway to facilitate a golf course and

17

that was one of them.

18

Q. 535

19 14:33:22 20

I'm only concerned for the moment, Mr. Fox, with your

line and your motion.? A.

21 22

But that was your line.

Later on the manager made a recommendation.

You have to take in the context that there was three motions.

There was three

lines. Q. 536

Yes.

But the -- you were being brought out by representatives of Monarch to

23

be shown on the ground lands; isn't that right.

24

by Mr. Galvin; isn't that right? He hadn't approached you at all in relation

14:33:40 25

Your motion wasn't requested

to the motion?

26

A.

No, he hadn't, no.

27

Q. 537

And you knew that your motion was being promoted by the Monarch interest as

28 29 14:33:55 30

opposed to the Galvin interest, isn't that right? You must have known that? A.

Well, I didn't know whose lands was out there like in the first place.

Q. 538

Well did you know -- did you think that Mr. Lynn and Mr. Lafferty were Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:34:00

14:34:14

89 1 2

representing Mr. Galvin? A.

Well, they gave me the impression that he was aware of it and that it was

3

through him -- it was -- that he was part of it.

4

out of it anyway at the time.

5

Q. 539

I think that's what I took

Well, even assuming that he was part of it, in other words, that he had no

6

objection to it and we know that he had.

7

to?

Assuming that he had no objection

8

A.

I didn't know at that time that he had objection to it.

9

Q. 540

You knew that the men who were coming to you in relation to this motion were

14:34:31 10

men who were representing the Monarch interest; isn't that right?

11

A.

Yeah.

12

Q. 541

And that anything that you were doing, you were doing to facilitate the Monarch

13

interest.

14

course interest but they were coming to you in respect of Monarch; isn't that

14:34:47 15

It might have a beneficial knock on effect for the Galvin/golf

right?

16

A.

Well that's true, yeah.

17

Q. 542

So you were facilitating Monarch by drafting or signing this motion; isn't that

18 19

right? You might have felt you were also facilitating Mr. Galvin. A.

Yeah, that's ...

Q. 543

Yes.?

21

A.

That's probably more like it, like, you know.

22

Q. 544

Yes.

14:35:00 20

But you --

And you know from the evidence that we had in Carrickmines 1, that Mr.

23

Dunlop has -- gave evidence at that time, that that motion, in relation to that

24

motion, to the effect that Mr. Kennedy who was representing Paisley Park at

14:35:19 25

that time had informed him that he had discussed a strategy concerning the line

26

of the motorway with Mr. Lawlor.

27

Mr. Kennedy had a number of discussions -- that he, Mr. Dunlop, had a number of

28

discussions with yourself and Mr. Hand in relation to the line of the proposed

29

motorway.

14:35:44 30

And that as a result of those discussions,

And that Mr. Kennedy had informed Mr. Dunlop that as a result of

his discussions, Mr. Lawlor had been responsible for drafting a motion. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

In

14:35:49

14:36:06

90 1

other words, Mr. Dunlop way saying and gave evidence and we've dealt with this

2

before, that that motion was effectively a strategy devised by Mr. Lawlor.?

3

A.

4 5

Well I can say to you and I said it, I think, Mr. Dunlop had no hand, act or part.

Q. 545

6

No hand, act or part.

He has given evidence that he amended the spelling on the motion. see --

7

A.

We went through that all Mr. Quinn, you know, so.

8

Q. 546

Yes.?

9

A.

So it's just absolutely fabrication.

14:36:23 10

11

Do you

It's not true.

Mr. Dunlop had nothing

whatsoever to do with that motion. Q. 547

Yeah.

So you signed that motion then as a result of your meeting with Mr.

12

Lynn and Mr. Lafferty.

13

isn't that right? And did Mr. Lynn or Mr. Lafferty give you the map at 8127

14

which accompanied that motion and which is on screen?

14:36:43 15

And you lodged it, I think, on the 5th of May 1992;

A.

I'm not too sure about that, you know.

16

Q. 548

Do you recall signing the motion?

17

A.

Well, it's going back, I signed it and my name is there so.

18

Q. 549

Did you give it back to Mr. Lynn or Mr. Lafferty to lodge with the council or

19 14:36:59 20

21

Must have.

do you recall if you lodged it? A.

I probably lodged it.

Q. 550

There is an amendment on text of the motion at 8126, do you see the word

22

"similar" has been misspelled and has been amended?

23

A.

Yeah, I see that.

24

Q. 551

Yes.

A.

Not that I recall.

26

Q. 552

Mr. Dunlop has taken credit for having made that amendment?

27

A.

He's taken credit for an awful lot of things.

28

Q. 553

In any event, you didn't make the amendment, you don't know who made the

14:37:13 25

29 14:37:25 30

We went through that before.

Did you make the amendment?

amendment, you have no recollection -A.

Well, I would presume that one of the two people did do that, you know. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:37:29

14:37:40

91 1

Q. 554

Mr. Lafferty or Mr. Lynn?

2

A.

Yeah, well I presume I just, you know ...

3

Q. 555

And how well did you know Mr. Lynn at that stage can I ask you.

4 5

May, June 1992? A.

6 7

Q. 556

Would it be fair to say that you were on first name terms with himself and Mr. Lafferty?

A.

14:38:02 10

11

I would have met him, you know, fairly, you know, I don't know how many times but I met him and I was supportive of Monarch's first proposal.

8 9

That is by

I would, yeah.

Maybe more so Pat Lafferty at the time because it goes back to

Nutgrove shopping centre, you know. Q. 557

12

And when was the first time you met Mr. Lynn do you recall or in what circumstances can you recall that you met him, Mr. Lynn?

13

A.

I think it might have been around '90, '91, that period there.

14

Q. 558

And how did you meet him?

A.

I think he -- he used to call to my place of work and he called to my house,

14:38:17 15

16

you know, so ...

17

Q. 559

And was that connection with the Cherrywood proposals?

18

A.

Yeah in, connection with them, yeah.

19

Q. 560

And was he seeking your support for the Cherrywood proposals?

A.

He was, yeah.

21

Q. 561

And I think your evidence is that you were very pro-development in this area?

22

A.

Oh, certainly, yeah.

23

Q. 562

And you would have told him this; is that right?

24

A.

Yeah.

Q. 563

Did he ever ask you to speak to any of your colleagues in Fianna Fail on the

14:38:32 20

14:38:42 25

26

Because it was needed.

council in relation to the proposals?

27

A.

No.

28

Q. 564

Did he ever ask you what the views of your colleagues were in relation to the

29 14:38:54 30

proposals? A.

No, he wouldn't ask me that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:38:56

14:39:13

92 1

Q. 565

When he would call to you.

2

A.

Discuss their proposals, I presume, you know, it was what they had planned

3

there.

What would you discuss?

I think it was even included in the manager's originally; was it?

4

Q. 566

And --

5

A.

The 1990 plan was it.

6

Q. 567

Yes.

7

A.

He called a number of times.

8 9 14:39:28 10

11

And would he call regularly either to your place of work or home? I just don't know the number of times but he

called. Q. 568

This is the period 1991/'92?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 569

And would he discuss with you his meetings with other councillors and where he

12

thought it was going or the likely chances of success?

13

A.

No, no.

14

Q. 570

He would never tell you whether or not he thought --

A.

I don't think I would have asked him, like you I mean.

Q. 571

Were you not concerned having regard to your stated aim for development in the

14:39:51 15

16 17 18

area as to the likely chance of success of any motion in relation to it? A.

19

Well residents groups were making representations, the Ballybrack, Loughlinstown, all of those areas were all very in favour of development out

14:40:06 20

there, something to be done out there for jobs and all those ends of it.

So I

21

presume they -- I mean, I wouldn't be into that.

22

doing a County Development Plan and that would be my purpose, my role at that

23

time and other people's roles was doing a County Development Plan for all of

24

the county, Dublin, but that area we were dealing with at that time.

14:40:32 25

Q. 572

I'd be looking that we were

Now, we know at the meeting on the 5th of June '92 that your motion was

26

withdrawn when the manager told you that the line was being entered for

27

diagramatical purposes only and all of the motions in relation to the line were

28

all withdrawn?

29 14:40:49 30

A.

That's what I said to you earlier. was unanimously decided.

There was three.

Agreed.

The manager -- and it

There was no EIS done on any of them,

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:40:55

14:41:16

93 1

like.

2

before.

3

proposal.

4

happened here.

5

then at the end of it was that it was the Manager's Report or whatever he

6

recommended unanimously agreed.

7

Q. 573

You can propose, put something up for debate.

I think I said it here

All you're doing is putting a thing before the council, a motion or a And then that would be decided by the council.

And that's what

So there was three motions put in in relation to that.

And

That was the outcome of that.

Now, we also know that the council rejected the manager's proposals as

8

contained in DP92/44 at that meeting on the 27th of May '92 in relation to the

9

development; isn't that right? And there was a successful Sean Barrett motion

14:41:43 10

which effectively zoned the lands at one house to the acre?

11

A.

That's the one, yeah, one house to the acre.

12

Q. 574

Do you recall that meeting?

13

A.

I mightn't recall it but I do know.

14

Q. 575

I think you voted in favour of the manager's proposals as we saw in 7207; isn't

14:41:58 15

that right and I think you --

16

A.

I wouldn't have voted for one to the acre.

17

Q. 576

You voted against Mr. Barrett's proposals; isn't that right? And we see that

18 19 14:42:10 20

at 7216? A.

I think I did anyway.

Q. 577

Do you recall any discussion with Mr. Lynn following on that meeting or indeed

21

with any of your colleagues following on that meeting?

22

A.

No, I don't recall any such, no.

23

Q. 578

There was no discussion with the Monarch interest?

24

A.

No, not that I recall.

Q. 579

Did Mr. Lynn continue to visit you at home and in your office or in your place

14:42:26 25

26 27

of work after that meeting in May '92? A.

28 29 14:42:46 30

He would have if he had anything that he wanted to talk to me about or make representations to me about, he would do that.

Q. 580

Well, in relation to Cherrywood for the moment.

Did he continue to come and

speak with you in relation to the Cherrywood position after May '92? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:42:50

14:43:00

94 1

A.

Oh, he did, yeah.

2

Q. 581

And did you ever have a discussion about what might have gone wrong in that

3

meeting of May '92?

4

A.

No, I don't recall any of that type of discussion, you know.

5

Q. 582

And when he would come and visit you.

6

A.

Other proposals.

7

What would you discuss?

Whatever they had -- it was always about what they were

proposing or.

8

Q. 583

Yes?

9

A.

Making, he'd be making representations on things like that.

Q. 584

But he knew where you stood in relation to any representations.

14:43:14 10

Particularly

11

if those representations were to the effect that there should be an increased

12

zoning on these lands; isn't that right?

13

A.

14 14:43:32 15

Yeah, well, I would imagine he would.

I don't know whether -- I'd imagine he

would have my records and my consistency. Q. 585

But you never discussed his proposals or the Monarch proposals with any of your

16

colleagues from what you say nor did you ever discuss them with him.

17

merely listened to what he had to say?

18

A.

More or less like, yeah.

19

Q. 586

And then I think on the 11th of November 1993.

14:43:52 20

At 7258.

You

You were again

present at a special meeting of the council where the amendments to the 1991

21

plan were back up for discussion; isn't that right? And I think at that

22

meeting Councillor Marren and Coffey proposed that the lands would remain at

23

four houses to the acre, isn't that right?

24

A.

That's correct, yeah.

Q. 587

And at 7263 you voted in favour of that proposal; isn't that right?

26

A.

I did, yeah.

27

Q. 588

Do you recall Mr. Lynn coming to you in advance of that meeting and discussing

14:44:24 25

28 29 14:44:32 30

his proposals with you? A.

He would have, yes.

He made representations to me on that proposal, yeah.

Q. 589

How often would he have he have come to you in the lead up to that meeting in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:44:39

14:44:49

95 1

November '93 do you think?

2

A.

I don't know to be precise about it, a number of times.

3

Q. 590

Would it be three, four or five times?

4

A.

It could be.

5

Q. 591

Yes?

6

A.

He did come and I was supportive.

7

Q. 592

From your evidence, Mr. Fox, you were supportive from the outset?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 593

Admittedly you didn't vote in favour of the manager's proposals on the 6th of

14:45:00 10

It's just speculating, like.

I was supportive.

December 1990 although you had been at the meeting earlier.

You didn't vote

11

on the manager's proposals but your evidence is, as I understand it, that you

12

were supportive of development in this area from the very outset?

13

A.

14 14:45:19 15

16

Absolutely.

I was if I was at the meeting I could possibly have voted for it.

That would be a vote. Q. 594

Yes?

A.

So I'm saying I had something important.

It must have been work, I'd have to

17

get back to work making suits and there might be deadlines or whatever.

18

I mean, it's not to say that I wouldn't voted for it if I was there.

19

I was pro-development in relation to it and the negative stuff like one to an

14:45:40 20

21

But,

I mean,

acre. Q. 595

22

Who else within Fianna Fail, to your knowledge, was supportive of the development of the area at this time?

23

A.

Who in Fianna Fail?

24

Q. 596

Yes.

14:45:56 25

What other councillors had the same view as you; that this area should

be developed?

26

A.

Well, if you see the minutes I think that will tell you.

27

Q. 597

No but I'm asking you, Mr. Fox.

28

A.

You wouldn't know until people voted who was in favour, who wasn't in favour..

29

Q. 598

Was it never discuss in Conways in advance of the meeting?

A.

It was for -- the agenda.

14:46:14 30

From this time.

You were very much --

If you were at the meeting it would be discussed if

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:46:18

14:46:29

96 1 2

there was motions on the agenda. Q. 599

Yes.

But you would never discuss these lands with any of your colleagues in

3

advance of the agenda or in advance of the agenda being published.

4

right?

Is that

5

A.

I don't think so.

6

Q. 600

Did you know, for example, between March '93 and November '93 that Mr. Dunlop

7

had been retained by the Monarch interest to lobby in favour of these

8

proposals?

9

A.

Never.

Q. 601

You never knew that?

11

A.

Never knew that.

12

Q. 602

Mr. Dunlop, you say, never approached you in relation to the matter and you

14:46:42 10

13 14

were unaware that he had been retained? A.

14:46:55 15

16

Absolutely, yeah Mr. Lynn, who must have been meeting with you seeking your support at this time, you say never mentioned Mr. Dunlop's involvement. No.

Q. 603

17

And none of your colleagues ever mentioned and it was never discussed that Mr. Dunlop was involved?

18

A.

No, not that I recall, no.

19

Q. 604

You would have known that Mr. Dunlop was involved in relation to other lands

14:47:12 20

and other developments; isn't that right?

21

A.

Yes, he was, yeah.

22

Q. 605

And he was a regular attender at the various meetings; isn't that right?

23

A.

I think he was, like, I mean, he was there.

24

Q. 606

And you would have met him; isn't that right?

A.

Yeah.

26

Q. 607

And you would have been ringing his office and that in this time?

27

A.

In what time?

28

Q. 608

In 1993?

29

A.

I don't know whether I was ringing his office in 1993

Q. 609

Well his records appear to show that you were, Mr. Fox. If we could have 4046.

14:47:24 25

14:47:39 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:47:41

14:47:50

97 1

Mr. Dunlop appears to have been retained by Mr. Sweeney in or about the 9th of

2

March 1993?

3

A.

Yeah.

4

Q. 610

And these are telephone attendances.

5

You'll have seen these in the brief.

That's the telephone attendance for the 9th of March 1993.

6 7

If you look at 4047.

8

looking for Mr. Dunlop at 3:55 on that date.

9

You see that a Mr. Tony Fox is recorded as having rang

A.

Where's that?

Q. 611

You see 3:55?

11

A.

Yes, Tony Fox.

12

Q. 612

Do you think that might refer to you, Mr. Fox?

13

A.

It could.

14

Q. 613

And what would you be ringing --

A.

I could have been returning a call.

Q. 614

That would have you returning a call to Mr. Dunlop on the self same day that he

14:48:11 10

14:48:19 15

16 17

appears to have been retained by Monarch?

18

A.

Is that right? Well I did not know he was retained by Monarch.

19

Q. 615

Who -- what was -- why do you think you might have been contacting Mr. Dunlop

14:48:38 20

in March '93?

21

A.

I don't know.

22

Q. 616

So he was looking for you and you were returning his call?

23

A.

Could have been, yeah.

24

Q. 617

Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that he would have contacted you within ten

14:48:51 25

But I would say it was returning a call.

days, I think, of his appointment?

26

A.

That's absolutely untrue!

27

Q. 618

Let's just look at that, Mr. Fox, for a moment.

28 29 14:49:05 30

Do you accept that Mr. Dunlop

was retained from the Monarch interest? A.

Just from the evidence I've seen here and read.

Q. 619

You accept the evidence of the various Monarch witnesses that ... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:49:06

14:49:22

98 1

A.

I wasn't aware that he was involved -- or retained.

2

Q. 620

I'm just now just looking at your evidence in that regard, Mr. Fox.

You

3

accept I think as you must, and as the Monarch witnesses have accepted, that

4

Mr. Dunlop was retained; isn't that right? Sometime --

5

A.

I have no doubt, like, I mean, you know, as what else ...

6

Q. 621

So we'll go forward on the basis?

7

A.

He got 85,000.

8

Q. 622

We'll go forward on the basis, Mr. Fox, that Mr. Dunlop had been retained by

9 14:49:35 10

11

the Monarch interest.? A.

Pardon?

Q. 623

We'll go forward in a Mr. Dunlop had been retained by the Monarch interest in

12

March '93.

13

would have been retained for the purpose of seeking support from councillors in

14

relation to the Monarch interest?

14:49:53 15

16

A.

I don't know.

Q. 624

He must have been.

17 18

And if he was retained would you agree with me, Mr. Fox, that he

He couldn't have been retained for any other obvious

purpose, could he, Mr. Fox? A.

19

I don't know, he's a PR or was he or something so -- there was other people employed as I read there, looked at it, some of those PR or whatever, I don't

14:50:08 20

know.

21

Q. 625

That's Mr. O'Herlihy?

22

A.

I don't know the roles or whatever.

23

Q. 626

What role do you think Mr. Dunlop was playing Mr. Fox in the period March to

24 14:50:19 25

26

November '93? A.

Well honestly, I never thought about it.

Q. 627

Let's think about it now, Mr. Fox.

For the very first time let's have a think

27

about why you think Mr. Dunlop was retained by March and November '93 for

28

Monarch?

29 14:50:34 30

A.

What did they say he was retained for?

Q. 628

To lobby councillors. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:50:36

14:50:49

99 1

A.

To lobby councillors.

2

Q. 629

Okay.

Assume now that Mr. Dunlop was retained and he was retained for the

3

purposes of lobbying councillors.

4

him to ignore some of the councillors that are in contact with him at this time

5

and seek their support?

6

A.

Unusual?

7

Q. 630

Yes.

Do you think that it would be unusual for

Do you think it would be an unusual conduct, unusual conduct on the part

8

of Mr. Dunlop that he wouldn't seek the support of councillors that he was in

9

contact with at this time?

14:51:06 10

11

A.

I don't know what his arrangements were or whatever might be.

Q. 631

Leaving aside his arrangements.

Do you think it would be unusual that Mr.

12

Dunlop would not ask a councillor who was ringing him on the 9th of March and

13

other subsequent dates which we'll come to in a moment that he wouldn't ask

14

that councillor for his views or support in relation to this area?

14:51:30 15

A.

All I can say is he didn't contact me.

16

Q. 632

You rang him on the 9th.

17

A.

Possibly.

And you think you were returning a call.?

I'm not -- that's just my name is there, you know so. I'm just,

18

I'm only saying that that could be possibility.

19

loads of calls making whatever and I would ring back.

14:51:51 20

thing to do.

If somebody rang me and I got It would be a normal

I'm not saying just my name is Tony Fox.

21

Q. 633

Do you think you ever rang him and asked him to ring you, Mr. Fox?

22

A.

What?

23

Q. 634

Do you think he ever rang and asked and left a message that Mr. Dunlop could

24 14:52:06 25

26

ring you? A.

It do be possible.

Q. 635

On the 31st of the same month, Mr. Fox, at 11:15 a Tony Fox rings and gives a

27

number and asks Mr. Dunlop to call him.

28

Mr. Fox? 11:15.

29 14:52:28 30

Does that number ring a bell,

It's the fourth entry on that list.?

A.

Maybe I did maybe a call and.

Q. 636

Do you recognise the number? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:52:30

14:52:39

100 1

A.

That I said to ring me, whatever he wanted.

2

Q. 637

Yeah.

3

A.

I do. I told you that before.

4

Q. 638

Yes.

5

A.

It's my work number.

6

Q. 639

Yes.

Do you recognise that number, Mr. Fox?

Is that your number, Mr. Fox?

And you rang, do you accept that you possibly rang Mr. Dunlop on the

7

31st of March of that year and you asked him to ring you, leaving your work

8

number?

9

A.

It's a possibility I said.

Q. 640

On the 29th of September 1993.

11

A.

20 what?

12

Q. 641

This is the 29th of September 1993, Mr. Fox.

14:52:54 10

13 14

a number given.

At 4547.?

10:27 entry.

Tony Fox.

Again

Said Frank Dunlop would know what it was about.?

A.

Probably returning one there that he, he would be after looking for me.

Q. 642

And he'd know why you were ringing him; isn't that right?

16

A.

No.

17

Q. 643

So now we have at least three contacts between yourself and Mr. Dunlop after

14:53:25 15

He would know what it was about. I mightn't know what it was about.

18

his appointment for the Monarch interest to lobby councillors and are you still

19

telling the Tribunal that you still didn't know that he was working for Monarch

14:53:43 20

or that he hadn't asked for your support in relation to the people that had

21 22

employed him? A.

23 24

They're phone calls.

Q. 644

You don't think that Mr. Dunlop managed to make contact with you even though you left your work number on two occasions?

A.

27

All I do know, Mr. Quinn, is Mr. Dunlop didn't make any representations to me about Monarch.

28

Q. 645

We're just looking at this objectively, Mr. Fox.

29

A.

Yeah.

Q. 646

We're just looking at it objectively.

14:54:14 30

I don't know

whether there was any contact made in relation to that.

14:54:00 25

26

But they're only written down there.

This is a -- an inquiry?

You've agreed with me that Mr. Dunlop

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:54:18

14:54:34

101 1

was retained by Monarch.

You've agreed with me that he was retained for the

2

purpose of seeking support of councillors in relation to the development in

3

Cherrywood.

4

could have effect on Cherrywood.

5

calls between yourself and Mr. Dunlop.

6

Dunlop, despite the fact that there was contacts between you on three

7

occasions, that he still didn't ask for your support?

You've -- it's a fact that you were one of those councillors who And we see at least three possible phone And are you still saying that Mr.

8

A.

Absolutely.

9

Q. 647

And do you not think that that's highly unusual, Mr. Fox.

A.

I don't know whether it is or it isn't.

11

Q. 648

Did he ever ask for your support in relation to any development?

12

A.

Any development?

13

Q. 649

Yeah.?

14

A.

Sure it's recorded here.

Q. 650

He had asked for your support in relation to other developments; isn't that

14:54:50 10

14:55:00 15

16

right?

17

A.

That's right sure ...

18

Q. 651

And why do you think he would not have asked for your support in relation to

19 14:55:11 20

this development? A.

I don't know.

21

Q. 652

Are you --

22

A.

You should ask him. I don't know whether you asked him or not, you know.

23

Q. 653

Are you also suggesting, Mr. Fox, despite the fact that you were constantly

24

meeting or had meetings, various meetings at home and at work with Mr. Lynn on

14:55:26 25

behalf of Monarch that Mr. Lynn never told you that Mr. Dunlop had been

26 27

retained by the company.? A.

28 29 14:55:49 30

Well I never looked at it in that way. don't recall it ever happening anyway.

Q. 654

I'm just saying it never happened.

I

What did Mr. Lynn say?

Now, Mr. Fox, you know that Mr. Dunlop is making an allegation that he gave you 2,000 pounds after the vote on the 11th of November 1993 in relation to this Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:55:54

14:56:08

102 1

development; isn't that right?

2

A.

That's right.

3

Q. 655

And in fairness to you, Mr. Fox.

4

the brief.

5

period.?

And it's absolutely untrue! Although they're not circulated as part of

Your accounts do not show a lodgement of 2,000 pounds in that

6

A.

What's that?

7

Q. 656

I said that although your accounts in relation to that period, your bank

8

accounts, are not circulated, they do not show a 2,000 pounds lodgement in that

9

period.

14:56:19 10

11

A.

They couldn't show it.

Q. 657

Yeah.

12 13

You did receive money, I think, Mr. Fox, from Monarch; isn't that

right? A.

14

I did, yeah.

But I never ever asked Mr. Dunlop for money.

and I said it here before.

14:56:35 15

This um, this I think it is coming up willy-nilly

and he says this in here or outside now.

16

never.

And I never ever

I'm telling you now and I'll say it

I never ever asked and I never ever got money from Mr. Dunlop.

17

Q. 658

And he have never sought your support in relation to this Monarch proposals?

18

A.

Absolutely, yes.

19

Q. 659

Now, just if could I have -- how well did you know Mr. Lynn, Mr. Fox, by 1991?

A.

I wouldn't have known him that well by '91.

Q. 660

You did receive I think 600 pounds from the Monarch Group on the 5th of June

14:56:58 20

21 22

'91; isn't that right? If we could have 3241, please.

23

A.

Yeah, I made you aware of that, yeah.

24

Q. 661

Can you tell the Tribunal again, Mr. Fox, the circumstances under which you

14:57:18 25

came to receive that money?

26

A.

Well I didn't solicit it as I think I said here before.

27

Q. 662

You didn't solicit it?

28

A.

Yeah.

29

Q. 663

It came to you out of the blue?

A.

Absolutely, yeah.

14:57:28 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

14:57:29

14:57:41

103 1

Q. 664

By cheque?

2

A.

I think it was by cheque, yeah.

3

Q. 665

Yes.

4

And why do you think that Monarch selected you for a donation of 600

pounds towards the June '91 election?

5

A.

I don't know.

6

Q. 666

Do you know who within Monarch recommended that you be paid that money?

7

A.

I don't but it could be possible, like, one of them people there, I mean.

8

Q. 667

That's Mr. Lynn or Mr. Lafferty is it?

9

A.

Mr. Lynn like, you know.

Q. 668

Mr. Lynn.

11

A.

No, I don't think I did.

12

Q. 669

Did you ever thank him for it?

13

A.

He didn't give it to me.

14

Q. 670

Well Monarch did.?

A.

Yeah well I mean, I didn't acknowledge -- I don't think I did anyway, you know.

16

Q. 671

You never acknowledged it to Mr. Lynn or Monarch?

17

A.

I don't think so.

18

Q. 672

I think it was the single largest contribution you had received in '91 isn't

14:57:55 10

14:58:06 15

19

Did you ever discuss the receipt the payment with Mr. Lynn?

It just came out of the blue anyway.

that right? I think the next nearest amount was 100 pounds as per your

14:58:26 20

evidence in Carrickmines; isn't that right?

21

A.

It was probably around that, yeah.

22

Q. 673

And then I think in November 1992 you received 1,000 -- sorry.

23 24

In January '93

I think you received 1,000 pounds; isn't that right? A.

14:58:42 25

Yeah can you tell the Tribunal how you came to receive that money. Well I was running for -- hoping to get on the General Election and I had to be elected

26

in' 91, as I think I said here before, I mean, my supporters were trying to

27

push me along to run for the General Election, you know.

28

And I made a few, in relation to and I wrote in to Monarch.

29 14:59:10 30

Q. 674

You wrote to Monarch seeking that?

A.

Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

So I decided to run.

14:59:12

14:59:20

104 1

Q. 675

Seeking support?

2

A.

Yeah.

3

Q. 676

Did you write that letter in January or had you written it earlier in November?

4

A.

Oh, I'd written it a lot earlier, yeah.

5

Q. 677

And had you discussed the matter with Mr. Lynn?

6

A.

Discussed it? Why.

7

Q. 678

Yes.?

8

A.

I think that's who told me to write in.

9

Q. 679

What discussion did you have with Mr. Lynn?

A.

It was in relation to the General Election.

Q. 680

So this is a discussion that would have taken place in November '92,

14:59:31 10

11 12

admittedly the payment was in January '93?

13

A.

I think there was a lot about me running for the General Election.

14

Q. 681

Yes?

A.

Over with my semi supporters and I might have mentioned, like, you know, that I

14:59:45 15

16

was going to go.

17

Q. 682

But I'm --

18

A.

When you're going into a General Election, I mean, you know.

19 15:00:02 20

whether you know it yourself or not but they're very expensive and costly. Q. 683

21

And you had discussed the fact that you were going into a General Election with Mr. Lynn; isn't that right?

22

A.

With Mr. Lynn?

23

Q. 684

Yes.?

24

A.

I probably did.

Q. 685

And can you tell the Tribunal --

A.

In relation to when I was elected in 1991.

15:00:13 25

26

I don't know

27

I mean.

There was sort of a push behind me

from ...

28

Q. 686

Yes?

29

A.

From my supporters and Cumanns and that type of thing.

Q. 687

You had done very well in the '91 Local Elections; isn't that what you're

15:00:23 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:00:27

15:00:36

105 1

saying?

2

A.

I did very well in every Local Election.

3

Q. 688

This was 1992 and you were putting yourself forward as a candidate, isn't that

4

right for selection?

5

A.

There was a strong thing behind me to go for it.

6

Q. 689

Were you selected as a Fianna Fail?

7

A.

I was beaten at convention.

8

Q. 690

So what we are talking about is a discussion leading up to the convention for

9 15:00:50 10

11

the selection of Fianna Fail candidates? A.

You'd have to have a lot of your homework done or whatever you know.

Q. 691

As part of your homework you had a discussion with Mr. Lynn about the likely

12

cost of an election; isn't that right?

13

A.

I could have mentioned it to him.

14

Q. 692

Could you tell Tribunal about that conversation Mr. Fox?

A.

It's just what I said to you.

16

Q. 693

Where could you have mentioned it to Mr. Lynn?

17

A.

It could have been in the house, it could have been, you know.

18

Q. 694

Would this have been on one of the occasions that Mr. Lynn visited you seeking

15:01:04 15

19 15:01:18 20

your support for the Cherrywood proposals? A.

21 22

It might have been. I did easily get some alterations done in my company too and they hired dress suits and that. It could have been at that time too.

Q. 695

23 24

I could have mentioned it .

Mr. Lynn's evidence to the Tribunal was that you got to know each other quite well by November '92.?

A.

Whose evidence?

Q. 696

Mr. Lynn.?

26

A.

Got to know him quite well?

27

Q. 697

Yeah.

28

A.

I got to know him fairly well anyway.

29

Q. 698

He says that he had suggested to you that he would recommend support for you if

15:01:38 25

15:01:51 30

That you got to know him quite well?

you ran in the election.? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:01:52

15:02:02

106 1

A.

Yeah.

2

Q. 699

Was he correct in that?

3

A.

Well I don't know what he said to that.

4 5

But to write in, in relation, to that

you might get support, you know. Q. 700

6

Yes.

And you were to write to Mr. Lynn I think subsequently in other years,

isn't that right and we'll come to them in a moment?

7

A.

I never wrote to Mr. Lynn.

8

Q. 701

You never wrote to Mr. Lynn seeking support for golf classics?

9

A.

Not to Mr. Lynn.

Q. 702

Who would you have written to?

A.

What happened in the golf classics was the core Dail or whatever would write to

15:02:21 10

11

Not wrote to him.

12

members and particularly the councillors and they would be asked to support or

13

get sponsorship for golf classics and things like that, you know.

14

Q. 703

As it happened --

A.

I don't know whether I gave it to him or whether I sent it in to him, you know.

16

Q. 704

That's the '92 request is it?

17

A.

I think any request you know.

18

Q. 705

At 4031.

15:02:43 15

19 15:02:59 20

You were given a cheque I think for 1,000 pounds in January of '93.

Were you a candidate in the Seanad election that year? A.

At the convention the other -- there was sort of -- in relation to in -- i had

21

been running for the Senate because there's local top PDs were all there, they

22

were all behind me so I could get the nomination for the Senate.

23

getting myself ready for all of that too, you know, the Senate Election.

24

wasn't successful but I mean I made a strong effort that time to appease my

15:03:27 25

supporters as well as that.

And I was

Because they were very strong behind me.

26

doing a lot of work in the constituency.

27

all of that in relation to support.

28

me as a perspective person that could maybe do more at that level.

29

I'd go forward.

15:03:58 30

that end of it.

I

I was

I'd built up to the community and

And that -- there was that surge behind So I said

I mean, they're still asking me people are you running. So I'm saying it's a -- I did quite well in all of my

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

All

15:04:04

15:04:19

107 1 2

elections. Q. 706

3

I worked well for the communities.

And that's ...

How long after you had your discussion with Mr. Lynn did you seek the 1,000 pounds payment that you received in January '93?

4

A.

Did I seek it?

5

Q. 707

Yeah.

6

A.

I wouldn't know.

7

Q. 708

I think you --

8

A.

I mean, you wouldn't do it until the election was, you know, called.

9

Q. 709

Well I think the election was called in November '92; isn't that right?

A.

Well so it would have been.

15:04:32 10

11

How long after that?

I did it in November some time.

Sent in the

note.

12

Q. 710

Did you suggest the amount that Monarch might give you?

13

A.

Absolutely not.

14

Q. 711

I think in the past you have told the Tribunal that the next single highest

15:04:44 15

amount you would have received at that time was a sum of 100 pounds; isn't that

16

right?

17

A.

I said probably that, like.

18

Q. 712

Yes?

19

A.

I mean, to say it was exactly that.

15:04:57 20

I mean, what you were trying to do was to

assist the Tribunal.

21

Q. 713

Yes, yes.?

22

A.

In giving you figures.

23

Q. 714

Well, I'm just putting to you, if you want to change it, Mr. Fox, you can.

24 15:05:10 25

But it wasn't.

It's just your own evidence given in Carrickmines 1? A.

I said probably, yeah.

26

Q. 715

Now, at 49 --

27

A.

What word did I use?

28

Q. 716

I can get up your evidence on that point, if you like, Mr. Fox.

29

A.

It doesn't matter. I'm just saying -- it doesn't matter.

Q. 717

If we could have day 383.

15:05:24 30

Page 45.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:05:36

15:05:51

108 1 2

Well, maybe we should take it from page 44.

3 4

And at page 44 you're dealing there with the payment of 600 pounds.

5

take question 141.

If we

6 7

Q: Had you ever received a contribution close to 600 pounds, any single

8

contribution close to 600 pounds?

9

A:

15:05:59 10

No.

Q: Either in '91 or '92.

11

A: 91 or 92.

12

Q: Yes.

13

A:

The 600 pounds in '91

14

Q:

You said that was the single biggest contribution.

15:06:11 15

What would the next

biggest contribution

16

A:

1,000 pounds.

17

Q:

In 1991 just compared to the 600 pounds and we're just dealing with the

18

1991.

19

A: In 1991 it would have been probably 100 pounds.

What was the next single biggest contribution that you had

15:06:26 20

Q:

Would that have come from family or friends

21

A:

Niall Andrews

22

Q: In 1992 --

23 24

A.

15:06:37 25

26

Niall Andrews.

I think you said that was, he didn't want -- anyway, it's

1,000 pounds. Q. 718

Q:

In 1992 then compared to the 1,000 pounds what would have been the next

27

biggest single contribution you would have received

28

A:

In 1992?

29

Q:

Yes

15:06:50 30

A:

It probably was the same, in or about the 100 pounds Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:06:55

15:06:59

109 1

Q:

100 pounds again

2

A:

Yes".

3 4

Is that ...

5

A.

Yeah.

6

Q. 719

Is there any part of that evidence you want to ....?

7

A.

No.

8

Q. 720

I think in 1994.

9

If we go back to 4943.

Fianna Fail Golf Classic.

15:07:23 10

14th of April '94. classic at 8406.

12

in 1994 for a golf classic? A.

14 15:07:34 15

There was a sum of 250 pounds contributed on the

And we see the cheque made payable to Fianna Fail golf

11

13

We see what is described as a

Do you recall receiving 250 pounds from the Monarch interest

I don't know whether that was sent directly to -- I said I would have given them in the templates and the correspondence.

Q. 721

Yes.?

16

A.

Requesting.

17

Q. 722

Would you have sought that, is what I'm asking you, Mr. Fox?

18

A.

Oh, yeah.

19

Q. 723

And I think in February '95.

15:07:48 20

So I don't know whether they sent it directly to the.

If we could have 5549.

I think you sought a

contribution to Bradford Rovers Football Club to defray costs of track suits

21

and travelling bags; isn't that right?

22

A.

That could be right, yeah.

23

Q. 724

And you sought that --

24

A.

Bradford Rovers was it.?

Q. 725

Yeah.

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 726

But you in fact addressed your letter to Mr. Richard Lynn; isn't that right.

28

A.

Yeah, he must have told me to put his name on it, yeah.

29

Q. 727

Do you recall making that request?

A.

I did.

15:08:01 25

15:08:14 30

And you sought that Mr. Fox from Monarch; isn't that right?

Well I must have done seeing as it's there. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:08:17

15:08:29

110 1

Q. 728

2

So you would have discussed it with Mr. Richard Lynn and he would have asked you to write or mark a letter for his attention; is that right?

3

A.

Must have been, yeah.

4

Q. 729

And I think you were successful in receiving 250 pounds for that purpose; isn't

5

that right?

6

A.

Bradford Rovers?

7

Q. 730

In 1995?

8

A.

Yeah.

9

Q. 731

And I think in June 1996.

15:08:38 10

At 6010.

You sought a contribution for a golf

classic; isn't that right?

11

A.

Golf classic.

12

Q. 732

Do you recall seeking --

13

A.

Fianna Fail, yeah, yeah.

14

Q. 733

I think at this time you were the Leas Cathaoirleach of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown

15:08:52 15

County Council; isn't that right?

16

A.

1996.

17

Q. 734

Yes.

18 19

I was, yeah. 10th of June.

When was it, June? And I think the cheque was sent on the 14th of June

'96.? A.

I wouldn't have been the Cathaoirleach then.

Q. 735

Leas Cathaoirleach.

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 736

You addressed your letter to Mr. Richard Lynn; isn't that right?

23

A.

Yeah.

24

Q. 737

For a golf classic.

A.

Fianna Fail.

26

Q. 738

Tony Fox, FF, I think that's 280 --

27

A.

200 is it?

28

Q. 739

280 I think.

15:09:07 20

15:09:23 25

Your headed notepaper says Leas Cathaoirleach?

And we see that cheque at 6016.?

That's what I was saying to.

29 15:09:34 30

CHAIRMAN:

It's 200.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:09:35

15:09:51

111 1

A.

I think it's 200 what I see here.

2 3

MR. QUINN: Anyway, if you look at 6017.

4

cheque reference No. 500093.

You see the debit and you see the

5

Q. 740

And that's for a debit of 280 pounds?

6

A.

Pardon?

7

Q. 741

That's a debit of 280 pounds?

8

A.

Yeah.

9

Q. 742

And if we look at 6017 a document supplied to the Tribunal by Monarch payment

15:10:04 10

to politicians under the heading 1996.

11

14th of June Tony Fox, Fianna Fail 280

do you see that?

12

A.

I'm not --

13

Q. 743

If we look at 6014 do you see Dun Laoghaire Town Centre limited cheque payments

14

book and you will see about five entries down for the 14th of June '96,

15:10:20 15

Councillor Tony Fox 280 pounds.

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q. 744

And if we look at 6015.

18 19

We see the request for that payment for 280 pounds.

Do you accept it was 280 pounds Mr. Fox or is there a dispute about it? A.

15:10:40 20

21

Do you see that?

Q. 745

There's not a dispute.

I'm just saying I seen it on the cheque, Chairman,

there 200.

I mean, there's no ...

That's all.

And I think on the 13th of February 1997.

22

golf outing, a sum of 280 pounds was paid.

23

Laoghaire town centre limited.

24 15:11:02 25

A.

13th of February, yeah.

Q. 746

And we see at 6170.

At 1587.

Tony Fox, Fianna Fail

And again at 6187 we see Dun

Do you see that?

On this time on Fianna Fail Dublin South headed notepaper

26

a letter addressed by you, Mr. Fox, to "Dear Richard", which I presume is Mr.

27

Lynn which requests that payment; isn't that right?

28

A.

29 15:11:25 30

Yeah, I just sent on that letter that was sent to me.

The letter from, when

was it? Q. 747

These are all requests of you -- sorry.

From you of Mr. Lynn; isn't that

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:11:31

15:11:47

112 1

right of Monarch for payments for golf classics?

2

A.

Yeah, he supported it, yeah.

3

Q. 748

And I think there was a further payment to the Bradford Rovers of 300 pounds in

4

March 1997; isn't that right? And I can bring that up if you require me to so,

5

Mr. Fox. Do you recall ever meeting Mr. Glennane in relation to any of the

6

Monarch interests?

7

A.

No, I never met him in relation to, he made no representations to me.

8

was at some functions, you know.

9

official opening of the Bloomfield Centre and others. So he was, I recall

15:12:15 10

seeing him at them.

11 12

And he

I was Chairman, I was Cathaoirleach to the

I have photographs actually I think taken by the groups,

you know. Q. 749

And in fact just for completeness, I should have said at 6753 there was a

13

further payment from Dunloe of 500 pounds which I presume was organised through

14

Mr. Lynn?

15:12:34 15

16

A.

Where's that?

Q. 750

In the past I think you've advised the Tribunal, Mr. Fox, that you ever only

17

wrote once to Monarch seeking contribution; isn't that right?

18

A.

Yeah, political contribution.

19

Q. 751

We have on screen at least three letters seeking monies in respect of golf

15:12:51 20

classics?

21

A.

Golf classics, yeah.

22

Q. 752

Are you making a distinction between the golf classic letters and the letter

23 24 15:13:02 25

26

you wrote for the 1,000 pounds in 1992? A.

I would certainly, yes.

Q. 753

And what distinction do you make there, Mr. Fox?

A.

Because I was looking for -- requested by the core Dail and requested for

27

sponsorships so I do that.

28

Q. 754

That's the distinction.

29

A.

Yes. One was for my political activity.

Q. 755

And what was the other for, Mr. Fox?

15:13:22 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:13:24

15:13:46

113 1

A.

For -- well clubs and organisations there.

2

Q. 756

If I could have 9042.

This is a table compiled from the documentation

3

circulated in the brief, Mr. Fox.

And it shows contact of one kind or another

4

between you and Mr. Lynn from September '93 forward to August '97.

5

have -- these contacts are backed up by either the documentation which I have

6

referred to or expenses sheets put in by Mr. Lynn to his employers as a result

7

of meetings with you and expenses by way of refreshments etc. that he would

8

have incurred.

You'll

9 15:14:07 10

Do you accept that you had contact with Mr. Lynn in that period?

11

A.

What was the period again?

12

Q. 757

The period on screen is a period September '93 to August '97?

13

A.

Yes, I had, yeah.

14

Q. 758

Mr. Lynn in fact has given evidence to the Tribunal that this would have been

15:14:23 15

the minimum contact he would have had with the various councillors, including

16

yourself.?

17

A.

That's his evidence.

18

Q. 759

Yes.

19 15:14:37 20

21

But would you agree that you would have had at least that amount of

contact and possibly greater contact with Mr. Lynn in that period? A.

Well, I had a lot of contact with him.

Q. 760

And are you saying, Mr. Fox, finally, that none of your colleagues ever sought

22

your support for any proposals in relation to the Cherrywood lands?

23

A.

Sought my?

24

Q. 761

Support, yes.?

A.

My colleagues?

26

Q. 762

Yes.?

27

A.

Not that I recall.

28

Q. 763

And do you recall any discussion with any of your colleagues in relation to the

15:14:54 25

29 15:15:06 30

various motions that you voted upon in the period '91 onwards? A.

For where? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:15:07

15:15:25

114 1

Q. 764

For Cherrywood.

We're only dealing with Cherrywood, Mr. Fox.?

2

A.

Just repeat that, Mr. Quinn?

3

Q. 765

I'm asking you.

Do you recall any discussion with any of your colleagues in

4

relation to the various motions that you voted upon in the period 1991 forward,

5

onwards for the Cherrywood lands?

6

A.

No, I don't recall, no.

7

Q. 766

And you're telling the Tribunal that you had no knowledge of Mr. Dunlop's

8

involvement in relation to the Cherrywood lands and that he certainly never

9

sought nor discussed Monarch lands with you in that period?

15:15:40 10

A.

Absolutely true, yes.

11

Q. 767

Even though you had discussions with him in relation to other matters?

12

A.

Yeah.

13

Q. 768

And he had sought your support in relation to other matters?

14

A.

The only person that made representations to me was Mr. Richard Lynn in

15:15:54 15

relation to Monarch.

16

Q. 769

Thank you, Mr. Fox.?

17

A.

Thank you.

That's the fact of the matter!

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

Do you wish to ask any questions?

15:16:06 20

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I just want to clarify one thing, Mr. Fox.

Yes, Judge.

23 24 15:16:15 25

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Were you a candidate in the Seanad Elections 1993

I didn't get the nomination.

26 27 28

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

You didn't get the nomination?

I think the closing was around January sometime.

29 15:16:21 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

I think the poll was sometime in January; is that correct? I

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:16:24

15:16:31

115 1 2

don't know it was sometime early or mid January A.

Pardon?

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

that correct?

6

A.

The actual poll for the Seanad was sometime in mid January; is

I'm not sure.

7 8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I think we have a table here.

I'm not too sure.

15:16:36 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

that correct?

13

A.

And I think the General Election was sometime in November is

Yeah.

14 15:16:41 15

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Can I just ask you.

You have told us that obviously you were

16

prevailed upon by supporters to put yourself forward for a nomination at the

17

Fianna Fail convention?

18

A.

Correct, yeah.

19 15:16:57 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

21 22

For whatever constituency it would have been.

And you didn't

get that for the General Election? A.

Yeah, but there's a lot of groundwork to be done in that.

23 24 15:17:06 25

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I appreciate that may be.

Pardon, no I wasn't.

But you weren't a candidate?

I was nearly but I didn't get through.

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

would vote at the convention; is that the way it works?

29 15:17:23 30

A.

Yeah.

And I think the system, I think, is that delegates

I think there's about, in my particular area, there's about 90 to 100 delegates.

You'd have to contact all of those to get before the convention. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:17:27

15:17:50

116 1

Now, I was a strong -- I was fairly strong on the ground so I -- I mean, it

2

would be hard for me to get all of them because you'd two top TDs there.

3

it was quite, you know, I put up a fantastic show.

4

would have got through then.

5

yeah.

And

But I thought maybe I

Put all of me efforts into that convention,

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

8

Seanad either?

9

A.

15:17:58 10

You didn't.

I don't think you got a nomination for the

On the convention night there's all a big speech and different things and a big recommendation that I run for the Senate and that I would be sort of -- you

11

have to get a nomination of the.

12 13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I accept that.

You did go to seek a nomination --

They'd all do this and that, you know.

15:18:10 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

get sufficient numbers?

18

A.

You didn't actually become a candidate at the end, you didn't

Yes, Judge, yeah.

19 15:18:16 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

I just want to ask you.

The cheque, the donation that you

21

got from Monarch at the end of January.

22

you didn't actually achieve your goal to be a candidate in either the General

23

Election or the Seanad? That you actually did get the 1,000 pounds cheque from

24

Monarch?

15:18:37 25

A.

26

Were you surprised in the fact that

Yeah, well as I said, I was -- I mean, in the 1,000 pounds.

I thought it was

a lot, you know.

27 28

JUDGE FAHERTY:

29

we've seen here a lot of documents ...

15:18:51 30

A.

In comparison.

If you just look at -- were you surprised --

Yeah. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:18:52

15:19:00

117 1 2

JUDGE FAHERTY:

3

June and in the run up to the Local Elections

4

A.

And Monarch obviously in 1991.

In the run-up to, in May and

Yeah.

5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY:

7

gave donations including one to yourself for 600 pounds

8

A.

They had lists of candidates and they knew candidates and they

So I read or seen, yeah.

9 15:19:09 10

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Were you surprised that they actually, if you like, if I could

11

put it this way.

12

or for the Seanad that they actually parted with the 1,000 pounds for an

13

election that you didn't actually run in?

14

A.

15:19:28 15

Given that you weren't a candidate in the General Election

As I said, I did a lot of work.

I had sent it in early.

Or from the time

that it would have been called, you know.

16 17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

19

I'm surprised.

I see.

I mean I could have been surprised.

whether they wanted to do that.

I mean, the point was

They did do that.

15:19:38 20

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

All right.

I did have a lot, a good amount of expenses.

So the Senate end of it ...

23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY:

15:19:51 25

26 27

It would appear to be fairly generous.

If you compare with

it with an election that you did run in '91, you got 600 pounds A.

Judge, you said in relation to other, it seemed to be -- what they gave out or whatever at the time was it?

28 29 15:20:07 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Yes.

What Monarch and Mr. Lynn and indeed Mr. Glennane also

said that they gave donations to candidates. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

15:20:13

15:20:21

118 1

A.

Yeah.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

4

surprised given that you didn't transpire, despite your hard work, to be a

5

candidate in either the Seanad or the General Election, that even though you'd

6

asked for it that they paid up on foot of your letter?

7

A.

And I'm just saying that, I'm just asking really were you

I understand, yeah.

It just didn't cross me mind, you know.

8 9 15:20:33 10

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

All right.

Thanks Judge.

11 12

JUDGE FAHERTY:

That's all I have, thank you.

13 14 15:20:37 15

CHAIRMAN: A.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Chairman, Mr. Quinn.

16 17

MR. QUINN: Those are the witnesses.

18 19 15:20:44 20

CHAIRMAN: A.

Are we sitting tomorrow?

Am I finished?

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

Yes.

Thank you very much.

So ten o'clock tomorrow.

23 24 15:22:42 25

26

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY, WEDNESDAY, 19TH JULY, 2006, AT 10:00 A.M.

27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 668

09:49:04

10:03:07

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY, 19TH JULY 2006

2

AT 10.00 A.M:

3 4

MR. QUINN:

Senator Don Lydon please.

5 6

SENATOR DON LYDON, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS

7

BY MR. QUINN:

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

10:03:38 10

A

11

Q

Good morning, Senator.

Good morning. 1

Good morning again, Senator Lydon. Senator Lydon, I think you were and you

12

have already given evidence to the fact, you were a member of Dublin County

13

Council from 1985 to December 1993.

14

A

10:03:58 15

Q

16

A

17

Q

Sorry I wonder would you speak in a little bit closer. 2

Yes. 3

18 A

10:04:10 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

23

A

24

Q

Yes. 4

And that is you were elected in 1985 and reelected in June 1991. Yes.

5

And I think you represented the Stillorgan ward, is that right? Yes. 1999 elected, yes.

6

10:04:29 25

And I think in 1994, you became a member of Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council and as you say, you were reelected to that council in 1999, is that

26

correct?

27

A

28

Q

10:04:55 30

You were a member, I think, of Dublin County Council from 1985 to December 1993.

19

29

Can you hear me now?

Yes. 7

I think you provided a statement to the Tribunal on the 23rd March 2006, if I could have pages 1338 to 1341. And at 1338, I think, you deal with your association with Monarch and representatives of Monarch, including the late www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:05:00

10:05:16

2 1

Mr. Phil Monahan deceased, I can get you a hard copy of this Mr. Lydon...

2

A

3

Q

No, that's fine, I can see that. 8

And if we look at roman numeral 2 there, under the heading, "Mr. Phil Monahan

4

deceased," you say the only recollection you have of meeting the late Phil

5

Monahan was at the opening of the Bloomfields Shopping Centre in Dun Laoghaire,

6

that would have been sometime in 1996, 1997?

7

A

8

Q

9

A

10:05:28 10

Q

11

A

I don't know what time, but I'll take your word for it. 9

The late 90s? Yes.

10

Prior to that, you don't believe you ever met the late Phil Monahan? When I'm here I have to say that I have no recollection of meeting him. I

12

might have met him at a function, I've no recollection of meeting -- I don't

13

think I was ever talking to the man before that.

14

Q

11

10:05:46 15

If we look at 1339, under the heading "Mr. Richard Lynn," I think you advised the Tribunal that you met Mr. Lynn on numerous occasions between the early

16

1990s up until the present time.

17

A

18

Q

Yes. 12

19

And you said that in addition to meeting with Mr. Lynn at occasions at Dublin City Council meetings, should that be Dublin County Council meetings?

10:06:03 20

A

21

Q

Socialised with him, is that what you said? 13

Yes, where Mr. Lynn had been involved lobbying on behalf of Monarch, you often

22

socialised with him, so apart from meeting him at council meetings, you were a

23

social acquaintance of his?

24

A

Well, that time, yes, yeah. But it wasn't a sort of, during that time he would

10:06:29 25

be around the council and he'd be around Conway's and he would be buying drinks

26 27

and food and all that sort of stuff, socialising in that respect. Q

14

28

It was socialising with him in the context of your attendance at council meetings?

29

A

10:06:44 30

Q

I am terribly sorry but I can just barely hear you. 15

I'm sorry, there's obviously a problem with the sound system this morning. You www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:06:51

10:07:08

3 1

are advising the Tribunal, Senator Lydon, that your socialising with Mr. Lynn

2

was in the context of your meetings at Dublin County Council, is that right?

3

A

4

Q

Yes, that's correct. Yes. 16

And then in relation to Mr. Eddie Sweeney, you say our client had dinner with

5

Mr. Sweeney and his wife many years ago and he had what he described as an on

6

off contact with him for years. He consulted with Mr. Sweeney in relation to

7

properties in county Donegal and one occasion considered the possibility of

8

entering into a joint venture with him.

9

A

That's correct, I first met him I think back in 1992 or something, I brought

10:07:28 10

himself and his wife to dinner and he was telling me all about Science and

11 12

Technology parks, that's the first time, I met him a few times since then. Q

17

13

You brought himself and his wife to dinner or did he bring you and your wife to dinner?

14

A

10:07:46 15

Q

I brought him, I wanted to learn about science and technology. 18

16

I understand. And then under the heading "Mr. Dominic Glennane," you said to the best of your recollection, you never met with Mr. Glennane.

17

A

18

Q

I don't think I ever met that man. 19

19

In relation to Mr. Phillip Reilly, you are saying our client met with Mr. Reilly many times when the latter was present at Dublin County Council

10:08:05 20

meetings, Mr. Reilly being usually in the company of the aforementioned

21

Mr. Richard Lynn. Senator Lydon would also have met with Mr. Reilly socially

22

on a number of occasions, he believes Mr. Phillip Reilly was lobbying on behalf

23

of Monarch but had no recollection of being lobbied by him, though Mr. Reilly

24

may have mention the lands to him.

10:08:20 25

A

That's all correct, yes, I met Phil Reilly since that time at a number of

26

functions, openings and I usually meet him at the Cairde Faile, and that's the

27

President of Fianna Fail's dinner, every year he goes to that.

28

Q

29 10:08:41 30

20

Is he the Monarch representative at that dinner, or does Mr. Lynn or another Monarch personnel attend that dinner?

A

No. www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:08:42

10:08:56

4 1

Q

2

A

21

I think he is some sort of PR or management company, he probably goes to every

3 4

Just Mr. Reilly?

dinner. Nothing to do with Fianna Fail, you know, he'd go to Fine Gael... Q

22

And again when you referred there, Senator Lydon, to meeting with Mr. Reilly

5

socially, are you talking about meeting Mr. Reilly in the context of your

6

attendance at Dublin County Council meetings?

7

A

What socially I meant was at openings, like the opening of the Dundrum Shopping

8

Centre, or something like that. He manages those kind of events, I think.

9

That's what I mean or the opening of Cherrywood or somewhere like that, that's

10:09:11 10

11

all. Q

23

And under the heading, "Mr. Frank Dunlop" you say, as already previously

12

outlined to the Tribunal, our client has no discussion, to the best of his

13

recollection, with Frank Dunlop. Again to the best of our client's

14

recollection, he had not met with Mr. Dunlop in connection with Monarch.

10:09:29 15

A

I didn't know he was working for Monarch. I have no recollection of him

16

working for Monarch. He may have mentioned it to me, if he says he did, well

17

he I did. But really, I didn't know at that time, to the best of my knowledge,

18

I didn't know that he was working with Monarch at all.

19

Q

24

10:09:47 20

You had no idea that Mr. Dunlop was lobbying councillors on behalf of Monarch between March and November 1993?

21

A

22

Q

23

A

24

Q

10:10:00 25

A

26

Q

27

A

No, I never met any councillor that he lobbied. 25

Sorry? I never met any councillor that he lobbied.

26

And he certainly never lobbied you in relation to Monarch or Cherrywood lands? I don't think he did.

27

But he had, I think, lobbied your support in relation to other projects? Oh he had, yes, he may have mentioned it, I don't want to absolutely that he

28

didn't, but he may have mentioned, but I have no recollection of it. I am

29

trying to think about this but I don't think that he did, he could have, but I

10:10:17 30

don't think so. www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:10:17

10:10:36

5 1

Q

28

Then I think under Roman numeral 3, you deal with monies received from Monarch.

2

You say, "our client to the best of his recollection received 600 pounds from

3

Monarch for the 1991 local elections and received a further payment of 2,500

4

from Monarch for the 1992/1993 Seanad elections."

5

A

6

Q

That's correct. 29

"These are, to the best of his recollection, the only donations received from

7

Monarch." And you go on to say that you received no donations or monies other

8

than, I think, a sum of 450 pounds which you describe from Mr. Sweeney for the

9

1999 local elections, is that right?

10:10:50 10

A

11

Q

That's correct, yes. 30

And at 1340, you say, "Our client received 1,000 pounds political contribution

12

from Mr. Frank Dunlop and Associates in relation to the 1992/1993 Seanad

13

election as previously advised to the Tribunal and a further 250 pounds from

14

Mr. Frank Dunlop and Associates by way of a political donation for the 1999

10:11:13 15

local elections campaign. Details of which have been already outlined to the

16

Tribunal."

17

A

18

Q

Correct. 31

19 10:11:28 20

that all the monies were received by cheque through the post, is that right? A

I think, that's correct yes. I don't ever recall -- no they came through the

21 22

You say you received no money or payments from Shefran Limited and you believe

post. Q

32

You say, "Our client is currently finalising investigations into accounts, the

23

payments outlined above were lodged and we hope to be in a position to furnish

24

you with details in due course." And you say, "representations made to Senator

10:11:39 25

Lydon in relation to the Cherrywood lands on behalf of Monarch were made by

26

Mr. Richard Lynn, the lands may also have been mentioned to our client by

27

Mr. Phillip Reilly." You say, "Our client was shown over the lands in

28

Cherrywood by the afore said Mr. Richard Lynn who outlined the projects,

29

developments to him." You said, "Our client believes that Mr. Eddie Sweeney,

10:11:59 30

who was involved in Monarch, was interested in the Science and Technology Park. www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:12:02

10:12:19

6 1

This idea came from an initiative of the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, TD and he

2

recollects attending at a dinner at the Grey Door restaurant along with Mr.

3

Sweeney, Mr. Lynn, Councillor Gilmore, Councillor Marren, Councillor Lohan and

4

some Japanese businessmen. Also present was an expert on Science and

5

Technology Park, Mr. Michael Ryan. There may have been one or two others

6

present at this dinner but our client can not recall who they may have been.

7

He have believes the dinner in question was hosted by Monarch Properties."

8

That's not the dinner you referred to earlier that you had Mr. Sweeney and his

9

wife as guests at?

10:12:37 10

A

No, that was a dinner, I don't know exactly when it was, I think was about '94,

11

'95 or '96, sometime before the Science and Technology Park was set up. And

12

there was Japanese people came over and we attended a dinner in the Grey Door.

13

Q

14

A

33

Can I just, before you leave that page, number 4 there is currently finalising

10:12:57 15

16

Now --

his -- I forgot about that honestly, I will do that for you next week. Q

34

Just in relation to and we have dealt with this before, Senator Lydon, at 1322

17

and I think you have already accepted in evidence, when you were attending the

18

Fianna Fail inquiry into these matters, you advised the inquiry that you

19

received 4/500 pounds from Monarch Properties in the form of a cheque for the

10:13:23 20

1991 and 1999 local election campaign and you received 1,000 pounds from

21

Monarch Properties for the 1993 Seanad election and for the 1997 Senate

22

election campaign.

23

A

24

Q

Yes, I was all sky ways on that, that was all wrong. 35

If we could have 3241 please. This, Senator Lydon, is a document provided to

10:13:45 25

the Tribunal on discovery by Monarch and it shows there for the 5th June 1991,

26

at local election expenses, "600 pounds to D Lydon, FF," is that the 600 pounds

27

we are speaking about?

28

A

29

Q

10:14:08 30

I assume it is, yes, that's right. The local elections. 36

If we look at the cheque payments book or the payments cash book, I should say, at 3152. We see there records of a cheque for 600 pounds being written up, www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:14:16

10:14:33

7 1

made payable to "Don Lydon, Fianna Fail," do you see that there on the screen?

2

A

3

Q

I can see it, yes. 37

And if we see 3287, this is an extract from a current account of yourself and

4

your wife and we see a lodgment there of 1,100 pounds and I think the

5

manuscript writing on that document is yours, is that right?

6

A

7

Q

That could have been that cheque, yes. 38

And you identify as the sums making up that total of 1,100 pounds, a sum of

8

150, 350 and 600. Are you saying that that's the 600 pound cheque you received

9

from Monarch?

10:14:52 10

A

Not to be honest with you, I don't know off the top of my head, it probably is,

11

I didn't get many 600 pound cheques, it's probably the only one I ever got.

12

It's 150, 350 and 600.

13

Q

39

14

If you did receive a cheque, I think you have advised the Tribunal you would have lodged it to your accounts, isn't that ...

10:15:12 15

A

16

Q

Oh yes. 40

And if we move on to 1992, if we could have 3809? This is an extract from the

17

books and records of Monarch Properties and you see the third last entry for

18

the 16th December 1992, a sum of "2,500 pounds, Senate election expenses,"

19

that's the highest Senate election contribution there, isn't that right?

10:15:39 20

A

21

Q

That's correct. 41

And we see that cheque at 8384 and if we could have 3957? This again is a

22

document, sorry, 3957. This again, Senator Lydon, is a document provided by

23

the Monarch Group, it appears to be a note made by Mr. Richard Lynn under the

24

heading, "Senate elections" and there are four names given there and you are

10:16:13 25

2,500 pounds is also entered there, do you see that?

26

A

27

Q

Yes. 42

I don't believe that Mr. Tony Fox, who is a councillor and a member of Fianna

28

Fail, was a contestant, either in that general election or that Seanad

29

election, isn't that right?

10:16:27 30

A

I think he went for convention for it but I don't think he contested it, no. www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:16:32

10:16:49

8 1

Q

43

2

That's what I asked you, Senator. Now, Senator Lydon, you live in the Stillorgan area, you represented the Stillorgan ward.

3

A

4

Q

Correct. 44

5

Matters that were developing in Cherrywood would be of interest to you and to your constituents, isn't that right?

6

A

7

Q

They would generally, yes. 45

And we know, for example, that December 1990, the manager had brought, to

8

council, a proposal, DP90/123, if we could have 6936? In relation to the

9

Carrickmines Valley and that whole area generally, is that right?

10:17:10 10

A

11

Q

I remember that, yes. 46

And in essence, the manager was recommending that the councillors might develop

12

or consider a strategy plan which would result in substantial development in

13

this area, isn't that right?

14

A

10:17:24 15

Q

That's correct, yes. 47

And I think at that meeting on the 6th December 1990, although you are not

16

recorded as being in attendance at 6952. There was a motion debated and

17

passed, a motion in the names of Councillors McDonald and Coffey, that

18

development in that area would be limited to the eastern side of the proposed

19

Southeastern Motorway, isn't that right?

10:17:47 20

A

21

Q

I don't think I was present but I do know what you are talking about, yes. 48

It would appear from that map that I had on screen a moment ago, that there was

22

now a new proposed line for the Southeastern Motorway to that which had been

23

contained in the 1983 Development Plan?

24

A

10:18:03 25

Q

That's right, yes. 49

And on the 18th of January 1991, the manager put forward two further maps at

26

6964, map 27, which was to take account, he says, of the vote on the 6th of

27

December showing development on the eastern side of the new line of the

28

motorway, isn't that right?

29

A

10:18:25 30

Q

Yes. 50

Again I don't think you were attendance at that meeting, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:18:29

10:18:53

9 1

Sorry, you were recorded as having been in attendance, 7003?

2

A

3

Q

I made a note of it, I wasn't present. 51

4

Yes. If we could have 7003. Sorry, yes, you are quite right, you weren't present at the meeting of the 18th January which is at 3086, sorry.

5

A

6

Q

The 18th January, I wasn't present. 52

Yes. That's right. But in any event, I think matters came to a head on the

7

24th May 1991, when you were present at 7003, we will see you as being in

8

attendance, isn't that right?

9 10:19:10 10

A Q

That's correct, yes. 53

And I think at that meeting, the manager put forward a report which recommended

11

that one of three options be adopted for the purposes of the display of the

12

Development Plan, and if we could have 7006 please. And the manager's

13

recommendation, I think at that stage, was that option 1, that is to say the

14

1983 line unchanged was to be suggested, that is DP90/129A, isn't that right?

10:19:41 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

1983 plan.

17 18

MR. QUINN: The 1983, I should say, yes. Isn't that right?

19

A

10:19:50 20

Q

I didn't get the sense? 54

21

that right?

22

A

23

Q

24

A

Yes we adopted the 1983 plan, is that what you said? 55

The 1983 plan unchanged was his recommendation, isn't that right? Except when it went on display, the manager changed it from one house to the

10:20:08 25

26

On screen, we see the recommendations of the manager, the three options, isn't

acre, he put it on display at four houses to the acre. Q

56

27

If we could have 7019. This is the manager's plan, isn't that right? That is to say that is map number 90/129A.

28

A

29

Q

10:20:39 30

A

Yes, I think so. That's correct, yes. 57

And that's what was voted upon and accepted at that meeting, isn't that right? Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:20:40

10:20:55

10 1

Q

2

A

3

Q

4

A

5

Q

6

A

7

Q

8

A

9

Q

10:21:13 10

58

Now you voted against that plan, isn't that right? Yes, I thought it would be better if we went with the 1990 DP123.

59

Which had been unsuccessful back in December 1990. Yes.

60

But you hadn't been at the meeting in December 1990. Was I not?

61

No, well you are not recorded as having been at the meeting. Okay.

62

A

And why did you support DP90/123, Senator? Because it seemed to be a more comprehensive map. It was, I thought it was a

11

better idea all over because it included more land and was more comprehensive

12

and it was what the manager wanted and I thought it was a good idea. I said

13

that before, I think.

14

Q

63

10:21:37 15

were, isn't that right?

16

A

17

Q

18

A

19

Q

10:21:48 20

A

21

Q

Some of them would be, some of them wouldn't be I suppose. 64

Was Councillor McDonald a Fianna Fail councillor? Yes.

65

And Councillor Coffey was a Fianna Fail councillor? Yes.

66

22 23

But your fellow councillors in Fianna Fail, I think, weren't as keen as you

So the motion in December 1990 was promoted and seconded by Fianna Fail councillors, isn't that right?

A

That's right but you see I suppose it depends too where you are from. The big

24

thing about all this was that the Dun Laoghaire councillors would have been

10:22:06 25

wary of promoting any shopping or that sort of thing, shopping centre out in

26

Cherrywood and they would be sort of afraid of that. You see in DP 123, the

27

manager represented -- he had two shopping centres, one at Ballyogan and one at

28

Cherrywood and he had 20 acres of district centre and 20 acres industrial.

29 10:22:35 30

Q

67

And you have given evidence, I think, in Carrickmines 1 that notwithstanding the position there, that you were supportive of industrial development in this www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:22:45

10:22:57

11 1 2

area, isn't that right? A

Yes, just to make sure, like the Sandyford industrial park, I don't mean heavy

3

industry but up around the Carrickmines interchange, he recommended industrial

4

close to the interchange because that would be easier access on to the

5

motorway, when it was finally settled.

6

Q

7

A

8

Q

68

Can I ask you, Councillor Lydon, do you see the map on screen. Yes.

69

9

And if we go, if we go, if we may, to 7006. This is a minute of the meeting that took place in May 1991.

10:23:12 10

A

11

Q

12

A

13

Q

Yes. 70

And it refers to the first option there, the 1983 plan unchanged. Yes.

71

14

Except for updating to take account of developments to date and adjustment of objectives and it refers to that drawing which I had on screen.

10:23:25 15

A

16

Q

Yes. 72

17

Are you saying that that drawing wasn't available to the meeting of the councillors in May 1991?

18

A

19

Q

In May '91. I don't know whether that was or not to be honest with you. 73

10:23:43 20

Because if it were available, it would have been obvious, I suggest to you, that the manager was recommending four houses to the acre in relation to that

21

portion of the Monarch site which was to be zoned for residential development,

22

if we could have 7019 please?

23

A

24

Q

10:24:09 25

Sorry, what are you saying now? 74

I am suggesting to you if that map were available to the meeting, it would have been obvious to the councillors present, including yourself, that it was the

26

manager's recommendation that that area, which he was proposing for residential

27

development, was to be developed at four houses to the acre because, as one

28

sees on the map, the recommendation is from AS/1 which is septic tank, one

29

house to the acre, to AP, which was piped sewage at existing residential

10:24:33 30

densities which is four houses to the acre, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:24:35

10:24:48

12 1

A

2

Q

Yes, I think so, yes. 75

3

Lydon?

4

A

5

Q

6

A

7

Q

8

A

9

Q

10:25:00 10

When he put it on display, the 1983 plan -76

Is it the 1991 Draft Development Plan? Yes. It went out, he put it out at four houses to the acre.

77

Yes. But --

78

A

Which is what he was recommending there in that map, isn't that right? Yes. I mean he didn't have to put any of these choices before us, he could

11 12

When you say the manager changed the map, what do you mean by that, Senator

have made an executive decision but he did it anyway. Q

79

Could he have made an executive decision, he had noted -- the council had noted

13

the maps in January 1991, but there were a series of motions which had been

14

tabled, isn't that right? Wasn't this the period when there were a whole

10:25:23 15

series of wrap up motions?

16

A

17

Q

He probably would have had to take the motions into account, yes. 80

18

options, isn't that right?

19

A

10:25:35 20

Q

21

A

22

And wasn't this short-circuiting matters by putting forward three possible

Yes. 81

So he couldn't have taken an executive decision, isn't that right? I think he could but I don't know, I think he could have made a decision to put it out and -- with the changes on it.

23 24 10:25:54 25

JUDGE FAHERTY:

I think in fairness to Senator Lydon, Mr. Quinn, he was in

attendance at a meeting on the 13th May where the manager read his report and I

26

think he actually specifically refers to four houses to the acre, in that

27

report.

28 29

MR. QUINN:

Yes.

10:26:05 30

www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:26:05

10:26:31

13 1

JUDGE FAHERTY:

I think that was the first scheduled meeting and was

2

continued, as I understand it, on the 24th May. I think 7197 would bring it

3

up, just to put it into context in fairness to Senator Lydon. Sorry, that's

4

1992, we are talk being 1991. I beg your pardon, sorry about that.

5 6

MR. QUINN:

7

between September and December 1991, isn't that right?

8

A

9

Q

10:26:40 10

A

11

Q

In any event, Senator Lydon, I think the map did go on display

That's right. 82

And it was at four houses to the acre. Yes.

83

12

And I think there was a substantial opposition to that proposal locally, isn't that right?

13

A

14

Q

That I can't say. 84

10:27:00 15

Did you hear at that time of an entity known as the Cherrywood Preservation Society?

16

A

17

Q

I did, yes. I don't think I ever met them but I heard of them. 85

18

Did you hear tell of local meetings at which the proposals for this area were being discussed by the local residents?

19

A

10:27:17 20

Q

I had heard of them but I don't think I ever attended any of them. 86

I appreciate you may not have attended them but you would have heard of them

21

and you would have known there was substantial local opposition to what was

22

being proposed, isn't that right?

23

A

There's two factors there, you see, first of all. Houses up near

24

Carrick/Brennan road, they would object to the industrial around the proposed

10:27:37 25

Carrickmines interchange. They started this and then there was a gentleman

26

called Smith and he was given 10,000 by Ben Dunne because Dunnes didn't want

27

any shop, they had Cornelscourt, they didn't want any shopping at Cherrywood

28

either. So the whole project started like that and built up and built up.

29 10:28:00 30

Q

87

My question to you, Senator Lydon, was, did you know that there was substantial local opposition to the proposals? www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:28:01

10:28:15

14 1

A

2

Q

3

A

4

Q

I wouldn't have known the extent of it. 88

You didn't know the extent of it, did you know there was any opposition? I did because I think they used to put flier's on phones.

89

5

The evidence to this Tribunal has been, Senator Lydon, there was a fairly hefty campaign organised --

6

A

7

Q

8

A

9

Q

Oh there was of course. 90

-- in the area. I am surprised that you weren't aware of that? I was aware of it but it never touched me --

91

10:28:30 10

I understand you may not have been directly involved but you were aware of it, which is my original question.

11

A

12

Q

I was. 92

And we know from their point of view that Cherrywood retained the services of

13

two PR consultants, isn't that right? Pembroke and, sorry, Monarch retained

14

the services of two PR consultants, that is Pembroke and Mr. O'Herlihy's firm,

10:28:51 15

isn't that right?

16

A

17

Q

18

A

19

Q

Who was the first one? 93

I have no idea about that. 94

10:29:02 20

21

A

I have a feeling that he called to me once, that's about all, yes. I think he produced the video. I remember seeing a video at the time.

Q

95

24

they would take over local schools and try and inform the locals?

26

A

27

Q

28

A

10:29:39 30

Did you attend any seminars or public meetings organised by Mr. O'Herlihy? Did you know, for example that Monarch were running a series of road shows, were

10:29:21 25

29

What about Mr. O'Herlihy, do you recall Mr. O'Herlihy being involved for Monarch?

22 23

I think it was Pembroke PR.

Not until afterwards. 96

When you say afterwards? Coming up near the end of the time they were running, I think they ran 14 weekends but I only learned about that afterwards. I did know one thing, there was a lady called Audrey Murphy from the Ballybrack area, I think, and she www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:29:43

10:29:58

15 1

organised a lot of support in favour of Cherrywood whereas the other people

2

were going against it. I understand --

3

Q

97

4

weren't part of it or you had very little knowledge of it at the time?

5

A

6

Q

I knew it was going on but it didn't matter to me so -98

7 8

A

But you see with all rezonings we're flooded with things from both sides, I had letters I think from Mr. Smith a number of times and leaflets through the door

10:30:24 10

and all that sort of stuff. Q

99

12 A

14

Q

10:30:38 15

A

16

Q

The other side then did the opposite and the same thing. 100

So the whole thing was quite controversial, isn't that right? Yes.

101

17

It was one of the most controversial rezonings or proposed rezonings at that time in relation to the review of the Development Plan.

A

Well it depends, define controversial. Yes, it was controversial, I would say,

19 10:30:51 20

There were newspapers published, leaflets distributed, I think people were going on national radio, the local newspapers, they were all --

13

18

Isn't that the type of thing a local councillor would be very keen to know was happening, isn't that right? The attitude of locals to a proposed rezoning.

9

11

So all this debate was going on out there Senator Lydon and you feel that you

yes. Q

102

21

Now in the middle of that controversy, I think, and that controversial development, you got involved in relation to it, isn't that right?

22

A

23

Q

24

A

10:31:07 25

Q

How do you mean I got involved? 103

Well your involvement culminated, I think, in a motion being proposed by you? Oh yes.

104

And in the lead up to that, you had met with Mr. Sweeney, I think, and you have

26

told us that you knew and had met both Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, who had both

27

given evidence --

28

A

29

Q

10:31:27 30

I met Mr. Lynn often enough. 105

Yes. And this was the biggest project that Monarch were involved in at this time. And Mr. Lynn had been specifically recruited in relation to this project www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:31:32

10:31:45

16 1

and you are meeting him regularly. Can I ask you to tell the Tribunal the

2

nature of the conversations that took place between yourself and Mr. Lynn at

3

this time in relation to Cherrywood?

4

A

Well I doubt if you would believe this but I hardly ever discussed Cherrywood

5

with him. It was mostly just a bit of -- I like meeting him because he was a

6

bit of craic and after a few minutes with him, you are laughing. He was very

7

sociable man and after meetings, he would buy drinks or meals or food for

8

anybody irrespective of party or creed or anything else.

9

Q

106

10:32:05 10

Cherrywood, it was hardly ever referred to and that it mainly related to craic

11 12

You are saying that your meetings with Mr. Lynn at this time never related to

and drink and socialising? A

It was honestly, I am sure he mentioned Cherrywood and naturally from time to

13

time but -- I would be supportive of Cherrywood, I wanted to see development in

14

that area from way back because it wasn't a matter that if it was going to be

10:32:26 15

developed, it was only a matter of when. The whole area from Stepaside down

16

through Sandyford, Ballyogan, Carrickmines, down to Cherrywood, down to Druid's

17

Glen had to be built on.

18

Q

107

19

Are you saying, Senator Lydon, that Mr. Lynn, who was employed at this time to canvass support and ensure the rezoning of these lands, when he met you as

10:32:46 20

Senator and a member of Dublin County Council since 1985, that he would never

21

have discussed the project with you, never asked you for your support, never

22

asked you for the support of your colleagues, never asked you to support the

23

project in any way?

24

A

10:33:04 25

Q

26

A

27

Q

28

A

He probably -108

He probably asked me earlier on -109

-- that was the extent of your relationship at this time? No, he probably asked me early on and I would say yes, I am very supportive of

29 10:33:15 30

Are you seriously telling the Tribunal --

it and he'd probably leave it at that, he wouldn't keep asking you. Q

110

Would he not tell you the various proposals that Monarch had at different times www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:33:20

10:33:37

17 1

for the site?

2

A

3

Q

I honestly don't know whether he did or not, that's the truth. 111

Can the Tribunal take it, that it's your evidence, that in the lead up to the

4

May 1992 vote, that whilst you had met Mr. Lynn and you knew him socially, that

5

apart from a couple of fleeting references to Cherrywood and Carrickmines

6

lands, you never discussed the matter at that time?

7

A

No -- I would have discussed it with him when he wanted me to sign a motion,

8 9

naturally. Q

112

10:33:51 10

We will come to the motion in a moment. But in the lead up to the signing of the motion, did he never -- first of all, did you know that Mr. Lynn was

11

lobbying, as was Mr. Reilly, in relation to the Cherrywood lands?

12

A

13

Q

I did of course because he was around all the time. 113

14

And did you know that he was around the council seeking the support of councillors in relation to it?

10:34:08 15

A

16

Q

17

A

18

Q

19

A

10:34:17 20

Q

Yes. 114

And you knew that's why he was there? Yes.

115

He wasn't there for the craic? I wasn't there for the craic but he was there lobbying councillors.

116

21

And you knew that's why he was there and that's why Mr. Reilly was there, isn't that right?

22

A

23

Q

24

A

10:34:28 25

Q

Yes. 117

And -I hadn't dealings with Mr. Reilly.

118

-- you would meet him and are you are telling the Tribunal you never asked him

26

how his efforts were going, what the position was in relation to the level of

27

support that he was likely to achieve?

28 29 10:34:46 30

A

To be honest with you, not really. I would meet him maybe after a meeting and, it could be down in Conway's, I guess, and he will say we will go for a jar and there could be 20 other people there and he was just buying drink and that was www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:34:50

10:35:03

18 1 2

it. Q

119

The other 20 or the 19 other than yourself, Senator Lydon, was there a regular

3

coterie of people that would go to those meetings with Mr. Lynn to Conway's or

4

wherever?

5

A

No, in fact he arranged a round I think, he brought everybody out at different

6 7

times. Q

120

8 9

meetings, is that right? A

10:35:20 10

Q

11

A

12

Q

Not permanently, there a lot. 121

You would have been a regular in his company? Fairly regular, yes.

122

13 14

Because you knew him quite well, were almost permanently with him at those

And yet you weren't discussing the one thing that had him at the meetings, namely, the likely level of support for the rezoning of this area?

A

That's not what councillors do, they go out of the chambers and they just want

10:35:36 15

to forget about it. I mean, you asked me about lobbying different people. I

16

remember being invited to dinner one night, I think my wife was with me, we

17

went along to this restaurant nt, l'Ecrivan, I think it's called, a very nice

18

restaurant, I walked in the door and there was nobody but Fine Gael people and

19

their spouses, all of the Fine Gael party and various spouses and I was a bit

10:35:53 20

taken aback but I sat down and we had a great night. That was the kind of

21 22

thing that happened. Q

123

On the 11th February 1992, Mr. O'Herlihy, if I could have 7777? Has submitted

23

an expenses sheet to his employers, Monarch Properties, in relation to a two

24

hour meeting which he had set up for Monarch and Senator Lydon, do you see

10:36:18 25

that?

26

A

27

Q

28 29 10:36:34 30

I saw that somewhere. 124

You may have read about it in the transcript, do you see that under the heading, Tuesday 11th February?

A

Yes, I think honestly that that's, maybe we would have creative accounting, I never had two hours to spare with anyone in my life. www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:36:38

10:36:46

19 1

Q

2

A

3

Q

4

A

5

Q

6

A

125

You don't believe you met Monarch for two hours in February 1992? Met Monarch?

126

Well Monarch representatives? No, I don't think so.

127

Did you ever meet Mr. O'Herlihy in the context of Monarch? Once he came to see me in the hospital, but if he did he wouldn't have stayed

7

two hours, the only time I would be two hours with somebody would be like doing

8

a neurological assessment or something, I just wouldn't have time. I would say

9

that probably meant, he would have included travelling time back and forward in

10:37:02 10

11

that meeting and other stuff. Q

128

12 13

company of somebody else? A

I once got mixed up and thought he came with that nice man from Cork,

14 10:37:19 15

O'Callaghan, but no, I think he came once to see me. I have no recollection. Q

129

16

He came once to see you in the hospital and it may have been February 1992 and it certainly wasn't for the two hours that he has told Monarch at that time?

17

A

18

Q

19

A

No. 130

And what did he say to you when he came to see you? I haven't the slightest idea, honest to God. I think he gave me a video but I

10:37:37 20

could have got it from somewhere else, I really have no idea, I don't remember

21

the meeting actually.

22

Q

23

A

24

Q

10:37:47 25

A

26

Q

27

A

28

Q

29 10:38:04 30

When Mr. O'Herlihy came to see you in the hospital, did he visit you in the

131

Sorry? I don't actually remember the meeting.

132

If you don't remember the meeting, why are you telling the Tribunal about it? Pardon?

133

Why are you telling the Tribunal about a meeting you say you don't remember? It's down there, if he says he met me.

134

What's down there, Senator Lydon, is that he met you or that you met with Monarch representatives for two hours on the 11th February 1992?

A

Well I don't have any recollection -- the only recollection I have of Bill www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:38:08

10:38:20

20 1

O'Herlihy is coming once to the hospital, what he said to me that time, I don't

2

know, when it was, I don't know. But he wouldn't have stayed two hours.

3

Q

4

A

5

Q

135

But it would have been in connection with Monarch if he did come to you? Oh yes.

136

6

And you would have been able to advise him that as you had already advised Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, you were supportive of the Monarch project?

7

A

8

Q

Oh I was of course, yes. 137

9

And that wouldn't have taken very long. I said that wouldn't have taken very long?

10:38:35 10

A

11

Q

That's what I'm saying to you. 138

Were you not surprise that had Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly hadn't told

12

Mr. O'Herlihy you were very supportive of the project and there was no need to

13

waste time visiting you in relation to it?

14

A

I suppose it would be but maybe it's going around all kinds of people, I don't

10:38:50 15

16

know much about the man at all. Q

139

If we could have page number 3765? This is an expenses claim form submitted by

17

Mr. Lynn for the week ending the 26th January 1992. And he submits a claim for

18

"Development Plan D Lydon," you see the third entry on that?

19

A

10:39:14 20

Q

76.70. 140

21

76.70. Do you recall in that week of the 26th January 1992 meeting with Mr. Lynn?

22

A

23

Q

24

A

10:39:25 25

Q

26

A

I don't, no. 141

But it wouldn't be unusual that he would have met you at that time? It wouldn't be unusual at all.

142

And you would have spent sometime in his company? You see 76.70 seems a lot of money and you would want to be in his company for

27

a long time to spend that, so I'm sure there's other people there you see.

28

Looking at these things, I would love to ask him but I wasn't able to ask

29

him --

10:39:43 30

Q

143

Well your counsel was here if there was a question you wanted to address to www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:39:47

10:39:55

21 1

him?

2

A

3

Q

Pardon? 144

I said your counsel, you were represented here and if there was a question you

4

wanted to ask him, you could have addressed it to him and in fact he will be

5

coming back later so if there's a question you want to ask him, now's the time

6

to tell the Tribunal what question you want to ask him?

7

A

8

Q

I am sure there were other people there, simple enough. 145

9

evidence of a further meeting of that week ending the 3rd of April 1992 with

10:40:15 10

11

On the 3rd April 1992, if we could have 3596? There's a further meeting,

you? A

Could be for all I know, that could have been, that doesn't -- you see I don't

12

know what time these things were supposed to take place at or anything, it

13

could have been after a meeting, could be --

14

Q

146

10:40:31 15

But none of this would surprise you, based on your evidence to the Tribunal this morning, Senator Lydon, because you had quite a close contact with

16

Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly. You were meeting quite regularly from what you are

17

telling the Tribunal?

18

A

I had close contact with Mr. Reilly, I met Mr. Reilly a number of times since

19

1992, I met him at functions. Mr. Lynn I met often.

10:40:48 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

147

Often in the context of your attendance at the council, isn't that right? I met him outside the council as well.

148

And Mr. Reilly was also in attendance at the council, are you telling the

23

Tribunal that it wasn't Mr. Reilly's practice to go to Conway's after the

24

meetings?

10:41:03 25

A

I don't know now, I can't speak whether he was or not, he might have been, I

26

don't know. But I know that Mr. Lynn was nearly always around and he would

27

always buy drinks or food or meals for anybody who was there. We went to

28

restaurants all over the place, not just me but other people.

29 10:41:25 30

Q

149

Now, you are also telling the Tribunal that apart from very general discussion in relation to the Monarch proposals, you never had any real detailed www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:41:29

10:41:42

22 1

discussion with Mr. Lynn or indeed with Mr. O'Herlihy, you were supportive and

2

they knew you were supportive?

3

A

4

Q

I had with Mr. Lynn coming up to the time of signing the motions. 150

5

up to the signing of the motions?

6

A

7

Q

Now don't ask me times or places but I think he came to you -151

8 9

Let's put it in context, the motion, I think, was received by the council on the 4th May 1992.

A

10:41:55 10

Q

11

A

12

Q

Yes. 152

And the vote was on the 27th of May 1992, so just to put it in context? He would have come to me beforehand to say he wanted to put on this motion.

153

13 14

Will you tell the Tribunal about the discussions you had with Mr. Lynn coming

Where did he meet you? Did he come to you in the hospital? Did he come to at home? Did he meet you in the council chambers?

A

I don't think he ever came to my home, I am not sure of that, I can't swear to

10:42:13 15

that, I don't think he ever did. Did he ever come to the hospital? Maybe he

16

did once or twice, but mostly around the council chamber and --

17

Q

18

A

154

And he said he wanted to put down a motion. Yes and would I propose it and I said I had no bother well I read it, I had

19

bother with it because --

10:42:32 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

23

A

24

Q

10:42:43 25

A

155

He had the text of the motion for you? Yes.

156

And did he have -Well he had mostly what he wanted to put into it.

157

Did he have an accompanying map? I couldn't tell you, I'm sure he had. What I objected to was the

26

neighbourhood, he wanted a district centre and I insisted this was too much and

27

would only put it down for a district, for a neighbourhood centre and this was

28

really to appease the people in Dun Laoghaire.

29 10:43:05 30

Q

158

Well can you tell the Tribunal why Mr. Lynn would have selected you, Mr. Lydon, for that task? www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:43:08

10:43:26

23 1

A

I think so, yes. It probably couldn't get anybody from Dun Laoghaire to put it

2

on because they would have been, it would have been awkward for somebody like

3

maybe Barrett or Butler or Coffey or someone like that because the shopping

4

wasn't going very well in Dun Laoghaire at the time. So the next people out

5

then would be me.

6

Q

7

A

8

Q

159

I don't remember that he did, no, I don't think so. 160

9

Did you know the feeling within your own party towards a development in Cherrywood?

10:43:41 10

A

11

Q

12

A

13

Q

14

A

10:43:59 15

Q

16

A

I would have a fair reason that they were mostly supportive of it. 161

How would you have known that? From listening to them or talking to them or maybe at meetings.

162

Would you have discussed it with him? I never really went around discussing things with people.

163

But yet you knew their mind on it? You would have a feeling. Coming up to anything, we discuss it before the

17 18

Did he tell you he had offered the motion to Barrett, Butler or Coffey?

meeting. Q

164

19

Ah yeah, but that's after you have a motion, isn't that right? But at this stage you don't even have a motion.

10:44:12 20

A

21

Q

Then I probably wouldn't know exactly. But I would know that people -165

But even in the absence of knowing what the feeling amongst your own colleagues

22

were, you were prepared to propose a motion, isn't that right? And sign a

23

motion?

24

A

10:44:29 25

Q

26

A

I was prepared to sign, it yes. It was a good development, yes. 166

And you feel that you were third or fourth choice for the task? Well, working out from Dun Laoghaire, I would be the next person I suppose,

27

that's the way you put it, there's no good asking somebody from Fingal or

28

somewhere like that.

29

Q

10:44:56 30

A

167

Why would there be no good asking somebody from Fingal? He mightn't know it as well as I'd know it. www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:44:59

10:45:18

24 1

Q

168

Yes, amongst your colleagues therefore in Fingal and other outlying areas, you

2

would be seen as a key person in relation to it because you would be living

3

close by and seen as somebody who would know what was happening in this area

4

and what was required locally for the area?

5

A

6

Q

7

A

I probably wouldn't be seen as key as Larry Butler and Betty Coffey. 169

I don't know if I would or not, if it was a proposal out in Fingal, I wouldn't

8 9

see anybody as key. Q

10:45:46 10

A

11

Q

12

A

13

Q

170

What the local Fianna Fail people were doing, isn't that right? What?

171

What the local Fianna Fail councillors were doing? That's what the party would think.

172

14

Evidence has been given here, Mr. Lydon, that local councillors' views were very much sought after by other councillors when they came to make a decision,

10:45:58 15

isn't that right?

16

A

17

Q

That's right. 173

18

And you were the local councillor here who was prepared to support this proposal, isn't that right?

19

A

10:46:09 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

23

A

I wasn't a local councillor, I was the next -174

Who was the local Fianna Fail councillor? I think it was Larry Butler.

175

And did you speak to Mr. Butler about it? I have no idea. I probably did. I don't know, to be honest with you, it's so

24 10:46:23 25

But after Betty Coffey and Larry Butler you would have been seen as key?

long ago. Q

176

26

If we could have 7144 please? This is the motion that you actually signed, Senator Lydon, isn't that right?

27

A

28

Q

29

A

10:46:46 30

Q

Yes. 177

And it's also countersigned I think by Tom Hand, the late Tom Hand, deceased? Yes.

178

Did you know that Mr. Hand was going to second the motion? www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:46:49

10:46:58

25 1

A

2

Q

3

A

4

Q

5

A

6

Q

Probably Richard Lynn would have told me. 179

No. 180

181

So you would have signed a motion in circumstances where you didn't know who was going to second it?

8

A

9

Q

Probably, yeah. 182

10:47:12 10

Well supposing Mr. Lynn was unable to get a seconder for the motion, what would happen then?

11

A

12

Q

Just it wouldn't go on the clar, that's all. 183

13

Would that not disturb you, you would have signed a proposed and supported a motion that there couldn't have been a seconder for?

14

A

10:47:27 15

Q

16

A

Would that not disturb me? 184

Yes. It probably wouldn't disturb me, you see there was no bother ever getting

17

somebody to second something. Q

185

19

Did you have any commitment to the motion, Mr. Lydon, you give the impression that you were doing somebody else a favour, effectively, in signing a motion

10:47:41 20

21

Did you ever discuss it with Tom Hand? I wouldn't think so, no.

7

18

Did you know before you signed it that Tom Hand was going to sign it?

which really didn't offend you, so to speak? A

If I could clarify, it's a good enough question. I was committed to the area

22

and I was committed to getting development going out there, one way or another,

23

there had to be houses built there. If I could just finish, I had a young

24

fellow working with me in the hospital, a young psychologist and he got

10:48:04 25

married, the only place he could get a house was Edenderry and he had to drive

26

up from Edenderry to Stillorgan every morning and drive back every evening and

27

my theory was wouldn't that be easier for that young man to drive in from

28

Cherrywood, the Silver Tassie, there was no argument about that.

29 10:48:25 30

Q

186

The wording of the motion as we see it there, Mr. Lydon, that wording you say came from Mr. Lynn but that you had an input into it, the second paragraph www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:48:30

10:48:40

26 1 2

which dealt with the -A

I would have no input in the first paragraph, certainly have input in the

3

second paragraph.

4

Q

5

A

187

I was adamant that I would reduce, I wanted the retail thing reduced to

6 7

What about the third paragraph?

neighbourhood size. Q

188

That's the second paragraph, in fact the retail end of things seems to be

8

substituted, looking at that second paragraph, with a leisure based activity,

9

for example, a hotel.

10:48:57 10

A

Well you see Richard Lynn put it to me if there was, what do you call it a, a

11

district centre, there would be more jobs, so I said to him well you know we

12

can get jobs in other ways, maybe put in a hotel or put in some other retail

13

there. He thought that was all right. I don't think he was that happy with it

14

but he had to put up with it anyway.

10:49:22 15

Q

189

Just looking at that second paragraph for a moment, Mr. Lydon, and this is a

16

paragraph that you actually had input into, the paragraph reads, "that the

17

retail element be subject to a detailed retail impact assessment, in any event

18

be substantially reduced from the proposed 120,000 square foot to a maximum of

19

80,000 square foot". And that was your recommendation, isn't that right?

10:49:49 20

A

21

Q

From a district to a neighbourhood. 190

Yes, "retail space for the currency of the plan and that the reduced retail

22

space be replaced by a leisure based activity, e.g. a hotel." In other words

23

are you referring there to the 40,000 square foot that's now lost or are you

24

referring to the 80,000 square foot retail space which you were promoting?

10:50:11 25

A

26

Q

The 40,000, the difference. 191

27 28

with a hotel, is that right? A

Some kind of thing like that, I didn't want a big shopping centre out there at

29 10:50:29 30

The difference, the difference between the 80 and the 120 would now be taken up

the time because I didn't think it would run. Q

192

So you were looking for a shopping centre and a hotel? www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:50:37

10:50:45

27 1

A

2

Q

A hotel or anything else that would give some jobs. 193

Just in relation to the jobs that you were creating and the houses that you

3

were creating at this time, Senator Lydon, the line of the Southeastern

4

Motorway hadn't been confirmed, isn't that right?

5

A

6

Q

7

A

8

Q

Not at that stage. 194

Not at all. 195

9 10:51:00 10

And the sewer, whilst, I think, it had been given some indication that it could proceed, had not been commissioned?

A

Well with the help of the Shanganagh outflow thing at that stage, had been

11 12

There was absolutely no access to this site at this time?

committed to. Q

196

13

I think by 1992, as I understand it, the sewer was as far off as it had been in 1990.

14

A

10:51:17 15

Q

Oh I'd say so, yes. 197

Now just I am curious about the third paragraph, Senator Lydon, and whether

16

it's your suggestion or the suggestion of Mr. Lynn, "That the council obtain an

17

undertaking from the developer that he will use their best endeavours to

18

complete the development within five years from the date the Development Plan

19

is finally adopted and hand over to the council, if it so requests, the area

10:51:43 20

designated zone F on the attached map."

21

A

22

Q

Yes, I think zone F was a high amenity or something. 198

Leaving aside the hand over of the high amenity area, where did you get the

23

suggestion that the development be completed within five years and that that be

24

imposed as a condition on the developers?

10:52:02 25

A

26

Q

27

A

28

Q

29 10:52:18 30

Where did I get it at the time, I don't know. 199

Was that Mr. Lynn's suggestion? That, I can't tell you. I think it probably was.

200

So Mr. Lynn was responsible for the first and third paragraph and you were responsible for the variation on the existing submissions, by way of a reduction from 120 to 80,000 square foot of retail space, but that the balance www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:52:24

10:52:42

28 1 2

be made up a leisure activity like a hotel, is that right? A

Yes, I had no trouble with the number of houses or any of that sort of thing,

3

what I had was the large shopping centre out there because I don't think the

4

town was quite ready for it, afterwards of course the county manager bumped it

5

up to a town centre before I left the council.

6

Q

201

So, on the 4th May 1992, sometime prior to that, you had signed this motion and

7

you had given it back to Mr. Lynn together with the accompanying map, is that

8

right?

9

A

10:52:53 10

Q

11

A

12

Q

That's right. 202

Well then it came to the council and on the 27th May, we had this long meeting. 203

13 14

Now would you tell the Tribunal what happened next?

Well before we get to the 27th May, presumably you kept in touch with Mr. Lynn and monitored his efforts to have your motion seconded?

A

Well the way you put it, monitored my, I didn't monitor things like that, it

10:53:19 15

was up to him to go away, he might have come back and said Hand had signed it

16

or something, he could have said Tony Fox, he could have said Anne Devitt,

17

could have said anybody.

18

Q

204

19

Presumably he told you who did sign it, Councillor Hand, isn't that right? And Councillor Hand was a member of the other party, isn't that right?

10:53:36 20

A

21

Q

That's right. 205

22

And again evidence has been given to Tribunal of the necessity of having cross party support for proposals?

23

A

24

Q

10:53:48 25

That's correct, if you had -206

And this would have been in keeping with that principle that there should be cross party support. Did you have to tell Mr. Lynn or would you think he

26

already knew of the necessity of getting a councillor, if possible, from fine

27

Gael or Labour to countersign the motion?

28 29 10:54:06 30

A

Mr. Lynn knew more about the County Council, I'd say, than the County Manager or any of the councillors, he worked in Drogheda or Dundalk, or somewhere, in the County Council. He knew all about the County Council, he knew about www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:54:11

10:54:21

29 1

motions and plans and variations and everything and you wouldn't have to tell

2

him anything.

3

Q

207

4 5

motion? A

You see I would have no connection with Tom Hand except I would meet him now

6

and again, I say Tom you seconded the motion, it would be casual.

7

Q

8

A

9

Q

10:54:36 10

A

11

Q

208

209

It's unlikely that he did from what you say, isn't that right? It's unlikely that he did because he was, you know --

210

He never discussed it with you and you had already agreed a text with Mr. Lynn and that text was signed?

A

I can only hypothesise or speculate it that he discussed it with Mr. Lynn and

14

if he was satisfied, he seconded it. But generally speaking it wasn't very

10:54:56 15

16

Do you know if Mr. Hand had any input into the text of the motion? I don't.

12 13

And you never discussed this motion with Mr. Hand, even though he seconded your

difficult to get anyone to second or third or fourth a motion. Q

211

So now the motion is signed and it's countersigned by Councillor Hand and we

17

come to the meeting on the 27th May. And did you speak to your Fianna Fail

18

colleagues in relation to the motion in the run up to that meeting?

19

A

10:55:17 20

Q

Probably if I got to Conway's in time before the meeting, I would have. 212

21 22

Yes, but did you speak to any other colleague about it other than what you might have said at the meeting in Conway's, assuming you got to that meeting?

A

Not really, I mean I wouldn't canvass support for, you probably find it hard to

23

believe, you see Richard Lynn was canvassing everybody. He's was just going

24

around councillors day and night and he didn't need me to do it and anyway, it

10:55:38 25

wasn't up to me to do it. I wouldn't --

26

Q

27

A

213

When I say I never mentioned to anybody, I didn't say it, I may have mentioned

28 29 10:55:52 30

So you came to the --

to somebody, I don't know. Q

214

So you are saying that you came to the meeting on the 27th May and you may have mentioned it at the Fianna Fail meeting at advance in Conway's, but you can't www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:55:58

10:56:11

30 1 2

recall if you did or not? A

I can't recall if I was even at the meeting, it would be likely if I was

3

proposing something that I would try to get to the meeting and say, "Look, this

4

is coming up lads, anybody any objection?"

5

Q

6

A

215

I can't say I discussed it, I might have mentioned it to him or he might have

7

mentioned to me but I wouldn't be going into deep discussions about it.

8

Q

9

A

10:56:30 10

Q

11

A

12

Q

216

And you may or may not have mentioned it with Mr. Lynn? Mr. Lynn?

217

Yes. Obviously I would have mentioned to Mr. Lynn, yes.

218

13

And you can't recall the extent of which he was able to tell you the support he was gaining for your motion?

14

A

10:56:43 15

Q

He wouldn't have discussed that with me. 219

16 17

Yes and you certainly didn't discuss it with Councillor Hand?

He wouldn't have discussed with with you, even if he had been in a position tell you, he wouldn't have told you the motion was likely to succeed?

A

You see he canvassed all parties and he wouldn't go around saying, Fine Gael is

18

going to support this or the Labour or the PDs are going to support -- I don't

19

think he operated like that. He just canvassed individual people. What he did

10:57:03 20

was, the way he operated, that I could see, was that he just put before you

21

what he wanted and would leave it to you then to either do it or not do it. It

22

wasn't pressure, he never pressured anybody that I know of, he certainly didn't

23

pressure me.

24

Q

220

10:57:22 25

We are talking about his contacts with you and the extent which he briefed you and updated you on his efforts because you certainly weren't promoting your own

26

motion and I am just asking you the extent of which he updated you on his

27

efforts to get support for your motion which benefited the Monarch Group.

28

A

I don't honestly recall if he did or not, he may have and he may not, I really

29 10:57:41 30

don't know. Q

221

Did you know that there were other motions due for hearing on the same day in www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:57:44

10:57:54

31 1

relation to the same --

2

A

3

Q

4

A

5

Q

Yes, sure I got the agenda. 222

Yes. 223

6

And the manager had, I think himself, had his own views, isn't that right, and he had produced a map in relation to the matter, isn't that right?

7

A

8

Q

9

A

10:58:05 10

Q

11

A

12

Q

13

A

14

Q

That's correct. 224

That's DP92/44? That's right.

225

And you recall receiving that map? I don't actually recall receiving it but I'm certain probably that I did.

226

When you received that map, did you discuss the map with Mr. Lynn? I don't think so, no. Maybe -- I really can't recall.

227

10:58:32 15

16

And the manager had produced his report at a previous meeting, is that right?

And isn't it the type of thing you probably might have discussed with Mr. Lynn since it affected your proposals?

A

If I met him before the meeting I would say look, this manager's report, if

17

it's adopted will probably give you all that you want anyway. So I might have

18

said something like that to him.

19

Q

228

10:58:50 20

Did you discuss the map with the seconder to your motion, that is Councillor Hand?

21

A

22

Q

No, definitely not. No, I don't think so -- well I can't say definitely. 229

Did you address the meeting on the eve of the vote on the 27th May, you would

23

have been addressing that Fianna Fail meeting in the context of a motion which

24

you had signed sometime prior to the 4th May, isn't that right, which we saw on

10:59:10 25

screen a moment ago and in the context of the manager's proposals as we see

26 27

them on screen there, namely 92/444? A

Yeah, I would probably have said to the meeting look it, the manager has a

28

report down and if it goes through, I think it would be a very good thing for

29

the area.

10:59:28 30

Q

230

Isn't that completely contrary to what you told the Tribunal a moment ago you www.pcr.ie Day 669

10:59:32

10:59:47

32 1 2

might have said to that meeting namely would they support your motion. A

Probably supporting my motion if the manager's motion didn't go, I don't know

3

what I told the meeting, I really don't.

4

Q

5

A

6

Q

231

I don't. 232

7 A

9

Q

I don't -233

A

particular motion. I'd just go in and -Q

234

13 14

In advance of the meeting. You see there's -- well -- I never really canvassed councillors for any

11 12

And you certainly have no recollection of asking my colleague to support either proposal, is that right?

8

10:59:56 10

You don't know if you addressed the meeting?

You give the impression, Senator Lydon, of not being terribly committed to your proposals.

A

No, no, I was committed enough. I wanted to see the happening, as I told you

11:00:19 15

before, I would love to see development out there. I wanted to see the whole

16

valley developed properly, green spaces left along from Brides Glen and that

17

sort of thing.

18

Q

19

A

11:00:33 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

235

I did. 236

237

A

11:00:49 25

Q

Sorry, I didn't hear that. 238

26

Wasn't there a lively debate in the council chamber on the day of this motion, that is to say --

A

I'd say there was because some people would want bits and some people didn't

28

11:01:05 30

If we could have 7207. Wasn't there quite a lively debate on the day, Senator Lydon, in relation to the matter?

24

29

And did you propose that the manager's proposals be accepted? Yes, I did. I proposed --

23

27

Did you address the council meeting on the 27th May?

want bits, yeah, it would be lively enough. Q

239

So there had been a fairly lively debate which you now recall outside the chamber in the lead up to it and now there's a fairly lively debate within the www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:01:09

11:01:16

33 1

chamber in relation to it?

2

A

3

Q

I'd say so. 240

4

And yours was the motion which was supporting the Monarch line, isn't that right?

5

A

6

Q

Yes. 241

So you were effectively the Monarch champion, so to speak, at that debate on

7

that date, you were the person, the lead councillor representing the Monarch

8

interest on the day, isn't that right?

9

A

The lead councillor is a phrase I never heard until Mr. O'Herlihy introduced it

11:01:32 10

here and I don't think anybody else ever heard of it either.

11

Q

12

A

13

Q

242

You were the -I was the proposer of the motion.

243

14

Yes, you were the champion, so to speak, from the Monarch point of view for their cause on the day in relation to the motion which you had agreed, the text

11:01:44 15

of which you had agreed with Mr. Lynn?

16

A

17

Q

I would object to the term champion. 244

Okay, we will try come up with a phrase that might properly reflect your

18

position on the day, Senator Lydon. You were the main supporter, the main

19

councillor looking after the Monarch interests on the day?

11:02:01 20

A

21

Q

22

A

No, I was the proposer. 245

You are using words like main or lead, I wasn't like that. I wanted to see the

23 24

thing passed, I was willing to propose it. In effect I withdrew it. Q

246

11:02:22 25

proposed by you, isn't that right? A

Yes, I proposed the manager's report. That was lost, I saw no point in putting

28 29 11:02:41 30

You withdrew it in circumstances where another proposal which, again, would have been in interest to the Monarch Group had been lost but which had been

26 27

You were the proposer of the only motion, apart from the Gilmore motion?

the other motion. Q

247

Of the councillors present, Mr. Lydon, apart from Councillor Hand, weren't you the only other councillor that took a lead role in relation to the Monarch www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:02:47

11:03:03

34 1

interest in the lead up to this and indeed at this meeting on the 27th May,

2

that is to say you signed the motion which put forward the Monarch's position

3

in relation to the rezoning?

4

A

I signed the motion but I didn't go around canvassing support for it or

5 6

anything like that. Q

248

You signed the motion which would have represented the Monarch interests which

7

was being canvassed by other representatives on behalf of Monarch, you probably

8

spoke to the motion at the Fianna Fail meeting in Conway's in advance of the

9

meeting and at the meeting, yours was the motion which, if successful, would

11:03:22 10

have rezoned these lands for Monarch, isn't that right?

11

A

12

Q

13

A

14

Q

11:03:39 15

A

Correct. 249

And indeed from the community's point of view. 250

this at all only I thought it was good for the area? Q

251

18

You wouldn't have proposed at all, Senator Lydon, if Mr. Lynn hadn't approached you with the text of the motion, isn't that right?

19

A

11:03:51 20

Q

That's correct. 252

21

So we will leave the community out of it, you were promoting a motion that was given to you by Mr. Lynn, isn't that right, on behalf of Monarch?

22

A

23

Q

24

A

Yes. 253

And you went to the meeting on the day in that context, isn't that right? Yes. But you have got to understand, it didn't matter to me if it was Monarch

11:04:06 25

or Ponarch or Sonarch or Ronarch, it didn't matter to me who owned it, I wanted

26 27

I'm just looking at it now from Monarch's point of view? Well you have to look at it in the overall because I wouldn't have proposed

16 17

And there was a lot riding on this from Monarch's point of view?

to see the place developed. Q

254

If that were the case, Senator Lydon, you would have drafted your own motion

28

and got your own map and you would have gone to the meeting promoting your own

29

motion and your own map for the area and you would have got support amongst

11:04:24 30

your colleagues insofar as you could for it, isn't that right? www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:04:25

11:04:38

35 1

A

2

Q

I think the manager's report would have covered that. 255

3

Yes and let's deal with the manager's report, when did you first discover that the manager was proposing a development for this area?

4

A

5

Q

I don't know, probably when I got the agenda. 256

If we could have 7203? This is the managers proposal, isn't that right? That

6

there would be now development, residential development in this area on action

7

area plan at four houses to the acre.

8

A

9

Q

Yes. 257

11:05:02 10

proposed line of the motorway, isn't that right?

11

A

12

Q

Correct. 258

13 14

There was still an area I think, the property of Monarch, south of that line, which would have been left at agricultural zoning, isn't that right?

A

I think so. I find the maps a bit hard to follow, but I take what you are

11:05:23 15

16

And I think he had extended the area for residential development to another

saying. Q

259

I find that unusual, Senator Lydon, in that you were at this meeting on the

17

27th May, you were the person who had the probably the most serious motion for

18

debate on the day, vis-a-vis the Monarch interest, this was the manager's

19

proposal, how could you be so badly briefed in relation to the matter on the

11:05:44 20

21

day? Or indeed even now? A

Very simple, I'd come into a meeting, put up a map like that and you'd look up

22 23

and do the best you can to see what was on it. Q

260

24

But you told us a moment ago you would have received the map when you received the agenda?

11:05:59 25

A

26

Q

Yes. 261

27

And you had no difficulty asking your colleagues to support what was on the map, isn't that right? Because you proposed that the map be adopted.

28

A

29

Q

11:06:17 30

A

In the meeting? I don't remember proposing at all. 262

You hardly asked your colleagues to support a proposal you didn't understand? No but I mean, probably not, but -www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:06:20

11:06:31

36 1

Q

263

2

manager's map be accepted, isn't that right?

3

A

4

Q

5

A

6

Q

Yes. 264

265

A

9

Q

Not really, anybody could have seconded it. 266

11:06:45 10

existing motion? A

I don't think I discussed with him, I can't be sure, I don't think I discussed

13

proposing the manager's report, no. I may have but I can't be sure. Q

267

11:07:05 15

Do you think it came as a surprise to Mr. Lynn then that you promoted the manager's recommendation instead of your own motion?

A

No, but it came as a big surprise to him when I said I wouldn't propose his

17 18

Had you discussed with Mr. Lynn, in advance of the meeting, whether or not you would promote the manager's recommendation or you would stick with your

11

16

Were you surprised Councillor Hand hadn't seconded it since after all he had seconded your motion?

8

14

Did you, how did Councillor McGrath come to second it? As far as I know he just stood up and seconded it.

7

12

Now your colleague, Councillor McGrath, seconded your proposal that the

motion. Q

268

19

He has given evidence of that, I think you called him out of the chamber or called him to the back of the chamber --

11:07:19 20

A

21

Q

22

A

I did, yes. 269

Could you tell the Tribunal the circumstances under which that came about? When the manager's report went down I figured that the other would go down

23

because it was very close to it. I beckoned him, you see you can't talk to

24

somebody in the gallery, but you can beckon them out and I beckoned him out and

11:07:34 25

there was a sort of wee place behind the chamber and I said I am not going to

26

propose this because I don't think this will go. What he said to me, I don't

27

know but I don't think he was very pleased but that was just tough.

28

Q

29 11:07:50 30

270

Why did you feel it necessary to tell Mr. Lynn you weren't going to propose his motion?

A

Out of courtesy, you would always do that, if anybody was proposing a motion www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:07:55

11:08:08

37 1 2

and they were going it withdraw, you would tell the person. Q

271

3 4

motion? A

I don't remember, probably did. Probably on the way out I said look Tom,

5 6

Did you tell Mr. Hand you were not going to proceed with the proposal of the

there's no sense in putting this thing and he probably said yes. Q

272

7

I think you were quoted widely in the papers, following on that meeting, in relation to the proposal, isn't that right?

8

A

9

Q

I couldn't tell you. 273

11:08:25 10

If we could have 8161? I think there were reports carried under the heading, "Carrickmines plan vetoed by council," do you see that?

11

A

12

Q

I do. 274

13

Do you recall giving an interview saying that you had withdrawn the motion because you could see that there was not enough support for it?

14

A

11:08:45 15

Q

I don't recall, I can't see that here but I don't recall saying it. 275

If we could have the fourth paragraph, second column in, see "Councillor Lydon

16

said after the meeting that he had withdrawn his motion he could see there was

17

not enough support for it?"

18

A

19

Q

Yes. 276

11:09:04 20

21

or for the manager's proposal? A

I was, because I thought the lads would be looking at and it and see it was a

22 23

Were you surprised that there wasn't sufficient support for either your motion

good motion. Their only objection to it was, I think, the shopping thing. Q

277

24

You could have dropped the shopping thing, isn't that right? From your proposal and put forward an amended motion which might have been accepted?

11:09:24 25

A

26

Q

27

A

28

Q

29

A

11:09:32 30

Q

Sorry? 278

You could have withdrawn the shopping aspect from your motion? Remove it entirely?

279

That's the middle paragraph? I suppose I could have.

280

And put forward an amended motion? www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:09:33

11:09:45

38 1

A

2

Q

3

A

I suppose I could. 281

No, the manager had planned for -- no, that was earlier on. The manager's map,

4 5

And there was no reference to shopping in the manager's map, isn't that right?

I don't know. Q

282

If we could have 92/44 back on screen please, 7203?

6 7

MR. O'TUATHAIL: Mr. Chairman, I don't want to interrupt Mr. Quinn's

8

examination, there's a reference here to the manager's report and the map is

9

shown under 7203. If there is a written report, could that be put to him, he

11:10:05 10

clearly would have had that with the agenda prior to the meeting.

11 12

MR. QUINN:

13

mention of a C zoning on that map, isn't that right?

14

A

11:10:17 15

Q

No, there's not. 283

16 A

18

Q

That's correct, that passed all right. 284

19 A

That's correct, I thought there would be probably no support for the Gilmore motion.

22

Q

23

A

11:11:01 25

You are saying you withdrew your motion because you thought your colleagues were opposed to the shopping aspect of the motion?

21

24

And there was in fact a successful shopping, Town Centre, District Centre motion by Councillors Gilmore and O'Callaghan on the day, isn't that right?

17

11:10:38 20

I am about to call up that but before I get to that, there is no

285

Does that make sense, Senator Lydon, in the context of what transpired? You see, this is all really about politics, it's not about shopping centres. The Fianna Fail, a man like -- most of the Fianna Fail and Fine Gael people from Dun Laoghaire got their support from the areas where the most agitation

26

was occurring and also from Dun Laoghaire where the shops were, whereas the DL

27

got support from the Ballybrack area where there was a shortage of jobs, I

28

think there was eight or nine thousand people unemployed at the time. The

29

Democratic Left could be seen then to put down a motion and get it successfully

11:11:25 30

to build a district centre but at the same time opposing all residential. What www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:11:30

11:11:46

39 1 2

ended up that day, there was a shopping centre but nobody around to shop in it. Q

286

3

referred to, didn't you support that?

4

A

5

Q

Did I support it? I think I did. Sure that would be a good motion, yes I did. 287

6 A

8

Q

9

A

That's correct, yes. 288

And that was a district centre. I didn't think it was that great a benefit to them but they apparently thought

11:12:00 10

it was. Q

289

12 13

And that was the only successful motion that benefited Monarch on the day, isn't that right?

7

11

If I could have 7214, wasn't the Gilmore/O'Callaghan motion, which you just

So any suggestion that your motion had to be withdrawn because it referred to a district centre or retail centre can't be true, isn't that right?

A

Not at all, no, no. You see I told you, or I didn't tell you maybe, but I

14

didn't respect that the Gilmore motion would get support from Fianna Fail and

11:12:19 15

Fine Gael because they generally voted against each other, you wouldn't know

16

whether it would go through or not, and at the time maybe Gilmore made a good

17

case and they decided to vote for it.

18

Q

19

A

11:12:40 20

Q

290

He certainly convinced you, Senator Lydon, didn't he? Sure I was putting in for shopping in the first place anyway.

291

But you withdrew it because you felt that you couldn't get support for shopping

21

and it didn't occur to you to take your shopping aspect out of your motion and

22

try an amended motion?

23

A

You are putting in things not exactly, I withdraw it because it was close to

24

the manager's in regard to other things as well and I didn't think it would go

11:12:57 25

through, maybe I was mistaken, maybe it would have gone through, we will never

26 27

know. Q

292

You say that when you came to vote on that date, you had no idea whether or not

28

either the manager's proposals or your own motion would have been successful,

29

but you thought they might have been?

11:13:15 30

A

I thought they might have been, why wouldn't I. www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:13:18

11:13:33

40 1

Q

293

2

I think you raised issues with the manager in relation to the vote on the day, at the subsequent meeting, isn't that right?

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Just before you go on, I think Mr -- you had looked for the

5

report, 7194, I really starts at 7195. I think Ó Tuathail had asked if there

6

was a written report to attached to DP92/44 and I think in fairness to

7

Mr. Lydon, if it's on the agenda --

8 9

MR. QUINN:

11:13:52 10

This is a meeting, I think, that took place on the 13th May 1992

and on screen at 7194. We have maps 26 and 27, Carrickmines Valley being

11

discussed and the first thing you see there are the representations which have

12

been received, isn't that right?

13

A

14

Q

Yes. 294

11:14:11 15

And the representations in relation to the Cherrywood lands were representations given number 001117?

16

A

17

Q

I think that was the motion I put down. 295

And then if we go to 7195, we have a continuation of the manager's report and

18

he reminds the council that at a meeting on the 24th May 1991, the council

19

resolved to adopt the 1982 plan unchanged, except for updating to take account

11:14:35 20

of developments to date and adjustments to objectives and he said that the

21

draft plan, which was put on public display, had five changes from the 1983

22

plan and he identified those as the line of the Southeastern Motorway had

23

changed from the 1983 plan. And at 2 he says, "That in view of the proposed

24

sewer passing through the lands zoned for low density, one house per acre,

11:14:54 25

residential development on septic tank at Loughlinstown and the unacceptability

26

on health grounds of a large number of houses in one area on septic tanks, it

27

was proposed to change to low density and piped drainage at ten houses per

28

hectare or four, approximately, per acre. He said that the zoning of the IDA

29

business park at Leopardstown was changed from residential to industrial and

11:15:13 30

the development had occurred in 1983. That was to take account of the www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:15:17

11:15:36

41 1

development that had taken place." At 4 he says, "Residential development had

2

taken place at Murphystown on lands zoned for low density in the 1983 plan and

3

this zoning was now changed to normal residential at A." And at 5 he says,

4

"lands along the Leopardstown Road at Murphystown were zoned residential to

5

industrial." And he says, "at a meeting of the 24th May 1991, the council also

6

resolved to change the zoning of lands at Brookfield, Ballyogan Road to

7

residential A from industrial." And he dealt with the Southeastern Motorway.

8 9

The motorway, at 7196, he dealt with the motorway junctions, Wyattville

11:15:53 10

junction, the Harcourt Street line, motorway to the south, the eastern bypass,

11

main drainage. And at 7197, he dealt with the Cherrywood area itself, isn't

12

that right?

13

A

14

Q

Yes. 296

11:16:12 15

And he said, "in the 1991 draft plan the zoning of the areas was changed from low density residential of one house per acre on septic tanks to ten houses per

16

hectare, approximately 4 per acre, on piped drainage." He said, "in view of

17

the proposal to run the Carrickmines Valley sewer through these lands, it was

18

considered more acceptable environmentally and for health reasons to change to

19

pipe drainage zoning." And he goes on to say, "that piped drainage at a low

11:16:34 20

density, in this case four houses per acre, affords an opportunity for a better

21

and more economically viable mix of development. The Monarch Properties

22

submission illustrates one possible option, although at a higher overall

23

density whereby this sort of improvement could be achieved." And he says, "the

24

examination of this option in detail is not appropriate at the Development Plan

11:16:54 25

stage." I think he was suggesting there that there would be an action area

26

plan, isn't that right?

27

A

28

Q

29

A

11:17:08 30

Yes. 297

And -That's why the manager in the 1991 plan, he put out the 1983 plan and the draft plan was four to the acre instead of one to the acre. www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:17:10

11:17:22

42 1

Q

298

He goes on to say, "In relation to shopping, it was considered essential that

2

shopping facilities should be confined to neighbourhood proportions only, in

3

view of the extent of the existing facilities in the south east of the county

4

and the implication of any further additional major shopping in the area." And

5

he says, "apart from the proposed zoning changes at Cherrywood, it was not

6

recommended that any further changes should be made to the existing draft in

7

the area," isn't that right?

8

A

9

Q

11:17:33 10

A

11

Q

Yes. 299

And those were the manager's proposals at that time? Yes.

300

Now I think at a subsequent meeting on the 12th June 1992, you raised with the

12

manager, issues in relation to what had transpired at that meeting on the 27th

13

of May 1992.

14

A

11:17:50 15

Q

16

A

I did because I believed it's wrong. 301

Did Mr. Lynn ask you to raise those issues? He did ask me, I was going to raise it anyway. You see at the end of the

17

meeting on the 27th, I raised it and I think so did Nora Owen or Breda Cass or

18

somebody, they didn't listen to me, they were going out of the meeting and they

19

wanted to get away.

11:18:09 20

Q

21

A

302

Were you disappointed with the outcome, Mr. Lydon? Not disappointed, that's not the word I would use. It's happened a couple of

22

times during my time of the council, when things were done wrong, I would

23

always confront the manager and he never liked it.

24

Q

11:18:28 25

A

26

Q

303

It was a disastrous day from Monarch's point of view, isn't that right? I am not interested in Monarch.

304

Not alone did they not get the four houses to the acre but because of the

27

successful Barrett motion, the lands had reverted to one house to the acre,

28

isn't that right?

29

A

11:18:41 30

Q

I believe that motion was illegal. 305

Did you discuss, with Mr. Lynn, the day's events after the motion, after the www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:18:46

11:18:57

43 1

meeting?

2

A

3

Q

4

A

5

Q

6

A

I did, yeah, I discussed it with a number of people. 306

He seemed to be happy enough with what he got but -307

Did -I said to him I thought that the Barrett motion shouldn't have been, it was

7

just wrong.

8

Q

9

A

11:19:12 10

Was Mr. Lynn disappointed?

Q

308

Do you know that Mr. Lynn took credit when writing to GRE for having had you -I saw that, I thought that was a bit cheeky, if I can put it at its mildest.

309

At 8837. In writing to Mr. Gillies on the 17th June, he is referring to a

11

meeting on the 10th June 1992, at which he advised Mr. Gillies, "That the

12

matter we discussed was raised at the council meeting on the 12th June by

13

Senator Don Lydon on our behalf."

14

A

I think that was a bit cheeky and he was writing there to the fella that pays

11:19:40 15

the bills, I wouldn't put too much pass on it.

16

Q

17

A

18

Q

310

Oh yeah. 311

19 11:19:56 20

And he felt, in writing to Mr. Gillies, that you had raised the procedural issues with the manager at the meeting on the 12th June, isn't that right?

A

That's correct. I think he felt that I did it at his request but in fact I was

21 22

You had signed the motion at his request, isn't that right?

doing it anyway. He probably asked me, I think he did ask me. Q

312

Doesn't it also appear that the matter, which was raised by you on the 12th

23

June, was the subject of discussion between Mr. Lynn and Mr. Gillies of GRE at

24

a meeting on the 10th of June?

11:20:12 25

A

26

Q

27

A

28

Q

29 11:20:26 30

I have no idea. 313

Isn't it obvious from that first sentence in that letter -Sorry, I didn't read that, yeah.

314

He says, "I refer to our meeting of the 10th June 1992, and would advise that the matter we discussed was raised at the council meeting on Friday 12th June, by Senator Don Lydon, on our behalf." www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:20:29

11:20:46

44 1

A

2

Q

Yes, obviously. 315

And isn't it obvious from that, that there was a meeting between Mr. Lynn and

3

Mr. Gillies on the 10th June, where the procedural issues which had gone on on

4

the meeting of the 27th May were discussed and that a number of days later,

5

those issues were raised and Mr. Lynn was advising Mr. Gillies that they were

6

raised on his behalf and on Mr. Gillies' behalf by you --

7

A

8

Q

9

A

11:21:02 10

Q

Yes. 316

-- isn't that right? That's right. On our behalf.

317

So, for example, as far as GRE were concerned, or Mr. Gillies were concerned,

11

Mr. Lynn was in a position to have a councillor raise issues in relation to the

12

procedural matters which had transpired on the 27th May.

13

A

14

Q

11:21:20 15

A

16

Q

17

A

I know that -318

And the councillor that he identified to GRE -Was me.

319

-- was you. I think that he was being a bit, I don't know the word, you get the impression

18

that I was doing what he was saying but that's not the case. I intended to

19

raise this anyway.

11:21:32 20

Q

320

If he were meeting with Mr. Gillies in advance of the meeting of the 27th May

21

1992 and sometime after the 4th May 1992, wouldn't he equally have been correct

22

in advising Mr. Gillies that he had a motion tabled for an upcoming meeting of

23

the council proposing the rezoning of Cherrywood and that that motion had been

24

tabled by Senator Don Lydon at his request?

11:21:55 25

A

26

Q

27

A

Wouldn't he have been what? 321

He would be correct in making that claim? Yes, he could make that claim. But you see, you must understand that I raised

28

this before I spoke to Mr. Lynn at all, I raised it at the 27th at the end of

29

the meeting. But the meeting had gone on very long and the manager didn't want

11:22:13 30

to talk about it and these things are not recorded in the minutes, that's the www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:22:17

11:22:40

45 1

problem. I raised it again after that and he wouldn't listen to me. And the

2

motion, the minutes of a meeting were normally taken about one or two meetings

3

later. He put that off until I think November of that year, I think it was the

4

14th November, I can't remember the date. And I just happened to be there that

5

day and I raised it again and he said no, he is satisfied that the chairman

6

made a ruling, the chairman made no ruling, he hadn't made a ruling but sure

7

you can't fight city hall so I just left it.

8

Q

322

9

between the 10th and 12th June 1992 between yourself and Mr. Lynn?

11:22:54 10

A

11

Q

I discussed with it him on the 27th. 323

12 A

14

Q

That doesn't follow from that at all. 324

11:23:12 15

12th of June? A

That's not a logical conclusion from that at all, I would respect. I refer to

18

our meeting on the 10th June and would advise -Q

325

11:23:26 20

A

22

Q

He is not advising that as

Yes. 326

23

Or as discussed, the matter was going to be raised by Don Lydon at -- on our behalf.

A

The matter we discussed, he was discussing that with Mr. Gillies, he wasn't

11:23:37 25

26

That the matter we discussed was raised." discussed, the matter was raised.

21

24

Otherwise he wouldn't have been able to tell Mr. Gillies at the meeting on the 10th June, he had was having you raise the issue at the upcoming meeting on the

16

19

There must also have been a discussion, I suggest to you, after Mr. Lynn's meeting with Mr. Gillies on the 10th June?

13

17

Doesn't it appear from that letter there had to have been a discussion sometime

discussing that with me. Q

327

No but the matter he was discussing with Mr. Gillies, I suggest to you, on the

27

10th June, was the procedural difficulties of the 27th May, not that you were

28

going to raise those issues on the 12th June with the manager.

29 11:23:53 30

A

I don't know what he discussed with Mr. Gillies. I raised this at a meeting of the 27th June, I raised it again I think on the 12th June and I raise it again www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:23:57

11:24:13

46 1

in November whenever the minutes came up, which was months and months later,

2

which I really see as an attempt by the manager to shelf the whole issue

3

without doing anything about it. He knew, I was going to say, he knew bloody

4

well that there was something that wasn't quite right and that's why the

5

minutes I believe were put off for four or five months. That's what convinced

6

me that, I looked up the Act and everything afterwards. There's a part of

7

Local Government Act which said that you couldn't, that a decision of the

8

County Council was either for or against something and the manager came with

9

with this excuse, there was only two things passed and all the rest were not

11:24:40 10

passed, I contend and I believe they were legally correct they were decisions

11

of the County Council, and I put that to him and he said he had no copy of the

12

minutes. I brought him a copy of the minutes and then he just waffled for a

13

bit, if you are ever at a County Council meet, you will know you can't ever

14

argue with the manager, that's your business, that's all that happened.

11:25:00 15

Q

328

Now we know, Mr. Lydon, that a number of things appeared to have happened

16

following on that meeting. Firstly, the services of Mr. O'Herlihy were

17

severed, isn't that right? He was no longer required.

18

A

19

Q

I don't know -329

11:25:26 20

somebody who is championing the cause of Monarch appears to have waned, isn't

21

that right?

22

A

23

Q

24 11:25:42 25

His contract came to an end. Secondly, it would appear that your profile as

Waned? 330

Waned, you were no longer the councillor who was looking after the Monarch interest?

A

I wasn't looking after the Monarch interests in the first place, you have got

26

to get this clear. I put down a motion for Monarch but they could have been

27

anybody. I put it down because I wanted to see jobs and houses and I had two

28

priorities at local level and two at national level, the two at local level

29

were jobs and houses, houses and jobs, that's all I was interested in, I don't

11:26:04 30

care who built them or what they were cost, or anything else, I just wanted to www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:26:07

11:26:21

47 1

get them done. And that's all that ever motivated me. All the other things

2

councillors do like fixing drains, that's all important, but if you give a man

3

and a house and give a man a job, the economy will thrive and that's what

4

happened.

5

Q

6

A

7

Q

331

I don't know anything about that either. 332

8 9 11:26:34 10

We know in March 1993, Mr. Dunlop was retained by Monarch, isn't that right?

You would have seen Mr. Dunlop and you would have met Mr. Dunlop at various council meetings, isn't that right?

A Q

I would because he was discussing Paisley Park with me. 333

11

And you would continue to meet with Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly at those same meetings?

12

A

13

Q

14

A

Mr. Reilly not that much. 334

Okay, well Mr. Lynn? When I said I met Mr. Lynn, I would walk into the Hall, he would be there and

11:26:47 15

he would shaking hands, "Howya Phil," and that's it. But Mr. Lynn I met

16

often, I remember going for meals with councillors, Mr. Lynn, places like --

17

we went to the Goat Grill, we went to restaurants all over the place.

18

Q

19

A

335

Yourself and Mr. Lynn? Myself and whole pile of councillors, of all parties. He would round up a

11:27:07 20

crowd and off we'd go and he would pay the tab and that was it.

21

Q

22

A

336

With Mr. Lynn, Mr. Lynn would pay the tab? I suppose Monarch paid the tab and apparently Mr. Lynn had a good expense

23

account.

24

Q

11:27:25 25

A

337

Why do you think Mr. Lynn and Monarch would do that? Well Mr. Lynn's philosophy, I think, was the same as anybody else who was

26

seeking something. He would put his case to you and you would look at it and

27

say yes or no. He wouldn't push it any further, he will say we will go for a

28

meal and have a drink, in which case you probably got to like the man, he would

29

hope then -- I can't answer for him but I was assuming he was trying to get us

11:27:48 30

to like him and through him, his projects. www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:27:50

11:28:14

48 1

Q

2

A

3

Q

338

He didn't ask you to sign the motion in 1993, did he, Mr. Lydon? No, I only signed one other motion after that.

339

4

We will come to that in a moment. At 7226, we have the November 1993 motion. And neither yourself nor Mr. Hand were asked to sign it, isn't that right?

5

A

6

Q

I think he used to go around getting different people to sign things. 340

Were you surprised you weren't asked to sign the 1993 motion? After all you

7

had promoted the cause in 1992, weren't you the most obvious person to be asked

8

to sign it in 1993?

9 11:28:36 10

A Q

Not at all, I wouldn't the slightest bit offended or worried about it, no. 341

You say that you didn't know that between March '93 and November 1993, that

11

Mr. Lynn and Monarch had retained the services of Mr. Dunlop and that

12

Mr. Dunlop was actively looking for support for this proposal?

13

A

No. And I don't think I ever met a councillor that knew that Mr. Frank Dunlop

14 11:28:52 15

was employed by Monarch either. Q

342

We know Mr. Dunlop and I think Mr. Dunlop accepts that he got somewhere between

16

70 and 80,000, indeed in excess of 80, depending on where a particular cheque

17

went from Monarch for his works in that period. So you accept he must have

18

been doing something in that period, Mr. Lydon?

19

A

11:29:11 20

Q

21

A

No, I don't. 343

I think -- I was going to say feck all, I don't think he did very much. I have

22 23

never seen it happen. Q

344

24

Do you think Mr. Lynn was the type of man or Monarch was the type of company that would lay out that type of money to somebody who wasn't even doing the

11:29:31 25

26

You don't.

very basic work of asking for support for the proposal? A

Mr. Quinn, when developers are going for zonings, they'd layout millions

27

because they are going to make hundreds of millions, I mean you are talking

28

about 85,000, it doesn't matter, sure if he asked for 200,000, they would have

29

given it to him, it made no difference.

11:29:51 30

Q

345

Mr. Dunlop was constantly meeting councillors and looking for support for other www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:29:55

11:30:10

49 1

projects. Why would he not include the Monarch proposals even if he had no

2

great interest in it?

3

A

I never saw it, maybe he did and maybe he mentioned to me but maybe he

4 5

thought -- Richard Lynn, I proposed that was fine, I was okay, I don't know. Q

346

6 7

But none of your colleagues, you said, mentioned to you that he had been seeking their support for it.

A

No, I never met anybody who said that Frank Dunlop was on to them about

8

Monarch. Maybe he was but I never met anybody and I don't know that he did

9

what you did.

11:30:29 10

Q

347

11

aware of the close relationship between Mr. Lynn and Senator Don Lydon?

12

A

13

Q

Yes. 348

14

on Senator Lydon as the main access to Fianna Fail support for the Cherrywood

16

proposals?

17

A

18

Q

19

A

11:30:57 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

I wouldn't agree with that. 349

But you were the main Fianna Fail councillor, isn't that right? I was the one that proposed the motion.

350

You were the Fianna Fail councillor that proposed a motion? That's the only motion but there were other people --

351

23

You were one of two Fianna Fail councillors that proposed the manager's proposals, isn't that right?

A

There's a couple of Fianna Fail councillors in the motion you have up there on

11:31:15 25

26

He would be correct in that, that there was a close relationship between you. He said that he was also made aware from discussions, that Mr. Lynn was relying

11:30:46 15

24

Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that when he was taken own board he was made

screen, they were just the same as me. They proposed motions as well. Q

352

And Mr. Dunlop advised the Tribunal that Mr. Lynn had become increasingly

27

frustrated, culminating in an incident in which Senator Lydon, in an

28

intervention in the council chamber, which was to have a specific objective,

29

resulted in the opposite occurring and that he described your efforts as

11:31:34 30

purile. www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:31:34

11:31:47

50 1

A

2

Q

3

A

I read that. 353

What do you say that to that? I don't know where that was, I never -- I mean, I don't know whether he said he

4

was purile enough, maybe he did, there's no particular incident where I failed

5

because all I did was propose a motion. I think he also said, Frank Dunlop

6

said I fell at a number of hurdles, there were no hurdles, only one as far as I

7

can see.

8

Q

354

9

the councillors recommended." Was that your approach in the run up to the 1993

11:32:05 10

motion, Senator Lydon, that you would go with whatever proposal the majority of

11

the councillors would recommend?

12

A

13

Q

Which was 1993 motion? 355

14 11:32:24 15

He said, "Senator Lydon appeared to be willing to do whatever the majority of

The 1993 was the motion on screen, effectively that only the Monarch lands would be zoned at four houses to the acre.

A

I know that. Well, you see at that meeting, I doubt if a lot of people knew

16

but anyway, I would support that motion because it was a good compromise at the

17

time I think. You couldn't, for some reason, Marren put down this motion and

18

he thought it was a good idea that this would be get through, that this would

19

be a start to the whole process and it was a start, at that's -- I would

11:32:48 20

21

support that, yeah. Q

356

Well it wouldn't come as a surprise that you would, since the only lands being

22

zoned, on foot of that motion, were the Monarch lands, isn't that right? 2720

23

please.

24

A

11:33:02 25

Q

If it had gone outside it, I probably would have supported it as well. 357

But you didn't propose that it go outside, isn't that right? And yet you are

26

telling the Tribunal that you were very much in favour of development in this

27

area and yet you are supporting a limited development which coincidentally is a

28

Monarch development?

29

A

11:33:20 30

Q

So were a whole pile of other people. 358

Well just dealing with you now Senator Lydon and your stated objective to www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:33:27

11:33:41

51 1

promote development and residential development and job creation in the area,

2

isn't that right?

3

A

Yeah, just I thought I had -- I don't know how many people voted for that 1993

4

motion, I would say a good number of people did because it was --

5

Q

6

A

7

Q

8

A

359

Pardon? 360

44-27 was the vote. That's a pretty good -- so most people supported that. I suppose on the basis

9

that it was going to get things going anyway. Now the town centre and go off a

11:33:59 10

11

44-27 was the vote, Senator Lydon. 7263.

build a few houses -Q

361

12

You are saying it's absolute coincidence that that motion only favoured the Monarch lands?

13

A

14

Q

11:34:09 15

A

Coincidence? 362

Yes. No coincidence, I think Marren put down the motion, himself and Coffey talked

16

about it. And they figured that this was only thing that would get through and

17

it got support. Obviously there was 44 there, 27 against. So --

18

Q

363

19

If I could have 9056 please? This is a record of a telephone message taken by Mr. Dunlop's staff on the 2nd November.

11:34:33 20

A

21

Q

22

A

23

Q

24

A

11:34:42 25

Q

26

A

27

Q

2nd November, yes. 364

At 10.48. Yes.

365

You see at "10.48, Don Lydon, until lunch time." Yes.

366

We see know that Mr. Dunlop was meeting Mr. Sweeney on that morning. I didn't know that.

367

You may not have known that. We know that there was to be a meeting on 3rd and

28

there was in fact a council meeting on the 3rd November and the motion would

29

have been on the agenda for the 3rd, as it happened and wasn't taken until the

11:35:04 30

11th. Can you tell the Tribunal why you were contacting Mr. Dunlop on the 2nd www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:35:08

11:35:23

52 1 2

November 1993? A

I have no idea, probably returning a call to him. You see I don't know if he

3

used to phone people a lot, I know that much and I probably, that was a message

4

to say, I would be at work until lunchtime. I don't know if he ever rang me

5

back or we made contact at all, I have no idea what it was about. We were

6

saying that it was before the 3rd November, is that it?

7

Q

368

Yes. Mr. Dunlop, just to put it in context for you, Senator Lydon, on the 2nd

8

November 1993, Mr. Dunlop met with Mr. Eddie Sweeney and on the 2nd November

9

1993, Mr. Dunlop presented to Monarch, an invoice for a VAT exempt payment of

11:35:49 10

15,000 pounds and on the 2nd November 1993, Mr. Dunlop was paid one of a series

11

of cheques but this time in the sum of 15,000 pounds. At -- which appears to

12

have been cashed by him on the 2nd November 1993.

13

A

14

Q

What's that got to do with me? 369

11:36:15 15

tell the Tribunal why you might have been ringing Mr. Dunlop on the 2nd

16

November 1993?

17

A

18

Q

I have no idea, none, I don't even recall it. 370

19

So what I'm saying to you, this is a time when Mr. Dunlop was very much involved with Monarch in relation to their proposal, you are talking to him and

11:36:33 20

21

I am putting it in context for you and I am asking you, Senator Lydon, can you

he is not even mentioning to you the fact that he is involved for Monarch? A

Maybe he rang me that morning to say would I support it or something like that

22

and I was ringing him back, I don't know, Jesus this is years ago.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

11:36:49 25

A

26

Q

Well, Mr. Quinn, will see that --

I am not saying Mr. Dunlop never mentioned to Monarch to me. 371

I thought your evidence was that you didn't even know that he was involved for

27

Monarch, so if he did mention it to you, you would have known he was involved

28

for Monarch?

29

A

11:37:04 30

Q

He would have mentioned it to me at that stage, I don't know. 372

Your evidence is, Senator Lydon, is that you didn't even know he was retained www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:37:09

11:37:20

53 1 2

by Monarch. A

That's right, I had no recollection of Dunlop being involved with Monarch at

3

all. Now, he may have rang me, he may not have rang me, I don't know, all I

4

can tell you is the truth.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

We will take a ten minute break, Senator.

7 8

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS.

9 11:56:26 10

MR. QUINN:

Thank you, Senator Lydon.

11 12

CONTINUATION OF EXAMINATION OF SENATOR DON LYDON BY MR. QUINN:

13 14

Q

373

11:56:43 15

Thank you, Senator Lydon. Senator Lydon, earlier, you had referred to a second motion which you had signed on behalf of Monarch and if we could have 2371

16

please? This is a motion which is dated 10th October 1994 and signed by

17

Richard Conroy, yourself and Mr. Cosgrave, Liam T Cosgrave, do you see that?

18

A

19

Q

11:57:03 20

A

21

Q

I do, yes. 374

Do you recall signing that motion? I don't actually recall signing it but I know I signed it, yes.

375

And Monarch again advised GRE that they had instigated the submission of that

22

motion, so can you tell the Tribunal what your input was in signing that

23

motion?

24

A

Well I understand the manager wanted a motion put down because he wanted to

11:57:27 25

bring forward the Science and Technology Park. This is what Mr. Lynn told me

26 27

anyway and Richard Conroy signed it and I signed it. Q

28 29 11:57:47 30

376

So you say you signed because you were told by Mr. Lynn that the manager wanted you to sign a motion, is that right?

A

I understood that he did want a motion -- you see the manager has difficulty bringing forward things for himself unless it's a report that somebody proposes www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:57:52

11:58:05

54 1 2

or else somebody puts down a motion. Q

377

3

motion, that he would have to send word to you through Mr. Lynn?

4

A

5

Q

I don't think the manager can ask him to sign motions, I don't know. 378

6 7

Do you think the manager couldn't have contacted you and asked you to sign a

But if the request from the manager comes through the developer, then it's signed, is that right?

A

Ah no, this suited, I think, the manager particularly to have a motion down.

8

As it happened, the motion was superseded by the manager anyway so it was never

9

even proposed. In actual fact I never actually proposed anything for Monarch.

11:58:30 10

Q

379

We are dealing with the circumstances under which you came to sign this motion,

11

Senator Lydon, and my understanding of your evidence in relation to it and your

12

initial evidence was that you signed it because Mr. Lynn told you the manager

13

wanted it signed and I was asking you was could the manager not have asked you

14

to sign it?

11:58:47 15

A

That's not true, I didn't sign it because Mr. Lynn told me the manager wanted

16

it signed or that he wanted -- I know the manager wanted a motion. I signed

17

the motion because it was, well it's a good motion, it provides for the Science

18

and Technology Park, but in essence it wasn't necessary, I think that thing

19

went through anyway.

11:59:10 20

Q

380

If we could have 5392? This is a note of the meeting between representatives

21

of Monarch and Mr. Willie Murray and I just want to show you what Mr. Murray

22

was telling Monarch at a meeting on the 14th of October. That's four days

23

after this motion was signed. Do you see the first, the second paragraph at

24

the very end, "they," which is the management, "strongly feel that the proposal

11:59:35 25

should be led by the council officials and contacts to date with the

26

councillors have been unhelpful." Do you see that?

27

A

28

Q

29 11:59:56 30

Yes I know what that's about. 381

That the manager and his staff felt that the contacts between Monarch and councillors had been unhelpful and in fact that note records that the manager would put through a report which is the easiest solution to the current www.pcr.ie Day 669

11:59:59

12:00:17

55 1

problem, in other words that the manager would put forward his own proposal as

2

he had done in 9244 which we had saw earlier and which you had proposed --

3

A

Sorry I didn't mean to interrupt you. I understand that the manager felt that

4

there wouldn't be enough support for it at the council and that I think is why

5

he wanted a motion to go down but I'm not sure about that. It was a draft

6

variation I think, a simple majority and the motion was never moved because

7

there was just so much support for it anyway.

8

Q

382

9

And did you know, for example if we look at 5393, that as I say, Monarch Properties were advising GRE that they had instigated the submission of a

12:00:40 10

motion, do you see that there on the third paragraph?

11

A

12

Q

I wouldn't be aware of any of that, no. 383

And do you see the reference in the final paragraph there to the meeting with

13

the manager and what he was suggesting, that the Monarch and GRE people were

14

confident that the motion would succeed, which was the opposite view held by

12:01:00 15

the County Manager and his officials, who were saying that even if it did

16

succeed on the first vote on a marginal basis, that it would fall at the

17

further vote after the end of the three month display period due to public

18

pressure and lack of support from the manager and his officials.

19

A

12:01:19 20

Q

Probably Richard Lynn knew more than I did, I don't know. 384

And if we go to 5395, which is the same letter, it's a letter from Mr. Sweeney

21

to GRE seeking support for the manager's proposals. In the fourth last

22

paragraph he says, "Whilst there is an obvious temptation to rely on the votes

23

on the existing motion, I feel this is a very high risk strategy bearing in

24

mind that the final vote will not be taken until next March and the current

12:01:42 25

unsuitable political position of the present government."

26

A

27

Q

28

A

Yes. 385

Do you know what Mr. Sweeney was trying to convey there? I have no idea, to be honest. As councillors, we wouldn't know any of this

29 12:01:56 30

Do you see that?

stuff was happening in the background, none. Q

386

But in any event, would you agree with me that the manager and his staff were www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:02:00

12:02:17

56 1

of the view that the contacts between Monarch and the councillors, which would

2

have included you, were unhelpful to the position of the manager at that time?

3

A

If you could just go back to that page for one second, I thought it read

4 5

something else but -- is that the same? Q

387

6 7

with Mr. Sweeney on the 14th October 1994. A

"I strongly feel" -- no, that means contacts between the county officials an

8 9 12:02:40 10

No the "unhelpful" reference comes from 5392, which is the note of the meeting

the councillors. Q

388

A

You think that's contacts between? "Contacts to date with the councillors have been unhelpful." That means -- to

11

me it means, "They strongly feel the proposal should be led by county officials

12

and contacts to date with councillors --" that means that contacts from county

13

official to councillors have been unhelpful.

14

Q

389

12:02:58 15

his staff and the councillors had been unhelpful?

16

A

17

Q

18

A

I would think so, that's what it seems to be. 390

Not contacts between the Monarch and its representatives and the councillors? I don't think so, that's not the way it reads, but take what you like out of

19 12:03:14 20

Oh I see. You say that that relates to the contacts between the manager and

it, it doesn't make any difference really. Q

391

Finally, if I could just go back, Senator Lydon, to that meeting on the 27th

21

May 1992 and if I could have 8161? This is the newspaper report on that

22

meeting that we dealt with earlier and if I could have the third column and the

23

third column of that report reads as follows and it's quoting you, Senator

24

Lydon, it says, "basically the outcome means that the company can build 167

12:03:49 25

huge mansions on the site, but I understand that they will not proceed with

26

this, said Senator Lydon after the meeting. I listened to the contributions

27

from the floor and then decided to withdraw my motion because there was not

28

enough support for it."

29

have said to a reporter following on the meeting?

12:04:07 30

A

That would be a fair representation of what you might

You see if one to the acre on septic tanks. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:04:12

12:04:31

57 1

Q

2

A

3

Q

392

It's not going to go ahead, there's going to be no development? Nobody would build that.

393

Just to go back to that report, it goes on to say that, and it appears to say

4

that you had made a passionate plea, now I accept that the, unfortunately the

5

paper has been folded over just at the line, but "that he had made a passionate

6

plea on behalf of Monarch, saying that the project would bring 1,000 permanent

7

jobs to the area and a further 900 during construction."

8

A

That's true, there's two and a half thousand people working out there in the

9

Science and Technology Park, I mean it's true. Whether I made a passionate

12:04:53 10

plea or not, that might be -- you know the way reporters write, just heads

11 12

around it. Q

394

13 14

a passionate plea at the meeting? A

Maybe I did make a passionate plea, I would like to see jobs, there's no doubt

12:05:07 15

16

Certainly it was the impression of the reporter, on that day, that you had made

about that and there's jobs there now and I am happy. Q

395

You were certainly the first speaker if we look at 7207 at that meeting, is

17

that right? It says following discussions to which Councillors Lydon, Hand,

18

Gordon, Fitzgerald, Dillon-Byrne, Breathnach, Smith, Logan, Gilmore,

19

O'Callaghan, Barron, Barret, Dockrell, Coffey, Mitchell, Butler, Cass, Marren

12:05:27 20

Higgins contributed. The manager replied to the queries raised by the members,

21

isn't that right?

22

A

23

Q

Yes. I thought that would actually go through, to be honest with you. 396

24

that meeting or prior to that meeting who had a greater prominence than

12:05:49 25

26

Senator Lydon, can I ask you this, can you name a Fianna Fail councillor at

yourself in relation to the Monarch proposals? A

Not unless there was somebody from Dun Laoghaire. Somebody like Coffey, for

27

example or somebody like that, maybe Butler. I was only --

28

Q

29

A

12:06:14 30

Q

397

If we look at Coffey and Butler on that motion on those proposals on that date. They voted against it.

398

They both voted against it. They could never be regarded as having a higher www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:06:19

12:06:38

58 1 2

profile than yourself in support of the Monarch proposals at the time? A

The people that swung the vote against, the first four or five there are all

3

from Dun Laoghaire, Barrett, Breathnach, Butler, Coffey, Cosgrave. They were

4

the people that swung the vote against it because they didn't want, they

5

couldn't be seen from a political point of view to support anything that was

6

going to put shopping out in Cherrywood, that's all.

7

Q

399

Can we take it, Senator Lydon, there is no councillor from Fianna Fail who had

8

a greater prominence than yourself in support of the Monarch position at that

9

time.

12:06:56 10

A

11

Q

Well if you want to say that, I don't mind. 400

No, I don't want to say it unless it's true.

12

MR. O TUATHAIL:

Sorry, Mr. Chairman, would Mr. Quinn just specify what at

13

that time means in the context of --

14 12:07:09 15

MR. QUINN:

Yes, in the lead up to the 27th May 1992.

16 17

MR. O TUATHAIL:

Sorry, there were two --

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

Just --

12:07:17 20

21

MR. O TUATHAIL:

On behalf of Senator Lydon, there were two votes, one in

22

1992 and another in 1993.

23 24

MR. QUINN:

Yes, I am dealing with the 1992 period.

12:07:26 25

26

MR. O TUATHAIL:

To be precise.

27 28

MR. QUINN:

29

that clear but in case I hadn't, in the lead up to the May 1992 vote.

12:07:36 30

A

Sorry, I am dealing with the 1992 period, I thought I had made

Well I tell you my answer to it, I think you are trying to make out I was some www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:07:40

12:07:57

59 1

big promotor of Monarch or something. That's not true at all. I told you

2

before I didn't give a hoot as long as the houses or the places were built,

3

that was my only concern and that was the truth.

4

Q

401

5

There was no greater Fianna Fail councillor supporter than yourself, Mr. Lydon, at that time, than yourself, is that right?

6

A

7

Q

8

A

9

Q

No greater Fianna Fail supporter? 402

Yes. I think there would be -- Ardagh, Brady, Brock, Creavan.

403

12:08:11 10

None of those people had addressed the meeting or had signed the motion at that time, is that right?

11

A

12

Q

If they were voting for it. 404

13

They voted in favour of the proposal, I accept, but they hadn't signed motions and hadn't addressed the meetings?

14

A

12:08:22 15

Q

That's right. 405

And you heard the evidence, I am sure you will have been advised of the

16

evidence of Mr. O'Herlihy and his recollection of what was said to him by

17

Mr. Lynn.

18

A

I think what he said was outrageous. I think it was actually outrageous even

19

to allow it to be introduced her. It's done me more damage, it's appalling

12:08:44 20

what has happened to me. How would you feel about this, I have to say this,

21

how would you feel if your wife was at home listening to you on the one o'clock

22

news and you heard your husband is the leader of corruption in Dublin County

23

Council. There was a headline in the paper the following day about me on the

24

Examiner, "Linked to 100,000 pounds bribe", there was no bribe, there was no

12:09:04 25

26

linkage, it was just filth. Q

406

27

Well we will take it in stages, Mr. Lydon. First of all, you say that there was no truth to what was said?

28

A

29

Q

12:09:14 30

A

No truth. 407

But you don't know whether it was said or not? I don't know what, whether it was said or I don't know who said what to whom www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:09:17

12:09:31

60 1

but I know one thing, I have to say this and I'm being critical, it should

2

never have been allowed in here.

3

Q

408

4

wasn't said here?

5

A

6

Q

7

A

There was no need to mention my name at all. 409

mentioned. Q

12:09:43 10

11

How the Tribunal investigate it if we didn't mention your name? They could have mentioned -- there's plenty of cases where names were not

8 9

How do you say, Mr. Lydon, that the Tribunal could ever investigate it, if it

410

And how would your counsel be given an opportunity to cross-examine the witness in relation to it, Mr. Lydon, if your name wasn't mentioned?

A

12

He wouldn't cross-examined if I wasn't mentioned. I mean I had nothing to do with this thing.

13 14

MR. O TUATHAIL:

12:09:54 15

Mr. Chairman, that question, if I may say so, from Mr. Quinn

is improper, it's a legal issue, counsel cannot cross-examine hearsay.

16 17

CHAIRMAN:

I agree, it is an issue ultimately I suppose for submission and

18

between Mr. O'Tuathail and the Tribunal. It's not a matter for questions

19

to -- but I suppose Mr. Quinn is reacting to Senator Lydon.

12:10:19 20

21

MR. QUINN:

Were you aware that Mr. Dunlop had suggested that Mr. Lynn had

22

made similar comments to him a year later?

23 24

A

I was aware on the transcript, yes.

12:10:33 25

26

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, I will have to object to that. Mr. Dunlop did not make

27

similar comments to the comments made by Mr. O'Herlihy. If my friends wants to

28

put to Senator Lydon what Mr. Dunlop said, I have no problem with that.

29 12:10:48 30

CHAIRMAN:

I think that should be done. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:10:49

12:11:03

61 1 2

MR. QUINN:

3

Mr. Lynn where Mr. Lynn advised him to the effect, and I'm paraphrasing here,

4

that when and he is expressing the disappointment of Monarch and he is

5

referring to the, he says something to the effect that "When you consider the

6

amount of money they have been paid, you would imagine these idiots would have

7

got it right. That they would get their act together." You will have seen

8

that?

9 12:11:16 10

A Q

Yes. Mr. Dunlop made reference to a conversation he had with

Yes. 411

Did you know that that was --

11 12

MR SANFEY:

13

the exact quote is "When you think of the amount of money that is being spent",

14

there's an important difference between that and being paid. The exact quote

12:11:30 15

Sorry, chairman, once again I know Mr. Quinn is paraphrasing, but

is: "When you think of the amount of money that is being spent, you would

16

think these idiots would get their act together."

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

Yes, it doesn't necessarily mean there was money paid to

19

councillors or certainly money improperly spent on councillors.

12:11:42 20

21

MR SANFEY:

Precisely, sir.

MR. QUINN:

Did you know that that had been said?

22 23 24

A

12:11:50 25

Q

26

A

27

Q

Did I know it had been said? 412

Yes, that that had been said by Mr. Lynn. Only when I read it in the things I sent me from the Tribunal.

413

28

If we could have 9042. This is a list compiled from the brief, Mr. Lydon, of contacts between yourself and --

29

A

12:12:11 30

Q

I have never seen that before, I didn't get that yet. 414

You didn't get that, your solicitor should have got it. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:12:14

12:12:30

62 1

A

My solicitor didn't get it, we stopped about 8930 or something like that. We

2 3

didn't get anything from there on. Q

415

Well then I won't refer to this document just in case you may not have got it

4

but you should have got it, it's a document which has been compiled from the

5

documentation already circulated to you in the brief and it sets out dates of

6

possible meetings between yourself and Mr. Lynn compiled from those documents

7

which we had on screen earlier for the period January and February 1992.

8

A

Okay.

9 12:12:44 10

CHAIRMAN:

Sorry, Mr. Quinn, just to correct one thing lest it be left on the

11

record, Mr. Dunlop said that Mr. Lynn had said to him something about the

12

amount of money that had been expended by Monarch. It's not something that

13

Mr. Lynn accepts he said, as I understand it.

14 12:13:10 15

MR. QUINN:

That's correct.

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY:

It's alleged.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

It's alleged by Mr. Dunlop that Mr. Lynn said that to him.

MR. QUINN:

In any event, I think, Mr. Lydon, you accept --

12:13:18 20

21 22

A

23

Q

These are meetings. 416

24

These are possible meetings and contacts you would have had with Mr. Lynn but I think in any event and Mr. Lynn's evidence would be that would be the minimum

12:13:31 25

number of meetings and contacts he would have had with people, including

26

yourself, and I think your own evidence is to the effect there would have been

27

substantial meetings between yourself and Mr. Lynn and Mr. Reilly, isn't that

28

right?

29

A

12:13:44 30

Q

Those are the page numbers on the dates, are they? 417

All right. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:13:45

12:14:00

63 1

A

2

Q

I have no idea but I am sure they took place, yes. 418

Thank you very much, Senator.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Sanfey, do you want to?

MR SANFEY:

Just one topic.

5 6 7 8

THE WITNESS WAS CROSS-EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. SANFEY:

9 12:14:00 10

Q

419

Senator, I represent Monarch Property Services Limited and various people

11

formerly employed or directors of that entity, including Richard Lynn and it's

12

in relation to Mr. Lynn I would like to ask you one or two questions. Senator,

13

you say on the 27th May at the crucial vote, you beckoned Mr. Lynn to behind

14

the gallery and told him that you wished to withdraw the motion, the motion

12:14:21 15

that you had put forward, and Mr. Lynn has given evidence also to that effect

16 17

that that's what happened. A

Just to, that's what, I have to be very careful here, it's not that I wished, I

18

was going to withdraw it. I told him I was going to withdraw it.

19

Q

12:14:38 20

A

21

Q

420

Yes, you informed Mr. Lynn. Yes.

421

22

You beckoned him, you told him you were going to withdraw the motion and Mr. Lynn accepted that?

23

A

24

Q

12:14:55 25

Yes, the motion had come out, yes. 422

Mr. Lynn's evidence has been that he went to the gallery early to make sure that he got a seat, he puts it around at around 10.30, given the meeting was to

26

start at 11 o'clock and he was there in the gallery until the meeting ended at

27

five past two. Now it may be that you can assist the Tribunal or you may not

28

be able to but do you have any recollection of Mr. Lynn being there, as he

29

says, throughout the meeting?

12:15:15 30

A

Well, I didn't get time to read all the things that he said to the Tribunal. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:15:20

12:15:33

64 1 2

Was he there at the beginning, I don't know. Q

423

3 4

Mr. Lynn's evidence is that from the time he went in early to ensure that he got a seat about 10.30, he never left?

A

I don't know whether he was there at 10.30, I can't actually remember meeting

5

him before the meeting but I do recall meeting him after it because I

6

immediately said to him about that motion that Barrett had proposed. That was

7

just right after the meeting. I did say that to him. He was there at the end

8

anyway so he must have been there all the time.

9

Q

424

12:15:52 10

Yes. Mr. Lynn has also given evidence that it was his practice to remain in the gallery and not to leave for any reason during any motion concerning

11

Monarch, would that accord with your collection of Mr. Lynn's involvement?

12

A

13

Q

14

A

12:16:04 15

Q

16

A

Yes, I think it would. 425

Does that sound right? Oh yeah.

426

He said that -I can't imagine him leaving that meeting if that's what you are asking me,

17

there were a whole pile of motions, they were all to do with Monarch

18

eventually. There might have been bits and pieces. I just think he wouldn't

19

leave.

12:16:18 20

Q

21

A

427

Very good, thank you, Senator. And I think, didn't he make a brief of something, that was another meeting,

22

sorry. That's all I can tell you. I can't honestly say that I met him first

23

thing in the morning or anything like that. I can't really say that. I do

24

know I met him after the meeting and I am nearly certain he was there all for

12:16:38 25

the meeting. What time he came in, I don't know.

26 27

CHAIRMAN:

All right. Mr. O'Tuathail, do you want to?

28 29

WITNESS CROSS-EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR. O'TUATHAIL:

12:16:45 30

www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:16:45

12:17:00

65 1

Q

428

MR. O TUATHAIL: Senator Lydon, if I may go back, you have been on the council

2

since when, on the Dublin County Council and the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown

3

subsequently. When were you first elected?

4

A

5

Q

1985. 429

6

with the Eastern Region Development Organisation report of 1988?

7

A

8

Q

Yes, I think I saw it, yes. 430

9 A

11

Q

That's correct, yes. 431

12 A

14

Q

Yes. 432

12:17:38 15

outfall works, the major sewage project?

17

A

18

Q

I don't know, I suppose about, I think it was around eight or nine million. 433

19 A

Well it was a very big thing. We went out to see it, it's a very big thing, it's a big construction and it's technical, you know.

Q

434

23 A

There was going to be a sewer pipe all the way up through the Carrickmines Valley up as far as the Glenamuck cottages eventually and that's what the

26

outfall thing was done for, yes. Q

28

12:18:45 30

Yes. And one of the main purposes of the Shanganagh outfall was to accommodate the Carrickmines Valley sewage scheme, is that correct?

12:18:23 25

29

Yes. I think the figure is eight million but wasn't that a very significant figure in 1988?

21

27

And then you were on the council I think in 1988 and do you recollect how much money did the council vote or spend on the Shanganagh treatment works, the

16

24

And I think there was a recommendation in that report that the land should be serviced to accommodate that increase.

13

22

And that dealt, that was, that dealt with an increasing population of 33,000 projected for that general area.

12:17:22 10

12:18:00 20

1985. So you would have been there, I take it, you would have been familiar

435

And the areas being serviced by that sewage scheme then would have included, am I correct, Cherrywood, Cabinteely, Ballyogan, Glen, Stepaside?

A

I am not sure it went up as far as Stepaside but it may have, up the middle of the valley was the idea. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:18:47

12:19:03

66 1

Q

436

2 3

Was it around that time or was it before that time that you decided that Carrickmines Valley was ripe for development?

A

I didn't decide Carrickmines was ripe, other people did but I would go along

4

with it. It wasn't my decision but I certainly would support that, yes. There

5

was nowhere else for people to live. They had to develop it and it's been

6

developed now.

7

Q

437

And I think the particular sewage scheme for that area, the Carrickmines area,

8

a further vote was made by the council for expenditure of about four million,

9

is that correct?

12:19:20 10

A

Oh yeah, that's right, that was for, I think that was for the sewage scheme

11

itself, I think that was an allocation made, I am not sure what the exact

12

figure but that's right I think, yes.

13

Q

438

14

in that Carrickmines area? Or would you have been aware?

12:19:40 15

A

16

Q

17

A

Not really, no. I mean I think not until I met Richard Lynn, I'd say. 439

And when was that, can you recollect your first meeting with Mr. Lynn? I was trying to think of that the other day but I can't really, probably about

18 19

And so, I think when were you first aware of Monarch having acquired any lands

'90 or '91, I would say. Q

440

12:20:00 20

But it was certainly subsequent to the votes in relation to the whole entire sewage scheme and the development of that area?

21

A

22

Q

Subsequent to it, yes. 441

Yes. And if I could move on then just come to, there was a meeting, a special

23

meeting of the county council on the 18th October 1990 and I think the

24

manager's report there, it's DP 90/123, that dealt with that entire area, it

12:20:29 25

dealt with amenity lands, if I am correct, industrial lands, transportation and

26

the line of the old Harcourt Street railway.

27

A

28

Q

29 12:20:47 30

Yes. 442

And now, do you recollect the residential component in that scheme as proposed by the manager in his report?

A

I think there was something like 20, 25 acres for, oh, industrial and 25 acres www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:20:58

12:21:19

67 1

or 20 acres for, I think for shopping. The rest was all, I think it was eight

2

to the acre for the rest of the thing.

3

Q

443

I think it was 20 acres for an district centre and 20 acres for an industrial

4

estate and I think the Wyattville junction would decide the location of the

5

industrial estate subsequently.

6

A

Not the Wyattville junction, that would be the Carrickmines junction, the

7 8

junction down near Cherrywood. Q

444

9

But the point is, or the point I am seeking to elicit is that your recollection is that the manager's report in terms of the residential component had eight

12:21:39 10

house to the acre?

11

A

12

Q

13

A

14

Q

I think so, that's correct. 445

And that was in October 1990. Yeah.

446

12:21:50 15

And then there was various special meetings, some of which you attended and some of which you didn't but on the 29th November 1990, there was a tour

16

organised of the entire area, is that correct?

17

A

18

Q

19

A

12:22:03 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

23

A

Of the valley, yes. 447

By the County Council. Yes.

448

Now were you on that tour? I think I was because I think we went for lunch afterwards.

449

Can you describe the purpose of that tour by the councillors? Well as far as I remember, it was to brief the councillors on the outline of

24

the valley. We went up I think to Tully Church and went down roads where the

12:22:24 25

bus couldn't turn and all kinds of things and we went all over the place.

26

Q

27

A

450

Yes. It was just to get a feel for the area. I don't know how much we learned on it

28

but certainly we got a picture of the place, when you come in then you would

29

have some idea what you were talking about.

12:22:42 30

Q

451

Yes. And then I think so you had at that stage, you had a familiarity with the www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:22:49

12:23:10

68 1 2

geography and the layout an the prospects for that area? A

Roughly, yes. I did go up before I proposed it or before I was going to

3

propose the other motion, I did go up to look at the lands in Cherrywood. I

4

think I went up one Sunday morning and I met with Richard Lynn and I think

5

Helen Keogh and we walked all over the place as well. So I had a good idea

6

about the proposed amenities.

7

Q

452

8 9 12:23:26 10

Yes. And I think that was that was your norm in relation to any motion you would propose, you would walk the lands in question?

A Q

Well yeah, I thought it was normal to do that. 453

And then there is, just coming quickly there, Mr. Quinn mentioned to you the

11

meeting of the 6th December 1990, which was another special meeting. Have you

12

difficulty hearing me?

13

A

14

Q

A wee bit of difficulty. 454

12:23:38 15

Sorry. Coming to the meeting of the 6th December 1990, that was a special meeting, that was the McDonald Coffey Murphy motion.

16

A

17

Q

Yes. 455

And you are aware that that had the effect of limiting the development in the

18

area to the eastern side of the proposed Southeastern Motorway, isn't that

19

right?

12:23:55 20

A

Yes, the proposed motorway, they blocked all further development on the other

21

side of the motorway.

22

Q

23

A

24

Q

456

I don't think so. If you say, I wasn't there. 457

12:24:13 25

You are not noted as not being present and coming on to the 18th January 1991, another, well a special Development Plan meeting, the maps 26 and 27 which have

26

been put up on screen --

27

A

28

Q

29 12:24:37 30

Yes. And you weren't present at that particular meeting?

I understand they were noted. 458

They were noted on at that particular meeting and again you were not present at that meeting on the 18th January 1991.

A

I don't know, if it says so. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:24:39

12:24:59

69 1

Q

459

2

And then there was several meetings before the local elections of June, 27th June 1991 were the local elections, isn't that right?

3

A

4

Q

I will never forget that, yes. 460

And there was a meeting of the 16th May 1991 and that decided to proceed with a

5

display of the draft plan and that all the recommendations by the council would

6

be incorporated in the public display, isn't that right?

7

A

8

Q

9

A

12:25:18 10

Q

Yes. 461

That was carried by 27 to 22 votes. Yes. Well I mean I don't know, you seem to know more about it than I do.

462

I have a note here, advantage in that sense. But the Shatter Menzies proposal

11

there was carried by the highest vote I have seen in any of these votes, 47 for

12

and against one. That was that the council rejected the report of the 16th May

13

1991 as submitted by the manager, do you recollect that?

14

A

12:25:44 15

Q

I do, I have some recollection of it, yes. 463

16 17

And asked that the Draft Development Plan be not put on display until the motions presently before the council were dealt with?

A

All they wanted, I think Shatter and Menzies, were they didn't want a draft

18

plan going out without any amendments or things that the council would have

19

brought up in the meantime, I think that was about the essence of it.

12:26:04 20

Q

464

21

And that was a politically sensitive time because I think the local elections were due or imminent at that time?

22

A

23

Q

Yes. 465

24

Now coming then to the meeting of the 24th May 1991, there you had the manager's three options, the 1983 plan updated, the October 1990 DP/123 or maps

12:26:31 25

26 and 27.

26

A

27

Q

Yes. 466

That was the 1991 decision to confine development to the northeast side of the

28

Southeastern Motorway as considered at that meeting of the 18th January 1991.

29

Now, the result of that meeting, when that was being put on display, that

12:26:56 30

should have, that would have included, I think, residential at one house to the www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:27:00

12:27:15

70 1

acre on a septic tank system, is that correct?

2

A

3

Q

In the 1983? I think he put it out as I said before at four to the acre. 467

4

That's the point, I just want to elicit that. The manager's display was four houses to the acre?

5

A

6

Q

On the draft plan? This was a draft plan, is that right? 468

The 19th, when the Development Plan was put on display, the draft plan, it was

7

listed at four houses to the acre and it was on display from the 3rd September

8

1991 to December 1991 notwithstanding any previous votes by the council. Now

9

you had some discussion with Mr. Quinn about whether the manager could have

12:27:39 10

made that change from one septic tank house to four houses per acre on his

11 12

executive authority. A

Well, I am not an expert in this but my understanding is that the manager can

13

put out a Draft Development Plan any way he likes and he can make any decisions

14

he wants to. It's only a draft plan and it's up to the councillors to make

12:28:03 15

16

amendments to it before we accept the plan. I think that's the way it goes. Q

469

17 18

to the acre was still hankering from certainly more than one house to the acre? A

One house to the acre was pointless because it was septic tanks and one house

19

on an acre, nobody was ever going to build them, whereas four houses to the

12:28:28 20

21

Doesn't it also show that the manager, while he had gone away from eight houses

acre on piped sewage, there was a chance. Q

470

And the distinction was, I think you have said it there, the distinction was

22

that a septic tank would be independent of a sewage system whereas the four

23

houses to the acre would require the provision of a sewer?

24

A

The ultimate plan was to take a sewer up the middle of the valley and there was

12:28:42 25

no point having land above the sewer zoned septic tank when you were going to

26 27

put in the sewer. Q

471

Yes. Well not to join in the, as little as I have to in the confusion about

28

the 11 motions in on the 27th May, this was a long complicated meeting, isn't

29

that correct?

12:29:05 30

A

Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:29:05

12:29:29

71 1

Q

472

2

motion on the 4th May 1992.

3

A

4

Q

I think that's the date, yes. 473

5

Now, I think that one of the motions included there in the motions defeated at that meeting was the proposal for one house per acre on septic tanks.

6

A

7

Q

8

A

One of the motions defeated? 474

Am I correct in saying that? There was our or five motion that wanted one house to the acre and they were

9 12:29:42 10

The meeting of the 27th May 1992, you had submitted with Councillor Hand a

all defeated. Q

475

They were all defeated. And what was your understanding or reading of the

11

situation when they were defeated? Was it that whatever else was going on the

12

lands, it wouldn't be one to the acre, it had to be four?

13

A

14

Q

That's right, that was a decision of the council. 476

12:30:03 15

Yes. And that was consistent with your own view that there should be housing and employment in the area?

16

A

17

Q

Yes but -- yeah. 477

And I think you mentioned, I think you referred in terms of construing some of

18

those meetings, you were seeking to raise a clarification issue at the end of

19

that meeting of the 27th May, isn't that correct?

12:30:25 20

A

21

Q

22

A

I was seeking clarification, is that what you said? 478

Yes. I did but there was so much, at the end of the a long meeting, nobody is really

23

interested in talking about that sort of stuff so ...

24

Q

12:30:38 25

A

479

You are seeking a clarification in relation to the effect -I did speak to, I remember speaking to Cyril Gallagher at the end of that

26

meeting and he said you know, that's not right he says because there's a rule

27

56 he says which, I didn't know what rule 56 was but I --

28 29 12:31:01 30

Q

480

If I could refer to that because I think you mentioned that in reply to Mr. Quinn, you referred to a section in the Local Government Act 1941, the effect of a vote at Section 41 of the Local Government Act 1941. The side note www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:31:09

12:31:30

72 1

is the doing of acts and signing of questions at meetings and basically

2

subsection A of that section states that "An act which by virtue of any such

3

enactment may be done at a duly constituted meeting of a local authority by a

4

majority of the members present at such meeting may be done by a majority of

5

members who vote at such meeting for and against the doing of such act."

6

Isn't that correct?

7

A

Yes, what you are saying is that, I don't mean to paraphrase you or anything,

8

are you saying that what I said and what I think you are saying is that when

9

the council makes a decision, it doesn't matter whether it's positive or

12:31:47 10

11

negative. As the manager said, a decision is a decision is a decision. Q

481

12 13

that's the standing orders of the council? A

That's where you can't change or amend or rescind a decision of the council for

14

about six months later.

12:32:07 15

Q

16

A

17

Q

482

483

Similar to I think provisions that are found into the Buam Order Dail Eireann and Seanad Eireann, it's similar to that, but I will read it out to you.

A

You needn't read it out, you can if you wish, I didn't know it at the time, but

12:32:26 20

21

That's correct, there's a time limit on it? I think there are some exceptions but that's about it.

18 19

Is a decision. And I think Cyril Gallagher's reference then to regulation 56,

Cyril Gallagher prompted me on that. Q

484

Just to put it on the record as it were, it's article number 56, "When any

22

motion has been disposed of by the council, it shall not be in order for any

23

councillor to propose a similar or rescinding motion within a period of six

24

months without the consent of not less than three fourths of the members

12:32:46 25

present at the meeting of the council, such meeting consisting of not less than

26

one half of the members of the whole council when present. For the purposes of

27

this standing order, a motion which has the subject of a report merely noted

28

but not adopted by the council shall not be deemed to have been disposed of by

29

the council."

12:33:03 30

www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:33:03

12:33:20

73 1

So I take it when you were seeking the clarification at the end of the meeting

2

in May and subsequently at the meeting of the 12th June, you were seeking to

3

clarify the effect of the decisions, isn't that correct?

4

A

5

Q

Yes. 485

6

And you made your comment about the manager postponed any resolution of that into November or December, isn't that right?

7

A

8

Q

9

A

12:33:39 10

Q

11

A

12

Q

I think it was October and November but it was months later anyway. 486

Yes. And you interpret that -I just happened to be there that day.

487

Yes. Yeah. I didn't know it was coming up, I don't think anybody did.

488

Very well. Well then if I could move on, please, Senator Lydon, and ask you --

13

now, if I could get up page number 1373 on screen, these were mentioned not

14

today, certainly previously. Have you sight of that page, 1373? That is a

12:34:20 15

list at Christmas 1999 and it's, I believe, it's the Dunloe Ewart who may have

16

succeeded Monarch in this area but they are setting out there, you see there a

17

big list of people who received some sort of a Christmas gift, I take it, from

18

Dunloe Ewart.

19

A

12:34:41 20

Q

Yes. 489

21

bottom, do you see it there?

22

A

23

Q

I see it, yeah. 490

24 12:34:58 25

A

It could have been a hamper, it could have been bottles of whisky or flowers or something like that.

Q

28 29 12:35:14 30

What might you have received from Dunloe Ewart at Christmas 1999 or can you remember?

26 27

And do you note there, I mean your name appears there, eight or nine off the

491

And you weren't the only recipient if I look at that list, there appears to be a total of 60 names on it?

A

I don't know what they sent anybody else but I think it was probably a hamper. It could have been a hamper, it could have been bottles of wine or whisky or www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:35:21

12:35:35

74 1 2

something like that. I don't honestly -Q

492

3

All local representatives. Now at that time, the double, the dual mandate hadn't been abolished, am I correct, that you could be a councillor and a TD?

4

A

5

Q

6

A

7

Q

8

A

What time was that? 493

1999. Yes.

494

And I just, my count is a total of 60, including 10 TDs. A lot of these people wouldn't be councillors, I don't know if you are asking

9

me or not.

12:35:51 10

Q

11

A

12

Q

495

Well, we won't -- you are correct there, a lot of them wouldn't be. I don't know.

496

13

Certainly a number of them, yes. The membership of the county council at that time was 78, isn't it?

14

A

12:36:08 15

Q

16

A

17

Q

78. 497

Dublin County Council? I think it was 78.

498

18

If I could go then to the other, 1374, if that could be put up on screen just for the sake of completeness.

19 12:36:20 20

MR. QUINN:

I don't wish to interrupt my friend but the figure of 78 I think

21

would not have applied after the 1st January 1994. And we are dealing with

22

1999.

23 24

MR. O TUATHAIL:

12:36:38 25

Yeah, 94. We are then talking about Dun Laoghaire County

Council and Dublin County Council as separate entities. If I go to 1374,

26

that's Christmas 1998, again it's a Dunloe Ewart list and again, your name

27

appears there on that list

28

A

29

Q

12:37:04 30

Yes, I see it, yes. 499

Now there's 64 names on that list in total and can you recollect, did you receive anything in Christmas 1998? Have you any recollection of receiving any www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:37:22

12:37:40

75 1 2

gift at Christmas 1998? A

Is that 1998, that one. I don't have an absolute recollection no, but if it's

3 4

there, I am sure I got something, yes. It was normal practice, you know. Q

500

Yes. And if I could turn then to some of the Cherrywood references in their

5

accounts, I take it it's a redaction of those accounts. Page 1376 and sorry,

6

at 1377, now I am looking in particular there at number 45 and 46 there.

7

A

8

Q

9

A

12:38:09 10

Q

11

A

12

Q

Yes. 501

44 is "Fine Gael National Headquarters Golf Classic." I see it, yes.

502

Now do you see 45 and 46? I do.

503

Now, what, "a Golf Classic in aid of St. John of God Research Foundation

13

requested by Senator Don Lydon, a contribution of 1,000 pounds made in August

14

1999." Who would have received those monies?

12:38:29 15

A

16

Q

Who would have received it? Well the Research Foundation in John of God's. 504

17

And below that is, "The Order of Malta, Bethlehem 2000, Gala dinner," again organised through yourself and it says "1,000 pounds in September 1999?"

18

A

19

Q

12:38:50 20

A

Yes. 505

I take it, was it the Order of Malta would have received that? Yes. The Order of Malta, they had a, that's a dinner for the hospital in

21

Bethlehem, it's a maternity hospital that's run in Bethlehem, I think it's from

22

the Franciscan Sisters of Charity and the Order of Malta support it.

23

Q

506

24

Over the years, Senator Lydon, if I am correct, you were soliciting various funds for charities that you had an interest in or a connection with, is that

12:39:15 25

correct?

26

A

27

Q

Yes. 507

28

And over your career to date, have you any estimate of how much monies you might have raised for charitable purposes?

29

A

12:39:25 30

Q

In total? 508

Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:39:25

12:39:52

76 1

A

2

Q

3

A

I suppose well over a million. 509

And that would be now over a 25-30 year period. No, I wouldn't do this all the time, I just do it in bursts, I get a -- I

4

just -- I'd look up a few rich people and go to them and ask them for money for

5

a charity.

6

Q

510

Yes. Now could I turn then, if I may, to the evidence given by Mr. Bill

7

O'Herlihy insofar as it relates to yourself, Senator Lydon. There was, I

8

think, you gave your reaction to Mr. Quinn in relation to that evidence and it

9

would be the subject of probably a further submission in due course, but what

12:40:27 10

do you know, if anything, I mean in relation to the allegation or I mean

11

Mr. O'Herlihy wasn't making an allegation, he was retelling an anecdote he

12

heard, to Mr. Gallagher, an anecdote he heard in 1992, he says, in the Royal

13

Dublin hotel, you have read his evidence.

14

A

12:40:54 15

Q

Yes. 511

I think this evidence was first of all admitted and accepted by Mr. O'Herlihy

16

that it was hearsay, that he couldn't swear to it and he only, and with

17

difficulty, thought it might be your name was involved with an allegation of a

18

payment of 100,000 pounds. Now I know you have already totally rejected that

19

in relation to Mr. Quinn, but in relation to effect on you outside this

12:41:19 20

Tribunal when that was allowed, can you say anything to the Tribunal, what was

21 22

the effect of that? A

I can. I didn't mean to be offensive before, sir, but it had an awful effect

23

on me. I mean, there was a headlines on all the papers the following day and I

24

mean my wife was there, I mean, my friends and they are looking at this stuff

12:41:46 25

and it's, you know, it's very hard to say, this is pure utter rubbish and you

26

see the way the papers print it, they always say it is alleged or it was

27

referred to or said but people only read the headline and it damaged me

28

terribly. It's shocking.

29 12:42:07 30

Q

512

I don't think it was heavily carried that Mr. O'Herlihy gave that evidence under protest. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:42:08

12:42:24

77 1

A

Yes. I don't think Mr. O'Herlihy has anything personal against me. It's

2 3

just -Q

513

4 5

boasting in a bar for all I know. You recollect that. A

Well I think I am reading that, yes. I do remember reading it because I read

6 7

And he stated about it that in re-examination that it could have been a fellow

it a few times. Q

514

Yes. And that this person could have been taking the Mickey out of me. And

8

this was evidence which was given to Mr. Gallagher in private in Dublin Castle

9

in the year 2000, eight years after the alleged conversation.

12:42:45 10

A

11

Q

Yes. 515

12

That's correct. It was only produced in this Module, six years on and it is in Mr. O'Herlihy's words, I think, pure hearsay.

13

A

14

Q

Yes. 516

12:43:05 15

So what -- I mean, we all know, we all live in the real world, in a sense, there's a general election coming up at the latest, we could say, May of next

16

year, now you are a sitting Senator, you are in your third term as it is as a

17

Senator?

18

A

19

Q

12:43:23 20

A

21

Q

Fifth. 517

Oh it is, yes. 518

22

And is this, I mean your electorate, well the parliamentary party might have to propose you and the councillors are your constituency all around the country.

23

A

24

Q

That's right. 519

12:43:41 25

26

Fifth term, and is it your ambition to run again?

Have you any estimate of how this will have affected your chances of proceeding again?

A

Well of course it will affect my chances, yes. It will, there's always some

27

people believe this type of thing, they say there's no smoke without fire or

28

some such thing.

29 12:43:57 30

Q

520

And how can that be in any way remediated at this stage, given that this evidence has been given? www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:43:58

12:44:22

78 1

A

I don't know, just if -- I mean if Mr. O'Herlihy, I don't know him very well

2

but if he said that, he said the best he could, I suppose, he said it was just

3

hearsay, maybe if the Tribunal ruled that it was just rubbish or, that would

4

help, that's all I can think of.

5

Q

521

Thank you indeed, Senator Lydon.

6 7 8

CHAIRMAN: A

All right. Senator Lydon, can I just ask you one or two things?

Yes.

9 12:44:36 10

CHAIRMAN:

I think, I presume you would say something similar to what many of

11

the other councillors have said, when they were asked and maybe you have said

12

it already, when they were asked what, how would they approach a particular

13

vote in relation to rezoning in an area which was outside their immediate area

14

and most of the councillors, I don't know whether you would include yourself as

12:44:59 15

one of these, most of the councillors have told us that they would often follow

16 17

the local councillors. A

Yes.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

12:45:20 20

look to the local councillors, as if you like, lead councillors in those

21 22

Or the lead of the local councillors. So they would be inclined to

circumstances. A

Yes.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

12:45:30 25

Because the local councillors would have presumably a better idea

as to how local people felt about a particular issue. Would you include

26

yourself as one of those councillors who would approach votes outside your area

27

very much in that way?

28 29 12:45:54 30

A

I probably would. I may have discussed this with the fellows in Dun Laoghaire before I proposed it and I can't say now, but I think their attitude would have been. You see most of the councillors in Dun Laoghaire were supportive of a www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:45:58

12:46:15

79 1

Cherrywood thing but just didn't want the big shopping centre out there

2

because -- and it was only afterwards when I think Monarch decided to build

3

Bloomfields Shopping Centre in Dun Laoghaire, it was after that that they

4

changed their mind and voted for it.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

7

different view to the local councillors?

8

A

9

But in 1992, when you signed the motion, were you not taking a

I was but they wouldn't take offence at this. A lot of people -- the only people, I think, on our side that voted against it would be the fellows for the

12:46:39 10

local area, one of or two of them. That's just purely political, there would

11

be no offence taken, they would understand it was going to come eventually but

12

they would, they couldn't go before the electorate and say that they had voted

13

for a shopping centre.

14 12:46:50 15

CHAIRMAN:

16 17

But you would have taken a different view even to some of your own

party who were local. A

Yes.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

12:47:07 20

And I'm just wondering, what, on this occasion, tempted you or not

tempted you, but what on this occasion prompted you to, having ascertained the

21

view of the local councillors, what prompted you to take a different or to go a

22

different route?

23 24 12:47:32 25

A

Well it's a reasonable question, chairman. As I explained to you earlier on, I was very eager to get jobs and houses out on that area and I knew it was going to happen. As I said before, it wasn't a matter of if, it was only a matter of

26

when, we all knew that anyway and the manager knew it and the councillors knew

27

it. And so I think they wouldn't have had any objections really to it and I

28

was really certain that, I wasn't certain but I was pretty, I believed I

29

suppose that the thing, that the manager's report would have gone through on

12:47:55 30

the day or certainly, you know, I thought it would have. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:47:58

12:48:14

80 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

3

party their concerns about it?

4

A

Well do you recall discussing with the local councillors of your

I had no clear -- I think I did discuss it with Betty Coffey and Larry Butler

5

because I know them very well and I probably would have discussed it. And

6

Betty would say something like, I can't support that if there's a shop out

7

there, but you go ahead and propose it if you want. Butler would be more

8

philosophical, I won't support it this time but it will come around eventually.

9 12:48:31 10

CHAIRMAN: Would you not be inclined, as most councillors might be in similar

11

circumstances based on what they have told us, would you not be inclined to, if

12

you like, stand behind the local councillors?

13

A

14

Well I would but you see I'm dependent on people like Betty Coffey and Larry Butler to support me and they do and always did. So if it was really going to

12:48:55 15

offend them, I wouldn't do it at all, but I knew it wouldn't.

16 17 18

CHAIRMAN: A

Whether you cause offence, that would be a different scale.

I maybe used the wrong word.

19 12:49:03 20

CHAIRMAN:

Why not take a view, as a lot of councillors might do, well, I am

21

not a local councillor, my colleagues who are local councillors are going to

22

vote against, so I will simply go with them?

23 24 12:49:29 25

A

Because, chairman, this was good planning, it was a good idea. The manager had recommended it. He had thought carefully about it. There had been umpteen reports recommending this from the ERDO report all the way down. The services

26

were coming along, the manager thought it was good, the manager wanted it and

27

the people of Dun Laoghaire weren't opposed to it, it was just at the

28

particular time. It was worth certainly proposing. It wasn't a bad

29

development or anything. It's a magnificent development. In fact the County

12:49:56 30

Council, when they eventually got a third of the Science and Technology Park www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:49:56

12:50:07

81 1

for 150,000, that's now worth I think it's 150 million. I mean that's a great

2

deal. You know.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

5

preparing and promoting a motion in relation to rezoning, in relation to the

6

Development Plan on your own bat, as it were? In other words, whether or not

7

it was going to benefit a developer obviously any rezoning would benefit

8

someone, but did you ever decide this is what I think should be done here and

9

prepare your own motion and put your name to it?

12:50:44 10

A

Just one other question, did you ever or do you ever recall

The answer is I did. I gave it serious, very serious consideration once and I

11

dismissed the idea because it would mean I would have to go around canvassing

12

all the councillors and all the parties to try and support the thing, I just

13

didn't have time. I did think about it once, it's not the sort of thing a

14

councillor does, but it did occur to me.

12:51:06 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

17

they would sign or second motions was to get the thing on to the floor --

18

A

We have been told many times by councillors that one of the reasons

Yeah.

19 12:51:14 20

CHAIRMAN: -- of the chamber, where there would be a debate and the pros and

21 22 23

cons would then emerge and people would make a decision. A

But there's no point putting something on to the floor just without any hope at all of it.

24 12:51:29 25

CHAIRMAN:

That's why I asked, did you ever prepare, based on your own views

26

in relation to development and so on, did you ever come up with your own

27

motion, your own proposal, irrespective of whether it suited or didn't suit

28

developers and then promote that motion and get debate on the floor and see

29

what happened? Now you said in response to that that you thought about doing

12:51:59 30

it once. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:52:00

12:52:05

82 1

A

That's right.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

4

to?

5

A

And was that in relation to, can you say where that was in relation

It was in the Carrickmines Valley. I thought of maybe putting in a motion

6

maybe something like the, what is the number, I can't remember, DP/123 where

7

there would be a bit of industrial, not heavy industrial but like Sandyford

8

Industrial Park, take that out and putting in linear parks and all the rest of

9

it.

12:52:22 10

11 12

CHAIRMAN: A

Why didn't you do it, do you know why you didn't do it?

It just didn't happen.

13 14

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

12:52:30 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

vote on the 24th May 1991, that was where the manager put the three options.

18

A

Just one thing, Senator Lydon, I just want to ask you, the

Yes.

19 12:52:41 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

One was the first one was 1983 plan unchanged, except to take

21

account of objectives and then there was number 2, DP90/123 and number three

22

was the maps that had been noted back in January of 1991. I just want to ask

23

you, it would appear and I think in fairness to yourself, you accepted that

24

there had been, prior to that, four meetings, special meetings dealing

12:53:07 25

specifically with the Carrickmines Valley, the 18th October, the 16th November

26 27

1990 and the 18th January I think. A

I think so, yes.

28 29 12:53:24 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

And I think the manager refers -- and the 6th of December

1990, of course, where there was a vote taken, the McDonald Coffey motion. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:53:28

12:53:38

83 1

A

Yes.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

4

think in fairness to Mr. O'Tuathail, your answer is you have accepted that.

5

And you are at the meeting of the 24th May 1991.

6

A

You are not listed as attending any of those meetings. And I

Yes.

7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY:

9

floor, which was the '83 plan unchanged, except to take account of changes, you

12:53:53 10

11

And the record will show that the option that was put to the

voted against that. A

That's right.

12 13

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14

favour of one or other, either of the other two options.

12:54:05 15

A

And I think you said to Mr. Quinn that you would have been in

The second one.

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY:

18

weren't in attendance at this meetings and I know you said you were on the tour

19

on the 29th November and given that you have already said to Mr. Quinn that you

12:54:20 20

The DP90/123 and I just want to ask you, given that you

didn't discuss matters with your Fianna Fail colleagues, how did you inform

21

yourself, by the 24th May, of what was, if you like, in the interests of the

22

Carrickmines Valley or indeed Cherrywood in general?

23

A

Sure I would have known them, I would have known all about them.

24 12:54:40 25

26

JUDGE FAHERTY: A

I just want to know --

We were circulated with stuff night and morning, all the time, you know. I was

27

very familiar with the second option. The third option I knew roughly what it

28

was about, it was maps 26 and 27, they were just a few amendments and the first

29

one was the 1983 plan, which went out slightly different than had been

12:55:03 30

proposed, it was gone backways I thought rather than going forward. www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:55:11

12:55:27

84 1 2

JUDGE FAHERTY:

3

we know now you had signed a motion in respect of the Monarch submission and

4

calling for the, I think it was, you were looking for, I think, roughly five

5

houses to the acre with parks and the neighbourhood centre.

6

A

And just one other thing on that same topic, in May of 1992,

Yes.

7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY: And we know that on the day of the 27th, the first thing that's

9

on the agenda is the manager's map and you and Councillor McGrath proposed

12:55:48 10

11

that. A

I proposed it, yes.

12 13

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14

acre on an area action plan.

12:55:56 15

A

And that map was seeking, I think, again four house to the

Not as -- much wider than Monarch lands.

16 17

JUDGE FAHERTY:

18

you had, if you like, on that day, you had gone into the meeting, presumably,

19

and maybe you were at the earlier meeting on the 13th of May, when the manager

12:56:15 20

That's the point, it was wider than the Monarch lands. And

made his report, but prior to that you had signed the Monarch motion which was

21

to deal with the Monarch lands effectively, they weren't to involve anything

22

else and if you like you are at the meeting and there's a proposal by the

23

manager, wider than the Monarch proposal and obviously you have agreed with it

24

because you propose it and we know it's defeated fairly narrowly and I just

12:56:43 25

want to ask you, when it came to November 1993, I know you weren't a proposer

26

or a seconder of the particular motion regarding the Monarch lands, Senator

27

Lydon, but you vote for that proposal which --

28

A

The Marren --

29 12:56:59 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

The Donal Marren and Betty Coffey motion. Yes. Now, given www.pcr.ie Day 669

12:57:05

12:57:20

85 1

that you had, if you like, proposed, it would appear to be in favour of a much

2

wider proposal in 1992, why did you confine yourself to --

3

A

Voting just for the Monarch lands.

4 5 6

JUDGE FAHERTY: A

Yes, in November 1993.

The simple answer is that was before me on the day and I thought it better to

7

get something going. We had been going around in circles forever. You had to

8

start somewhere and I thought these guys were adamant, they were eager to build

9

and it would get them started and Monarch were going in there and gradually it

12:57:39 10

would expand from there and I think that's what happened, that's all.

11 12

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Thanks very much, Senator.

13 14

CHAIRMAN:

All right. Thank you very much, Senator. Two o'clock?

12:57:51 15

16

MS. DILLON:

Yes, sir.

17 18

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

19 12:58:08 20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:02:44

14:04:35

86 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2.00 P.M.

2 3

MS. DILLON:

4

Mr. Sanfey.

Good afternoon sir, Mr. Richard Lynn to be cross-examined by

5 6

MR. RICHARD LYNN, PREVIOUSLY SWORN, EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS

7

BY MR. SANFEY:

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

Afternoon, chairman. Now, Mr. Sanfey?

14:04:51 10

11

MR. SANFEY:

12

us about your background and particularly your working background in relation

13

to your experience of local authority matters.

14

A

Good afternoon, Mr. Lynn, I'd like to begin by asking you to tell

Well, I commenced work in 1966 in Wexford County Council as a clerical officer.

14:05:14 15

I have acted as borough accountant in Wexford, as town clerk in Wexford, I was

16

appointed County Accountant in Wexford. I was actually the youngest County

17

Accountant appointed in the country at the time. I acted as County Secretary

18

in Wexford. And I then became Town Clerk in Dundalk and all of those jobs

19

would have entailed that I had direct communication with the elected members,

14:05:43 20

so you can take it that I would have great knowledge in relation to how local

21

authority works, the workings of a local authority, how the members deal with

22

business, how their make up was. I have been a returning officer for local

23

elections, both in Wexford and in Dundalk and I have been deputy returning

24

officer for general elections in Wexford and in County Louth.

14:06:19 25

Q

522

26

So, from 1966 until I think 1989, you were exclusively involved in local authority?

27

A

28

Q

29

A

14:06:40 30

Q

In local government, that's correct. 523

You left Monarch in 1996, I think, is that right? I think 1997 when the transfer of the assets from Monarch to Dunloe occurred.

524

And what have you done since you left Monarch? www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:06:42

14:07:08

87 1

A

I set up my own company, a property and development consultancy, and I

2

basically have continued as a consultant in the same line of business as I did,

3

as I performed for Monarch. In that I take charge of various projects, I will

4

bring a green field, from a green field state to a developable state and to a

5

sale state if necessary. So I can involve myself in all the aspects of getting

6

a particular parcel of land developed.

7

Q

8

A

525

And would you advise as to planning permissions and things like that? Oh yes, I mean I will front the team putting in the planning applications. If

9

the land requires a change in zoning or, which can be obtained through a

14:07:37 10

variation or through waiting for the next Development Plan, that's a decision I

11

will take. If there's a material contravention, which I have put a few

12

through, even with the revised voting arrangement, I have done that. Or just

13

straight planning. But it's not just planning I do, I mean I look after end

14

users for commercial developments, I will sit in with marketing people in

14:08:02 15

developing the marketing strategy in determining the level of rents and then

16

ultimately in the sale of the particular project onto the likes of pension

17

funds.

18

Q

19

A

14:08:20 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

526

Richard Lynn & Associates Limited. 527

And that's been going since 1997? It's still going.

528

23 24

And what's the name of that company?

Do your activities for that company ever involve you speaking to councillors in relation to rezoning?

A

Yes, I mean constantly, constantly. I have activities in Wexford, Kildare,

14:08:44 25

Louth, Meath, Dublin -- Dublin being mainly in the Fingal area. In Roscommon,

26

I would have three or four in Kildare and I have maybe five or six in Dublin

27

and two major ones in Drogheda. So I am very familiar -- and all of that would

28

entail talking to councillors.

29 14:09:20 30

Q

529

All right. I'd like to ask you about the political donations that were made by Monarch, which we have heard so much about, and I wonder could we have Day 666, www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:09:28

14:10:13

88 1

I do trust there's no significance in that number, pages 43 to 44. If you look

2

at line 11 there, you are talking about the estimate that you -- you were being

3

asked about the estimate that you would give to GRE in terms of political

4

donations into the future and just after line 10 there, at line 11, you say,

5

"And I am asked to put the kitchen sink into the estimate."

6

also used this phrase, "putting the kitchen sink into the estimate," can you

7

tell us what was your impression of or what were the instructions that you had

8

in relation to preparing estimates or indeed list of expenses for GRE?

9

A

Now, Mr. Sweeney

Well the parameters were quite simple, basically what you were trying to do was

14:10:41 10

establish a budget and agree, if you like, the gross sum with GRE to which they

11

would then, if the monies were then expended, they would reimburse to the

12

degree of 50 percent and the difficulty with dealing with a firm or a Plc like

13

GRE, unless it was in the budget, you will have difficulty in getting money

14

from them if you did expend subsequently. And that's the reason why the

14:11:10 15

amounts of money were put in and they varied from time to time as you can see,

16

there's no terrific science about it, about the, about the political donations

17

end of it. Other parts of it would be fairly accurate, they would reflect the

18

going rate for engagement of consultants, like planners or engineers or noise

19

experts, the landscape architects, etc. That end of it would be fairly

14:11:43 20

accurate. Thereafter, there would be, you know, figures from the ceiling would

21

be taken, which is very similar to the way a lot of estimates are put together.

22

Q

23

A

24

Q

14:12:04 25

And presumably those estimates would never be under estimates. You would hope never to underestimate.

531

And Mr. Glennane and Mr. Sweeney both gave evidence to the effect that there would be a lively negotiation with GRE in relation to what GRE would ultimately

26 27

530

agree to pay, is that correct? A

Yes. They would only pay in respect of monies actually expended, and what they

28

were looking for was, A. Was third party receipts and/or indications and it

29

always came down, as all business comes down to, a horse trade at the end of

14:12:31 30

the day. So I mean I partook in a number of negotiations with Anthony www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:12:38

14:13:12

89 1

Petfield, who was my counterpart in GRE, and I successfully got monies out of

2

him on behalf of Monarch and I don't suppose we ever dropped any of our claims,

3

we continued, even when they said, I recollect, during the course of the

4

Tribunal Brian Gillies saying he wouldn't recompense Monarch for political

5

contributions whereas they were eventually recompensed.

6

Q

532

7

political donations were referred to as strategy consultancy fees?

8

A

9

Q

Yes. 533

14:13:23 10

And obviously you have been examined on that at length but I just want to ask you, did GRE know that strategy consultancy fees included political

11 12

You are aware that in the supporting documentation that was sent to GRE, those

contributions? A

Definitely they did because if the figure is 22,150 where I had the initial of

13

the councillor and the political party in initials and the amount, that was

14

gone over in detail and my recollection is that, that is all Anthony Petfield

14:13:45 15

wanted to see, he didn't want to see the full names. Why he didn't, I don't

16

know, but that 22,150 was definitely discussed with Anthony Petfield who was a

17

director of GRE Properties Limited.

18 19 14:14:11 20

Q

534

Can I, all right can I just move down a little bit on that page and at line 16 the chairman says, "but you are not saying to GRE that the political donations, while they are voluntary, that there's no legal compulsion to pay them but we

21

see them as an expense that will have to be met if we're to realise our

22

ambition." And your answer is, "No, I don't see the connection between one and

23

the other." And further down you say, at line 22, "What I see is that in the

24

event of us making political contributions, we will seek to recoup that from 50

14:14:38 25

percent of the of that Guardian, I don't see the marriage, I think, as you are

26

trying to say that we associated one with the other". And the next page, Judge

27

Faherty asked you, "what possible impact would a by-election or a general

28

election have on a planning application"? And you said, "absolutely none,

29

there's no marriage between the event of a by-election or a general election

14:14:59 30

and us meeting requests for contributions and the fact that we are thinking of www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:15:02

14:15:19

90 1

doing a planning application or doing a rezoning or whatsoever, there's no

2

marriage between the two events, save that if Monarch expended money for any

3

purpose, we tried to recoup that from Guardian, 50 per cent of that from

4

Guardian. But there's no marriage between one event and the other event." And

5

you then go on to say, "Sorry, I thought I got that across in my earlier

6

evidence. There is no marriage between making a political contribution and the

7

hope that that will lend you a favour someway down the line. You would be

8

absolutely a fool to believe that one would give rise to the other or give you

9

a favourable result."

14:15:37 10

Now you have set out, on a number of occasions, in

fairly forceful terms that you don't see a connection between a political

11

donation and getting a favourable political result. Why would you be a fool to

12

think that would be the case?

13

A

Because if you ever indicated to a member that because you had given or were to

14

give a political contribution, that that in any way entitled you to anything,

14:16:00 15

that would be the end of your support from that member. I mean I found it

16

totally unacceptable the, if you like, the opinions being expressed that

17

because contributions are made, that in some way entitles -- the only thing I

18

ever got from members was their time and I got tremendous time and I suppose it

19

was the most dear thing that they actually had. I got tremendous time from

14:16:32 20

most of the members of the council. Some who voted for and some who voted

21

against but at least they all, most of them, allowed me to make my case but

22

there was, if you ever suggested that you are entitled to anything because you

23

have given or were to give a contribution, you would be shot out of the water.

24

It's totally unbelievable, chairman.

14:16:54 25

Q

26 27

535

Mr. Lynn, can I ask you, what do you say is the purpose then of giving a political donation?

A

Well the only purpose is that you are, normally you are responding to a

28

request, you have taken or you hope to take up time with the member and in

29

explaining your case. You are taking their time. You can take it from the day

14:17:20 30

a member is elected, what's on his or her mind is the day they want to be www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:17:24

14:17:48

91 1

reelected and they have a focus on that. So when you come to discuss matters

2

with them, re-election is always on their minds and they all -- also outside of

3

election times, they are running various charitable events, etc, and they would

4

seek support in relation to the charities, which are close to them, when I say

5

charity, it could be GAA clubs or soccer clubs or whatever, but to try in any

6

way tie in any financial support with a possible benefit, you really would want

7

to be a fool.

8

Q

536

9

a local authority would give you time or a recognition that they had given you

14:18:18 10

11

So the purpose of political donation would be primarily to, so that a member of

time or -A

It's a combination of that, it's -- I mean I was meeting all of the members on

12

a constant basis and as I say, once a member is elected, the first thing on the

13

agenda is the re-election. So this was an ongoing part of conversation, etc.

14

And I'd have no hesitation in saying that if you are looking for support, drop

14:18:37 15

me a line and I will see what I can do. Now I couldn't guarantee that my

16

employer would make contributions but they did and I continue to do so. I

17

continue to make contributions to people who make requests of me. I just hope

18

there's not too many of them arise out of that particular statement but and I

19

see absolutely not a -- I never asked anybody, I never tried to marry the part

14:19:08 20

that a political contribution entitled you to anything and as I was saying

21 22

twice now, if it did, you would be shot. Q

537

23 24

Did Monarch make donations only to people who had supported motions which Monarch would have been promoting?

A

No, chairman, I think if you go down the list. You can go down the list, you

14:19:32 25

will find that people who voted against us also received -- basically if a

26

request came in, it was invariably the recommendation to make a contribution.

27

So people who hadn't supported us, they also received a contribution from

28

Monarch.

29 14:19:56 30

Q

538

So do I take it then from your evidence that you never expected a political favour in return for a payment? www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:19:57

14:20:11

92 1

A

2

Q

I wouldn't even think of expecting to obtain anything from it. 539

3

Did you ever pay money to a councillor in return for his assurance that he would vote in favour of a Monarch motion?

4

A

5

Q

Absolutely not, chairman. Absolutely not. 540

Can I ask you, in relation to Mr. Dunlop, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Dunlop has stated to

6

this Tribunal that his modus operandi was to bribe councillors. Now in March

7

of 1993 or any time up to when Mr. Dunlop apparently came clean in April or May

8

2000, were you aware of his professed MO to bribe councillors?

9

A

Absolutely not, chairman. He came in from March 1993 to December 1993, but I

14:20:52 10

would have seen him around the council chamber prior to that. But I don't

11

think anybody knew of what his claimed modus operandi is, I suppose it's a

12

matter for the Tribunal to determine, but certainly I was not aware that he was

13

making any untoward contributions to anybody.

14

Q

541

14:21:18 15

16

To your knowledge, was anyone in Monarch aware of what Mr. Dunlop is now saying that at that time, his MO was to bribe councillors?

A

Absolutely not, chairman. Because if you look at his background, he was coming

17

in from being a former press secretary of a government, a Fianna Fail

18

government and then he was retained in Fine Gael as a press secretary to John

19

Boland, so he was coming in from that political background that he had insights

14:21:45 20

or he had connections, a connection certainly at the upper level of politics in

21

the Dail, the Senate. I don't think he had any experience of local authority

22

but certainly there was nobody in Monarch, as far as I know, I am nearly

23

certain of that, nobody in Monarch would have known what his modus operandi

24

was.

14:22:13 25

Q

542

It's clear from your evidence that you were aware of Mr. Dunlop and I think you

26

had met him in or around the council chamber on a number of occasions before he

27

came on board in March 1993, but he seemed to suggest that he had had numerous

28

conversations with yourself and Mr. Reilly prior to coming on board and I took

29

issue with him on cross-examination on that, could you describe the level of

14:22:35 30

contact you say you had with Mr. Dunlop prior to March 1993? www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:22:38

14:23:06

93 1

A

Well prior to March 1993, I don't think I even had a cup of coffee with Frank

2

Dunlop. We would pass, if you like, either in the chamber or in Conway's or

3

the Royal Dublin but I have no recollection of even having a cup of coffee with

4

him because there was no reason to have. When I was there, I was there for a

5

set agenda, to either look for particular members, maybe having an interview

6

set up with them or a -- sorry a meeting set up with them or whatever. So

7

there was -- and certainly prior to Frank Dunlop being engaged, I think Phil

8

Reilly had very limited contact with the members, very limited. I think his

9

main contact would have been out in Tallaght and not in town and it was only in

14:23:35 10

town that I would have met, I would have met Frank Dunlop only around the

11 12

confines of the Dublin County Council. Q

543

And I think your evidence is that you weren't consulted in relation to taking

13

Mr. Frank Dunlop on and I think you said, on the last occasion, that you in

14

fact would have advocated that Mr. O'Herlihy be kept on rather that Mr. Dunlop,

14:23:58 15

is that correct?

16

A

17

Q

That is correct. 544

Now the remarks that Mr. Dunlop attributes to you, there are three remarks,

18

"when you think of the amount that has been spent, you would think these idiots

19

would get their act together." "People are getting very greedy." "Councillors

14:24:13 20

are costing so much". Those three remarks, I take it that you deny those

21 22

remarks? A

I absolutely deny them, I think I said earlier, I can't see the context in

23

which they would come up with Frank Dunlop at the period when he was engaged,

24

so:

14:24:30 25

A. I didn't have that type of conversational contact with Frank Dunlop, I may

26

have mentioned that I had two meetings with him in his own offices and the

27

first occasion, he barely rang the particular councillor who was leaving the

28

carpark and said also he didn't have ongoing contact with that person and after

29

looking at him leaving the car parks and on the second occasion, he was

14:24:58 30

actually colouring in maps for, he was involved in the Baldoyle lands and he www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:25:03

14:25:28

94 1

was making some amendments to whatever proposal he had made and he was

2

colouring the maps when I was down there. So, that was the extent of his

3

involvement or impact in relation to what Cherrywood was about. He didn't have

4

any input. It's a pity he wasn't asked at some stage now, he claimed, for

5

instance, that he had something to do with that motion on the Southeastern

6

Motorway. He couldn't have explained 156 acres. He couldn't have told you who

7

were the signatories or who were the possible signatories to the motion in

8

1993. He didn't know because he was not involved.

9

Q

545

14:25:51 10

11

I think he was in telephone contact with you perhaps half a dozen times, is that right?

A

Well there are telephone records of me making calls to his office but I would

12

again suspect, you will find that these were more or less on continuous days, I

13

was asked to make contact and he wasn't responding. So I really can't say that

14

I even had telephone contact with him.

14:26:14 15

Q

546

Yes. I think Mr. Dunlop, in cross-examination in any event, did concede that

16

the remarks that you made could be open to other inferences than the ones that

17

he drew, but in any event --

18

A

I will say those remarks were not made at all. But in fairness, I suppose, he

19

tried to pour a little oil on it.

14:26:37 20

Q

21

A

22

Q

547

Did he ever tell you that he had made corrupt payments to politicians? Never. Never had any conversation with him.

548

Now, I'd like to ask you about the Marren/Coffey motion. Firstly, we know that

23

Senator Lydon and Mr. Hand signed the motion in May 1992. Now, when it came to

24

the November 1993 motion, we know from Senator Lydon's evidence this morning

14:27:10 25

that he wasn't involved and neither was Mr. Hand. I wonder could we look at

26

7226. Now we see the signatories were Donal Marren, Larry Lohan, Betty Coffey,

27

Liam Cosgrave and Ann Ormonde. Do you have any theory why those individuals

28

signed this motion?

29 14:27:48 30

A

Certainly. I can tell you that the first four are all Dun Laoghaire people and I think we -- I said here previously is that your most successful, your most www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:27:56

14:28:14

95 1

successful way of getting anything through council is: A. Have the county

2

manager in favour of what you are looking for and B. Is to get local

3

councillors of good standing and C. Is to get the local community in favour of

4

it. I presume that Councillor Ormonde was on there because Councillor Coffey

5

asked her to sign it, but I would have certainly would have asked the first

6

four local councillors to Dun Laoghaire and that was the difference between

7

1993 and 1992. In 1992 the people of Dun Laoghaire wouldn't sign because they

8

feared that what they were -- Monarch had just completed the The Square Town

9

Centre, Tallaght, which is a half a million square feet of development and the

14:28:41 10

rumour machine, you heard Michael Smith, they said we were going to build

11

another Tallaght. And that's what went out and the people in Dun Laoghaire

12

were shocked at this. And that's why the representatives from the Dun

13

Laoghaire borough were not in favour and they would not put their names to any

14

of the motions in 1992. But all that had changed by 1993. We --

14:29:05 15

Q

16

A

549

What precisely had changed? What had changed, we had acquired the Dominican convent site and I can't

17

recollect whether we had made the first planning application, the first

18

application was refused on appeal to the board, we had acquired the Dominican

19

Convent site and we had acquired the Pavilion site and we had indicated and

14:29:29 20

demonstrated that we intended developing those two sites in the heart of Dun

21

Laoghaire and this was at the time when nobody else there was no other

22

developer willing to take on any development in Dun Laoghaire, but Monarch went

23

in and did it.

24

Q

14:29:43 25

26

550

So you are suggesting that the proposal that you were going to invest in Dun Laoghaire assuaged the concerns that the Dun Laoghaire councillors had.

A

Absolutely, our tale the whole time from 1990 onwards, was that there was

27

sufficient capacity in Dun Laoghaire for further retail development. They were

28

claiming that there wasn't and I am sure we had some reports prepared in

29

relation to it and then we were asked to put up and I am nearly certain it was

14:30:09 30

the manager who indicated that the Dominican Convent site was coming on board www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:30:14

14:30:37

96 1

and in fairness to the late Phil Monahan, he went down and he bought it and

2

that's how the Bloomfields development came about. It became nearly a

3

condition of us getting favourable reaction on the Cherrywood lands was to

4

carry out significant development in Dun Laoghaire. Thereby demonstrating that

5

we perceived that the development of Cherrywood would not endanger the centre

6

of Dun Laoghaire because we had now a centre in there ourselves.

7

Q

551

8 9

That enabled the councillors most intimately affected by the Cherrywood development to be brought on board in promoting this.

A

That's right, there is a note of -- in Pat Lafferty saying, quoting Betty

14:31:00 10

Coffey, that -- nearly to that effect, that she accepted that we had stood up

11

to our side of the bargain, that we would develop a significant development

12

into Dun Laoghaire and thereby she could look afresh at the Cherrywood

13

proposals and that is what -- that's what the change is but always in the

14

background and it was a mantra of ours, we always went back to the October

14:31:34 15

1990, the county manager first proposed this on his own. So it started as a

16

county manager proposal, it dipped in 1991/1992, it resurfaced a little in 1993

17

and by 1998, we were back to the position where we were in October 1990.

18

Q

19

552

Now, it's been suggested to a number of councillors that there was no justification for limiting -- of increasing density to four per acre to the

14:32:09 20

Monarch lands, in other words, that it should only be the Monarch lands in

21

November 1993 that got the four per acre. Now we heard Councillor Marren give

22

detailed evidence as to why his motion was limited to the Monarch lands, can I

23

ask you, did Monarch ask or request that the increase in density to four per

24

acre be limited to the Monarch lands?

14:32:36 25

A

No, chairman, if you look at the motion, although I have said in evidence,

26

there is a map attached to the motion which clearly outlines only the Monarch

27

lands and this is the motion of Donal Marren and the other councillor signed

28

and Councillor Marren proposed this amendment to his own motion on the floor of

29

the chamber and I think I have said that I believe he did that, if you like, to

14:33:05 30

assuage Sean Barrett and his supporters, that it wasn't a proposal to creep up www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:33:11

14:33:35

97 1

the, to do further development up the valley. It would have suited Monarch to

2

have all of the valley rezoned for development because the greater residential

3

block, the higher the retail centre was going to be, the larger the retail

4

centre was going to be. But can I just say, I mean my recollection of the 1983

5

plan, even the one house per acre area and that was a very limited area and I

6

don't know that Sean Barrett, Sean Barrett's motion of, when was it? In 1992,

7

that that limited itself to the '83 location -- sorry, area. But certainly

8

from what -- being at the meeting, Councillor Marren, I'm certain reading the

9

situation, he proposed that amendment to his own motion to assuage his own

14:34:13 10

party colleague.

11

Q

12

A

553

That came from Councillor Marren, we had nothing to do with it. As I say, it

13 14

would have suited us to have more land involved, more housing involved. Q

554

14:34:30 15

16

And that amendment came from Councillor Marren?

So in fact, the fact that the increase was only in respect of the Monarch lands was against Monarch's interests rather than --

A

It was, yes, chairman. Maybe the other part of that as well is to say that we

17

couldn't go any higher than four houses to the acre because of the legal

18

opinion that was given to the council. Whatever was out on both displays, you

19

could adopt either one or somewhere in between so that's the only thing, some

14:34:54 20

people are suggesting the four houses to the acre was a marvelous thing, it

21 22

wasn't, it was a stop gap. Q

555

Can I go back to May 1992, Mr. Lynn, and it was put to Senator Lydon this

23

morning that the outcome of the various motions on May 27th 1992 was a disaster

24

for Monarch, that's the phrase that was used. Now is that your view?

14:35:20 25

A

That is not my view and I have expressed this previously. Is that and it was

26

seen within Monarch as being a marvelous achievement, if achievement is the

27

correct word, not only because it gave us the 30 acres of a district centre,

28

some people are now expressing that now back down to 20 acres but in actual

29

fact I would have thought it was 25 acres but I have seen things in the papers

14:35:50 30

that it was 30 acres. To achieve a district centre of 30 acres against the www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:35:55

14:36:18

98 1

type of onslaught that we faced was a marvelous achievement and where it came

2

from in particular, it came from deputy Eamonn Gilmore's party, that that was a

3

recognition that Cherrywood was about to be developed.

4

Q

5

A

6

Q

7

A

556

That if there was a district centre there, development was inevitable? Absolutely, you couldn't have a district centre without residential.

557

And not at one house per acre? And in fairness, I have said this before, Sean Barrett was never against the

8

development of the valley and certainly not against the development of the

9

Monarch lands and they showed that. All he wanted was it -- for it to be

14:36:36 10

transferred into the new County Council set up in January 1994 and I think that

11

is demonstrated on the variation of the plan in 1994, deputy Barrett voted in

12

favour of it. So he had no, his only hang up was that he wanted, for whatever

13

reason, and they never told me what the reason was, for whatever reason he

14

wanted it to be dealt with by Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown County Council.

14:37:02 15

Q

558

16

consider that the time was right for development at that time.

17

A

18

Q

19 14:37:19 20

And I think deputy Barrett gave evidence to that effect, he just didn't

Yes. 559

Just in relation to the events of the day, did you meet Bill O'Herlihy before or after the meeting at all, can you recall?

A

I have no recollection -- I can say I didn't meet him, I have no recollection

21

of him but he could have been around the council chamber prior to the meeting.

22

I don't -- I think in his evidence he indicates that as a representative of

23

Monarch, that he saw nothing untoward in the representations that we were

24

making that morning. That person making that representation was me. I have no

14:37:46 25

recollection of meeting Bill O'Herlihy afterwards and I think from the evidence

26

that has come out in the Tribunal, his favoured timed is 12.30 to one o'clock,

27

that was cut across by you indicating and the evidence eventually given by

28

Dominic Glennane and Noel Murray that they were with him at that time in the

29

Royal Dublin. He opted to go further, to go beyond and he was told that the

14:38:13 30

meeting didn't terminate until 2.05, he opted to go past two o'clock, that was www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:38:22

14:38:45

99 1

cut out because I was doing an interview with Sean Barrett at the time, he

2

opted to go later than that. Michael Smith cut that out by putting him in a

3

motoring car in O'Connell Street immediately after the meeting and as counsel

4

tried to go short, he tried to say, well maybe it was at ten or half ten in the

5

morning, but if you want to go short, you have to leave Noel Murray out of it.

6

If Noel Murray was in and out of whatever conversations were allegedly being

7

had, they couldn't have taken place until Noel Murray was in the hotel and he

8

wasn't there. My understanding from the evidence and from Dominic Glennane's

9

evidence was that they didn't attend the hotel till between 12 and 12.30. So

14:39:09 10

there is a hole in his bucket in relation to all of the 27th May 1992.

11

Q

12

A

560

In any event, you certainly didn't meet Mr. O'Herlihy in the Royal Dublin? I certainly did not meet him in the Royal Dublin and outside of that, I did not

13

have that conversation with him on that day or any other day or I didn't have a

14

like conversation with anyone. I mean whoever had that conversation, if that

14:39:35 15

conversation was had, knew nothing about the planning system.

16

Q

17

A

561

Why do you say that? Well it purports to say you get 50,000 for planning permissions and you are

18

giving that to councillors. Councillors have no involvement in planning

19

permissions. And why would you be talking about planning permissions as it is

14:40:01 20

or variations, at a time when the only focus on the 27th May was the review of

21

the 1983 Development Plan. Why would you have, why would anybody with any

22

ounce of the knowledge of the planning system have such a wide ranging, if it

23

was me, my total focus was on the review of the Development Plan that day, not

24

on anything else. So it's, it just didn't happen.

14:40:28 25

Q

562

I think you had a private interview with the Tribunal on the 24th May 2000 and

26

I think that was prior to Mr. O'Herlihy's private interview which was the

27

following month, when he first told the Tribunal of this alleged conversation,

28

is that right? Do you recall your first private interview?

29

A

14:40:54 30

Q

Yes, 24th May 2000 is correct. 563

Now you had a subsequent private interview on the 26th March 2003, was www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:41:00

14:41:23

100 1

Mr. O'Herlihy's conversation mentioned to you at all in that second interview?

2

A

3

Q

4

A

No, chairman, there was never a mention of that. 564

When did you first hear about Mr. O'Herlihy's allegation against you? Well we heard it, chairman, by letter of the 11th May at 2006 and the second

5

paragraph where it is said what Bill O'Herlihy was expected to say and I just

6

wonder --

7

Q

8

A

565

Perhaps you could read that out just so we know what you are talking about? 11th May addressed to Mr. Noel Smyth.

9 14:41:40 10

11

MS. DILLON: A

Sorry, Mr. Lynn, could you give us the page number again?

8552. Do you want me still to read it out?

12 13 14 14:42:00 15

MR SANFEY: A

Yes please.

"Among the matters which will be dealt with at the public hearings is an allegation of Mr. Bill O'Herlihy concerning your client, he is expected to tell

16

the Tribunal that he was informed by your client that monies were paid to

17

councillors to secure their votes to rezone Cherrywood and mentioned a figure

18

to him of 100,000."

19

signed by Noel Smyth & Partners and we asked for -- in the third paragraph we

14:42:32 20

Now we responded to that letter at 8550 to Mr. Donal King

say, "By reference to prior correspondence, please advise whether there are

21

private, public or other statements which have not been made available to our

22

client in relation to this Module." And we go on to say, "Our understanding of

23

the operation of the Tribunal is that the basis of this Module is reflected in

24

the documents and statements contained and furnished in the brief. This has

14:42:50 25

also been advised to our client."

26 27

Now we didn't receive that private interview of Bill O'Herlihy's until after

28

the opening statement was made by Ms. Dillon and therefore we were not and this

29

was taken up by Mr. O'Higgins on behalf of Mr. O'Herlihy, he was of opinion

14:43:11 30

that maybe I had made a further statement and that he hadn't been circulated www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:43:14

14:43:37

101 1

with it. We couldn't make a further statement because we weren't, we hadn't

2

received what the allegations were, save what was contained in the letter of

3

the 11th May. And in dealing with the opening statement, I still would like to

4

know why Bill O'Herlihy gave a narrative statement and he dropped all those

5

allegations. The Tribunal pursued them in relation to that and wrote, and

6

contained in the opening statement the fact of what he had said in private

7

session, which he hadn't contained in his narrative statement and that they

8

would be taking that up and they did give a one liner, "that Mr. Lynn will be

9

denying that." But they didn't contain anything to the effect that there's

14:44:09 10

corroborative evidence from a third party, i.e. Frank Dunlop. That Mr. Lynn

11

may not have been where Mr. O'Herlihy wanted him to be on the 27th May 1992.

12

It was known to the Tribunal that Frank Dunlop was saying that I was in the

13

council chamber. He was chased for five or six pages by senior counsel for the

14

Tribunal in relation to the 27th May. It wasn't that it was unknown. John

14:44:41 15

Gallagher chased him and tried to confirm or otherwise that it was the 27th May

16

1992 that he was talking about. But there's no reference of that and in

17

looking at the minutes and you can see where the manager's proposal was taken

18

before and voted on, before the suspension of standing orders, to allow the

19

meeting to continue. So the timescale was in documents available to the

14:45:08 20

Tribunal and I was not given a fair crack of the whip in that opening

21 22

statement. Q

566

In any event, do you recall when Mr. Mr. O'Herlihy's private interview, the

23

document which set out Mr. O'Herlihy's private interview, was given to your

24

solicitor?

14:45:26 25

A

I don't know the precise date but it was certainly after the opening statement.

26

But I do know from the correspondence that Don Lydon's side, they had had sight

27

of it because it's referred to in correspondence, if I can find it now, it was

28

referred to in correspondence between his solicitors and the Tribunal.

29

Q

14:45:55 30

A

567

Was Senator Lydon referred to in the opening statement? Senator Lydon was not referred to in the opening statement. And I'd imagine he www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:46:03

14:46:31

102 1

wasn't, I presume that -- well there was contact between Senator Lydon's

2

counsel and the Tribunal. We weren't afforded that opportunity and yet the

3

most damaging allegation was being made, was being made against me.

4

Q

568

Can I ask you, Mr. Lynn, we have heard Mr. O'Herlihy has had much to say about

5

how his appearance at the Tribunal has troubled him and affected his

6

reputation, could you tell the Tribunal how the publicity and your appearance

7

at this Tribunal has affected your representation and your business?

8

A

I can, chairman. Effectively, once Bill O'Herlihy's statement came out on the

9

paper I was in negotiation for three ventures and they have gone silent. I

14:47:04 10

have been asked within the past six weeks, since this thing commenced, not to

11

attend a meeting with Kildare County Council on behalf of a client because they

12

felt it might be damaging. My phone is silent in relation to new business and

13

that's only on, that's on the business end of my life. It has had a profound

14

effect on me, a profound effect on my wife, my family, my children, my family,

14:47:39 15

friends that I have. There's nudges and winks, you go out on the golf course

16

and there's all types of smart remarks being made. It has had a profound

17

effect, not only on business for me but also in my personal life and also that

18

of my wife and children and family.

19

Q

14:48:11 20

A

569

Thank you, Mr. Lynn. Thank you.

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

23

his personal life, I mean that is unfortunately a by product of anyone

24

appearing who is facing allegations of wrongdoing in a public inquiry. The

14:48:33 25

Just in relation to what Mr. Lynn has just said about the effect on

Tribunal can't unfortunately control that. I accept that for you and for many

26

other people, it is a fact of life that there is damage to your reputation

27

simply because you have to give evidence before the Tribunal.

28 29 14:49:00 30

A

But the -- chairman, the delay between Mr. O'Herlihy being called, A. Was it necessary for my name to be mentioned in the opening statement and B. That the delay between Bill O'Herlihy being called and I being called -www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:49:04

14:49:17

103 1 2

MS. DILLON:

3

before Mr. Lynn goes any further, Mr. Lynn was listed as one of the earliest

4

possible witnesses. But I understand that it was considered more appropriate

5

that Mr. Lynn would be left to the end when he would be in a position to deal

6

with all of the allegations that had been made and on that basis, Mr. Lynn was

7

moved back further. We never received a request from Mr. Lynn, to my

8

knowledge, that his evidence be taken at a time other than the one that's been

9

scheduled and had such an application been made, it would have been considered

14:49:37 10

With respect in relation to that, I understood it was intended

by the Tribunal, as it was considered by other witnesses such as Mr. Lydon who

11

asked not to be called to give evidence until after Mr. Lynn had given his

12

evidence.

13 14 14:49:47 15

CHAIRMAN: A

All right we will just --

I beg your pardon, chairman, the only thing that my solicitor wrote to the

16

Tribunal, was the effect I was out of the country for a week, a week and a bit

17

on holidays. Other than that, you could see that I was available, I was at the

18

back of the hall.

19 14:50:04 20

CHAIRMAN:

Well, just, I don't want to get into a wide ranging discussion as

21

to how the Tribunal conducts its business but what the Tribunal endeavours to

22

do in every case, not just this Module, is to call witnesses as quickly or as

23

early as possible in order to deal with allegations that are made, particularly

24

where allegations are being made. We have dealt with I think 80 or 90

14:50:36 25

witnesses. It's not possible to call them in the, in a sequence that perhaps

26

suits everybody but we certainly do our best to get through witnesses as

27

quickly as possible and to leave as little as possible a gap between the

28

evidence of one witness and another where there are allegations concerning

29

them. That concludes your cross-examination?

14:51:01 30

www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:51:01

14:51:20

104 1

MR SANFEY:

It does.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

4

you were being asked in your examination, I think, by Ms. Dillon about the cash

5

sums and it was necessary for you to identify what these were for, so that you

6

could then, because it was part of your job to seek to recover half of the sums

7

from --

8

A

Just before, can I just ask you, Mr. Lynn, when you went to, when

These were a particular belt of those.

9 14:51:41 10

11

CHAIRMAN: A

Yes.

21,000 pounds.

12 13

CHAIRMAN: And you went to, I think you said, people in accounts and obviously

14

it was necessary for you to arm yourself with as much information as possible,

14:51:55 15

so you could justify or explain and justify these claims to GRE and I have a

16 17

note of what you said at the time, you were told look to Somerton. A

That's correct.

18 19 14:52:12 20

CHAIRMAN: A

Which I assume is another way of saying ask Mr. Monahan.

That's correct.

21 22 23

CHAIRMAN: A

And you didn't do that, or did you?

No.

24 14:52:18 25

26

CHAIRMAN: A

Why not?

Well I explained to the, I think to Judge Faherty. I felt that it was a matter

27

for accounts to get the receipts from the back up documentation from Somerton,

28

if that is where they felt the answer lay. It wasn't my job. Could I -- yes.

29

I don't know whether you ever came across the late Phil Monahan. Some of your

14:52:49 30

colleagues on other benches have. If I had approached him, A. I wouldn't get www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:52:55

14:53:08

105 1

an answer but B. I would get another six jobs to do, so you didn't volunteer

2

to go to Somerton.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

5

Somerton, did that suggest to you that it was some embarrassment on behalf of

6

the accounts person you were talking --

7

A

But did you, I mean the manner in which it was said to you, look to

No, I wouldn't say there was any embarrassment, it appeared to be, I better not

8

say natural but that appeared to be the way that Phil conducted his business,

9

he came in and withdrew cash and accounts and if he came in and he asked for

14:53:35 10

it, he was given it and I could understand that. And nobody would dare to say

11

what are you using that for?

12 13 14

CHAIRMAN: A

But you were pursuing this particular query --

Well I was pursuing this on behalf of Monarch.

14:53:49 15

16 17

CHAIRMAN: A

Yes.

And if I had good back up documentation, I probably would have got the sum

18

reimbursed but if they couldn't provide that to me and it was a matter for

19

accounts to provide it, well then the people to lose out on it were Monarch.

14:54:09 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

22

much information --

23

A

But in the ordinary way, you would want to arm yourself with as

Absolutely.

24 14:54:15 25

26

CHAIRMAN: -- so when an executive in GRE said what's this for? A

You would have some answer, yes.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

29

the accounts people.

14:54:25 30

A

Yes and that's presumably what prompted you to raise the query with

Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:54:25

14:54:30

106 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

3

Mr. Monahan.

4

A

You were told well look to Somerton, in other words ask

Yes.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

7

wouldn't have mentioned it to Mr. Somerton, (sic) assuming you believed they

8

concerned legitimate payments, not necessarily in relation to Cherrywood but --

9

unless you believed there was something underhand?

14:54:56 10

A

I am still not quite certain why or don't fully understand why you

Absolutely not, chairman. That's the point. The point you want to get across

11

is that if PM came in and asked for money, he would get money. And what he did

12

with that was his own business and unless he was explaining what he was going

13

to do to accounts, that record wouldn't be there. Now, can I say to you, it

14

would be absolutely futile for me to go out and make contact with Phil, A. I

14:55:21 15

wouldn't get any response or any satisfactory response and B. I would come out

16

with about another six projects to look after.

17 18 19

CHAIRMAN: But how are you going to deal then with -A

14:55:36 20

I wasn't, I just dropped it and I advised accounts and you can see on one of the sheets you have, there's 21,500 on the right-hand side as my, I advised

21

accounts if you don't get me the back up documentation, they are coming out and

22

it won't be recouped. It was their responsibility, if anybody had

23

responsibility, to get the back up documentation. It wasn't my responsibility.

24 14:55:54 25

CHAIRMAN:

26 27

Presumably it was somebody in accounts who decided in the first

place to include the -A

Yes apparently what's where they were slotted in.

28 29 14:56:12 30

CHAIRMAN:

And you don't know nor did you query, well how did those figures

get there? www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:56:12

14:56:20

107 1

A

2

No, or who made the decision that they should be included in that particular category.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

5

part of Mr. Monahan?

6

A

7

You immediately assumed this was some private expenditure on the

Yes, because you could see they were balled figures, it was 655, three and a two and a half I think are the particular figures.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

14:56:35 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

giving evidence and indeed Mr. Glennane when he gave evidence and he was being

13

examined, I think, by Ms. Dillon about those figures, particularly figures,

14

debits and cash that seemed to be attributed, these were debits by way of

14:57:00 15

Yes, just on that point, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Sweeney, when he was

cashing of cheques, it would appear, particularly around the specific months

16

and I think October, November, 1993 was mentioned where I think Ms. Dillon put

17

a figure to Mr. Glennane of something like 41,000 for which Mr. Glennane had no

18

explanation.

19

A

Yes, I mean I heard this. I heard Mr. Glennane's evidence.

14:57:17 20

21

JUDGE FAHERTY:

22

these matters, advised the Tribunal that they might look to Mr. Glennane who,

23

when he did give evidence, had no explanation and you, I think, on the other

24

day, can't account for these monies either effectively, is that?

14:57:35 25

A

And Mr. Sweeney when he was giving evidence generally about

That's correct, I wouldn't have any knowledge of --

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

the Cherrywood General Promotions books.

29

A

As the chairman has said, all of these matters were posted to

Again, not by me.

14:57:48 30

www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:57:48

14:57:57

108 1 2

JUDGE FAHERTY: A

But somebody must have made a decision.

Yes, they couldn't appear out of nowhere.

3 4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY: A

That it was a Cherrywood expense.

Yes.

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

8

or, that nobody has been able to provide an explanation as to who made the

9

decision or indeed what the monies were used for? I know Mr. Glennane has

14:58:11 10

Are you surprised now of the three major people, if you like,

suggested a, has made suggestions but he has not, that's as far as it's gone

11

but that, I mean in the first premises, if I can put it like this, Mr. Lynn, is

12

that the, somebody made a decision within Monarch and the companies, that these

13

were Cherrywood expenses and that they were accordingly posts but nobody can

14

say what those monies over the course of '92/93 and indeed going on to '94/95

14:58:40 15

16

were expended on. Do you find that strange? A

The strange part I find about it is that they were posted to a heading in the

17

accounts, into an account that we wish to obtain a 50 percent recoupment that

18

couldn't be obtained unless you had back up documentation. So wherever else

19

they should have gone, they shouldn't have gone in there because they were

14:59:09 20

serving no purpose being in there.

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY:

23

certain circumstances.

24

A

Some of these figures were sought from GRE, GRE declined in

I think only one -- certainly --

14:59:23 25

26

JUDGE FAHERTY:

27

in the books, these things were carefully notated and carefully headed. And

28

this was --

29 14:59:43 30

A

We have heard over the last few weeks but like everything else

Yes and I think the figure is 21,500, the 625, a three and a two and a half and I struck them out and advised accounts I was striking them out because they www.pcr.ie Day 669

14:59:47

15:00:03

109 1

were unrecoverable and there was no sense in holding them in under that

2

particular heading because we weren't going to get a penny of it.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

that because we know that's your evidence, Mr. Lynn. In relation to, it is on

6

the face of it recorded in the internal books of the Monarch related companies

7

that these sums were expended in relation to the promotion of -- into the

8

Cherrywood, isn't that correct?

9

A

If you leave the covering of them out altogether, we will park

They were certainly posted in there, yes.

15:00:20 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12

but nobody has been able to advise the Tribunal as to what those sums were

13

expended on.

14

A

Forget about recovering them from GRE, you've explained that,

And I would be the least likely one to be able to explain it.

15:00:37 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

indeed Mr. Sweeney has said and I don't think you disagree, you had an input

18

into the figures that were being projected as likely sums being expended.

19

A

And just can I ask you in relation to that, we have seen and

Yes, that's right.

15:00:53 20

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY: A

In various documents that were sent to GRE.

That's correct.

23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY:

15:01:00 25

coin that you were involved in projecting figures and again, I think they were

26 27

And if I could put it this way, that's the other half of the

called, strategy consultancy fees and other headings. A

Yes.

28 29 15:01:14 30

JUDGE FAHERTY: A

And you were project coordinator.

That's correct. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:01:17

15:01:26

110 1 2

JUDGE FAHERTY:

3

Mr. Sweeney who was heading the substantive, the whole project,isn't that

4

right?

5

A

And I suppose in terms of the actual project, it would be

Yes, he was the director in charge of it.

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

8

projections but that you don't seem to have any control on the budget or

9

knowledge about where certain figures were spent, do you see what I mean? I'm

15:01:44 10

11

Is it not surprising that you would have an input into

just asking, they appear to be two sides of one coin. A

12

I appreciate what you are saying and maybe in other businesses, one would have that but I had no control over actual expenditure.

13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY:

15:02:01 15

here, you were talking about Mr. Dunlop and his activities or I think really on

16 17

Very well and just on the issue, the last day when you were

your own evidence what you perceived as a lack of activity -A

Could I just say on that, if you go through the various evidences being given

18

by various members, I could only find three who recollected contact from Frank

19

Dunlop, that's Mickey Joe Cosgrave, Liam Creavan and Kevin McGrath.

15:02:27 20

21

JUDGE FAHERTY:

22

evidence as to what you, your perceptions were at the time that you believed as

23

I understand your evidence from the other day, that you didn't see Mr. Dunlop

24

doing a lot, in fact he was picking your brains about certain matters, that was

15:02:44 25

26

Yes. I just want to ask you, if you sort of, you have given

your evidence the other day. A

Yes, your honour.

27 28

JUDGE FAHERTY:

29

indeed by Monarch personnel, though you may not have known, that by the 12th

15:02:56 30

And we know, I think and it's accepted even by Mr. Dunlop and

March, Mr. Dunlop gets 25,000 pounds. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:03:01

15:03:17

111 1

A

But I had no knowledge of that but I saw that.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

4

certainly by September, I think, he has certainly on the books, maybe 50,000

5

pounds is paid and there is a dispute about a cheque and that's not, we can

6

park that. But what I want to ask you, Mr. Lynn, you are project coordinator,

7

you said the other day you complained to Mr. Sweeney about Mr. Dunlop.

8

A

And in the course of the year of 1993, he gets other sums and

Well his activities or lack of.

9 15:03:37 10

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Lack of activities, I think, in fairness to yourself. Are you

11

surprised that large sums of money continued to be paid to Mr. Dunlop despite

12

you, as project coordinator, complaining to the, if you like, the head man of

13

the project, Mr. Sweeney, about what you saw as lack of work being done by

14

Mr. Dunlop? Does that surprise you?

15:04:01 15

A

I am more than surprised, more than surprised at the fact that the amount of

16

the amount of money he got for the activities that he didn't perform, is the

17

only way I can put it. So the answer to your question is, yes, I was and am

18

very surprised.

19 15:04:22 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

21 22

When you discussed this with Mr. Sweeney, did you discuss any

course of action you might take? A

I was coming back to Mr. Sweeney and telling him, I had been asking Mr. Sweeney

23

to meet with Mr. Dunlop to review positions and I told him that it was no good

24

him relying upon Mr. Dunlop, all he was going to hear back from Mr. Dunlop was

15:04:42 25

26

what I was telling Mr. Dunlop. Now it's a matter for Ned Sweeney then, as a development director, to take that forward.

27 28

JUDGE FAHERTY:

29

have said that you would normally agree to pay donations to county councillors

15:05:04 30

I see and just one final matter. I think two councillors, you

if you were asked. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:05:05

15:05:16

112 1

A

Absolutely, yes.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

4

offering a donation in 1992 which I think he says he declined.

5

A

Mr. Gilmore has given evidence that you telephoned him

He declined, yes.

6 7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY: He declined to accept. A

I think I did the same again, there was a general election in 1998 or 1999.

9 15:05:27 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY: A

He said that in his evidence.

Eamonn Gilmore gave me more time than any other member. I remember when Eamonn

12

became Minister of State and he was off the council, naturally, because of

13

that, he still wanted to be briefed in Cherrywood and I used to have cups of

14

tea or coffee with him at breakfast time. Eamonn Gilmore gave a huge

15:05:51 15

commitment and it wasn't to Monarch he was giving it, he gave a huge commitment

16

towards bringing activity, commercial activity, which had jobs at the end of

17

it, into the area.

18 19

JUDGE FAHERTY:

15:06:06 20

You have said that already, I have heard. What I'm asking you

is, his evidence would suggest, I am only reading my own notes and I could

21

stand to be corrected by the transcript in fairness, that the approach for

22

political donation came from you to him as opposed to any request.

23

A

Yes, it did, chairman, that's quite correct.

24 15:06:28 25

JUDGE FAHERTY:

I think Ms. Keogh has said that she declined also, I think

26

it's Ms. Keogh, a political contribution, I think in the course of the 1992

27

election

28

A

She may have.

29 15:06:42 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Do you recall anybody else not accepting the offer of www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:06:45

15:07:03

113 1 2

political donation? A

Yes, the other one I think I mentioned is Catherine Quinn who was a PD

3

councillor out in South Dublin County Council, I made contact with Catherine

4

and I said you were running again, she was and she said she was okay but she

5

had a colleague, I can't remember his name, I am going to be slightly

6

embarrassed but she had a colleague who had been co-opted to the council and he

7

was running then in the ensuing local election and that he could do with a bit

8

of support. So I organised support for that and that member and probably he

9

never knew where it came out of.

15:07:24 10

11

JUDGE FAHERTY: And just one final question, Mr. Lynn. We have heard evidence

12

of the late Mr. Monahan was largely in an office in Somerton.

13

A

14

No, he had his office in Somerton, but Phil would be more out than in. But his office was in Somerton.

15:07:51 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

it was yourself that said last week that he would ask you on occasions about

18

the Cherrywood development.

19

A

15:08:08 20

Yes. But I just want to ask you, when he was giving, I think

Yes. Very few occasions, having regard to the importance of it actually. And you can see that I think from the brief. There are very few reports from me to

21

him in relation to where we were at any particular time.

22 23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY: A

And were you surprised at what you --

No, knowing the man, he had Dominic and Eddie back in, if you like, head office

15:08:28 25

looking after the project and one presumes that they, at their board meetings

26

or whatever, that they were in regular contact. Or presumably he was relying

27

upon that stream of information rather than, but Phil was a remarkable man. He

28

had a terrific property brain and the day he bought Cherrywood and indicated

29

the type of development he wanted on it, etc. He was then, he then went from

15:09:02 30

there on to the next venture and it's only if he needed assistance that you www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:09:08

15:09:17

114 1

would go back to him, if that gives you some colour as regards how Phil

2

operates.

3 4

JUDGE KEYS:

5

proper, or maybe the correct word should be healthy, that political donations

6

are made to councillors at a time when the Development Plan is being reviewed

7

is paid a company which has a special interest in that particular area and

8

where motions are pending and the result of which could substantially enhance

9

the value of that particular company if successful?

15:09:49 10

A

Mr. Lynn, I wonder could I ask you this, do you believe that it's

I do, chairman.

11 12 13

JUDGE KEYS: A

14

You believe that to be healthy?

It's healthy, and it's democratic and it's out in the open. One thing I didn't say, one of the ways of making contributions to councillors is for them to hold

15:10:01 15

golf outings.

16 17

JUDGE KEYS:

18

straightforward payments, large payments have been made --

19

A

I am not talking about golf outings now, I am talking about

I have answered that, chairman, the answer is yes.

15:10:15 20

21

JUDGE KEYS:

22

like that?

23

A

Do you think that a conflict of interest can arise in a situation

No, chairman I do not believe that for a moment.

24 15:10:22 25

JUDGE KEYS:

26 27

And you were a person who was employed by the local authority in

the past, is that right? A

That's absolutely correct. I was there for 20 years and I left in '89 and if

28

you like, I spent all my working life facing local elected members. I have the

29

height of regard for them, those who vote for or against the project. At least

15:10:42 30

they put their name forward if they are out there exercising the democratic www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:10:46

15:10:57

115 1

process and then they need and are justified in giving support.

2 3 4

JUDGE KEYS: A

So no conflict of interest can arise.

Absolute none.

5 6 7

JUDGE KEYS: A

And that is your view.

That is my view and I hold that view.

8 9

JUDGE KEYS: And it is because of that view you decided then that you would be

15:11:07 10

instrumental in donations to be paid to special councillors, certain

11

councillors over the period of time when the Development Plan is being reviewed

12

and the company, which you were employed by, were awaiting the outcome of

13

rezoning motions.

14

A

15:11:25 15

I wouldn't go, I wouldn't accept the way you put it there. We responded to requests for contributions from almost, not almost, from all parties, of all

16

persuasions, at all times.

17 18 19

JUDGE KEYS: A

Tell me --

I beg your pardon.

15:11:39 20

21 22

JUDGE KEYS: A

Go ahead.

And if elections coincided with development plans, there's no marriage when the

23

two and as I said before, you would want to be a fool to try and marry -- if

24

you felt you were going to achieve a benefit from a political contribution, you

15:11:55 25

would be dead in the water.

26 27

JUDGE KEYS:

28

off the cuff remark, he said if you didn't say a contribution, you would be

29

shooting yourself in the foot, would you agree with that?

15:12:10 30

A

I see. Well you know Mr. Glennane and he referred to it as an

I wouldn't agree with that. I would not agree with that. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:12:15

15:12:28

116 1 2

JUDGE KEYS: So he is wrong in that respect. A

He would be wrong in that respect. With respect I would say that I know a whole

3

lot more as regards how local elected representatives operate than

4

Mr. Glennane, I very much doubt he has met half a dozen in his working life.

5 6 7

JUDGE KEYS: A

8

Tell me why were political payments made at all?

To meet the expenses of running elections, to meet the expenses of getting out pamphlets.

9 15:12:37 10

JUDGE KEYS: Aren't there other councillors all over the country which have the

11

same expenses, did your company ever pay any money to any other councillors

12

over the country where did they not have business pending before --

13

A

You mean to councillors.

14 15:12:51 15

JUDGE KEYS:

16 17

Pick any, Limerick County Council, Galway County Council, Mayo

County Council, have you ever paid any monies towards them? A

Can I answer that, my understanding of the evidence has been given here that

18

there was significant monies paid in Louth and the reason for that would be was

19

because Phil was from Louth. I think you had the Minister for Foreign Affairs

15:13:12 20

in here acknowledging he received two or three or four thousand.

21 22 23

JUDGE KEYS: A

I said where there was no business pending.

There's no business pending in Louth at that stage.

24 15:13:23 25

JUDGE KEYS:

We don't know about that precisely, take for example places where

26

he had no business whatsoever, did Monarch make a contribution to local

27

authorities, outside local authorities where he had either motions or an

28

interest or there was something pending which would result in a favourable

29

result to his companies?

15:13:44 30

A

You are mentioning payments to local authorities. I take it you mean www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:13:50

15:13:58

117 1

councillors or --

2 3 4

JUDGE KEYS: A

Sorry, yes, donations.

If you want to put up the list, there are a number of people, say I see my name

5

in association, I beg your pardon, in association with Senator, I beg your

6

pardon, Sean Coffey. At that stage, we didn't have any activity going on in

7

Dublin city. I saw a reference to Colm Hilliard. He was from County Meath, we

8

didn't have any business going on in County Meath and if you want to put up the

9

names, I can give them to you. And I don't know how many Phil himself gave

15:14:37 10

privately, so the answer to your question is yes and had we got requests from

11

people around the country, if there were known to any of the persons in

12

Monarch, they would have got a contribution.

13 14 15:14:51 15

JUDGE KEYS: A

16

I see.

So it wasn't, there is no marriage between political contributions and any planning or any other related activity of a local authority.

17 18 19

JUDGE KEYS: A

I see.

You are wrong in that.

15:15:05 20

21

JUDGE KEYS:

22

Mr. O'Herlihy. I certainly got the impression from your counsel's

23

cross-examination of Mr. O'Herlihy that he was not stating or indicating or

24

suggesting that Mr. O'Herlihy was telling lies or that he had come in and was

15:15:24 25

making up a false story, which I suppose would be the same thing, having heard

26 27 28

Okay. Just in relation to one other matter. In relation to

your response to your counsel's questions, does that remain the same position? A

It still remains the position. It's a matter for the Tribunal. I have outlined to you the various steps that you have heard.

29 15:15:46 30

JUDGE KEYS:

No, no, you were saying is that Mr. O'Herlihy didn't say, that www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:15:49

15:15:56

118 1 2

you did not say the words he has referred to him. A

That's quite right. I am not saying he did not --

3 4 5

JUDGE KEYS: A

So he is wrong in that.

He is not only wrong, but absolutely wrong in that.

6 7

JUDGE KEYS:

8

making it up? What other conclusion can one come to if he is wrong?

9

A

If he is wrong then, the next question one would ask, well is he

No, no, he could be mistaken. I don't know why he has -- why he is alleging --

15:16:19 10

11

JUDGE KEYS: Let's take the word mistaken, mistaken in what sense? That it

12

wasn't you who said it or it could have been somebody else from Monarch who

13

said it and he is mistaken by indicating that it was you who said those words

14

to him?

15:16:34 15

A

I can't help you on that. All I can tell you is --

16 17 18

JUDGE KEYS: A

19

I think you can.

No, no, I can't, chairman, I can only tell you did not have that conversation with me. I am lucky Frank Dunlop puts me a certain position and Michael Smith

15:16:50 20

puts me a certain position, that I couldn't have had the conversation at the

21

time when he says that I was having it.

22 23

JUDGE KEYS:

24

while he may be wrong in the time or the place, one thing he was absolutely

15:17:05 25

26

Well I think in fairness to Mr. O'Herlihy, he did state that

sure about was that you did say the words to him. A

Yes, he has said that and I heard him say that and I refute that.

27 28

JUDGE KEYS:

Therefore what you say isn't as one would say the phrase, isn't a

29

full defence, if you want to phrase it that way. He is saying that the words

15:17:23 30

were said to him by you. I just querying whether it if you maintain that he www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:17:29

15:17:47

119 1

didn't say those words and I am asking you do you think then when you say he is

2

mistaken, that these words could be said by somebody else to him?

3

A

That I can't put any further information in front of the Tribunal. I know I

4

didn't say it.

5 6

JUDGE KEYS:

I see. Thank you very much.

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

All right. Thank you very much.

9 15:17:53 10

MS. DILLON:

Thank you, Mr. Lynn. Mr. Patrick Murphy please. Mr. Murphy is

11

represented by Mr. Mark Carthy instructed by Messrs. Brown McCabe and I

12

anticipate they will have an application for representation.

13 14

MR. McCARTHY: Yes, May it please the chairman, I have an application, I appear

15:18:13 15

instructed by Boland McCabe solicitors and I have an application for limited

16

representation on behalf of this witness.

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

Granted.

19 MR. PATRICK MURPHY, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS

15:18:20 20

21

BY MS. DILLON:

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

Good afternoon, Mr. Murphy.

24 15:18:40 25

MS. DILLON: Good afternoon, Mr. Murphy, in 1974, if I can take you back very

26

quickly to 1974, you became involved in renting land from the late Mr. Liam

27

Lawlor, is that right?

28

A

29

Q

15:18:54 30

A

That's correct, yes. 570

And you had cattle on that land? I had, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:18:55

15:19:06

120 1

Q

571

And you were involved in a number of different activities but in 1992 you

2

purchased a pub or a licensed premises known as the Railway House at Inchicore,

3

is that right?

4

A

5

Q

That's correct, yes. 572

Now after you had purchased the licence premises known as the Railway House,

6

Mr. Liam Lawlor sometime after that approached you asking you to cash a cheque,

7

is that right?

8

A

9

Q

That's correct, yes. 573

15:19:22 10

11

And thereafter, over a following period of time, a relationship grew up between yourself and Mr. Lawlor whereby you agreed to cash cheques for him?

A

Well I didn't agree, just when he would ask me, there was no arrangement,

12

agreement, just when he asked me to cash a cheque, if I had the cash, I would

13

cash it for him.

14

Q

574

15:19:39 15

available to you?

16

A

17

Q

That's correct, yes. 575

18

Now would it be fair to say that the categories of cheques you were asked to cash, they fell into different categories, the cheques were asked to cash?

19

A

15:19:52 20

Q

That's right, yes. 576

21

There would have been cheques drawn on Mr. Liam Lawlor's own bank account and unhappily some of these bounced, is that right?

22

A

23

Q

24

A

15:20:05 25

Q

That's right. 577

And then there would be cheques made out to Mr. Liam Lawlor? That's right, yes.

578

26

There would have been a cheque signed by X but the payee would be Mr. Liam Lawlor?

27

A

28

Q

29 15:20:20 30

And at that time you were in the public house business and you had cash

That's right. 579

And then there would be third party cheques probably so-called where the payee was not Mr. Liam Lawlor but could be a company name or some other name?

A

That's correct, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:20:21

15:20:31

121 1

Q

2

A

3

Q

580

Yes. 581

4 5

And they were the cheques you cashed for Mr. Lawlor?

In general, the cheques drawn on his own personal bank account were for relatively small sums of the order of 1,000 or thereabouts?

A

That's right, normally it would be for wages, he would ring me of a Thursday

6

and say keep me back a thousand and I will drop you around a cheque. It was

7

always around a thousand and it was the AIB Bank in Lucan.

8

Q

582

9

And the second category of cheques would be cheques that were made out to Mr. Liam Lawlor by third parties?

15:20:50 10

A

11

Q

That's right, yes. 583

And you would cash those cheques or if you hadn't enough money to cash it in

12

its entirety, you would lodge the cheque and pay off Mr. Lawlor the proceeds

13

over a short period of time?

14

A

Sometimes I just give him a certain amount of cash and he would look for one of

15:21:07 15

my own cheques, the business cheque.

16

Q

17

A

584

And he might say to me, make that payable to Hazel or make it payable to Pat

18 19

Long or somebody like that, the balance of the money. Q

585

15:21:24 20

I am going to come to those in a second and then the third category of cheques were cheques that would be made out to companies or people where Mr. Lawlor's

21

name did not appear on the face of the cheque at all.

22

A

23

Q

That's right, yes. 586

24

And can I, I just what you were talking about there a moment ago, what you used to always also do for Mr. Lawlor, if he was looking for a large amount of money

15:21:43 25

and you didn't have the amount of money, you would give him a cheque drawn on

26

your own business account?

27

A

28

Q

29 15:21:58 30

Yes.

That's right. 587

What might happen, say for example, was that Mr. Lawlor would come to you with a cheque say for 38,000 pounds made out to somebody other than Mr. Lawlor?

A

Yes. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:21:58

15:22:11

122 1

Q

588

And he would want to be paid the proceeds of that cheque and you might give

2

him, say, 8,000 pounds in cash which you would have had from your business, and

3

you would give him a business cheque made out to Mr. Lawlor in the sum of

4

30,000 pounds?

5

A

Yes, he would get the balance and if I gave him the 8,000, he would get the

6 7

balance then in cheques, my own cheques. Q

589

But the effect of that would be that when Mr. Lawlor lodged that 30,000 cheque

8

to his own account, it would be a cheque in the name of Mr. Lawlor, isn't that

9

right?

15:22:25 10

A

11

Q

Yes. 590

12 13

Because when you made the cheque out to him or Mr. Lawlor wrote the cheque and you signed it, you made it out to Liam Lawlor or Hazel Lawlor?

A

That's right or there was another man, I know there was one, there was 1,500

14

pounds made by the name of Liam long.

15:22:45 15

Q

16

A

17

Q

18

A

19

Q

591

Pat Long? Pat Long.

592

John Long, he has given evidence here previously. I know him as Pat Long anyway.

593

15:22:58 20

He was an associate I think it would be fair to describe it of the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?

21

A

22

Q

That's right. 594

The way you would fund the cheques that Mr. Lawlor would come to you, if he

23

came to you with a very large cheque, is that you would give him what cash you

24

had and you would then give him a cheque drawn on your business account,

15:23:08 25

payable either to Liam Lawlor or Hazel Lawlor or Pat Long otherwise John Long?

26

A

27

Q

Yes. 595

28

And the effect of that would be is that it would be your bank that would take the large cheque and process the large cheque?

29

A

15:23:21 30

Q

That's correct, yes. 596

It would go through the account of Clearys? www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:23:23

15:23:39

123 1

A

2

Q

It would always go through the Clearys account, yeah. 597

And I think that you have calculated and it isn't necessary for us to break it

3

down in detail, you have calculated, in association with your accountant, the

4

value of the cheques or monies that you paid out to Mr. Lawlor over the years,

5

isn't that right?

6

A

7

Q

That's right. 598

8 9 15:23:48 10

And you estimate that the figure is somewhere between 238,000 and 270,000 pounds, isn't that right?

A Q

In or around that figure. 599

11

And that is the value of the cheques or monies that you dealt with through your business on behalf of the late Mr. Liam Lawlor?

12

A

13

Q

That's right, yes. 600

14

Now I think that the Tribunal in the course of this Module wrote to you and they sent you two cheques and if I could have 8912 first on screen and this is

15:24:14 15

a cheque, Mr. Murphy, that is made out to Frank Dunlop & Associates in the sum

16

of 10,000 pounds dated 26th May 1993 and on the back of the cheque there is a

17

signature, Frank Dunlop and there is name Clearys.

18

A

19

Q

15:24:33 20

A

That's right, yes. 601

Now can you assist the Tribunal as to how or when that cheque was negotiated? The late Mr. Lawlor, Liam would have brought me that cheque and I would have

21

cashed it for him because Clearys is on the back of it and my wife, I have a

22

writing problem with my right hand and my wife always signs the cheques, just

23

at the back Clearys for lodgment to the bank, when we'd be lodging them to the

24

bank, that way the bank would know if the cheque, you know, if the cheque, they

15:24:59 25

know it's Clearys' cheque and that signature on the back there, that's

26

something the way Mr. Lawlor used to write. I remember him signing that cheque

27

at the back up in the pub, just put a squiggly scrawl as I call it across it.

28

Q

29 15:25:22 30

602

So you remember the late Mr. Liam Lawlor signing Frank Dunlop's name on the back of that cheque?

A

He done it up in the living quarters of the pub. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:25:26

15:25:36

124 1

Q

603

2

Catherine, is that correct?

3

A

4

Q

That's correct. 604

5

And that was for the purpose of assisting the bank when the matter was being processed, isn't that right? That it would go to the proper account?

6

A

7

Q

8

A

Yes. 605

And was Clearys the name of the public house? That was the name of the public house. It was the Great Southern/Western

9

Railway House, the person I brought it off, a woman by the name of Alice Cleary

15:25:49 10

11

This is up over the pub. And the signature Clearys was put on by your wife

and I left it as Clearys, I didn't change the name. Q

606

And in the bank they would have known, when they got the cheque in, that this

12

was a cheque that was going through the Clearys account as opposed to the farm

13

account or any other account that you had?

14

A

I had no other account, I had only a savings account that's all I had in it,

15:26:03 15

along with the business account.

16

Q

17

A

18

Q

607

How do you remember this cheque specifically? Just I remember it, it's just I remember it.

608

19

And you are absolutely satisfied that that's the signature of the late Mr. Liam Lawlor on the back.

15:26:17 20

A

21

Q

That's right. 609

Can I show you a second cheque at 8913. And this is a cheque dated the 5th

22

January 1995 in the sum of 2,500 pounds in favour of Mr. Liam Lawlor and on the

23

reverse of the cheque, it has P Murphy, lounge bar, Inchicore. Was that cheque

24

negotiated through you as well?

15:26:39 25

A

26

Q

27

A

28

Q

29 15:26:58 30

That's the stamp I got printed up for that then for cheques. 610

And would you have given cash to Mr. Lawlor for that cheque? I did, yes.

611

Right. And on occasion, when Mr. Lawlor wrote cheques, the Friday cheques for wages that bounced, would you then have taken the proceeds out of subject cheques that Mr. Lawlor gave you? www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:27:00

15:27:15

125 1

A

When I approached him about the cheques coming back, he said I will be giving

2

you more and whatever is due to you take it out of the cheque and give me the

3

balance.

4

Q

612

Right. And can I show you a list of names, Mr. Murphy, and can you indicate to

5

the Tribunal where you ever remember cheques made out to these people or signed

6

by these people being cashed by you on behalf of Mr. Lawlor, if I could have

7

1269 please? And just the first half of that page. And I will read the names

8

out to you, it's just in case it might stir a recollection if you have one,

9

Mr. Murphy, of seeing these names, Industrial Consultants International.

15:27:40 10

A

11

Q

12

A

13

Q

14

A

15:27:47 15

Q

16

A

17

Q

18

A

19

Q

15:28:02 20

A

21

Q

Don't remember it. 613

Comex or Comex Limited. No.

614

Economic Reports? No.

615

Eastern International? No.

616

Long Consultants. That Long Consultants rings a bell with me all right. I think so.

617

And Long Associates? No.

618

And did you previously lodge a cheque, I think, to one of your accounts in the

22

name of Long Consultants which you subsequently paid out in a number of pieces

23

or tranches to Mr. Lawlor and his wife?

24

A

15:28:20 25

Q

26

A

27

Q

28

A

29

Q

15:28:36 30

A

Sorry, say that again please. 619

Did you get a cheque, I think a cheque for 38,000 pounds -That's right, I did, yes.

620

Drawn on Long Consultants? Well I don't know whether it was a Long Consultants.

621

Or payable to Long Consultants, which you lodged to an account of yours? That's correct, yes. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:28:36

15:28:46

126 1

Q

622

2 3

payments? A

That's right, yes, they were paid through the Ulster bank cheques, so there is

4 5

And which you paid out to Mr. Lawlor and I think his wife in four or five

a record of them there. Q

623

Yes and if you just look then at Advance Proteins Limited, do you ever remember

6

a cheque made out to Advanced Proteins Limited or by Advanced Proteins Limited

7

which you cashed?

8

A

9

Q

15:29:00 10

A

11

Q

12

A

13

Q

No. 624

No. 625

Or can I give you another name that's not on that list, Baltic Timbers Limited. No, I don't, they could have but I don't remember them.

626

14 15:29:19 15

Or Demographic and Strategic Consultants?

But you do I think have a recollection of regularly cashing cheques that were drawn on an account in Czechoslovakia?

A

I think Flymo was the name on that account, I'm not sure. But I know it was

16

Czechoslovakia anyway.

17

Q

18

A

19

Q

627

It was a Czechoslovakian bank, I think, is that right? That's right, yes.

628

15:29:28 20

And it was a relatively small sums but regular sums of the order of a thousand pounds?

21

A

22

Q

All around a thousand pounds. 629

And I think it would be fair to say that insofar as any writing of cheques were

23

concerned, it was in the normal course your wife Catherine Murphy who wrote out

24

the cheques for you?

15:29:40 25

A

26

Q

That's correct. 630

27

Or if she wasn't available, Mr. Lawlor wrote out the cheques and you signed them?

28

A

29

Q

15:29:49 30

A

No, I wouldn't sign them. 631

You would put your name to the bottom. Normally my wife would have four or five cheques signed in the book. www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:29:54

15:30:09

127 1

Q

2

A

3

Q

632

Yes. 633

4

Did you ever or do you recollect ever seeing a cheque made in favour of an entity called Pragus Strategic Studies?

5

A

6

Q

No. 634

7 8

And then if she wasn't available, Mr. Lawlor would fill out the cheque?

That doesn't ring any bell with you. And ultimately, I think, Mr. Murphy, you ceased carrying out this activity for Mr. Lawlor, is that right?

A

I did, we had a robbery at the house and I had cashed a cheque for him for

9

2,000 pounds and he was supposed to collect it on the Friday night and there

15:30:33 10

was a robbery on the Sunday, he didn't collect the cheque and there was a

11

robbery on the Sunday night and when he eventually came around for the 2,000

12

pounds, he made a kind of a laugh about it, he still wanted his money anyway.

13

He didn't seem to be a bit concerned or sympathy for me or anything.

14

Q

635

15:30:55 15

It was yourself weren't involved in the robbery but your wife and children were, is that right?

16

A

17

Q

18

A

19

Q

My wife and children were. 636

It was a very traumatic incident? It was.

637

15:31:03 20

And I think you subsequently met Mr. Lawlor following that and he asked you was the robbery in your premises, is that right?

21

A

22

Q

23

A

24

Q

He did, yes. 638

And you confirmed that that was so. That was so, yes.

639

15:31:12 25

And thereafter, I think Mr. Lawlor asked when he could get his money, is that right?

26

A

27

Q

He did, I got it for him in the next couple of days, it came off the insurance. 640

28

And it was following that incident that you stopped providing this service, if I can call it that, to Mr. Lawlor, is that correct?

29

A

15:31:24 30

Q

That's right, yes. 641

Thank you very much, Mr. Murphy, if you would answer any questions anybody may www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:31:33

15:31:33

128 1

have for you.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

Do you have any questions?

4 5

MR McCARTHY: I have no questions.

6 7

CHAIRMAN:

8

ceased providing the service for him?

9

A

15:31:48 10

Mr. Murphy, what did Mr. Lawlor do for you up to the time you

He didn't do anything for me really. I just had the land off him, I had 22 acres, I was giving him 1,500 a year for it which I thought was good value.

11 12

CHAIRMAN: When he signed the Frank Dunlop cheque, did that not concern you

13

that he was putting somebody else's name to it?

14

A

It didn't. It was -- I cashed third party cheques all the time. You know.

15:32:07 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

17

get the cash sign the cheque?

18

A

But would it would it be not normal to have the person who was to

Not normally, no.

19 15:32:21 20

21

CHAIRMAN: A

All right. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

22 23

MS. DILLON:

Thank you, I understand the next witness is Miss Catherine Murphy

24

but I'm only going to ask her to confirm the evidence already given.

15:32:30 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

There's no need to.

27 28

MS. DILLON:

There's no need call, if there's no need to call her, then that

29

concludes the business of the day.

15:32:37 30

www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:32:37

15:32:41

129 1

CHAIRMAN:

All right, we are not sitting.

2 3

MS. DILLON:

Tomorrow and we are not sitting on Friday.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

Does Mr. Murphy's counsel want to say anything.

6 7

MR McCARTHY: No.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

We are not sitting tomorrow or Friday.

15:32:48 10

11

MS. DILLON:

We are sitting Tuesday I think. I am just flagging there may be

12

a difficulty with some of the witnesses on Tuesday, we don't know what the

13

actual position is but we understand that it's unlikely that Mr. Albert

14

Reynolds will be available on Tuesday.

15:33:02 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

We will say 10.30 on Tuesday.

17 18

MS. DILLON:

May it please you sir.

MR SANFEY:

Chairman, I am sorry just before you rise, Mr. Lynn obviously was

19 15:33:10 20

21

our last substantial witness, we may have to return for Mr. Paul Monahan or

22

whatever, I just wonder could we get some indication from the Tribunal as to

23

when submissions might be entertained, particularly given the time of year and

24

so on.

15:33:27 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

Well certainly not for, it will be some months time I would expect.

27 28

MR SANFEY:

Yes. After the other Modules about Mr. Dunlop have been

29

concluded, I take it.

15:33:40 30

www.pcr.ie Day 669

15:33:40

15:33:52

130 1

CHAIRMAN:

Probably not this year.

2 3

MS. DILLON:

It will be open of course to Mr. Sanfey to put in his submissions

4

immediately that the Module concludes and to supplement them later after the

5

conclusion of the other Modules. It's not to say that he can't put in his

6

submissions.

7 8

CHAIRMAN:

9

and that is that written submissions, lawyers may feel the matters fresh in

15:34:08 10

There is a facility which some parties have exercised or opted for

their minds and they can certainly submit written submissions which would be

11

held by the Tribunal until such time as an invitation generally goes out to

12

parties in particular Modules to make submissions and they can be either left

13

as they are, if they have been made in the form of, in the written form or they

14

can be expanded upon. So you have that choice. So if you prefer, if you or

15:34:33 15

any other party wants to put in written submissions given we are effectively at

16

the end of this Module, then you can do so. If you wish to do so but there

17

will be an opportunity at a much later date to add to these if you do decide or

18

to make them fresh.

19 15:34:52 20

21

MR SANFEY:

To do it sooner rather than later sounds like a very wise course

of action, chairman, I think I might avail of that.

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

Some of the parties do that. And the opportunity will arise to add

24

to them if you wish.

15:35:05 25

26

MR SANFEY:

Thank you, sir, I am very grateful, thank you.

27 28

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL TUESDAY, 25TH JULY 2006,

29

AT 10.30 A.M.

30 www.pcr.ie Day 669

09:30:22

10:40:03

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON

2

TUESDAY 25TH JULY 2006 AT 10.30 AM:

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Morning Ms. Dillon.

5 6

MS. DILLON:

7

morning, sir, is some correspondence that has passed between the Tribunal and

8

Fine Gael arising out of an article that was published in the Irish Times on 15

9

July 2006 and on the 19 July 2006 the Tribunal wrote to Mr. Kevin O'Higgins,

10:40:22 10

Morning sir.

The first matter I want to open to you this

solicitor for Fine Gael in the following terms.

11 12

"Dear Mr. O'Higgins, I have been instructed by the Tribunal to write to you in

13

connection with an article published in the Irish Times on 15 July 2006 under

14

the heading "Fine Gael contends Barrett Tribunal" outraged. In this article

10:40:40 15

the political correspondent to the Irish Times, Stephen Collins, quotes from a

16

statement attributed to a spokesman for Fine Gael which describes the conduct

17

of the Tribunal as an outrage and disgrace. The Tribunal is concerned to

18

establish whether or not the statement quoted was made by a Fine Gael spokesman

19

and if so wishes to address it's content. Accordingly, I am instructed to

10:41:01 20

request to you ascertain from your client whether such statement was made by a

21

Fine Gael spokesman, if so the Tribunal request your client to provide the

22

Tribunal with a factual basis for such statement so the matter can be addressed

23

by the Tribunal.

24 10:41:14 25

The Tribunal requests your client give this matter immediate attention."

26 27

The Tribunal received on the 21st July 2006 a letter from Mr. Kevin O'Higgins,

28

solicitor for Fine Gael, which was, in fairness to Mr. Higgins, not a letter in

29

reply to the Tribunal's letter but one which had been prepared by him on his

10:41:33 30

return from holidays on him being appraised of the contents of the article. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:41:38

10:41:54

2 1 2

At the outset I should say it's clear from Mr. O'Higgins letter that there is

3

an unreserved apology in the letter to the Tribunal for the remarks attributed

4

to the Fine Gael spokesman as carried in the Irish Times.

5 6

In fairness to Mr. O'Higgins I will read the letter in it's entirety into the

7

record. The letter is dated 21st July 2006.

8 9 10:42:06 10

"Dear sir, I refer to media reports of comments made by a Fine Gael party official following the recent evidence before the Tribunal of Mr. Michael

11

Smith. The comments reported purported to criticise the Tribunal for the

12

manner in which it conducted the taking of evidence of Mr. Smyth. As

13

solicitors having representation on behalf of Fine Gael it would be

14

inappropriate for us to make any comment in relation to a third party matter.

10:42:26 15

16

However, we regret the comments made. Such comments were inappropriate and ought not to have been made.

17 18

As solicitor to the Fine Gael party I have full responsibility for the party's

19

interaction with the Tribunal and report directly to the general secretary of

10:42:40 20

the party for instructions. Other than taking instructions from the party

21

leader, the general secretary and he alone has exclusive authority in the

22

matter.

23 24 10:42:55 25

The remarks as reported were not made in the form of a formal press release or statement from the party. The comments were made by way of a telephone

26

briefing conversation with the journalist and arose in the context of

27

significant media reports of serious third party allegations against a serious

28

party member.

29 10:43:08 30

The comments made arose out of a sense of annoyance as that person concerned Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:43:13

10:43:24

3 1

perceived it that these matters had not been put to him when he had earlier

2

been a witness before the Tribunal.

3 4

At the time the comments were made, the general secretary of the on leave and

5

although attempts were made to contact him these efforts proved unsuccessful.

6

Furthermore, neither I nor counsel instructed in the matter were consulted. As

7

it happened I was in the South Africa last week and there may have been a view

8

that I too would have been uncontactable.

9 10:43:40 10

Having caught up with matters since my return on Monday evening last I was most

11

unhappy to read the comments as reported. On speaking to senior officials

12

within the party leadership there was an appreciation that if any issue arose

13

concerning the evidence heard by the Tribunal it ought to have been aired

14

before the Tribunal itself through the good offices of counsel for the party

10:43:59 15

concerned.

16 17

Fine Gael accordingly regrets the comments made and unreservedly apologises to

18

the Tribunal for any impression created that the party is critical of the work

19

carried on by the Tribunal.

10:44:10 20

21

While there is no attempt to deny the accuracy of the report by the journalist,

22

the comments made emphatically do not represent the views of Fine Gael. This

23

letter has been sanctioned with the full authority of the party leadership as

24

conveyed to us by the general secretary and was settled and approved on the

10:44:27 25

afternoon of Wednesday July 19 before receiving your letter of the same date by

26

courier at 5.25 that evening. We make this point in order to emphasise the

27

importance attributed by us and by the Fine Gael party to the necessity of

28

disassociation from the comments made since the article appeared and in

29

particular since the writer's return to the country on Monday evening last.

10:44:47 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:44:47

10:45:02

4 1

Subject to any views the Tribunal may have in the matter my instructions are to

2

relay it's contents in the Tribunal's public session. Fine Gael has the

3

highest regard for the Tribunal and values the productive and cooperative

4

relationship that has developed with the Tribunal over the past years.

5 6

Fine Gael will continue to assist the Tribunal in it's difficult and important

7

tax in anyway it can in the future.

8 9

Yours faithfully, Kevin O'Higgins solicitors"

10:45:13 10

11

I think that clarifies the matter arising from the publication of that article.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

All right, thank you very much.

14 10:45:21 15

MS. DILLON:

Mr. John Bruton please.

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:45:30

10:46:00

5 1 2

JOHN BRUTON, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON

3 4 5

CHAIRMAN: Q. 1

Morning Mr. Bruton.

Good morning Mr. Bruton. There are really two matters that I want to deal with

6

this morning, one is the question of any payments that may have been made to

7

the Fine Gael party by Monarch Properties and the second relates to a meeting

8

that took place in Conway's on or around the 21st of September 1993.

9 10:46:19 10

I think that you were leader of Fine Gael for a long period of time and

11

Taoiseach from 1994 to 1997, is that correct?

12

A.

That's correct.

13

Q. 2

You are presently EU Ambassador to Washington, is that correct?

14

A.

I am Ambassador heading the European Commission Delegation in Washington.

Q. 3

And I think the Tribunal wrote to you on the 1st of February 2006 and asked you

10:46:37 15

16

to provide information by way of a statement in relation to any information

17

that you have in relation to certain people identified in that correspondence,

18

these are people in connection with Monarch Properties and any payments that

19

may have been made to Fine Gael, page 127 please.

10:47:01 20

21

Now, you were asked for details of any contacts or meetings you would have had

22

with Monarch Properties Limited or Monarch properties services limited or any

23

company in the Monarch Group and at paragraph two you were asked for any

24

contacts or meetings you would have had with the late Mr. Phil Monahan, Mr.

10:47:16 25

Richard Lynn, Mr. Eddie Sweeney, Mr. Dominic Glennane, Mr. Phillip Reilly and

26

Mr. Frank Dunlop or any individual or company -- can I ask you first and

27

foremost Mr. Bruton whether you ever met the late Phillip Monahan?

28 29 10:47:43 30

A.

I think I may have seen him anyway. I think I remember seeing him at a funeral in Castletown, County Meath on one occasion, and maybe on other occasions. I am not sure that I ever spoke to him, but he was someone whom I could recognise Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:47:49

10:48:01

6 1 2

anyway. Q. 4

3 4

Did you ever ask Mr. Monahan, to your recollection, for any political donation or support for the Fine Gael party?

A.

Not to my recollection. Obviously, I can't say that the party didn't issue

5

circulars, one of which or letters one of which he might have received

6

requesting a donation, I don't know anything about that.

7

Q. 5

Did you ever meet a Mr. Richard Lynn?

8

A.

I don't believe so, not to my knowledge. That name doesn't mean anything to me

9 10:48:18 10

at all. Q. 6

Mr. Eddie Sweeney?

11

A.

Nor does that name mean anything to me.

12

Q. 7

Mr. Dominic Glennane?

13

A.

Likewise.

14

Q. 8

Mr. Phillip Reilly?

A.

Yes, I think I probably did meet Phillip Reilly and spoke to him. I think

10:48:27 15

16

Phillip Reilly originates in County Meath. I think his family are from County

17

Meath or somewhere in that part of the country with which I am most familiar,

18

and I might have met him in that context or at events of some kind or other,

19

but I don't remember having any substantial conversation with him about any

10:48:58 20

21

matter effecting the business with which he is associated. Q. 9

22 23

Did -- you would have known, would you not, that the late Mr. Phillip Monahan was the General Manager or founding director of the Monarch Group?

A.

24

Well, I don't know that I would necessarily. I knew he was in that, in the business of development and probably knew he was associated with Monarch. I

10:49:21 25

don't really know, it's very difficult to exactly fix what one's state of

26

knowledge would have been back in the early 1990s, but I knew he was in this

27

business. I think I -- I think he may have associated in my mind with the

28

shopping centre in Tallaght.

29 10:49:46 30

Q. 10

I was about to ask you that. Would you not have known that Monarch Properties were the company that were developing the shopping centre in Tallaght. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:49:49

10:50:01

7 1

A.

I think so. Well, I would have known Mr. Monahan was involved with it, I am

2

not sure how much the word Monarch Properties would necessarily have meant to

3

me at the time.

4

Q. 11

5

But you would have known that Mr. Monahan had an involvement with the development of the Tallaght Town Centre?

6

A.

Yes, yes.

7

Q. 12

Can I ask you -- first of all can I show you a cheque at page 3905 please?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 13

This is a cheque made out to you as leader of Fine Gael on the 18th November

10:50:20 10

1992, that was in the course of a then general election, isn't that right?

11

A.

I believe that general election, polling day took place some days later.

12

Q. 14

Can you assist the Tribunal as to the circumstances in which that cheque came

13 14

to be made out to you. A.

10:50:40 15

party would tend to receive donations during an election campaign, whether it

16 17

No, not really. I imagine it was a donation received by the party, as the

was solicited or unsolicited I don't know. Q. 15

And I think from inquiries that have been made within Fine Gael according to

18

your solicitor, Mr. O'Higgins, that payment was lodged to the Fine Gael account

19

with Bank of Ireland?

10:50:58 20

21

A.

So I am advised.

Q. 16

Right. But that is a matter that would have been attended to by somebody other

22 23

than yourself, Mr. Bruton? A.

24 10:51:10 25

Most certainly yes. I wouldn't have had any involvement with that sort of thing during an election campaign.

Q. 17

I think again in 1997 at 6333 please there is a cheque for three thousand

26

pounds also made out to Fine Gael and I think that again your solicitor has

27

advised that this sum was also, together with another sum of 1,000 pounds, was

28

paid into the Fine Gael account of Bank of Ireland?

29 10:51:39 30

A.

So I am advised, I don't think I ever saw this cheque at any time until recently. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:51:40

10:52:00

8 1

Q. 18

2 3

Did you ever seek or solicit any financial support from Monarch Properties that you can recollect?

A.

No. Well -- it's possible that letters were issued in which my name was

4

mentioned on behalf, by the Fine Gael party, either locally in the constituency

5

where he was active or otherwise. I am not aware of ever soliciting any money

6

from him.

7

Q. 19

Now, I think in September of 1993 Mr. Bruton, you had a meeting or you

8

organised a meeting in Conway's pub of the Fine Gael members of Dublin County

9

Council as it then was, is that right?

10:52:22 10

A.

That's right. I was approached -- sorry. There had been, as I think is

11

outlined in a statement which the Fine Gael party furnished to the Tribunal in

12

2001, there had been a considerable amount of controversy during the summer of

13

1993 about the way in which the Development Plan for Dublin County was being

14

processed, and in particular there was a concern that in the case of the Fine

10:52:58 15

Gael party the members seemed to be voting against one another rather than

16

attempting to reach a group position on development issues. And while the

17

party was of the view, I believe it remains of the view that in exercising

18

their function as members of a County Council in drawing up or revising a

19

Development Plan, that at the end of the day members act quasi judicially and

10:53:31 20

therefore must make their own independent judgement. There was, I think quite

21

a concern, that the Fine Gael group in Dublin County Council wasn't making any

22

effort at all to try to come to a common position on matters of this nature,

23

sorry on this matter, on these matters and I understand from my reading of the

24

statement that has been furnished to this Tribunal by the Fine Gael party that

10:54:05 25

the then spokesperson on the environment, Mrs. Avril Doyle had intervened with

26

the leader of the group of the time, Fine Gael group, Donal Marren,

27

unsuccessfully in an attempt to get more coherence.

28 29 10:54:30 30

I should also just by way of political background say that in 1993 Fine Gael at the time was in the aftermath of the 1992 general election which had not been a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:54:36

10:54:57

9 1

successful election for Fine Gael and particularly had not been a successful

2

election for Fine Gael in Dublin, and there was a concern that we should, in

3

every way we could reasonably do so, present a coherent image as a party to the

4

electorate of Dublin on matters of importance to the electorate of Dublin and

5

that included the way in which the Fine Gael members in the local authorities

6

serving Dublin would present themselves and present the party.

7 8

So it was in that, against that background that I believe I myself initiated a

9

contact with councillor Donal Marren and he suggested to me that I would come

10:55:24 10

to a group meeting which he convened in Conway's public house which is around

11

the corner from the offices of Dublin County Council, in order to convey, to

12

give me an opportunity to convey my concerns to the members of the council and

13

to give the members, Fine Gael members of the council an opportunity to convey

14

their viewpoints to me.

10:55:54 15

Q. 20

One of the matters that I think you have just told the Tribunal that was of

16

concern to you was the lack of unity or disparity of approach of the Fine Gael

17

members that was drawn to your attention as a problem, is that right?

18

A.

Well I was of the view myself, I think many in the party were, that this was

19

not good, not good from any point of view in the sense that it presented the

10:56:16 20

party as an incoherent group that couldn't work together as a group, and by

21

definition a political party is an entity, it ought to operate or seek to

22

operate cohesively, that's the justification of the very existence of political

23

parties.

24 10:56:34 25

But also I think there was a concern that the decisions that were being taken

26

might not be the best decisions and that other parties by virtue of the fact

27

that they acted in a more disciplined fashion were having more of an impact on

28

the future shape of County Dublin than the Fine Gael party, and that had

29

implications which I wanted to address.

10:57:05 30

Q. 21

Well, was the concern that was identified to you and which you wished to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:57:09

10:57:23

10 1

address the fact, that it appeared or there was a perception that the members

2

of Fianna Fail were more unified in the approach they took to voting in

3

relation to the Development Plan?

4

A.

5

Yes. My understanding is that that the members of Fianna Fail actually imposed a whip, that Fianna Fail imposed a whip on itself in these issues.

6

Q. 22

These are Development Plan issues?

7

A.

That's my understanding. Obviously I can't speak for Fianna Fail, that was the

8 9

information that I had at the time. Q. 23

10:57:39 10

11

But this wouldn't have been information that you would have had of your own knowledge Mr. Bruton because you weren't a member of Dublin County Council?

A.

That's right. No, it would have been I suppose common knowledge, and probably

12

may even have been touched upon in some of the articles in the media that were

13

being, that were written as far as, around that time, as far as I know. It has

14

been called to my attention in preparation for this evidence, that Mr. Frank

10:58:06 15

McDonald I think had a series of articles in the Irish Times, it may well have

16

been that that fact was adduced in those articles. I can't identify exactly

17

where I would have got that information.

18

Q. 24

19

And at this time in September 1993 the final phase of the review of the 1983 Development Plan for County Dublin was drawing to a close, in other words the

10:58:28 20

final consideration that, the lands were up for their final consideration

21

before the councillors in this period leading up to December 1993, isn't that

22

right?

23

A.

Of the 1993 Development Plan, yes.

24

Q. 25

And this therefore at the time this meeting took place this was taking place at

10:58:43 25

a time when it was going to be the last chance for any councillor to influence

26 27

how the county was going to be shaped, isn't that right? A.

Well that would appear to be the case. I can't say whether that particular

28

fact was in my mind at the time. I was more concerned I think as the overall

29

party leader, with a general image of the party, rather than with the specific

10:59:10 30

content of the Dublin Development Plan which was not a concern of mine. So Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

10:59:14

10:59:29

11 1

whether I would have been aware at the time I phoned Donal Marren that we were

2

at the last possible point in the revision and production of a particular

3

Development Plan, I can't say for sure.

4

Q. 26

But you would have -- but whether you were aware of how close it was to

5

conclusion, leaving that aside, you would have been aware Mr. Bruton that what

6

the council was dealing with in 1993 was primarily the making of the 1993

7

County Development Plan for Dublin?

8

A.

9

I think so, but I don't know for sure. I mean whether I was actually conscious of the deadlines and the processes applying to Dublin County Council in terms

10:59:55 10

of the Development Plan, I don't know. What I do know I would have been aware

11

of was the public concern about the way in which, and concern within the party

12

as well I should say, with the way in which members of the Fine Gael group were

13

going in different directions. I understand that within the party, the Dublin

14

Regional Council had also held a meeting at which one of the councillors was

11:00:25 15

debating with Mr. Frank Mac Donald about the right approach to development in

16

Dublin. I have learned that had recently and I think that probably would have

17

-- that indicates to me that there would have been concern in the party,

18

amongst grass roots members of the party that the councillors were not acting

19

in as coherent a fashion as one would expect them to seek to act, as members of

11:00:51 20

a political party, taking due account of the fact that ultimately they did act

21 22

in a quasi judicial capacity. Q. 27

But the question I asked you Mr. Bruton was whether you would have been aware

23

at the time you went to the meeting that the Development Plan was nearing

24

conclusion or if you weren't aware that it was nearing conclusion that what was

11:01:09 25

being considered at that stage by the councillors of Dublin County Council was

26

the Development Plan and I am suggesting to you that you must have known that

27

the primary business that was being conducted by Dublin County Council at that

28

time had to be the Development Plan?

29 11:01:31 30

A.

Sorry, I don't want to categorically state that probably that is the case -- I cannot remember whether the issue of the, the time limits for that particular Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:01:39

11:01:58

12 1

Development Plan was in my mind at that time. It probably was, but my concern

2

was more political really.

3

Q. 28

Yes. If I could just show you the notes that you made in relation to that

4

meeting that you furnished to the Tribunal Mr. Bruton at page 9066 please? I

5

think this is a copy of your notes, isn't that right?

6

A.

That's correct, yes.

7

Q. 29

I just want you to see -- if you look first of all it says "people adopt" then

8 9 11:02:10 10

it says "something councillors decision", do you see that at the very top? A.

Yes.

Q. 30

And then you have done the political break down of Dublin County Council to the

11

side, do you see that?

12

A.

Yes, I see that.

13

Q. 31

Then it goes down Dublin County Councillors party image divided, I think?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 32

Then do you see beneath that "Fianna Fail apply a whip on Development Plan"

11:02:21 15

16

under lined?

17

A.

Yes, I wrote that.

18

Q. 33

Yes, well I would suggest to you that because you have written Fianna Fail

19

apply a whip at the Development Plan at the commencement of this meeting you

11:02:34 20

must have been aware that the matters that were being considered by the Dublin

21

County Councillors at the time was the Development Plan?

22

A.

Yes I suppose so yes.

23

Q. 34

You then go on to identify certain matters such as one divided party, is that a

24 11:02:49 25

26

reference to Fianna Fail, Fine Gael? A.

Yes.

Q. 35

And then absolutionist's position, doesn't solve problems or don't solve

27

problems forever. Then number 3, will issues be forgotten. 4 says leave. 5

28

try to maximise unity and does that say brand image?

29 11:03:05 30

A.

Yes.

Q. 36

So were you trying to convey the necessity of a unified position? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:03:09

11:03:34

13 1

A.

2

Yes, I think that section of my notes with the six points was possibly what I intended to say.

3

Q. 37

Your agenda as it were?

4

A.

Yes, at the beginning of the meeting and I think then the points that I circled

5

would have been the points that I would have used in my concluding remarks

6

when I was drawing from either things I had said myself originally or points

7

that had been made by members of the County Council upon which I wanted to make

8

a remark.

9

Q. 38

11:04:05 10

group statement, group activities, extremely negative and seriously affected,

11 12

And number 6 under the heading of your agenda, if I can call it that, refers to

is that right? A.

Yes, that would have been the absence of a group approach would have been

13

extremely negative and that it would seriously affect our standing as a party.

14

Then I think communications to party to understand would have referred to

11:04:31 15

communicating within the party organisation, that members would have or

16

endeavour to have a group position which they could communicate, which would be

17

capable of being communicated by them or by others, within the party

18

organisation in Dublin so that they would know what was the Fine Gael approach

19

in general terms.

11:04:52 20

Q. 39

And did you advise the party or indicate to that party meeting in Conway's that

21

what was desired or what was wanted was that Fine Gael would present a more

22

united front in the course of the County Council meetings, that there would be

23

a Fine Gael position as it were?

24

A.

11:05:13 25

meet previous to meeting, or previous to voting on particular issues that they

26 27

would meet and try to find a common position. Q. 40

28 29 11:05:34 30

Well, that they would endeavour to find a Fine Gael position, that they would

And was it also indicated to the meeting that that common position if it could be found should be indicated to the Council at the start of each meeting?

A.

I believe that would be so, yes.

Q. 41

If that were to be the position Mr. Bruton, it would mean that the, what was Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:05:38

11:06:00

14 1

desired at that time in September 1993 was that a decision in relation to a

2

party position would be taken by the Fine Gael members at a Fine Gael meeting

3

in advance of the council meeting itself?

4

A.

5 6

Yes. Obviously the only feasible way of reaching a common position would be to do so before the voting took place.

Q. 42

7

And that that common position would then be announced or would be told to Dublin County Council at the council meeting?

8

A.

Yes, yes.

9

Q. 43

That would mean that the Fine Gael members were committing themselves to a

11:06:13 10

stated position in advance of hearing any arguments from any of their

11

colleagues from any other party on the floor of the chamber?

12

A.

It would mean that, it would mean that, yes.

13

Q. 44

And it would in effect mean --

14

A.

On the other hand, I think at the end of the day one accepts that members in

11:06:32 15

the County Council ultimately and this was the Fine Gael view and I know it's a

16

view that was minuted in a Fine Gael front bench decision earlier that year,

17

that at the end of the day members are acting in a quasi judicial capacity and

18

therefore have an individual obligation to follow their own individual

19

consciences but that does not preclude them, I think, from seeking to find a

11:06:59 20

common decision in the same fashion where judges are working they will seek to

21

find common positions without prejudice to the fact that they have an

22

individual responsibility at the end of the day as well.

23

Q. 45

24

But effectively what you appear to, and feel free to disagree with me if you wish, what you appear to have been attempting to introduce in the meeting in

11:07:21 25

September of 1993 was the introduction of a whip?

26

A.

No, I don't think --

27

Q. 46

If you let me finish?

28

A.

Excuse me, sorry.

29

Q. 47

An introduction of a whip on the Fine Gael members but a whip without sanction,

11:07:34 30

if I can put it like that, insofar as if one didn't follow the stated or agreed Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:07:38

11:08:01

15 1 2

position no sanction would follow, would you agree with that? A.

I think what I was attempting to do, as is indicated there in the portion of

3

the comments by Nora Owen, that I think I referred to subsequently in my

4

closing remarks, that they should endeavour to get a party line even on some

5

issues and get some coherence on some issues. That did not mean that in every

6

case there would be an automatic whip backed up by a sanction. I would make

7

the point that in general while the Fine Gael party applies a whip quite

8

strictly in the Dail and in the Seanad, it hasn't been the practice of the

9

party to apply a strict whip at local authority level other than in cases where

11:08:28 10

the vote is taking place at the annual meeting for various offices where if the

11

party has decided that a particular member should be its' candidate for

12

Chairman everyone is obliged to vote for that candidate. So, to have

13

introduced a very strict whip on other business wouldn't have been usual, but I

14

think the -- what I was attempting to do was to get the members of the council

11:08:56 15

to apply the maximum moral persuasion to themselves in favour of a coherent

16 17

position. Q. 48

And certain it would appear to be the position that insofar as Mr. Cathal

18

Boland is concerned, and Mr. Cathal Boland has furnished a statement to the

19

Tribunal, outlining his recollection of the Conway's meeting and indicating

11:09:18 20

that thereafter because he was not happy to vote in accordance with the Fine

21

Gael position, he resigned because he felt he had breached what he describes as

22

your order of the previous evening?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 49

Isn't that, you will have seen that in Mr. Boland's statement?

A.

I have read Mr. Boland's statement. I don't think that I would characterise

11:09:35 25

26 27

anything that I said as an order, but as a strong advice, as a strong request. Q. 50

Right. But you would accept would you not Mr. Bruton that if the leader of a

28

political party and particularly a significant political party like Fine Gael

29

goes to the trouble of organising a meeting with local councillors who are in

11:09:59 30

the main local politicians and not national politicians that while you may not Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:10:03

11:10:23

16 1

describe it as an order, your instructions or your request could be perceived

2

certainly by your local authority members as a direction?

3

A.

Yes, I think that's possible that members could have interpreted it in that way

4

quite legitimately, but it was not my intention to impose a whip with automatic

5

sanctions or heavy sanctions of any kind, but rather to push members to,

6

towards attempting to meet, to attempt to achieve a coherent position. If

7

conceivably members had refused to attend such meetings, that could have

8

constituted a breach of discipline upon which sanctions might flow, but if

9

members were merely attending the meetings, conscientiously attempting to reach

11:11:05 10

a common position but then finding themselves at the end of the day not

11

agreeing with the common position, I don't think the same sanctions would flow

12

from that, that's the distinction I think I would have been drawing.

13

Q. 51

14

But insofar as the meeting took place Mr. Bruton, what your local authority councillors were being told by you was that the Fine Gael party wanted a

11:11:23 15

unified position, it wanted the party to meet in advance, it wanted it to

16

agree a unified position and to present that unified position to Dublin County

17

Council and to do so in the context of the Development Plan?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 52

And you would agree and I think you have agreed that because you were the

11:11:40 20

leader of the party and you had come to this meeting with this brief for them,

21

that that could have been interpreted by the Fine Gael members as an

22

instruction or a direction from you and from the party?

23

A.

24 11:12:03 25

Yes. The party leader giving that sort of request to people could be so interpreted but that doesn't --

Q. 53

There isn't much point having a meeting, with the greatest of respect to you

26

Mr. Bruton. If they are not going to listen to what you say and they are not

27

going to do what you want?

28 29 11:12:20 30

A.

That I wouldn't necessarily agree with. I take the view that the members of the local authority have their own electoral mandate. Each one is elected individually and while they ought to listen to what their party leader has to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:12:25

11:12:42

17 1

say and ought to take that on board, in the interests both of the party to

2

which they belong, that at the end of the day in matters of this nature people

3

do have margin of their own individually as on the basis of their own electoral

4

mandate.

5

Q. 54

6

But you wouldn't have any difficulty with accepting that they would have treated this meeting as a direction from you as party leader?

7

A.

I would have difficulty with the term direction, yes.

8

Q. 55

What were you doing if it wasn't giving them a direction on how they should

9 11:12:57 10

conduct their business? A.

I was giving them very strong, conveying to them a very strong request on

11

behalf of the party that they should seek to act in a more coherent fashion

12

than they had been previously acting and endeavour to get their act together,

13

so to speak, on planning matters. I don't know how more, how much further I

14

can go on that semantic discussion.

11:13:18 15

Q. 56

Right. Leaving semantics aside, the reality appears to be that when Mr. Cathal

16

Boland felt he could not adopt or following the line as suggested by you he

17

voted in a different fashion to his colleagues and then resigned from Fine

18

Gael, isn't that right?

19

A.

11:13:38 20

So, I have subsequently learned. I am not sure whether I was aware at the time that Mr. Boland took that decision that that was his reason for doing so.

21

Q. 57

Certainly according to Mr. Boland that's what he did following --

22

A.

I am not disputing that.

23

Q. 58

And it would appear also that in, that Ms. Mary Muldoon when she previously

24 11:13:56 25

gave evidence to the Tribunal on day 611 in a previous Module also described the meeting in the following terms at page 18 of bay 611, "I do recall one

26

particular meeting with Mr. John Bruton who was then Fine Gael leader. It was

27

in September of 1993 and we were all called to the up stairs room in Conway's

28

pub. And the thrust of what Mr. Bruton was saying to us was that we were a

29

disgrace in our voting patterns --

11:14:21 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:14:21

11:15:08

18 1 2

MR CREEGAN: I have nothing on my screen. Q. 59

There is a delay always on the transcript. Day 611, page 18 and 19. Yes I

3

think, I will start again She says "I do recall one particular meeting with

4

Mr. John Bruton who was then Fine Gael leader. It was in September of 1993 and

5

when we were all called up to the up stairs room in Conway's pub and the trust

6

of what Mr. Bruton was saying to us was that we were a disgrace in our voting

7

patterns. That we were going which way and what and he indicated that he would

8

like to us meet on each particular rezoning issue and make up our minds,

9

discuss the matter fully and then reach a consensus and vote all of us in the

11:15:27 10

same direction.

11 12

And at that meeting I said to Mr. Bruton, but then all of County Dublin is

13

going to be rezoned for housing and he said to me, how can you possibly say

14

that? I said well you surely know that there is a rezoning majority in this

11:15:40 15

party and combined with Fine Gael they are getting all the rezoning motions

16

through and he dismissed what I had to say at the time."

17 18

Now, Ms. Muldoon appears to suggest there, that what she took from the meeting

19

was that there was to be a consensus and everyone in Fine Gael was to vote in

11:15:58 20

21

the one direction? A.

That was the desirable objective, yes. I don't think I would have used the

22

term disgrace. I don't believe that -- I don't remember Mary Muldoon saying

23

what she is purported as saying here that she said to me that there was a

24

rezoning majority and that I then dismissed what she had to say. I have some

11:16:34 25

notes of the meeting which I have furnished to you and while I have no doubt

26

that Mary Muldoon was at the meeting I haven't any note of her making any

27

comment of that nature.

28

Q. 60

29 11:16:50 30

You don't appear to have recorded anything attributed to Ms. Muldoon in your notes, is that right?

A.

That's right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:16:50

11:17:08

19 1

Q. 61

2 3

And I think the balance of the notes record comments that were made by the other councillors in discussion with you arising from this?

A.

Yes I think -- of course one can't be sure, these were notes that I was writing

4

so to speak in the heat of the meeting, it's possible that something as strong

5

as that would be said and I wouldn't have noted it, but I think I would. But I

6

don't know.

7

Q. 62

What was the end result of the meeting Mr. Bruton?

8

A.

Well I had conveyed my views to the members of the council and I did what I

9

considered was, I discharged what I considered was my responsibility to convey

11:17:32 10

11

to them the need to act more coherently. Q. 63

And Mr. Boland in his statement says after the initial discussion it was

12

accepted that we, and by we I think he means the Fine Gael members of Dublin

13

County Council, should see how we could reach agreement as Deputy Bruton

14

instructed. Do you agree what you gave was an instruction or not?

11:17:54 15

A.

I think you could use that term. I have difficulty with these terms

16

instruction and direction when one is talking about discussions between

17

politicians who are each one of them elected. I think one -- it has not been

18

the practice in Fine Gael to issue instructions or directions on ordinary

19

business to local authorities and I don't think I would have been issuing an

11:18:22 20

instruction or a direction, but I would have been issuing a strong request with

21

all the authority that goes with the office I held at that time, namely party

22

leader.

23

Q. 64

24

That was the, I was quoting from Mr. Cathal Boland's statement Mr. Bruton and I am giving you an opportunity to comment on whether or not you agree with his

11:18:43 25

use of the word instruction, that's his use not mine?

26

A.

Yes, I see.

27

Q. 65

Thank you very much Mr. Bruton if you answer any questions that anybody else

28

might have for you.

29 11:18:53 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:18:53

11:19:14

20 1

WITNESS CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CREEGAN:

2 3

Q. 66

4

Conor Creegan counsel for Mr. Boland, good morning Mr. Bruton. Now Mr. Bruton can I take you to your notes if we can have, I think it's page 9066, back?

5

A.

Yes. I have them in front of me.

6

Q. 67

Can I take you to point number four there, what's that word?

7

A.

I don't know.

8

Q. 68

I suggest to you it's 'leave'?

9

A.

Oh sorry the word, I don't know what it means. I think it is 'leave'.

Q. 69

Okay, so I will try and help you there. I quote from Mr. Boland's statement

11:19:29 10

11

and I will just kick into it, that he, he is referring to you, "He did not care

12

what we zoned or did not zone, but that he wanted his councillors to block

13

vote or agree positions reached among themselves in private session, that those

14

who could not vote with the majority" this is the key "That those who could not

11:19:59 15

vote with the majority should leave the group", I suggest that that's what

16 17

number four means? A.

18 19

Yeah, I don't think that that's the -- I don't think I would have expected people to depart from the party.

Q. 70

Well Mr. Boland remembers it like that, you have got a note that says leave?

A.

Yes. I see the word.

21

Q. 71

It walks like a duck and quacks like a duck Mr. Bruton?

22

A.

Well leave could have meant -- look I don't want to speculate beyond --

23

Q. 72

Can I put it to you that that's what you did mean?

24

A.

I don't think that that would have been consistent with the view that I held,

11:20:16 20

11:20:37 25

which was ultimately if members were acting conscientiously in making decisions

26

about zoning issues, they were acting in a quasi judicial capacity and that

27

therefore it wouldn't be possible to impose that sort of sanction or

28

requirement upon them. It possibly could have meant that they would not vote

29

in that particular vote if they couldn't agree with the party position, but I

11:21:04 30

can't be more helpful than that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:21:07

11:21:21

21 1

Q. 73

Can I just put it to you Mr. Bruton, at that stage other than being their party

2

leader you were essentially a civilian if I can put it like that, they were

3

councillors you were a civilian?

4

A.

What do you mean by the term civilian?

5

Q. 74

You had no function in Dublin County Council?

6

A.

I was the party leader.

7

Q. 75

As far as Dublin County Council goes you were a civilian, I am just using that

8 9 11:21:34 10

as a term. You had no function in that council? A.

That's right, yes.

Q. 76

Okay. So you come do them as their party leader, okay, as an outsider, and

11

according to Mr. Boland you give, according to yourself you give an instruction

12

that is something of a request, bordering on a perhaps, you know, almost a

13

topic for debate. My client insists it was an instruction, I will put it to

14

you more strongly, my client took it as an instruction and he took your word

11:22:02 15

and resigned because he couldn't go along with the group, okay? Can you

16

comment on that. He resigned the following day?

17

A.

Yes, I believe that's the case, yes.

18

Q. 77

Does that not strike you as instructive of you giving an instruction?

19

A.

Well it certainly, as I agreed in the examination which I have just had from

11:22:26 20

the Tribunal counsel, that it was, that my strong request was open to that

21 22

interpretation, to the interpretation that it was an instruction. Q. 78

23 24

My colleague, Ms. Dillon, put it to you that you put a whip on the party. I put it to you again that what you essentially did was put a whip on the party?

A.

No. Basically the party would impose a whip on itself in individual local

11:22:52 25

authorities. If Dublin County Council members wanted to impose a whip on

26

themselves as members of Dublin County Council on a particular decision it

27

would be for them to do that, it would not be for, as you elegantly describe

28

it, a civilian to impose the whip on particular decisions.

29 11:23:13 30

Q. 79

But what were you doing then?

A.

I was, as I have explained already, endeavouring to get them to meet in advance Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:23:21

11:23:43

22 1

of decisions and reach decisions collectively before voting. I also had the

2

opportunity of looking at some of the testimony given by Mary Muldoon here

3

where she, I think indicated that there were no group meetings where they

4

discussed these matters in advance and I would think that my concern would have

5

been that there should be such group meetings so they could reach common

6

positions.

7

Q. 80

If I can put it to you, you can't partially interfere with a quasi judicial

8

function. You either interfere with it or you don't interfere with it. I put

9

it to you again, no matter what your interpretation of it is you put a whip on

11:24:02 10

the party, not voting or voting is a whip, an interference with the quasi

11

judicial process that councillors are supposed to abide by. You put a

12

sanction, it's written down in black and white leave. My client puts it in his

13

narrative statement that you told them if they couldn't go along with the

14

majority they had to leave?

11:24:22 15

A.

I don't believe I said that. I believe I did convey to them my strong wish

16

that they should act collectively. I think that there may have -- obviously

17

that would require them to be present at meetings where they would endeavour to

18

reach a consensus position. If people just refused to vote as such meetings

19

that could well have been a matter that could cause concern to the party of a

11:24:46 20

disciplinary nature, but I don't think it would have been consistent with the

21

view that we had as a party that they were acting quasi judicially to require

22

them to vote in a particular way if that ran completely contrary to their

23

conscious, after they had listened to the views of others as we would have

24

wished them to do within the party group.

11:25:12 25

Q. 81

My -- my instructions are that that's not the way you put it to the meeting.

26

As Mr. Boland puts it in his statement and your notes record, you were very,

27

you went along a very strict line of argument. And I put it to you again, even

28

the suggestion as I say, you can't partially interfere with a quasi judicial

29

process. Even the suggestion that they whip themselves is an interference with

11:25:40 30

the quasi judicial process? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:25:41

11:26:02

23 1

A.

No, I don't accept that at all. As I said already, I think it is possible for

2

judges who are meeting in a court whether there is more than one judge, to

3

consult with one another and maybe to have procedures which require them to

4

consult with one another and listen to one another before coming to a decision

5

and then having done so, they would have discharged their collective function

6

so to speak and after that it would be for the individual to make a decision

7

different from the majority view if that was their conscientious view, that's

8

the way my understanding of the way in which for example the Supreme Court of

9

the United States works.

11:26:26 10

Q. 82

11

I would suggest to you there aren't 19 judges on the Supreme Court of the United States?

12

A.

There are nine, I think.

13

Q. 83

Not 19. To get 19 people to quietly argue together and reach a consensus

14 11:26:44 15

without some form of, I'll use the word pressure? A.

I think the pressure that I would have been wishing to apply would be the

16

pressure to get them to actually meet because it would appear from, it would

17

appear they didn't meet collectively to discuss these matters.

18

Q. 84

You wished for some kind of pressure?

19

A.

Yes, pressure to attempt to reach a coherent view.

Q. 85

Okay Mr. Bruton. Can I move on now, we have established that you agree you

11:27:02 20

21

wished for some kind of pressure. Can I move on to who initiated this meeting,

22

there is some inconsistency I think, I can be corrected on this, in what you

23

say, initially you said you were approached by Councillor Marren, is that

24

correct?

11:27:27 25

26

A.

I think the sequence of events ...

Q. 86

If you could just say to me --

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

29

the question.

11:27:43 30

Q. 87

Wait now, Mr. Bruton should be allowed finish or at least answer

I apologise, Chairman. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:27:44

11:28:02

24 1

A.

Yes, I think I approached Councillor Donal Marren.

2

Q. 88

That's not what you said initially. You said Marren, Mr. Marren approached

3

you, but subsequent to that you said I phoned Councillor Marren, can we take it

4

it was on your initiative this meeting?

5

A.

I think so, yes.

6

Q. 89

Thank you. Now if I can move on just a little bit more. Now Mr. Boland

7

resigned the following day from the Fine Gael group. He says because he

8

perceived that he could not go along with it and you had asked anybody that

9

could not go along with the group to leave, do you accept that, you were aware

11:28:32 10

11

that he had resigned, one of your councillors had resigned? A.

12

I not sure that I was aware of it immediately. And as far as I recall I was puzzled as to why he had resigned.

13

Q. 90

Did you ask him?

14

A.

No. I hadn't at that time much contact with Councillor Boland.

Q. 91

But you had just taken the trouble to go to a special meeting of the Fine Gael

11:28:47 15

16

councillors the night before, to go through all this with them and the next day

17

one of them resigns, would that not strike you as worthy of interrogation?

18

A.

Well maybe it was, but I didn't pursue it with him.

19

Q. 92

Can we just discuss the meeting itself, this was a one off was it, this

11:29:11 20

meeting?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 93

You had never done this before with Dublin County Council?

23

A.

No.

24

Q. 94

Or any of the other local authorities around the Dublin area?

A.

Not to discuss a matter of this nature. I would have had meetings with local

11:29:19 25

26

authority, Fine Gael groups and local authorities throughout the country, as

27

part of my tour of the country as party leader, but not on a substantive matter

28

of this nature.

29 11:29:42 30

Q. 95

So it's September of 1993, the Development Plan is coming to a head, the Dail is probably in recess at that stage, it's usually in recess, what possessed you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:29:49

11:30:13

25 1

other than the, what you say is the tittle tattle of newspapers, was it solely

2

that, that possessed you to initiate this meeting in September?

3

A.

No, there had been, as I think, the Fine Gael statement to the Tribunal which

4

was supplied on 10th May 2001 indicates, there had been contacts between the

5

spokesperson on the environment of the party and members of the group

6

attempting to get the group to vote in a more coherent fashion to work in a

7

more coherent fashion, and also there were as you have said some media reports

8

and there was as I have already said myself in evidence here, some concerns

9

within the grass-roots, amongst the grass root members of the party about a

11:30:46 10

lack of coherence in the way these issues were being handled. I also would

11

imagine that there were many residents groups meeting and they were asking what

12

the Fine Gael party view was on these matters and it was very difficult to

13

answer that question in the absence of the Fine Gael members on the County

14

Council seeking to form a party view and I don't think they did make the

11:31:16 15

16

necessary effort to form a party view. Q. 96

Okay. Did you discuss this matter with anybody else prior to, I mean formally

17

discuss the matter with anyone else prior to the party meeting or it was quick

18

off the bat?

19

A.

I can't remember.

Q. 97

Were you interested in any particular proposals in Dublin County counselling?

21

A.

No.

22

Q. 98

In any motions on the 21 or 22nd of September '93?

23

A.

No.

24

Q. 99

Nothing brought to your attention?

A.

No. I gather that your client says that I sat through the rest of the meeting

11:31:30 20

11:31:41 25

26

where motions were discussed, I don't believe I did.

27

Q. 100

You are saying you had no particular interest in any particular motions?

28

A.

I had no interest in any motions, no.

29

Q. 101

Did you ever hold any such meetings with any other Fine Gael local authority

11:32:00 30

groups around the country? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:32:02

11:32:20

26 1

A.

Not of the nature of this meeting, in the sense that I was seeking to persuade

2

them to adopt a more coherent approach. I would have met Fine Gael groups

3

councillors throughout the country to discuss general issues as I toured the

4

country.

5

Q. 102

Did you make any representations or anything to any of these councils?

6

A.

No, I don't think so.

7

Q. 103

Not even your own Meath constituency?

8

A.

No. I think they felt I didn't meet them often enough.

9

Q. 104

I am going to move on. Mr. Bruton, I want to bring you to the Nugent inquiry

11:32:45 10

Mr. Bruton, this was your party's inquiry --

11 12

MR. BIRMINGHAM: Chairman I wonder could I intervene at this stage -- George

13

Birmingham, counsel for Fine Gael, it isn't out of any desire to close down any

14

line of inquiry but it is on the basis that this Tribunal obviously is

11:33:08 15

concerned that public time and public money shouldn't be wasted. It seems to

16

me, as I understand it, that the so-called Nugent inquiry was an internal Fine

17

Gael inquiry established by Mr. Bruton in his role as leader, and any grievance

18

that Mr. Boland has, real or imagined with the procedures followed by the

19

Nugent inquiry and the decision to establish it, would seem to be more properly

11:33:31 20

21

a matter that should be addressed through Fine Gael channels and not before this Tribunal.

22 23

Now I do appreciate that the Tribunal has a certain interest in the Nugent

24

inquiry and the comparable inquiries set up by other parties insofar as when

11:33:50 25

individual people who appeared before it gave an account of their stewardship

26

obviously it's of interest to this Tribunal what that account was and whether

27

it's consistent with what is now emerging or otherwise, but subject to that

28

limited exception, I really don't see how the decision to establish a Tribunal

29

and how that Tribunal interacted with Mr. Boland is a matter that is proper for

11:34:14 30

this Tribunal. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:34:15

11:34:24

27 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

Who --

3 4

MR. CREEGAN: Could I answer that Chairman? The first thing is that the Nugent

5

inquiry is in the brief. The second --

6 7

CHAIRMAN:

Is what, sorry?

8 9 11:34:32 10

MR. CREEGAN: In the brief, it's findings are in the brief. The second thing is the central issue between Mr. Boland and the Nugent inquiry was an amount of

11

money, four thousand pounds, he received from Frank Dunlop and this has been

12

put to the Tribunal in this Module, and Frank Dunlop has said he can't

13

recollect it, but the issue between Mr. Boland and the Nugent inquiry that

14

Mr. Boland would not reveal this issue to the Nugent inquiry at the time

11:34:57 15

because he felt he was under a confidentiality agreement with this Tribunal.

16

Subsequent to that the Nugent inquiry made a very unfavourable finding and I

17

think given the circumstances, and given that Mr. Bruton was the initiator of

18

this Nugent inquiry, I think this is relevant. I think we should follow it.

19 11:35:19 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

But if for the moment what you say is correct, to what extent would

you propose probing that with Mr. Bruton?

22 23

MR. CREEGAN: I should like some latitude, the extent of the contradictions in

24

the Nugent inquiry and Mr. Dunlop's evidence vis-a-vis my client.

11:35:42 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

No, but if what you say is correct and that Mr. Boland didn't

27

reveal the payment of four thousand because of his understanding that it would

28

breach the confidentiality of the Tribunal, I mean to what extent can that be

29

probed with Mr. Bruton?

11:36:03 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:36:03

11:36:14

28 1

MR. CREEGAN: Mr. Bruton was the initiator of this Tribunal, the Nugent

2

inquiry. I might point out.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

But wait now, he didn't, as far as I recall, as far as I know

5

Mr. Bruton didn't conduct the inquiry. He set it up.

6 7

MR. CREEGAN: He set it up and it reported to him and he made comment on my

8

client's character I am instructed afterwards based on the inquiry,

9

particularly with reference to my client's passabilty for election as a Fine

11:36:35 10

Gael candidate.

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

Based on the results of the inquiry.

13 14

MR. CREEGAN: I think it's germane, Chairman. I also think it's germane in

11:36:44 15

that Mr. Boland's evidence vis-a-vis the four thousand and Mr. Dunlop, went

16

some way towards helping the inquiry --

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

Well, there is no question --

19 11:36:53 20

MR. CREEGAN: Measure Mr. Dunlop's recollection.

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

23

explain his experience with the inquiry and why he said or didn't say what he

24

said or didn't say at the time, there is -- but I mean we are, at this stage we

11:37:16 25

There is no question that Mr. Boland is perfectly entitled to

are, our only concern is to what extent it is reasonable or fair that

26

Mr. Bruton should be probed as to how that inquiry was conducted given that he

27

wasn't personally involved in it's conduct.

28 29 11:37:40 30

MR. CREEGAN: He was shadow director, perhaps to use the company law analogy. Mr. Bruton would have been, to use a company law analogy, a shadow director, a Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:37:46

11:37:56

29 1

moving hand so to speak.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

Yes, but there is no issue as to the setting up of the inquiry in

4

the sense that we know it was set up and we know it took place and we have a

5

record of what individual witnesses said to the inquiry. But as I understand

6

you're, you are seeking leave now to probe Mr. Bruton as to the manner in which

7

the inquiry was conducted.

8 9 11:38:16 10

MR. CREEGAN: And it's findings. And perhaps why Mr. Bruton himself wasn't, given his involvement with Dublin County Council as he has admitted here, in

11

'93 and payments from Monarch over to the party and him personally, though it

12

went to the party account, I suggest why Mr. Bruton himself wasn't the subject

13

of inquiry.

14 11:38:32 15

CHAIRMAN:

Well that's a completely different issue.

16 17

MR. CREEGAN: It's part of the whole, Chairman.

18 19 11:38:41 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

Well the inquiry as I understand it, was inquiry into, by the party

and there was a similar inquiry conducted by the Fianna Fail party, into local authority elected councillors.

22 23

MS. DILLON:

Confined to Dublin.

24 11:38:51 25

26

MR. CREEGAN: While I understand that wasn't the initial Terms of Reference, I understand that it was narrowed somewhat.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

If one of the things you want to ask Mr. Bruton is why he didn't

29

submit to the inquiry himself, he wasn't a councillor.

11:39:07 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:39:07

11:39:42

30 1

MR. CREEGAN: That would be one of them. No, but the initial Terms of

2

Reference I understand were wider than that. But if you can just bear with me

3

I have it here. If I can look at Terms of Reference there, I don't know if you

4

have this before you Chairman? 2.1, do you have it Chairman? Can I read it

5

for you?

6 7

CHAIRMAN:

Is it in the brief?

8 9

MS. DILLON: Give a brief page, we can put it up.

11:39:47 10

11

MR. CREEGAN: I have it in hard copy. I will just read it out to you Chairman.

12

"To interview" -- Terms of Reference subparagraph 1 "To interview each public

13

representative in Dublin city and county, who is or has been a member of Fine

14

Gael party at any time during the period 20 June '85 to date". Okay? "For the

11:40:10 15

purposes of enquiring whether they have been offered or have been recipient of

16

any payment, and the circumstances and motives relative to any such payment".

17

Now that's a much wider brief than the initial.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

But it's confined to elected members in the Dublin area.

11:40:29 20

21

MR. CREEGAN: Dublin city and county, it would do.

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

But I thought you were going to give me, to indicate where, some

24

basis for your belief that Mr. Bruton should himself have been --

11:40:41 25

26

MR. CREEGAN: I know Mr. Bruton's constituency is Meath, but his active, for

27

want of a better word his activity took place in Dublin. I wouldn't want to be

28

semantic in that he was elected only to Meath, he was the leader of the

29

opposition at the time. He admits he went down to Dublin County Council and

11:41:00 30

essentially told them how he would like them to -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:41:03

11:41:13

31 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

Are you suggesting that the terms of reference which you have

3

opened should have included Mr. Bruton?

4 5

MR. CREEGAN: It would be an argument that Mr. Bruton himself should have been

6

involved. Initially as I understand 19 of April was the date of the original

7

Terms of Reference and they were amended on the 2nd of May.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

But how can that be a matter for the Tribunal?

11:41:28 10

11

MR. CREEGAN: I think it goes to Mr. Bruton's motives. Also the reference back

12

to the Monarch payments and to his involvement with Dublin County Council in

13

September of '93. I'm in the Chairman's hands.

14 11:41:45 15

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

16 17

MS. DILLON:

If I could just, just in relation to the submission that my

18

friend has made, that this Tribunal should examine this witness in relation to

19

the establishment of what has become known as the Nugent Inquiry.

11:42:00 20

21

This was a private internal political party inquiry and the Terms of Reference

22

were set by the party itself. It was of course open to Mr. Boland at the time

23

that he attended, to make a request that Mr. Bruton should submit himself, I

24

understand that was not done. However, Mr. Creegan has opened the Terms of

11:42:18 25

Reference and paragraph 2 of the Terms of Reference clearly exclude Mr. Bruton

26

from being a person who would have been amenable in any event, to the subject

27

direction of the inquiry as it was constituted, because Mr. Bruton is not a

28

qualified person within terms of paragraph 2 subparagraph 1, because he was not

29

then or any time a member of Dublin City or County Council as a councillor.

11:42:43 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

11:42:43

11:43:01

32 1

Therefore my friend's submission that this Tribunal should inquire of

2

Mr. Bruton because he ought to have been amenable to the Terms of Reference of

3

the Nugent Inquiry falls, because Mr. Bruton could not as it was then

4

constituted, ever have been made amenable to the Nugent Inquiry.

5 6

Therefore I say based on my friend's argument that that line of enquiry should

7

not be pursued with Mr. Bruton. It's not for this Tribunal to referee a

8

dispute, perceived or otherwise, between Mr. Boland and the Fine Gael party.

9 11:43:14 10

CHAIRMAN:

All right. Well we've reach a stage anyway where we'll take a

11

break. We are going to take a break for about 15 minutes and we will come back

12

and rule on this particular line of questioning.

13 14

MR. CREEGAN: Thank you Chairman.

11:43:43 15

16

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK AND RESUMED AS FOLLOWS:

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

19

information to the private internal inquiries conducted by Fine Gael and Fianna

12:02:44 20

Where witnesses have previously made statements or provided

Fail, such statements or information have been put or has been put to the

21

witnesses for their comments in the course of their evidence to the Tribunal,

22

in some instances witnesses have acknowledged that incorrect information was

23

provided by them to their party inquiry and some have provided an explanation

24

for such incorrect information being given.

12:03:12 25

26

In other instances witnesses have taken issue with the accuracy of information

27

furnished to the inquiry or have challenged or criticised the conduct of the

28

inquiry in question.

29 12:03:23 30

Other than noting the response of the witnesses in question the Tribunal has Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:03:28

12:03:37

33 1

not purported to investigate in any detail the manner in which either inquiry

2

was conducted.

3 4

Therefore, the Tribunal will not permit a line of questioning of a witness

5

which is likely to lead to what would in effect be a sub Module, charged with

6

investigating the establishment and conduct of these private internal

7

inquiries.

8 9

The Tribunal will continue to permit witnesses to acknowledge or criticise

12:03:55 10

these private internal inquiries or to qualify or explain the information

11

recorded therein and attributed to them. Mr. Boland will be entitled, when

12

giving evidence in due course, to explain or qualify the information or lack of

13

information furnished by him to the Fine Gael inquiry.

14 12:04:13 15

MR. CREEGAN:

16

Thank you Chairman. If I could just finish up then with

Mr. Bruton? I won't be long.

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

19 12:04:23 20

MR. CREEGAN:

Mr. Bruton, if I could just return you to Conway's? Your notes,

21

I have to put it to you that if we start at the top of your notes, page 9066,

22

you have FF apply a whip on Development Plan. Okay? Then number four you have

23

'leave', okay? Number five 'maximising unity', do you see all that?

24 12:04:57 25

A.

Yes.

Q. 105

All in your own handwriting, all made contemporaneously, and if we marry that

26

to Mr. Boland's evidence in his statement, I have to suggest to you that

27

essentially your desire was to put a whip on the Fine Gael councillors, that

28

they all vote en bloc in the same way, that such a whip would interfere with

29

their statutory duties, that as Ms. Muldoon seems to have been afraid of, that

12:05:33 30

you might, given the predisposition of the Fine Gael group, lead to rampant Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:05:40

12:06:06

34 1

rezoning and other matters, and that essentially if you look at number four on

2

that list of notes you made, that you wanted anybody who disagreed with this

3

notion to get out. I put that to you, all of that?

4

A.

I don't accept the statements that are being put to me as questions.

5 6

I have already indicated in the response to questions from the Tribunal's

7

counsel that while I believe that the beginning portion of the notes there that

8

I wrote may have been used by me to remind me of certain points I needed to

9

make, that the points that were circled were the points that I used in my

12:06:38 10

concluding remarks, and I think obviously in my concluding remarks, which would

11

be the conclusions I had reached, having listened to the members of the

12

council, would be the relevant ones which councillors would have left the

13

meeting with in their minds.

14 12:07:00 15

And as you can see from the note there, one of the points I circled is a point

16

made by Nora Owen where she said 'can we get', or at least my notes indicated

17

she said 'can we get a party line even on some issues, some coherence on some

18

issues'. I don't think that I was seeking to get absolute coherence on

19

everything, nor was I seeking to require that a whip be applied in every

12:07:32 20

instance or in any instance, but rather that there should be an attempt to

21

reach a common position, a sincere attempt to reach a common position.

22 23

I would like to similarly draw your attention on the next page of the notes to

24

another circled point I made which is under the heading of remarks made by Alan

12:07:57 25

Shatter where I put in the words 'respect position of local representatives'

26

and further this is the only power we have. Those are points which indicate

27

the, a view that councillors would have a power of their own, independently of

28

anything the party might impose upon them. I circled those points as points to

29

under line I believe, in my response.

12:08:32 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:08:32

12:08:58

35 1

I am quite convinced that the conclusion that I conveyed to the councillors at

2

the meeting was, as I have been indicating in my evidence here from the

3

beginning of these proceedings, that I was seeking to have them attempt

4

conscientiously to reach a collective position, to meet sufficiently frequently

5

and in a timely to ensure that they had the opportunity to do that. But I did

6

not seek the imposes of a whip on matters which, as I have indicated already,

7

ultimately are quasi judicial. Ultimately in respect of which they are acting,

8

were acting in our view, quasi judicially.

9

Q. 106

12:09:24 10

I put it to you again Mr. Bruton, or put it one more time, I will quote Mr. Boland, that those who do not vote with the majority should leave the group

11

and in your own hand number four, 'leave'. I put to you that that's what that

12

means?

13

A.

14

I know and that is not the impression that I conveyed to the councillors at the meeting, I have indicated to you by going through my notes which you are

12:09:44 15

relying on, indicating other material which clearly points in the direction,

16

that supports what I am saying and does not support the contention, the

17

inaccurate contention that you are making or putting to me.

18

Q. 107

Thank you very much Mr. Bruton.

19 12:09:58 20

MR. BIRMINGHAM:

Just very briefly Chairman.

21 22 23 24 12:10:14 25

WITNESS QUESTIONED BY MR. BIRMINGHAM. Q. 108

Mr. Bruton, you were discussing with Ms. Dillon for the Tribunal whether it was appropriate to categorise what you had to say in Conway's as an order or an instruction or whether it was appropriate to categorise it as advice or strong

26

advice and I think you commented at one stage that the distinction between you

27

might turn to one of semantics, perhaps then identifying the true nature of

28

what you had to say might be useful to look at what the outcome of the meeting

29

was.

12:10:36 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:10:36

12:10:57

36 1

If this was in fact an order from the party leader, would one expect an order

2

that could be given to be followed?

3

A.

I think if I had given an order to the councillors I would have taken steps to

4

invigilate the implementation of the order subsequently and would have

5

initiated disciplinary proceedings against those who didn't comply, but I

6

didn't issue an order, therefore there were no disciplinary procedures

7

initiated after the Conway's meeting. My understanding is that after the

8

Conway's meeting the then members of the Fine Gael group on Dublin County

9

Council did not act coherently, they didn't pursue matters in a way that I had

12:11:24 10

requested them to do and unfortunately I wasn't successful in my endeavours to

11

get them to act coherently. I have to say historically I wasn't alone in this

12

insofar as one of my predecessors, Dr. Garrett Fitzgerald, had also attempted

13

to get them to vote in a particular way and he wasn't successful either, he

14

didn't initiate any disciplinary proceedings after his meeting with them failed

12:11:52 15

to achieve it's objective and I didn't initiate any disciplinary proceedings

16

after my request, not an order, my request to them, did not achieve it's

17

objective.

18

Q. 109

Thank you.

19 12:12:08 20

JUDGE KEYS:

Just one question, could I have 9066 please? Mr. Bruton, if you

21

just look at A, Fianna Fail apply a whip on Development Plan. Is that a

22

heading or is that a statement of fact which you have on your notes emanating

23

from information you received somewhere else?

24 12:12:41 25

A.

I think the two points there, but I can't help the Tribunal as to why I put A in front of it because there is no B anywhere, but I think the two points there

26

is party image that divided, that was a concern that I had that Fine Gael had a

27

divided party image in Dublin because the councillors weren't acting coherently

28

and then in contrast to that I drew attention to the fact that Fianna Fail were

29

applying a whip.

12:13:08 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:13:08

12:13:23

37 1

JUDGE KEYS:

2

statement of fact, which you believed to be true, that Fianna Fail were apply

3

ago whip on matters dealing with the Development Plan?

4

A.

That's what I mean. Just reading the note it seems to be a

I think I did believe it to be true. I think it was true.

5 6 7

JUDGE KEYS: A.

Thank you very much?

That's a matter the Tribunal has better means of enquiring into it than I do.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

All right, thank you very much.

12:13:34 10

11

MS. DILLON:

Thank you Mr. Bruton. Mr. Cathal Boland please.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:13:42

12:14:06

38 1 2

CATHAL BOLAND, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED.

3

AS FOLLOWS BY MS. DILLON:

4 5 6 7 8

CHAIRMAN: Q. 110

9

Good afternoon Mr. Boland.

Good afternoon Mr. Boland. The issues I want to deal with you today are the following, the first matter I want to deal with is the monies stated by you to

12:14:18 10

have been paid to you by Mr. Dunlop in November 1992 then your interaction with

11

Monarch, your contribution to the planning in relation to the Monarch lands and

12

finally the meeting in Conways public house.

13 14

If I can ask you first of all, in 1992 you were a councillor, you had initially

12:14:39 15

been co-opted on to Dublin County Council in 1984 and then you had been

16

returned in the election in 1986, isn't that right?

17

A.

I was co-opted in March of 1983 and I was returned in 1985.

18

Q. 111

In 1985. And in 1992 you knew and had known for some considerable period of

19 12:14:59 20

21

time Mr. Frank Dunlop, isn't that right? A.

I would have known him from the start of the 80s.

Q. 112

Right. And you became aware I presume in the course of your currency as a

22

member of Dublin County Council that Mr. Dunlop had become a lobbyist or become

23

involved in seeking support for various clients around Dublin County Council?

24 12:15:16 25

A.

I was aware of that.

Q. 113

Right. Did Mr. Dunlop, in the general now as opposed to the specific, ever

26

approach you seeking your support for any developments with which he was

27

involved?

28 29 12:15:37 30

A.

The relationship I had with Frank Dunlop was one where he was a feature in the lobby. He had been the Press Secretary to my now late brother when he was a Minister. Frank through that connection knew the members of my family and he Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:15:46

12:16:11

39 1

would ask me how my mother was, how my sister was, so on. He might have said

2

to me 'see what you can do about that one' or whatever, but he never discussed

3

the detail of any proposition, and in effect the comment that he may have made

4

was simply a throw away line rather than a -- it couldn't be treated as in any

5

fashion a serious attempt to lobby for something.

6

Q. 114

So would it be fair to say that he would have indicated to you in a very genial

7

or superficial way that he had an interest in certain developments to seek your

8

support but didn't engage on any meaningful level with lobbying you in

9

connection with the developments?

12:16:31 10

11

A.

I think that would be correct.

Q. 115

Now in November 1992 did Mr. Dunlop make a political donation or payment to

12

you?

13

A.

In November 1992 did he.

14

Q. 116

Would you outline to the Tribunal the circumstances in which Mr. Dunlop came to

12:16:43 15

16

make that payment to you? A.

My recollection is that the Dail, the government was defeated on Wednesday, I

17

think it was the 5th November, there was a council meeting on Friday following

18

that, which I think then would have been the 7th. On leaving the chamber I met

19

Frank Dunlop who stopped me and asked me was it my intention to be a candidate

12:17:12 20

or not, at that stage I told him it wasn't my intention, he said if you were

21

going to be a candidate I would organise some funds for you. I said it doesn't

22

arise because I have no intention of being a candidate and I departed. In fact

23

I departed to catch up with the then deputy leader of the Fine Gael party to

24

advise her that it was my intention not to be a candidate at the convention

12:17:33 25

which was to be held the following Sunday. As events happened I ended up being

26

a candidate, and I was contacted at some point in the early part as I recall

27

it, of the following week by Frank Dunlop asking to meet me, that he wanted to

28

make a contribution to my election fund. My recollection is that it was in the

29

early part of the afternoon, my recollection is that it was after lunch, in the

12:18:08 30

early part of the afternoon, that I arranged to meet him, in the offices in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:18:16

12:18:32

40 1

Dublin County Council.

2 3

I was in the Fine Gael room doing some work, Frank Dunlop arrived in. He made

4

small talk with me about the election and the likely out turn or whatever, he

5

handed me a sealed envelope, told me he was making a contribution to my

6

election fund on behalf of a group of people. I was never a hundred per cent

7

sure whether he have said to me it was four or five people. I asked him who

8

they were, he told me that they didn't need to be acknowledged, that they

9

didn't wish me to know who they were, and that he was not one of the people who

12:18:59 10

was a contributor to the contribution.

11 12

He wished me well, told me he was in a hurry and departed.

13

Q. 117

Was there anybody else present Mr. Boland while this was going on?

14

A.

No.

Q. 118

And Mr. Dunlop, when you asked him from whom the contribution was being made as

12:19:15 15

16

it were, at that stage did you believe, before he told you it was from a number

17

of subscribers, did you think it was from Mr. Dunlop?

18

A.

19

Well, on the basis of what he had already told me at the Friday meeting I just assumed that it was going to be a straight contribution from Frank Dunlop

12:19:39 20

toward my election fund.

21

Q. 119

And obviously you would have been expecting a cheque?

22

A.

I hadn't given it any consideration Ms. Dillon, one way or the other.

23

Q. 120

What you got, according to your evidence, was four thousand pounds in cash?

24

A.

That's correct.

Q. 121

So when Mr. Dunlop gave you the envelope, even though you didn't open it there

12:19:54 25

26

and then you would have been immediately aware that it wasn't a cheque?

27

A.

Absolutely.

28

Q. 122

And you would have been aware that it was probably cash and probably a sizable

29 12:20:07 30

donation in cash? A.

Well, I was aware that it would, a reasonably sizable contribution obviously Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:20:16

12:20:36

41 1 2

because of the size of the envelope. Q. 123

So did you stop the interview or the meeting at that stage and say anything to

3

Mr. Dunlop, look you are giving me cash here, who is it from, what's exactly

4

behind this, do you normally give political donations in cash, did you have any

5

conversation of that sort with Mr. Dunlop?

6

A.

The only conversation I had with him was to ask who the subscribers were.

7

Q. 124

So what Mr. Dunlop is telling you at this meeting is that he is making a

8

donation.

9

subscribers and it is in cash?

12:20:52 10

11

It is not on his own behalf, on behalf of a number of anonymous

A.

That's correct.

Q. 125

Though Mr. Dunlop didn't mention the word cash to you, is that correct

12

Mr. Boland but you were aware by virtue of receiving the envelope that it

13

contained cash?

14

A.

12:21:07 15

16

I don't remember Frank Dunlop mentioning the word cash to me. It was quite obvious that it couldn't possibly have been a cheque.

Q. 126

17

How long after Mr. Dunlop gave you the envelope did you open the envelope Mr. Boland?

18

A.

A couple of hours later.

19

Q. 127

Were you surprised at the size of the donation?

A.

I was quite surprised.

Q. 128

In your experience, bearing in mind you had at that stage contested one local

12:21:17 20

21 22

election, is that right?

23

A.

No, I believe that I would have --

24

Q. 129

By 1992?

A.

I contested the local elections of 1985, I was a Senate candidate in 1987,

12:21:29 25

26

local elections in 1999.

27

Q. 130

But up to this point in time in 1992?

28

A.

'91, sorry my apologies. '91 is what I meant to say not 1999. So '84, Senate

29 12:21:53 30

'87, '91. Q. 131

And in that period, during any of those elections had you been given a payment Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:21:58

12:22:06

42 1

of or a donation of four thousand pounds in cash?

2

A.

No, I wasn't.

3

Q. 132

Was that the single biggest political donation you had received?

4

A.

Up to that point, yes.

5

Q. 133

Was it the, did you receive in the normal course many political donations in

6 7

cash? A.

If I was to try and summarise it, I have never considered the question, but my

8

view would be something in the region of about 20 to 25 per cent. I have

9

provided the Tribunal with details so the calculation can be made to establish

12:22:35 10

whether my guess is correct.

11

Q. 134

But assuming for a moment you are correct when you say 20 to 25?

12

A.

No 25 per cent.

13

Q. 135

What was the greatest size of those in cash?

14

A.

The largest contribution in terms of -- if one was to take the Frank Dunlop

12:23:03 15

contribution as being a single contribution it is the largest contribution, but

16

it was made on behalf of four or five people so you know is it a thousand or is

17

it 800? I know that I received a couple of contributions of 2,000 and I have

18

received quite a few one thousand.

19 12:23:32 20

21

Q. 136

In cash, the question was in cash?

A.

Sorry.

Q. 137

I am trying to establish from you Mr. Boland is -- Mr. Dunlop gives you four

22

thousand pounds in cash. After, apart from that four thousand pounds in cash,

23

what is the next largest size contribution in cash you ever received, was it a

24

hundred pounds, was it a thousand pounds, was it 15 hundred?

12:23:50 25

A.

2,000 pounds.

26

Q. 138

2,000 pounds in cash?

27

A.

That's correct.

28

Q. 139

From another source?

29

A.

That's right.

Q. 140

And after that, what election was that, was that prior to 1992?

12:23:56 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:24:02

12:24:20

43 1

A.

No, it would have been in the late 90s.

2

Q. 141

You see what I am trying to -- I am not making myself clear Mr. Boland if we

3

just start again. In November 1992 you get four thousand pounds in cash from

4

Mr. Dunlop, up to November 1992 and forget after November 1992, what I am

5

trying to establish whether A this was the biggest political donation you had

6

got, and B, was it the biggest political donation in cash you had got and C,

7

what was the next biggest political donation in cash you had got up to November

8

1992. So first of all was it the biggest political donation?

9

A.

12:24:55 10

It was the biggest, the largest cash donation I had received and I think any sum, any other sum that I had received up to 1992 was less than 500 and I

11

honestly, at this point, I can't say to you whether the 500 was a cheque or 500

12

was cash.

13

Q. 142

So this would have been a unique event in your political life?

14

A.

Absolutely.

Q. 143

Did you go back to Mr. Dunlop when you opened the envelope and realised you got

12:25:12 15

16

four thousand pounds in cash and discuss the matter with him?

17

A.

No.

18

Q. 144

Did you discuss it with any of your immediate circle of political advisers or

19

friends at that time who were involved in the election with you that you had

12:25:26 20

received this amount of money from Mr. Dunlop at the time?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 145

Who did you discuss it with?

23

A.

Lou McGovern and Richard Fulham.

24

Q. 146

Were these involved in your re-election campaign as it were at that time?

A.

Yes.

Q. 147

And did you have any concern at that time about taking that amount of money

12:25:42 25

26 27

from Mr. Dunlop in view of the fact that Mr. Dunlop was a lobbyist and you were

28

a councillor?

29 12:26:03 30

A.

No, I hadn't. As I said to you I had known Frank Dunlop since the early 80s. I had always found him to be an upright individual. I knew him when he was an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:26:09

12:26:33

44 1

Assistant Secretary in the department. This was somebody who I considered was

2

a pillar of society. I had no reason to be concerned and I particularly felt

3

in the context that he was telling me that he wasn't going to divulge to me who

4

the subscribers were nor did they wish any acknowledgement, they weren't asking

5

for anything, I didn't feel there was any --

6

Q. 148

Potential conflict?

7

A.

Yes, exactly.

8 9

MR. CREEGAN:

12:26:44 10

Excuse me Chairman, could I just interrupt there to clarify

something for the Tribunal? This Module is to do with Cherrywood and Monarch

11

essentially, Mr. Dunlop did not come on Monarch's books until 1993, I would

12

just like to make that clear to the Tribunal. This is 1992 we are dealing

13

with.

14 12:27:00 15

CHAIRMAN:

I know that, it's the end of 1992.

16 17

MS. DILLON:

18

suggested we are unaware of that. Mr. Creegan himself made the submission to

19

you this morning and he cross examined Mr. Dunlop, as I recollect, on this very

12:27:16 20

Yes, we are all aware of that, I don't understand it to be

issue and if there hadn't been any such cross-examination, I mean it follows

21

from the cross-examination of Mr Dunlop this must be dealt with Mr ...

22 23

CHAIRMAN:

We are satisfied it should.

24 12:27:26 25

MS. DILLON:

Thank you sir.

26 27

Mr. Dunlop has told the Tribunal that he doesn't think he made any such payment

28

to you Mr. Boland, and he has no recollection of making any such payment to

29

you, and I think you are aware of that, isn't that right?

12:27:42 30

A.

I am indeed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:27:43

12:27:55

45 1

Q. 149

You are absolutely satisfied however that such a payment was in fact made by

2

Mr. Dunlop and made in the circumstances that you have outlined to the

3

Tribunal?

4

A.

Absolutely. There is no question in my mind that it was Frank Dunlop walked

5

into the room, he handed me an envelope, the envelope was in my possession

6

until I opened it, no question in my mind.

7

Q. 150

8 9 12:28:17 10

And you say that Mr. Dunlop must be mistaken if he can't recollect making that donation to you in November of '92?

A.

I can only tell you what my experience was.

Q. 151

And can I ask you then briefly about payments, it might be quicker if I simply

11

take you through the documentation from Monarch to you and I think you accept

12

that insofar as the earlier Monarch payments are concerned you accept the

13

documentation that has been provided to the Tribunal by Monarch, you have a

14

recollection of receiving these monies but you did have a computer system that

12:28:37 15

16

crashed on which you had recorded receipt of all of these? A.

Exactly, I opened a political account in 1991 to receive any political

17

subscriptions and if I received monies from Monarch which I am not disputing,

18

and the suggestion is they are by way of cheque, I am quite confident you will

19

find that.

12:29:02 20

Q. 152

Indeed, insofar as the monies from Mr. Dunlop are concerned I think you have

21

identified to the Tribunal the bank account into which those funds were lodged

22

also, isn't that right?

23

A.

That's correct.

24

Q. 153

At that time I think at page 108 there is a lodgement on that account of 3,300

12:29:23 25

on the 13th November and you are satisfied that forms a significant portion of

26

Mr. Dunlop's donation to you, isn't that right?

27

A.

That's right.

28

Q. 154

Four thousand pounds. And again I think you maintained a separate political

29 12:29:38 30

account and did you have records until your computer system went down and you do have records in relation to the later political contributions isn't that Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:29:41

12:29:54

46 1

right?

2

A.

That's correct.

3

Q. 155

And if I show you first of all at 3241, this relates to June of 1991, I think

4

some approximately eight or nine from the bottom that have list it says

5

Mr. Cathal Boland, 300 pounds?

6

A.

Sorry -- yeah.

7

Q. 156

Isn't that right?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 157

I think that there is an extract from the cheque payments book at 3255?

A.

Sorry this is Monarch payments.

Q. 158

Monarch payments yes. If you just look third down it records a cheque in the

12:30:08 10

11 12

sum of 300 pounds to Mr. Cathal Boland that was debited to the Monarch account,

13

I think you accept you would have got that in June 1991?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 159

That would have been in connection with the local elections at that time?

16

A.

That's correct.

17

Q. 160

Right. I think if we turn to look then at the general election expenses in

12:30:24 15

18

November of 1992 at 3809 and approximately halfway down that page on 17th

19

November?

12:30:41 20

A.

Yes I have it yes.

21

Q. 161

400 pounds. I think again at 8354 there is a copy of the cheque?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 162

I think you would accept that you would have received that and you would have

24 12:30:56 25

26

lodged it to the political account? A.

That's correct.

Q. 163

And I think that then in April of 1994 there is, 4943, a sum of 200 pounds

27

which was a lunch fundraiser?

28

A.

That's correct.

29

Q. 164

And I think you in fact have a record of receiving that, isn't that right?

A.

Yes that's correct.

12:31:15 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:31:18

12:31:38

47 1

Q. 165

Now can you, just tell the Tribunal did you know Mr. Richard Lynn?

2

A.

I knew Richard Lynn in the context of being a feature in the council lobby,

3

everyone said hello, nice day. I don't remember any conversation that I ever

4

had with him.

5

Q. 166

Insofar as the two earlier political donations are concerned, the local

6

election of 1991 and the general election of 1992, did you seek those funds

7

from Monarch?

8

A.

9

My view is that I did not. I have indicated to the Tribunal that I have been involved in various fundraising activities on behalf of Fine Gael, that I

12:32:01 10

equally had attended at a walk about in Tallaght Town Shopping Centre with

11

Peter Barry at which I met one of the, I think I met two of the Monahan

12

children. Now I may as a result of that in Dublin South west have invited

13

Monarch to that fundraising event in which case it's possible I did write to

14

Monarch in '91, I think it's highly improbable that I did, in actual fact I

12:32:33 15

wondered in subsequent years when I looked back and asked myself, in the

16

context of Richard Lynn attending in '94, how I came to put Monarch name on the

17

list which would suggest to me that the Monarch cheques in '91 and '92 were

18

unsolicited and as a result of that they came on to my lists of potential

19

subscribers.

12:32:57 20

Q. 167

So you think the earlier donations were unsolicited but having received them

21

you would have put Monarch on a list of subscribers and that's what lead to the

22

fundraising lunch and Mr. Lynn being invited and although while the payment was

23

made he didn't attend, he sent a deputy, isn't that right?

24 12:33:16 25

A.

That's correct.

Q. 168

Did you see Mr. Richard Lynn as performing the same function that Mr. Frank

26

Dunlop was performing?

27

A.

I knew he was promoting Monarch Properties in Carrickmines.

28

Q. 169

Did you see him around the council as a lobbyist?

29

A.

Yes.

Q. 170

Was that a lobbyist only for Monarch properties?

12:33:31 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:33:34

12:33:48

48 1

A.

Yes. Yes, I would have thought that it was Monarch only.

2

Q. 171

But you would have known that Mr. Dunlop was a lobbyist for more than one

3

developer if I can put it like that.

4

A.

I would have had a feeling that he was involved with two or three projects.

5

Q. 172

Mr. Dunlop that is?

6

A.

Yes, yes.

7

Q. 173

But not Mr. Lynn. Mr. Lynn was working solely with Monarch?

8

A.

That's the impression I got.

9

Q. 174

Right. Would you have had casual or other chats with Mr. Lynn about the

12:34:00 10

Monarch Properties developments?

11

A.

Not to my recollection.

12

Q. 175

If I can ask you insofar as your contribution to the voting record or the

13

planning history of these lands are concerned, once the county is divided into

14

three counties in January of 1994 you had nothing further to do with Cherrywood

12:34:20 15

lands, isn't that right?

16

A.

That's correct.

17

Q. 176

Because your ward is in an entirely different location?

18

A.

Yes one is to the south and one is the north. Well divided.

19

Q. 177

Yes. I think that insofar as the earlier part of the planning history of the

12:34:34 20

Cherrywood lands are concerned while you were present at meetings in May of

21

1992 you are not recorded as having voted on any of the substantive motions,

22

isn't that correct?

23

A.

That's correct.

24

Q. 178

And similarly in 1990 while you were present at a meeting you are not recorded

12:34:49 25

as voting and the first time that in fact you are recorded as voting is in

26

November of 1993?

27

A.

That's correct.

28

Q. 179

On what has become known here as the Coffey Marren motion, you voted in favour

29 12:35:04 30

of the Coffey Marren motion and you had earlier that day voted against the Smith motion, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:35:05

12:35:17

49 1

A.

That's correct.

2

Q. 180

To keeping it at low density, so effectively what you were voting in favour of

3

was a motion increasing the density on the Monarch lands from one house per

4

ache to four houses per acre, isn't that right?

5

A.

Yes, I was voting in line with the manager's original recommendations.

6

Q. 181

But confined to the Monarch lands according to the terms of the motion, isn't

7

that right?

8

A.

Well the, I don't think it says Monarch in the motion.

9

Q. 182

At 7226 is the actual copy of the motion?

A.

Yes, the lands outlined in red on the attached map, it doesn't mention Monarch

12:35:41 10

11

lands.

12

Q. 183

And I think that the attached map is on the following page at 7227?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 184

Would you have known that they were the Monarch lands?

A.

I think the real question is would I have been aware of the fact that the

12:36:02 15

16

entire wasn't Monarch.

17

Q. 185

That the entire wasn't Monarch?

18

A.

Yes. In the context -- parcels of land or motions tend to have some

19

descriptive title given to them and I only knew that proposal as Monarch lands,

12:36:32 20

the Monarch proposal and that's how it's reflected in fact in the council

21

minutes. Unusually so in terms of, I don't think any other instance that a

22

developer's name is assigned to a rezoning proposal, that hasn't been

23

originally connected to it. So I am not sure that I would have been

24

consciously aware of who owned which piece of lands. I am aware of the fact

12:37:00 25

26

that there is a difference, having read the transcripts of the Tribunal. Q. 186

27 28

zoned lands in the Carrickmines Valley, that that was all the Monarch lands? A.

29 12:37:16 30

Right. But at the time you would have thought that all of the residentially

Yeah, I think I would have had that sort of general view, that that was the Monarch project.

Q. 187

And at the time when you were voting for this motion, what you were voting for Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:37:20

12:37:32

50 1

was to change the density back up to what the manager had recommended, isn't

2

that right?

3

A.

That's correct yes.

4

Q. 188

Now you must have known by virtue of the text of the motion at 7226 that there

5

were other lands that were not being?

6

A.

That there was lands excluded from the original.

7

Q. 189

Isn't that right?

8

A.

That's right, a compromise of some description had been arrived at.

9

Q. 190

That wasn't a compromise to which you made a contribution?

A.

That's right.

Q. 191

But you would have known then that there were other lands that were also

12:37:49 10

11 12

residentially zoned that were staying at one to the acre?

13

A.

That's right.

14

Q. 192

Can you now assist the Tribunal as to why you would have been happy for these

12:37:57 15

particular lands to be zoned at four to the acre and the balance at one to the

16 17

acre? A.

Well, effectively on arriving at the meeting on the 11th November the decision

18

was no longer mine. The only opportunity I would have had to influence whether

19

the entire would be zoned or not would have been to have put down a motion some

12:38:19 20

days prior, nine days I think it is, prior to the holding of the meeting. But

21

once the motion was tabled and the order paper was issued, the issue then is

22

outside the control of somebody such as myself arriving in, it's not my motion

23

and standing orders precluded me from increasing the density, sorry increasing

24

the density or increasing the land mass that would be covered by the motion.

12:38:51 25

Standing Orders are quite clear on this, that the motion may be no more onerous

26

than the original proposal whilst it would have been possible to propose a

27

motion to downsize the area of land or downsize the level of density, I

28

couldn't have up sized.

29 12:39:12 30

Q. 193

In any event you voted in favour of the motion?

A.

That's correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:39:13

12:39:25

51 1

Q. 194

2

On the 11th November and it was duly passed as was the town centre motion duly passed by a show of hands, isn't that right?

3

A.

That's right.

4

Q. 195

And the they capped at neighbourhood size and that effectively ended your

5

involvement in the Carrickmines lands?

6

A.

That's correct.

7

Q. 196

Now do you remember ever being approached by Mr. Lynn who I think has told the

8

Tribunal that he met every member of Dublin County Council seeking their

9

support bar one and I don't think that person was you. I think he says he met

12:39:42 10

11

everybody and spoke with everybody seeking their support? A.

I think Ms. Dillon, one I have no recollection of any such meeting taking place

12

and I am quite confident it didn't. The other point, I don't know what page it

13

is in the brief, but I think if you look at it my name is not marked by Richard

14

Lynn as having been somebody that he met.

12:40:04 15

Q. 197

And I think in, indeed it's post the event but certainly it would appear in

16

April of 1994 at 5057 this is expenses claim form by, put in by Mr. Lynn I

17

think, yes it is by Mr. Lynn?

18

A.

Yes, I see my name there.

19

Q. 198

You see your name there, do you recollect meeting Mr. Lynn in April of 1994, if

12:40:28 20

21

so what it would have been in connection with? A.

No, I don't recollect meeting Mr. Lynn, as we touched earlier on, Mr. Lynn

22

attended, sorry Mr. Lynn sent somebody to represent him at a fundraising lunch

23

which had occurred -- it would have been the following week, it was the end --

24

the latter part of April, I can't recall the date, perhaps that's what the 60

12:40:55 25

26

pounds relates to, the expenses that he was drawing down to attend that function but he certainly didn't meet with me in April of 94.

27 28

MR. CREEGAN:

29

evidence was never put to Mr. Lynn specifically. He was asked during his

12:41:12 30

Excuse me Chairman might I interrupt again? This particular

evidence to pass a series of dates and times all presented to him not like Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:41:18

12:41:39

52 1

this, but in sheet form with dates, dates and page numbers written on them, but

2

he never looked at them he just said yes, multiples -- I am paraphrasing here,

3

and let them pass through. I would just take this opportunity since the

4

evidence is now being put to my client prior to ever being put to Mr. Lynn, to

5

point out that the designation here is Cherrywood Properties Development Plan

6

and at this stage my client was over on Fingal Council and Cherrywood was long

7

since gone.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

12:41:59 10

Yes, but it's just being put to him as, in that it suggests some

contact between the two, it goes no further than that.

11 12

MR. CREEGAN:

13

purposes of the evidence before the Tribunal of the circumstances of it. Thank

14

you.

12:42:13 15

A.

16 17

Q. 199

But certainly around that time you were writing to Mr. Lynn seeking his support for your fundraising lunch?

A.

12:42:30 20

21

That's the only suggestion I can make to you, that's what it relates to. I can't see what else it could relate to.

18 19

I am not disputing that. I just want to clarify for the

I think in fact if I wrote I would have written to Monarch, I am not sure I would have written to Mr. Lynn.

Q. 200

Can I ask you now, the meeting of the 11th November 1993, in the month or two

22

months prior to that, in September 1993 there was a meeting in Conways called

23

by the then leader of Fine Gael Mr. John Bruton who gave evidence this morning,

24

you were here for Mr. Bruton's evidence?

12:42:50 25

26

A.

I was indeed.

Q. 201

Would you outline to the Tribunal, what you recollect occurring at that meeting

27

and what your understanding was of what you were being asked to do at that

28

meeting?

29 12:43:11 30

A.

Well, the council had met on the Monday afternoon. A conclusion of the council meeting, that the council was advised that Mr. Bruton wished all the Fine Gael Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:43:20

12:43:36

53 1

members to attend a meeting in the upstairs function room of Conways public

2

house.

3 4

We arrived, this was very unusual, certainly in my nine years I had never had

5

the experience of the party leader coming to talk to the elected members of

6

Dublin County Council in this fashion.

7 8

He told us that we were the front line troops, that the nation was watching

9

what the Fine Gael members were doing in Dublin County Council. That we were

12:44:04 10

not acting in the best interests of the party. That there was a need for us to

11

act in a cohesive fashion. That he didn't care what we zoned or what we did

12

not zone, but that he wanted us to vote as a party, to vote as a unit. There

13

was some discussion. He told us that those who were not in a position to

14

accept a majority decision of the group in Dublin County Council, that they

12:44:45 15

ought to leave the group.

16 17

There were points made by various members as to what might or might not happen

18

and what kind of approach might be appropriate to try and find a common

19

position. We were dealing with the Swords maps, we had worked our way through

12:45:18 20

four or five motions, the manager had put forward a proposal that in essence

21

saying that the amount of lands which potentially could be zoned on this Module

22

were inappropriate because of the drainage capacity in Swords.

23

Q. 202

24

Sorry I don't want to cut across you, are you now moving on to what happened at the meeting the following day.

12:45:41 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

No, I think he is explaining?

27

A.

I am trying to explain, sorry, yes.

28

Q. 203

What was discussed --

29

A.

Maybe I am becoming too technical.

Q. 204

No, no. Are you explaining to the Tribunal what was being discussed at the

12:45:52 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:45:52

12:45:56

54 1

meeting where Mr. Bruton was present?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 205

All right I am sorry.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

6

perceived to be an instruction from Mr. Bruton?

7

A.

You are -- talking about a potential problem you saw given what you

Yes. Well there was a difficulty that we all were conscious of the fact that

8

we had individual responsibility, it was one of the things that Fine Gael I

9

suppose prided itself on, that it didn't follow a party line, that you had on

12:46:27 10

either side of us the Fianna Fail would appear to have been following a general

11

whipped position, although some members, some of their members didn't always

12

vote in a straight line.

13 14 12:46:49 15

16

Then on the other side we had the Labour Party and other, the greens and so on, who tended to vote against every proposition. So really the ones who were the floating voters as it were in Dublin County Council were the Fine Gael members.

17 18

The issue which was before the council was the Swords Development Plan. We

19

were, we had gone halfway or some portion of the way through the motions

12:47:17 20

related to Swords.

21 22

The meeting adjourned circa half five, we went to Conways and we were to resume

23

at half two the following day to discuss the remaining portions of the Swords

24

lands and as such Swords really became the talking point. There was the

12:47:42 25

academic thing in terms of what was the correct thing to do in terms

26

politically, morally or whatever, but when it came down to the point was it

27

possible to find a compromise the issue in front of us was how we were going to

28

compromise in relation to the advice the manager had given us in respect of

29

Swords. Was it possible for us to look at it in some fashion where everybody

12:48:04 30

could feel comfortable that they had exercised their duty and could vote in Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:48:12

12:48:27

55 1

accord with the logic of what the manager's report was.

2

Q. 206

You are now at the meeting the following day, is that right?

3

A.

No, I am still at the Conways meeting.

4

Q. 207

You are still at the Conways meeting, is this a point that you were making at

5 6

the Conways meeting? A.

Yes, the primary people who spoke in terms of the Swords map would have been

7

Nora Owen, Ann Devitt and myself being the three immediate elected members for

8

the area who would have known the issues to the greatest extent.

9

Q. 208

12:48:49 10

attempt to form a consensus in relation to the Swords map or the Development

11 12

And was it your view at the end of the meeting that there should be some

Plan, that there should be some discussion among the Fine Gael people? A.

Yes, in the light of the approach by John Bruton who convened the meeting.

13

What he had said to us about the terms of the importance of trying to put the

14

best gloss of the Fine Gael position on it, it seemed not unreasonable that in

12:49:13 15

the context of having all of the reports, the motions and particularly in the

16

context of Swords, we had had a dress rehearsal of the issues because we had

17

already discussed the first half of the motions, so people would have spanned

18

across -- the first motion in fact was the manager's report and a compromise

19

which he had put, which I had proposed, that obviously meant that everybody had

12:49:41 20

aired their views as to whether or not Swords should be zoned, not zoned or

21

whatever. So the issues had been well rehearsed in respect of that. At the

22

Conways meeting a view was taken as to parcels of land which could be zoned

23

which were still within the manager's target, waste water target figures and it

24

was agreed that that should be deemed to be the common position.

12:50:10 25

26

I think we were all somewhat struck by John Bruton's instruction to us that we,

27

that we started to question our own built in system that we had had, which was

28

that everybody acted as they thought fit. Suddenly we had the party president,

29

and leader, telling us that we should work in a more cohesive fashion and we

12:50:40 30

should have a Fine Gael position. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:50:44

12:50:57

56 1

Q. 209

And you are not suggesting to the Tribunal Mr. Boland, that Mr. Bruton was

2

giving that direction in connection with what was then being discussed in the

3

Development Plan?

4

A.

Ms. Dillon --

5

Q. 210

Just to be clear about it. I mean Mr. Boland, I am asking you, is that the

6

position, that the direction or the suggestion that was made by Mr. Bruton was

7

a general direction or suggestion to the Fine Gael councillors not specific?

8

A.

9

of, as he saw it, of the Fine Gael party. I certainly took it that he was

12:51:21 10

giving us an instruction, events subsequently have made me question all of

11 12

Mr. Bruton's motivations. Q. 211

13 14 12:51:38 15

Well Ms. Dillon, I took it at the time that he was acting in the best interests

Are those events the matters relating to the inquiry conducted by Mr. James Nugent?

A.

Yes, in essence.

Q. 212

I think we can leave that because that's a matter for a different forum and not

16

for this Tribunal, the Tribunal have already ruled on it. Can I show you at

17

9066 please, and just at the bottom of that page Mr. Boland you will see a note

18

that's headed Cathal Boland. First duty is to get FG elected (coherence)?

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 213

Let's see cappings and compromises. Don't hold cards till 2.30 each day?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 214

Now, can I just ask you first of all is it likely that that's accurate and you

12:51:58 20

23 24

did say don't hold cards until 2.30 each day? A.

12:52:24 25

into the chamber and a Fine Gael spokesperson should stand up and say we'll

26 27

vote for motion 5, 7, 11 and we won't vote for anything else. Q. 215

28 29 12:52:49 30

Mr. Bruton had proposed that whatever the decision was that people should go

Sorry I didn't make myself clear. Is it likely -- this records you as saying don't hold cards until 2.30 each day?

A.

I honestly can't remember saying that but that's the context in which, if I said it, it was said. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:52:49

12:53:02

57 1

Q. 216

2

And it would have been said in the context of, in other words let's know what our position is before we go into the meeting, isn't that right?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 217

Right. So what you appear to be suggesting to the meeting if that's an

5

accurate note, is something not dissimilar to what Mr. Bruton was suggesting,

6

in other words that everybody should know the Fine Gael position before you

7

went into the meeting, isn't that right?

8

A.

In the context of the Conways meeting I have to accept that.

9

Q. 218

So in fact according to Mr. Bruton's record or note of what happened in the

12:53:19 10

meeting you are not a million miles away from what Mr. Bruton himself was

11

suggesting as you have recounted?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 219

And you appear to have had a wider picture in view, isn't that right, in that

14 12:53:33 15

16

your first concern was to get Fine Gael elected, isn't that right? A.

That's right.

Q. 220

So that you are also looking, as Mr. Bruton appears to have been looking at,

17

the conduct of the Fine Gael councillors in the wider context, isn't that

18

right?

19 12:53:43 20

A.

Yes.

Q. 221

In other words how your behaviour as Fine Gael councillors before Dublin County

21

Council would affect the chances of re-election or otherwise of Fine Gael,

22

isn't that right?

23

A.

That's correct.

24

Q. 222

Okay so you again are also looking at presenting a more cohesive or united

12:53:59 25

front?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 223

So, and you, therefore would it be fair to say are in broad agreement with what

28 29 12:54:09 30

Mr. Bruton was suggesting at the meeting? A.

Broad brush agreement, yes.

Q. 224

Isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:54:09

12:54:20

58 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 225

In other words that it would make much better political sense if I can put it

3

like that, that the Fine Gael party would present themselves as a cohesive and

4

united front at local level?

5

A.

Yes, I think the argument basically would be in the context of what size you

6

intended to allow, for example Swords to grow to. The actual fields that would

7

be zoned would be a matter for individual consideration as to the pros and cons

8

which would be similar to the position that the manager was taking in terms of

9

saying it was possible to zone X amount of lands because the sewerage was

12:54:47 10

11

available and then you have an academic discussion. Q. 226

Yes, but the meeting in Conways pub Mr. Boland is not a meeting about the level

12

of a sewer pipe in Swords. The meeting is a policy meeting about a more

13

unified approach by the Fine Gael councillors in general on Dublin County

14

Council in relation to council business and in particular the Development Plan,

12:55:06 15

isn't that right?

16

A.

No it spanned both, both facets.

17

Q. 227

Yes, but according to your statement to the Tribunal the approach by Mr. Bruton

18

was for a more united or cohesive front by the Fine Gael councillors, isn't

19

that right?

12:55:22 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 228

That is not a meeting that is brought about the size of a sewer pipe or a

22

specific matter, it's a policy approach in general, isn't that right?

23

A.

Yes, I think that's fair.

24

Q. 229

Because the perception abroad was of a lack of cohesion or a disparate group of

12:55:40 25

people without a focus in Dublin County Council, that was the view apparently

26

abroad of the Fine Gael members of the council?

27

A.

So it's said.

28

Q. 230

So, be that as it may. You appear to agree with that because you are recorded

29 12:55:58 30

as talking about the first duty is to get Fine Gael elected and not to hold the cards until 2.30 each day, in other words that there should be a more cohesive Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:56:03

12:56:12

59 1

approach?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 231

And there should be a more unified approach by the Fine Gael members?

4

A.

Yes, we should have been saying what our picture of Dublin was, I accept that.

5

Q. 232

Yes, in other words rather than dealing on a piecemeal basis if I understand

6

you correctly, on a field by field basis one should be taking a very big

7

picture overview and have a very clear mind where Fine Gael as a party wanted

8

the development of Dublin to be?

9 12:56:28 10

A.

Yes.

Q. 233

And that wasn't the position, isn't that right, there was no such clear

11

cohesive view among the Fine Gael members on the council?

12

A.

That's correct.

13

Q. 234

And would it be fair to say that it was in an attempt to redress that imbalance

14 12:56:48 15

that this meeting apparently took place in September of 1993? A.

16 17

I am not a hundred per cent sure, I really am not in a position to answer the question.

Q. 235

I think that's not quite correct because in your statement at page 8709 please,

18

this is what you state Mr. Bruton said, at the very beginning of that

19

paragraph.

12:57:09 20

21

"The leader thanked us for our attendance at short notice. He told us that we

22

were in effect the front line troops of Fine Gael. That our actions were the

23

ones which made the political head lines. That we set out what Fine Gael was

24

about. That he did not care what we zoned or did not zone but he wanted Fine

12:57:24 25

Gael members to act as a cohesive unit and that if any one of us could not vote

26

with the majority of their colleagues they should leave the Fine Gael group on

27

the council" is that right?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 236

Now from that what you set out Mr. Bruton set out at the beginning of the

12:57:40 30

meeting was that this was a political issue, the front line troops of Fine Gael Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:57:43

12:57:54

60 1

were the Fine Gael councillors and he wanted them to act in a cohesive unit

2

isn't that right?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 237

And that in effect is also what you wanted, isn't that right, according to what

5

you are recorded as saying?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 238

And then Mr. Bruton disputes that he would have said to you that anyone who

8

couldn't effectively tow the party line would leave, and your note then goes on

9

to record Mr. Bruton as saying that it seemed from the media we were all over

12:58:09 10

the place an we were letting others decide the shape of the county by not being

11

united. So you record Mr. Bruton as having a concern that due to the lack of

12

cohesion in the Fine Gael councillors, the shape of the county was being

13

determined by others presumably Fianna Fail, and that if there was unity in

14

Fine Gael then they could determine equally the shape of the County, do you

12:58:29 15

understand?

16

A.

Absolutely. That's precisely the point.

17

Q. 239

Yes, so in fact what Mr. Bruton's concern was according to your statement to

18

the Tribunal was the fact that Fianna Fail did not have full participation in

19

deciding the shape of the county because of the lack of unity, isn't that

12:58:44 20

right?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 240

And you agree with that, you have already agreed that?

23

A.

Well the view that I have on it is that the point that Mr. Bruton was making

24

was if Fine Gael took a position casting their 19 votes on any issue, either

12:59:05 25

Fianna Fail acquiesced to what the 19 wanted or -- and the issue became

26

zoned -- the 19 decided to zone something and went in and said we are going to

27

zone plot B. Fianna Fail either then had to decide whether to vote with the 19

28

or not vote with the 19. So effectively you were giving leverage to your 19

29

votes because you were picking up their 27 votes for the Fine Gael position.

12:59:32 30

Q. 241

Yes but the point I am making to you Mr. Boland is according to the statement Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

12:59:37

12:59:46

61 1

you made to the Tribunal, Mr. Bruton's concern, part of his concern was that

2

Fianna Fail were getting to determine the shape of the county due to the lack

3

of unity within Fine Gael?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 242

Right. And you agree that that was so. And what I had put to you was that

6

Mr. Bruton's concern was a political concern which was that the Fine Gael due

7

to their lack of unity were not playing the role they should have played within

8

Dublin County Council?

9 13:00:06 10

11

A.

That would appear to be the logic.

Q. 243

Of what your statement says?

A.

Of my recount of what he said at the meeting.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

All right Ms. Dillon it's one o'clock. So we are going to rise

14

until two o'clock.

13:00:16 15

16

MS. DILLON:

Yes sir.

17 18

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

13:00:31

14:07:38

62 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2 PM:

2 3 4

Q. 244

5

Thank you Mr. Boland, if you would answer any questions that anybody else might have for you.

6 7

CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Birmingham?

8 9 14:07:44 10

WITNESS QUESTIONED BY MR. BIRMINGHAM. Q. 245

I won't detain you more than two or three moments, can you just put in context

11

the situation where people met in Conways? I think you were telling us this

12

morning that prior to the meeting, that the Fine Gael group did not vote as a

13

coherent block in the council?

14 14:08:03 15

A.

That's correct.

Q. 246

And in fact I think you were saying that that distinguished them really from

16

all the other major blocks who tended to adopt at least a broadly common

17

position even if occasionally with some dissent?

18

A.

In a broad sense, yes.

19

Q. 247

But uniquely among the major blocks Fine Gael didn't adopt coherent, cohesive

14:08:26 20

position in the council?

21

A.

Not up to the 21st.

22

Q. 248

Not up to the Conways meeting. And I suppose it was in a sense a bit more

23

different even than that, in that not only do they not adopt a common position

24

in the chamber but it appears no effort was made to formulate a common

14:08:46 25

position?

26

A.

I think that would be a reasonable view.

27

Q. 249

And that, would you accept, is a matter that would be of legitimate concern to

28

people whose function it was to lead a party and who had a concern for the well

29

being of the party?

14:09:03 30

A.

I would. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:09:04

14:09:20

63 1

Q. 250

2

And would you accept it would also have been a concern perhaps to Fine Gael activists and maybe even to Fine Gael voters?

3

A.

Yes, I accept that.

4

Q. 251

And it appears from the notes that we had this morning, that insofar as there

5

was that concern it was a concern that to some extent you shared in because you

6

saw the advantage of being in a position to adopt a common position if

7

possible?

8

A.

I would have sought a Dublin position, yes, correct.

9

Q. 252

Now that was the position pre Conways, and you have told us your recollection

14:09:41 10

of Conways and you have told us the actions that you took in the aftermath of

11

Conways, but the position is after Conways --

12

A.

Mr. Birmingham, I'm sorry, did I tell you what I did after Conways?

13

Q. 253

I understood you to say you resigned the whip or at least you departed the Fine

14 14:10:01 15

16

Gael group, am I wrong? A.

I thought I said that in my statement, I didn't say it in evidence.

Q. 254

That is the position isn't it, that you left the group for a period and took

17 18

your place on the independent benches? A.

Following Mr. Bruton's instruction that a sanction would apply that those who

19

wouldn't vote with the majority of the Fine Gael should leave the group, I did

14:10:26 20

the honourable thing to leave Fine Gael when I couldn't support the position.

21

Q. 255

You then sat as an independent for a couple of years I think?

22

A.

I think until 95/96, I am not a hundred per cent sure.

23

Q. 256

Yes, your statement I think says '96?

24

A.

I read somewhere else that suggests '95 so --

Q. 257

Yes. Now during that period the Fine Gael councillors continued to go their

14:10:47 25

26

own way?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 258

During that period there was in fact no common position adopted and still less

29 14:11:05 30

was there any disciplinary sanction imposed on anybody? A.

Mr. Birmingham -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:11:07

14:11:24

64 1

Q. 259

Sorry just answer the question, isn't that so?

2

A.

Following my public statement of resignation and the impropriety of

3 4

Mr. Bruton's instruction there was no whip applied following ... Q. 260

Sorry, the question I asked emits of a yes or no answer. Is it in fact the

5

case that following on the Conways meeting people continued to go their own

6

way, just as they had heretofore and there was no disciplinary action taken

7

against anyone.

8 9

MR. CREEGAN:

14:11:39 10

Excuse me Chairman, might I just interrupt here and say

Mr. Boland had left Fine Gael at this stage, I don't think he is competent to

11

comment on that.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

14

of your client, so it has to be dealt with. If Mr. Boland says I don't know

14:11:55 15

whether anyone left or whether there was any issue in relation to sanction he

16 17

Well if he is not -- this is made a very big issue by you on behalf

can say that, but it is perfectly correct that he be asked. Q. 261

Just before you answer, given that your counsel intervened and it's suggested

18

you may not be in a position to answer the question, you sat in the council,

19

you were in a position to observe what way people were voting weren't you?

14:12:18 20

A.

Of course.

21

Q. 262

And is it the case that people continued to vote their own way?

22

A.

My understanding is from the, my observation of the record that's correct.

23

Q. 263

Now at that stage did you not find yourself in a situation of saying what am I

24

doing having moved my seat in the council, why am I sitting over here with the

14:12:39 25

independents when all of the other Fine Gael councillors are continuing to

26

exercise their own judgement and go their own way on vote after vote after

27

vote, did that occur to you?

28 29 14:12:59 30

A.

It occurred to me that I had acted as per the instructions of the leader. I remained a member of the Fine Gael party. I did not remain a member of the Fine Gael group. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:13:01

14:13:25

65 1

Q. 264

2 3

And did it occur to you that you seemed to have interpreted what was expected of you differently to what all your colleagues did?

A.

I acted as I interpreted the instruction. I don't know whether the others also

4

interpreted the instruction in the same way as I did, they may have just opted

5

not to act on it.

6

Q. 265

Well one of two things are possible. They either interpreted it differently

7

than you did or alternatively they interpreted the same way as you did but

8

decided notwithstanding that interpretation, to act in a manner contrary to it,

9

which do you think is more likely?

14:13:41 10

A.

11 12

My understanding is that many of them understood it in the same manner in which I interpreted it and decided not to follow the instruction.

Q. 266

And as time passed and you found that you were, if you were the only odd man

13

out, did you not find that that was becoming an increasingly untenable position

14

and did you not find yourself saying why should I be the odd man out? Why can

14:14:10 15

everybody else remain members of the party making their own judgement vote by

16

vote, issue by issue and I can't, did that occur to you?

17

A.

Well as you are aware --

18

Q. 267

Did that occur to me?

19

A.

Of course it occurred to me.

Q. 268

Did you take any action on it?

A.

In 95/96, I am unsure as to the date, I returned to the Fine Gael group on

14:14:24 20

21 22 23

Fingal County Council. Q. 269

24

And when you returned to the group matters progressed very much as they had been before the meeting in Conways public house, in that individual councillors

14:14:48 25

continued to make individual judgements?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 270

Thank you.

28 29 14:14:56 30

WITNESS QUESTIONED BY MR. CREEGAN. Q. 271

Chairman if I could just ask Mr. Boland a few questions. Mr. Boland can I just Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:15:01

14:15:15

66 1

take to you Conways and clarify your evidence for the Tribunal. Is it your

2

evidence that Mr. Bruton imposed a whip and a sanction or attempted to impose a

3

whip and a sanction and you disagreed with that and that you resigned on that

4

basis?

5

A.

It's my understanding that Mr. Bruton told the members of Fine Gael group who

6

met in Conways with him, that they should vote with the majority decision.

7

That they should meet prior to every council meeting which related to the

8

Development Plan. They should find a common position and that those who

9

couldn't vote with the majority should leave the group. That's my

14:15:43 10

understanding of what Mr. Bruton told us. We discussed the matter in Conways.

11

We considered the issue, my recollection is that the issue in terms of the

12

legitimacy of people voting with the group decision was expressed. The

13

following day the 22nd, having a common position on leaving Conways as to our

14

attitude to the voting on motions within the, on the 22nd. On the morning of

14:16:25 15

the 22nd I know I was at the council until around 1 o'clock, the meeting was

16

due to start at half two. An emergency meeting of the Fine Gael was summonsed

17

for half two, the council meeting commenced, the then Chairman, Pat Rabbitt,

18

adjourned the meeting to facilitate the emergency meeting of the Fine Gael

19

group. Issues were put forward that the decision which we had taken the night

14:16:57 20

before was impractical and that the motions that we voted for should be

21

altered. I advised the meeting, which was so chaotic, which you might

22

appreciate in terms of returning to a council which had adjourned to facilitate

23

the meeting, that I was not in a position to support the decision which had

24

been taken and that in the light of deputy Bruton's instruction the night

14:17:22 25

before that when we came to that item that I would resign from the group.

26 27

When we entered the chamber we went through a series of motions, we arrived at

28

a particular motion, the proposition was put which I felt was not in the best

29

interests of zoning, not in the best interests of the community who lived in

14:17:45 30

Swords or those who might come to live in Swords. As such I was incapable of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:17:50

14:18:10

67 1

voting with the majority of the group within the Fine Gael group sorry, and I

2

publicly indicated that I believed that what was about to happen was wrong and

3

that there was no way I could continue to be an active member of the Fine Gael

4

group and I would withdraw to the independent benches.

5

Q. 272

Now Mr. Boland is it the case that in principle, let's say you agreed with the

6

notion of Fine Gael agreeing, but what you disagreed with was the notion that

7

the party leader would impose a whip on agreement and a sanction with that

8

whip?

9

A.

14:18:34 10

Absolutely. I that that it's quite reasonable that a big picture can be painted but what Mr. Bruton's instruction effectively was that each day's

11

motions would be looked at and a whipped position be taken and that is just not

12

tenable in my view in terms of the Planning Act.

13

Q. 273

14

Thank you Mr. Boland. Can I move on now just to the final days voting in Dublin County Council on the Cherrywood lands, November 11th '93. There was a

14:19:02 15

motion by councillors Marren and Coffey, which has been mulled over much at

16

this Tribunal. Can I just explain to the Tribunal what the consequences of

17

that motion being defeated, as far as the modalities of votes are concerned

18

within the Dublin County Council chamber, the consequences of a defeat of the

19

motion in question would be?

14:19:28 20

A.

Well the motion wasn't defeated. My understanding was that the manager's

21

proposals had gone on public display and that I think it was May '91 sorry,

22

that they came back into the chamber and a proposition was put that the

23

manager's report be adopted and that motion was defeated.

24 14:19:58 25

Following that, a motion was successfully put by Deputy Barrett to zone the

26

land in the manner in which it was presented on the 11th November, after a

27

public display and it would seem to me that the logic is that if Deputy

28

Barrett's, sorry, if the Coffey/Marren motion was defeated that it would have

29

sent the zoning of the parcel of land back to the 1983 position because the

14:20:33 30

manager's report -- sorry the Barrett motion was effectively defeated. Then Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:20:40

14:21:04

68 1

the Coffey motion was put, had it been rejected it would have catapulted the

2

zoning of the lands back to the 1983 position because the 1991 position had

3

been rejected by the elected members, so the logic of supporting the

4

Coffey/Marren motion was, in terms of the advice which senior counsel

5

Mr. Gallagher had given to the County Council, that it was possible to do a

6

number of things to adopt the Development Plan with the amendment, to reject

7

the development -- to adopt the plan without the amendment or to find a

8

compromise between what was displayed in the '91 and the '92 display.

9 14:21:26 10

But in essence when you came to the '91 display there was two items on the

11

agenda, on display, there was the 1983 plan and the 1991 proposed amendment.

12

In my view because the members rejected the manager's report which suggested

13

the adoption of the displayed maps, it immediately reverted to the 1983

14

position. Then Councillor Barrett's motion put another proposition on display

14:22:00 15

with the 1983 position, so the 1992 position really should have shown the 1983

16

lands, zoning lands and the proposition of Councillor Barrett. And in fact I

17

noted going through the minutes that a similar situation had arisen, I think,

18

it's a parcel of land on the Naas Road, and the display actually showed that

19

one was the deletion of the 1991 position and then moving on to the '92

14:22:37 20

position. It's the Naas Road, if it's of importance I can find it.

21

Q. 274

Mr. Boland, where would that 1983 position have left the land, at what state?

22

A.

I think would have been one house on septic tanks per acre.

23

Q. 275

And now can I move on Mr. Boland, just one last point to make, could I have

24 14:23:06 25

26

page 92 of the brief please. Now before I ask the question Chairman I just want to clarify, my client does have a right to comment on the Nugent report as in the brief, did I read you right in saying that, just to comment on it?

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

29

Gael inquiry report is different to that which we have here on evidence, he

14:23:27 30

Yes, he can explain to the Tribunal if the position in the Fine

should explain in fairness to himself why that difference is. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:23:31

14:23:53

69 1

Q. 276

2 3

I think Mr. Boland would you like to explain to the Tribunal your comments on what's written there about you in the Nugent report please?

A.

I'd like just to explain my position.

4 5

The Tribunal of Inquiry wrote to me and asked me to provide information and

6

they marked the correspondence to me as private and confidential, they equally

7

said that what they were asking me and what I might tell them should remain

8

confidential between the Tribunal and myself and I shouldn't advise other

9

people whether I had been asked otherwise.

14:24:19 10

11

There was some controversy in the papers with speculation that Mr. Dunlop was

12

going to accuse Mr. Bruton of knowledge of a request by Councillor Hand of a

13

sizable contribution and arising out of that Mr. Bruton established the Nugent

14

Inquiry which strangely enough he and Fine Gael seemed to believe is actually a

14:24:52 15

kosher Fine Gael operation, but in actual fact is in breach of the constitution

16

of the Fine Gael party, so effectively it was a Bruton quango rather than a

17

Fine Gael inquiry.

18 19

MR. BIRMINGHAM:

Chairman, I --

14:25:05 20

21

CHAIRMAN:

22

know?

23

A.

Well that's just comment. Just explain, we don't really want to

My apologies.

24 14:25:11 25

CHAIRMAN:

Just explain, if you feel that the position as is set out in the

26

report is different to that which you have indicated here in evidence, then you

27

are entitled to explain why you took the position as would appear from the

28

report, other than that we don't really want to...

29 14:25:40 30

A.

Sir, I took the position I did in support of what I believed was the request of Mr. Justice Flood, to hold in confidence any issue which I disclosed to him. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:25:48

14:26:09

70 1

In the context that I disclosed to the Tribunal the existence of the

2

contribution of four thousand pounds by Mr. Frank Dunlop to myself, the manner

3

of questions and the line of questioning which the Nugent Inquiry put to me

4

would have meant that I had broken that bond of confidentiality between the

5

Tribunal and myself. I think that that would have been improper at the time

6

and in hindsight I believe that the recent evidence from, that's been before

7

the Tribunal in this Module demonstrates that the position which Justice Flood

8

had taken at that time, asking people to hold on to themselves the detail of

9

the information which they were giving to the Tribunal, was an extremely wise

14:26:35 10

11

judgement. Q. 277

I have no further questions, thank you Chairman.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

14

group with Mr. Bruton that we have heard about, was it the next day that you

14:26:55 15

16

Mr. Boland could I just ask you, after the meeting of the Fine Gael

resigned? A.

Yes.

17 18 19

CHAIRMAN: A.

Did you resign from the party or just from the group?

I resigned from the group.

14:27:00 20

21 22

CHAIRMAN: A.

But you remained a member of the party.

Yes.

23 24 14:27:07 25

CHAIRMAN: A.

When was the Swords vote?

Sorry, the Swords maps were considered on the 21st, being the Monday, the day

26

of Mr. Bruton's meeting and on the 22nd. Now they may possibly have run to a

27

third day but I think it was the 22nd. It did run to a third day but it was

28

the 21st and 22nd.

29 14:27:29 30

CHAIRMAN:

But was it a concern that you had about how you wanted to vote in

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:27:34

14:27:58

71 1

relation to the Swords land that prompted you to part company with the Fine

2

Gael group?

3

A.

I had concerns that -- I had concerns with the notion of a whipped position in

4

any event, but I considered that if people sat down, looked at all the reports

5

and gave a fair and rational debate, then it was possible to find, to allow

6

everybody to come to a cohesive position. It seemed to me to be totally

7

irrational that you could not all of the 19 members were present on the Monday

8

night, but that you could hardly reconvene a group meeting with a different

9

composition of members, try and decide the best interest of sorts in a hot,

14:28:30 10

sticky over crowded room in the space of seven or eight minutes. That doesn't

11

seem to me to be possible, therefore I would have had difficulty with any whip

12

arising out of that, but the particular change which was made to my mind was an

13

extremely poor decision.

14 14:28:52 15

CHAIRMAN:

16 17

But was there a difference of opinion between you and other Fine

Gael councillors in relation to Swords? A.

I think that's how the voting records certainly would show it. On the day that

18

I resigned four other members, Alan shatter, Mary Muldoon, Councillor Maher and

19

Councillor Laing also voted against the parcel of land which I had concerns

14:29:19 20

about. I would imagine that 11 or 12, something like that voted.

21 22 23

CHAIRMAN: A.

Was that the way you voted then?

I voted, yes, in that fashion.

24 14:29:28 25

26

CHAIRMAN: A.

So, some Fine Gael voted one way and some the other?

Exactly, yes.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

29

or attempt of any of those who voted contrary to the majority Fine Gael view,

14:29:44 30

And there was no, as far as you are aware there was no suggestion

there was no suggestion or hint of any sanction or -Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:29:48

14:29:58

72 1

A.

I have never been advised of any, I am unaware of any.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

4

been close to the ground at the time?

5

A.

Yes, but you would have presumably been aware, your ear would have

I wouldn't have allowed my ear to be close to the ground that day, sir.

6 7

CHAIRMAN:

8

made, isn't it likely that you as one of a group of councillors, although you

9

were outside the Fine Gael group at the time, but isn't it likely that you

14:30:14 10

would have been aware of any attempt to sanction or discipline those who had

11 12

But would you not have been aware if disciplinary moves had been

taken a different view to the majority? A.

Yes, absolutely. I would accept I didn't hear of any attempt to sanction them.

13 14

CHAIRMAN:

So, you would have realised very soon that your understanding of

14:30:31 15

what Mr. Bruton had said, this is the understanding that you told us about,

16

that he had applied some sort of a whip, that that was incorrect or likely to

17

be incorrect or was exaggerated or whatever because it didn't happen in

18

practice?

19

A.

14:30:56 20

Okay. I wouldn't have been able to form that position from what I heard at the time and what I have subsequently heard, it's my belief that a sizable number

21

of the people who attended the Conways meeting held similar interpretations as

22

to what Mr. Bruton said.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

14:31:17 25

That's fair enough, but within if you like days of Mr. Bruton's

meeting with you, it would have been pretty clear to you, from what you could

26

see, although you were somewhat outside the fold at the time, that any question

27

of sanction or discipline in practice wasn't arising for your colleagues?

28 29 14:31:46 30

A.

Yes, sir. I accept that. I purposely resigned during the course of the debate in the most public fashion in an effort to bring the Fine Gael members of the Dublin County Council to a point of realising that what they were proposing to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:31:50

14:32:00

73 1

do was improper.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

All right. Thank you very much.

4 5

MS. DILLON:

Thank you sir. Thank you Mr. Boland. The next matter is the

6

evidence in relation to the statements made by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor,

7

relevant to this Module, prior to his death and Ms. Emma Dalton will deal with

8

that matter, and after that then there are the submissions from Mr. Seamus

9

O'Tuathail.

14:32:22 10

11

MS. DALTON: Yes Chairman. If I can have page 1232 please.

12 13

Mr. Lawlor provided the Fianna Fail committee on Standards in Public Life with

14

information which is recorded on the report of the committee which is dated on

14:32:36 15

7 of June in the year 2000 and at paragraph I under the heading development

16

"Regarding donations from developers, Liam Lawlor stated that he would have

17

received one thousand or 2,000 from Mr. John Byrne at election times and that

18

Joe Tiernan might have participated in a golf fundraiser.

19 14:32:55 20

The next statement is page 1236 please. "On the 10th January 2001 in a

21

schedule to an Affidavit of Discovery Mr. Lawlor provided the Tribunal with a

22

document which is entitled income, including political contributions, donations

23

and consultancy fees being approximate and as recollected by Liam Lawlor in

24

respect of the period 1973-2000 and at five it says Monarch Properties, 70s,

14:33:26 25

80s and 90s, 40 thousand pounds"

26 27

On 4th May 2001 in response to queries raised by the Tribunal, at page 1276,

28

the late Mr. Lawlor provided the Tribunal with a narrative outlining the

29

history of his dealings with Phillip Monahan.

14:33:47 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:33:47

14:34:05

74 1

"I first met Phil Monahan in the early 70S at McCann Fruits complex in Dundalk

2

where he was employed in charge of the maintenance of the banana ripening

3

rooms. My refrigeration company had a contract, having installed and provided

4

maintenance for the cooling equipment. Sometime later the company got the

5

franchise for Chiquita Bananas and I recall travelling to Holland with Phil

6

Monahan to be provided with a technical briefing on the cooling and ripening

7

technology associated with above brand of bananas. We installed a number of

8

chill rooms at the Dundalk, Belfast and Dublin depots. My recollection is that

9

Phil Monahan went on to form a company called Building and Engineering Limited

14:34:26 10

and they undertook the construction contracts for new meat processing plant at

11

Dublin Meat Packers, Cloughran, County Dublin. My company designed, installed

12

and commissioned the industrial refrigeration equipment.

13 14 14:34:42 15

I had no contact with Phil Monahan over a number of years and when his company Monarch Properties Limited contracted to purchase the Dublin Corporation Lands

16

designated for Tallaght Town Centre from the original company London &

17

Clydeside Ltd who were the management's choice to build the Tallaght Town

18

Centre but as I recall were unable to fund the project. Monarch Properties

19

entered into some form of contractual arrangement with a view to building the

14:35:00 20

town centre but again there were difficulties with funding. Monarch Properties

21

Limited appointed Burke Kennedy Doyle Architects and I recall Mr. Edward

22

Sweeney prior to the appointment lobbying along with the then construction

23

industry, to have a ceiling put on the contribution that required to be paid to

24

the planning authority, which at the time had a price per square foot."

14:35:21 25

26

If we can just go down to the third last paragraph "Monarch Properties Limited

27

in the 80s lobbied the then Dublin County Council regarding lands at south

28

County Dublin and again mounted a major campaign. I was not very familiar with

29

the area and I recall supporting the management's proposal when some issue

14:35:41 30

arose at the council meeting regarding this area. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:35:42

14:35:52

75 1 2

Monarch Properties Limited agreed, following discussions with Mr. Ambrose Kelly

3

to financially support at the outset the Irish Consortium, to pursue

4

development opportunities in the Czech Republic.

5 6

Mr. Edward Sweeney, development director, Mr. Noel Murray, marketing director

7

and Mr. Pat Lafferty, architect for Monarch Properties Limited, travelled to

8

the Czech Republic with me and attended meetings pursuing various property

9

projects. Such information has been discovered to the Tribunal in various

14:36:08 10

files relating to the Czech Republic.

11 12

I also recall and have referred to Monarch Properties in the Green Property

13

Company explanatory note where Phil Monahan consulted with me on a very regular

14

basis regarding his interest in making a bid for or some type of agreed merger

14:36:24 15

with the Green Property Company. Both Companies Offices were I recall at the

16

time in Earlsfort Terrace. The matter was discussed in great detail

17

particularly after Monarch Properties succeeded in funding and building the

18

Tallaght Town Centre.

19 14:36:36 20

I would have met Phil Monahan at social occasions over the years as detailed in

21

file B42, I have detailed my recollection of contributions received from

22

Monarch Properties over the last 25 years."

23 24

And file B42 contains documents which we referred to moment ago.

14:36:53 25

26

In an affidavit sworn by the late Mr. Liam Lawlor on 8th April 2002 which is at

27

page 7583, Mr. Lawlor provided the Tribunal with further information in

28

relation to his income including political contributions and consultancy fees.

29

Paragraph 1, name and address of individual who authorised payment, name:

14:37:15 30

Monarch Properties. 2. Name and address of individual who actually made Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:37:19

14:37:34

76 1

payment, Mr. Phil Monahan or Mr. Edward Sweeney of Monarch Properties. 3

2

approximate amount and method of payment. Amount 40 thousand estimated.

3

Method of payment. Cheques.

4 5

4. Date of payment, not available. 5. Reason for payments: Political

6

contributions towards election campaigns and running of my constituency office.

7

6. How payment was dealt with: Bank details into which monies were lodged.

8

Lodged to bank accounts active at the time.

9 14:37:54 10

If I can have page 1269 please? On the 1st May 2002 the solicitor then acting

11

for Mr. Lawlor wrote to the Tribunal as follows "We refer to your letter of the

12

13th March 2002 in relation to invoices issued by our client. We are advised

13

by Mr. Lawlor that the following is a list of names used by him for the

14

purposes of creating invoices and at B is listed Comex Limited and C, Economic

14:38:24 15

Reports.

16 17

Mr. Lawlor advises that the following entities received or may have received

18

invoices under the above titles and at C is listed Monarch Properties.

19 14:38:37 20

Mr. Lawlor again wrote to the Tribunal on 23 of June 2003 and this was at page

21

1270. At the bottom paragraph "I have further concluded an exhaustive exercise

22

in cooperation with my accountants which are identified at schedules 2, 3, 4,

23

5, 6, 7, 11 and 12, providing all available records up to June 2003 which I now

24

provide to the Tribunal. On assessing the spreadsheets I conclude that the

14:39:07 25

only income applicable to the Tribunal's terms of reference has been identified

26

on schedule 11."

27

donations I received from any company or person that had any involvement with

28

Dublin County Council and by extension it's planning functions. 1983-91

29

inclusive. During this period I was an elected member of Dublin County

14:39:30 30

On the following page. Schedule 11 identifies the political

Council. The figure totals 320,150 pounds. This is the figure that warrants Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:39:37

14:39:49

77 1

the Tribunal's inquiries. Any information the Tribunal further requires

2

regarding this figure, please contact the undersigned. I terminated my

3

membership of Dublin County Council in June of 1991.

4 5

Schedule 12: A further analysis of the figures identifies on schedule 12 the

6

companies or party that provided political donations in the years 92 through to

7

2000 inclusive. This figure totals 235,604 pounds.

8 9 14:40:17 10

11

The figures identified in schedule 11 should be investigated and I have no difficulty being fully answerable for same as I received the sums during my term of membership of Dublin County Council.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

Sorry, can we put that back on screen.

14 14:40:22 15

Ms. Dalton: 1271 please, just at the third paragraph.

16 17

"In the exercising of my public duties in making policy, any potential conflict

18

between those duties and the receipts of funds from any party are legitimately

19

covered by the Terms of Reference of the Tribunal of Inquiry into certain

14:40:39 20

planning matters and payments for investigation."

21 22

Any could now have page 1274 please this is the spreadsheet entitled Schedule

23

11, political donations to Liam Lawlor, 1983 to 91 inclusive, the fourth row

24

down shows political donations from Monarch, four thousand in 1988, 10,000 in

14:41:04 25

1989, 10,500 in 1991, totalling 24,500 between 1983 and 1991.

26 27

And on the following page, 1275, schedule 12, the third row down shows further

28

payments from Monarch, three thousand in 1994, 2,500 in 1995 which totals 5500

29

between 92 and 2000.

14:41:34 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:41:34

14:41:39

78 1

That concludes the evidence of the late Mr. Liam Lawlor.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you.

4 5

MS. DILLON:

6

provided written submissions to the Tribunal this afternoon and a copy of

7

those submissions, I think, you now have in front of you. I think you

8

indicated would you afford Mr. O Tuathail an opportunity to expand upon, but

9

not necessarily to repeat what's already contained in the written submissions.

14:42:04 10

Sorry sir, Mr. O Tuathail on behalf of Mr. Donal Lydon has

And that's --

11 12

CHAIRMAN:

Well he can deal with it as he --

13 14

MS. DILLON:

That's the only matter that remains.

14:42:10 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

All right, Mr. O Tuathail?

17 18 19 14:42:12 20

MR. O TUATHAIL: I provided that outline as an assistance to the Tribunal, I am

21

grateful Mr. Chairman to yourself and to the Members of the Tribunal for

22

hearing me today. I had intended going through them in some detail and adding

23

to them, now if there is now a ruling that they are acceptable as are with any

24

additions that I may make I can go that road as well.

14:42:35 25

26

CHAIRMAN:

Well, you provided us with the submissions which can be made

27

available to anyone, any of the interested parties or to the press, and if you

28

want to then add to them as you deem fit then we can take it what's down in

29

writing as well as what you add to them as your total submissions.

14:42:57 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:42:57

14:43:18

79 1

MR. O TUATHAIL: I appreciate that Chairman and that will shorten matters today

2

but I should in any event explain that I am here because Senator Lydon insofar

3

as he is concerned in proceedings of this Module, it involved a statement made

4

in private to John Gallagher in, on the 6th July by Mr. Bill O'Herlihy, that's

5

the purpose of my -- this statement was adduced in evidence on the 7th June

6

2006 and to give the brief background to the provenance of that statement, on

7

the events about, out of which this statement by Mr. Bill O'Herlihy arose was

8

when Mr. O'Herlihy had been employed by Monarch as a public relations

9

consultant in relation to the Cherrywood project and concerned events around a

14:43:47 10

meeting of the Dublin County Council on 27th May 1992. It's important to note

11

that this statement that Mr. O'Herlihy made was made some eight years later to

12

Mr. John Gallagher, in privacy in Dublin Castle, and was only made public on

13

the 7th June, in the sense that a ruling of this Tribunal made it public in

14

relation to Senator Lydon. And that was on the 7th June 2006, some 14 years

14:44:20 15

after the events allegedly giving rise to the statement.

16 17

Now prior to the publication of that statement, we had a knowledge that the

18

statement was about to be made, either included in the opening statement or

19

otherwise travelled in evidence, and by letters of the 16th May 2006 and the

14:44:42 20

1st June 2006 we protested strongly that given the quality of that evidence and

21

given the statement itself by Mr. O'Herlihy as made to Mr. Gallagher, that it

22

was entirely improper and grossly prejudicial to Senator Lydon to connect his

23

name to what essentially could be described as a rumour or a fairy tale and

24

more so and particularly so when we now look back at the evidence given in this

14:45:14 25

Tribunal, where this statement has been denied by the person who allegedly made

26

it, who wasn't even present on his own evidence, when allegedly he made the

27

statement in the Royal Dublin Hotel to Mr. O'Herlihy, and Mr. O'Herlihy

28

himself, before he gave any evidence, stated that this was hearsay, unsupported

29

by any other evidence whatsoever and could not be supported on his oath.

14:45:44 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:45:44

14:46:05

80 1

Since engaging in the correspondence with the Tribunal we have been helped very

2

much by Mr. King's responses, and the case law he has sent to us which

3

indicates that a Tribunal has a discretion to accept hearsay, unlike a civil

4

court or criminal court. In that correspondence we pointed out of course the

5

dangers of hearsay, but the case cited to us from Mr. King and we accept the

6

statement, is Murphy and Flood, that particular case, in which alleged hearsay

7

evidence was challenged in the High Court and the High Court and Supreme Court

8

in turn supporting the High Court, stated that this was admissible in the

9

public interest. Now I accept that, I am not disputing that in general terms,

14:46:40 10

but the question I am here today to discuss and to address is what is the

11

effect once this hearsay is allowed in? What is the after effects of allowing

12

it?

13 14 14:47:00 15

And I say that the Tribunal, while it can entertain hearsay in the interests of the common good and can listen to it and can test it and have it tested as has

16

happened in this case, that of course the hearsay itself is not capable of

17

cross-examination. I make that point strongly. And I quote there from the Law

18

Reform Commission report on hearsay in 1988, I will just, for the record I

19

should set it out, that the Law Reform Commission says "Hearsay is excluded

14:47:31 20

because of the twin safe guards of an oath and cross-examination do not attend

21

it's introduction. The law takes the view that truth is best ascertained by

22

the unrehearsed answers and oath or affirmation of witnesses who have actually

23

perceived the relevant events and who were then subjected to cross-examination

24

in the presence of the court. Hearsay statement is by definition not made

14:47:50 25

before the court and if the maker does not testify he can not be cross examined

26

nor can his demeanour be observed or his credibility tested. With a hearsay

27

statement, if it is oral there is a possibility that it may be altered in the

28

telling, where it is made formally there is a danger that it will be tailored

29

to the requirement of the party making it. Further reasons sometimes given for

14:48:13 30

the rule is the possibility that a jury, where there is one, will be confused Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:48:17

14:48:27

81 1

by a proliferation of evidence of little value. This would add to the cost of

2

litigation, hearsay evidence is also said to operate unfairly by catching the

3

other party by surprise."

4 5

Now, apart from the final sentence in that quotation, every other evil

6

attending and did attend the evidence given by Mr. O'Herlihy who initially

7

asked that he not be forced as it were, to connect the name of my client with

8

the story he was telling or had remembered, and who then obviously on advice

9

from his own counsel gave his further evidence under protest. The difficulty

14:48:56 10

we have Chairman, is that the media do not distinguish between evidence, gross

11

hearsay evidence given in those circumstances and actual allegations or

12

evidence given in the normal sense in a court of law and/or at this Tribunal.

13 14 14:49:23 15

Essentially by, go ahead as it were to the point I wish to make in relation to the -- this cross-examination, it was internally contradictory as set out in

16

that document and I would much prefer to rely on the statement made to

17

Mr. Gallagher in it's own terms because it was made six years before rather

18

than on the evidence given at the Tribunal in relation to it six years later.

19

But that's a matter for the Tribunal, I accept that. But how could anybody

14:49:51 20

believe in evidence which is accompanied by statements by the witness who

21

allegedly heard it or who remembered hearing it, Mr. O'Herlihy, that it could

22

have been a fellow boasting in a bar for all I know, he could have been taking

23

the Mickey out of me and so on -- so that we say that Senator Lydon has been

24

subjected to an unsupportable piece of malicious gossip and he is a Senator, he

14:50:18 25

is a public person, he relies on the parliamentary party of which he is a

26

member for a nomination to the Senate and he relies as, on his electorate being

27

the County Councillors throughout Ireland.

28 29 14:50:39 30

Now this is damaging to him in any test of libel, be it holding him out to odium, ridicule and contempt or lowering him in the eyes of a large section of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:50:45

14:51:12

82 1

or class of people. This of course meets the test and is, is and has been most

2

damaging and all the more aggravated in our sense of it, in that Mr. O'Herlihy

3

is not and has not made any allegation against Senator Lydon from his own

4

knowledge or any knowledge he had and he has said that. And normally this

5

Tribunal only investigates allegations made by a party, and this --

6

Mr. O'Herlihy's statement was anecdote and it fails if we take the In re:

7

Haughey test it certainly could not qualify in relation to that, in that a

8

person before a Tribunal of this nature should be furnished with a copy of the

9

evidence, any copy, any evidence which reflected on his good name. There is no

14:51:46 10

11

evidence from Mr. O'Herlihy in any real sense of the word evidence, it's a remembered story and gossip in a bar.

12 13

Sub paragraph B of that held from In re: Haughey 1972, that he should be

14

allowed to cross examine by counsel his accusers. Of course that's rendered

14:52:11 15

impossible by the provenance of this hearsay. That he should be allowed to

16

give rebutting evidence, how could he? And, so that all of the parameters that

17

would normally guard and defend the reputation of a citizen of this country

18

have been denied to Senator Lydon and I refer there just in support of that to

19

the particular statements by Mr. Justice Hardiman in Maguire and Ardagh 2001

14:52:45 20

volume 1 IR, that the right to cross examine one's accusers is a constitutional

21

right and not a concession. It applies as In re: Haughey 1971 IR,

22

affirmatively, as that affirmatively demonstrates in an Oireachtas committee or

23

subcommittee as well as in any other forum, which in my respectful submission

24

includes the present forum, where a citizen may be accused. And it is an

14:53:15 25

26

essential, it is an essential constitutionally guaranteed aspect of fair procedures.

27 28

So, I wish to quote, just it may be a slight addition to what I have included

29

there, but I will just do it as quickly as I may, Ms. Justice McGuinness in

14:53:34 30

that particular case again, Maguire and Ardagh which was the prelude to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:53:40

14:54:10

83 1

Barr Inquiry in the events in Abbeylara, but 2002 volume 1 IR at page 619 of

2

the report, and I come here to one of the main reasons I am here today and that

3

is the constitutional protection of any citizen's good name. Ms. Justice

4

McGuinness at page 619 cites the article 43.1 and article 43.2 which I know the

5

members are familiar with.

6 7

Article 43.2 states "The State shall in particular by it's laws protect as best

8

it may from unjust attack and in the case of injustice done vindicate the life,

9

person, good name and property rights of every citizen" and she continues this

14:54:28 10

very comprehensive statement of the background and provenance of that right and

11

constitution. "This constitutional right to protection of one's good name is

12

not one which is found in by any means all statements of basic human rights.

13

The rights to protection of one's life, person or property are much more

14

universal and constitutional statements of rights or bills of rights throughout

14:54:48 15

the world. Right to protection of one's good name is not specifically found

16

for instance in the European Convention of Human Rights. It is not included as

17

a right in the United States constitution nor is it included in the Canadian

18

Charter of Rights and Freedoms contained in the Constitution Act 1982 nor in

19

the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900. The inclusion of this

14:55:11 20

specific right in the Irish constitution marks a recognition by the framers of

21

the constitution of the damage that can be done to a citizen even in the

22

situation where he or she is not subjected to legal penalties, to loss of

23

liberty or property or to physical injury, considering the balance which must

24

be held between the rights of the Oireachtas as such and those of the

14:55:30 25

26

individual citizen and the priorities which must be given to each, the right to protection of the individual's good name has to be given due weight."

27 28

And, it is in that very area that I am proposing my submission here today to

29

the Tribunal. The Tribunal in the interests of the common good has admitted

14:55:54 30

what we see as a grossly disproportionate piece of gossip and hearsay, having Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:56:01

14:56:19

84 1

no probative value whatever. That evidence is still running around this

2

country and anybody interested in public affairs as many people are, are aware

3

of it. And consequently, must think the less of the person who is the victim

4

of it.

5 6

Now the question is, for this Tribunal, that having allowed it and it could be

7

defended, having allowed it in the interests of the common good, what can it do

8

now to justify that allowance and vindicate to the extent possible and to

9

mitigate the damage done to Senator Lydon's reputation and in other words I am

14:56:45 10

saying and I can quote here Mr. Justice Hamilton, the former Chief Justice in

11

the case of Haughey and Moriarty, 1999, 3 IR page 1, where he poses this, sets

12

up this question himself, he says there at page 59 of the report "The

13

exigencies of the common good require matters considered by both houses of the

14

Oireachtas to be of urgent public importance be inquired into. Particularly

14:57:17 15

where such inquiries are necessary to preserve the purity and integrity of our

16

public life without which a successful democracy is impossible" and in that

17

particular case the Oireachtas deemed it expedient that one be established but

18

he goes ahead, pertinently to our situation the effect of such resolutions is

19

undoubtedly to encroach upon the fundamental rights of the plaintiffs in the

14:57:40 20

name of the common good. The encroachment of such rights is justified in this

21

particular case by the exigencies of the common good, but he then adds "Such

22

encroachment must however be only to the extent necessary for the proper

23

conduct of the inquiry. Both houses of the Oireachtas are entitled to assume

24

that the Tribunal will conduct its investigation according to the principles of

14:58:04 25

constitutional justice and fair procedures and will only interfere with the

26

constitutional rights of the plaintiffs when and only to the extent that it is

27

necessary for the proper conduct of the inquiry."

28 29 14:58:20 30

So, and that was of course Haughey and Moriarty about access by another Tribunal to the bank accounts without affording the plaintiffs in that case an Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

14:58:25

14:58:40

85 1

opportunity to contest an Order for Discovery.

2 3

But the comments are a apposite in a general sense and relate to Mr. Justice

4

Hamilton's clear understanding of the balance that should be obtained between

5

the necessity to serve the public interests on the one hand and preserve the

6

rights and constitutional rights in particular of the persons affected there

7

by.

8 9 14:58:57 10

Now, we say that our case falls into this area and that in my respectful submission and request to the Tribunal, one way now and the only way I can see

11

that Senator Lydon's position can be vindicated in the short term is that the

12

Tribunal make either an early final decision in relation to the admissibility

13

of this evidence of Mr. O'Herlihy or at least an interim decision which will

14

indicate to the wider world the weight that might be attached to this evidence

14:59:28 15

which of course respectfully we would say is nil, minus.

16 17

We say that because there is a general election by May of next year, if we can

18

believe the pundits and the Taoiseach, and the Senator, Senator's professional

19

political career will be in the balance like all other Senators and Teachta

14:59:55 20

Dail at that time, and if that is not, if this Tribunal is continuing beyond

21

that date and I can't speculate on that, then if it's, if we were to have some

22

timius mitigation of the damage done to us it must be in the short term rather

23

than the long term.

24 15:00:14 25

I would say that, this is why we ask you to make these submissions at the end

26

of this Module, and we can sympathise with other parties who are affected by

27

other statements, by other witnesses and have found their own means of trying

28

to redress that in the public media. We are coming here to the Tribunal, which

29

is the source of the damage to our client, and we are asking at source that

15:00:40 30

this damage be now limited and that that particular heinous piece of hearsay be Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

15:00:50

15:01:15

86 1

dealt with in the short-term. Of course that's a matter for the Tribunal, what

2

weight might be attached or should be attached, but insofar as this may seem an

3

exceptional request, I am aware that in and this is an addition as it were, by

4

letter of the 9th December 2002 which is nearly, well quite a while ago now,

5

but paragraph 8 of that letter from the Tribunal to Mr. Anton De Lapp of Edge

6

Manning acting for Mr. Lydon, it was stated that the Tribunal has already

7

stated that it will not reach any final decision in relation to the allegations

8

made by -- another witness at this Tribunal -- until all of the Modules in

9

which he makes allegations against councillors have been completed.

15:01:39 10

11

Now I mention that in case that reflects the general policy. We are not in

12

anyway engaging in relation to the person named in that paragraph, but we are

13

saying that Mr. O'Herlihy's evidence stands alone, is unique, the damage done

14

is unique, and that it can be dealt with exceptionally if that's the phrase

15:02:03 15

that has to be used, in this module, in order that proportionality and

16

reasonableness be reasserted in terms of the balance of the constitutional

17

rights involved, and in particular the right of Senator Lydon to pursue his

18

chosen career, and so that the wrong in relation to Senator Lydon may cease and

19

the right prevail.

15:02:31 20

21

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

22 23

CHAIRMAN: All right. I would like to say that we would be in a position to

24

give the ruling in relation to your submission this week, I think that's

15:02:46 25

probably not practical at this stage. If we do manage to succeed in that

26

endeavour we'll let you know through your solicitor, if not, certainly it will

27

be a matter which will be dealt with on the first day of public hearings in

28

September.

29 15:03:02 30

MS. DILLON:

I think that's the 19th.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

15:03:04

15:03:07

87 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

Which is the 19th September.

3 4

MS. DILLON:

19th of September.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

7

solicitor.

Yes. So, the Tribunal's solicitor will be in contact with your

8 9 15:03:17 10

11

MS. DILLON:

If I could just say very briefly in response, for fear that there

might be any belief that there is a concession being made as to the matters that have been canvassed by Mr. O'Tuathail.

12 13

It is not accepted that the Tribunal behaved either improperly or grossly

14

prejudicialy towards Mr. Lydon, nor is it accepted that any of Senator Lydon's

15:03:37 15

In re Haughey rights have been breached. It is noted that Mr. O'Tuathail,

16

contrary to his earlier position, now accepts the right of the Tribunal to

17

receive and take hearsay, and that apparently what Mr. O'Tuathail seeks is an

18

exceptional interim ruling from the Tribunal in what he describes as

19

exceptional circumstances. Thank you.

15:03:59 20

21

MR O'TUATHAIL: Well Mr. Chairman, very briefly if I can respond to that? I

22

have said it may be deemed to be exceptional, I don't accept that it's

23

exceptional. I think there is a necessary element to this.

24 15:04:12 25

The 19th September seems to my ears to be, I would agree that the Tribunal has

26

to do it's homework and have it's own position, but it seems to me to be a bit

27

late in time in terms of the public arena aspect of this.

28 29 15:04:40 30

I know the Dail will not be sitting for the summer, but if possible I would prefer an earlier date and I don't think I have changed my position on this. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

15:04:49

15:05:11

88 1

My position has been all along that Mr. O'Herlihy's evidence was pure hearsay

2

and that Mr. O'Herlihy himself asked that the name not be released, that in my

3

view could have been done. And there is a perception abroad among councillors

4

generally, that because of certain High Court actions that are holding up other

5

modules of this Tribunal, that they are being unfairly recycled through various

6

modules. And certainly my client would, I think, share that view.

7 8

But that being so, I am -- I will await the Tribunal's decision in the matter

9

and I thank the Tribunal for hearing me this afternoon.

15:05:33 10

11

CHAIRMAN:

12

should make some comment, just in relation to what you have said about

13

"councillors generally believe that because of certain High Court actions they

14

are, that are holding up modules of the Tribunal that they are being unfairly

15:05:52 15

Right. Well I would be inclined to -- I don't know whether I

recycled through various modules". Well that's not an accurate comment in the

16

sense that the only module that's being held up insofar as your client is

17

concerned would be that of Quarryvale. And had things been different, if there

18

had been no challenge in the courts in relation to Quarryvale, Quarryvale would

19

presumably have concluded by now and we would be at the, we would be engaged in

15:06:23 20

the modules that we are now engaged in in any event. We might about two or

21

three months behind the positions we are now in, but certainly the, insofar as

22

your client and other witnesses common to these modules are concerned, almost

23

certainly they would have spent much of this year in some degree of engagement

24

with the Tribunal.

15:06:50 25

26

MS. DILLON:

27

since last Christmas and it anticipates completing six more before next

28

Christmas. Those modules were all ready to take their place after Quarryvale

29

and there has been no question of anybody being recycled, or matters such as

15:07:06 30

Yes sir, that's correct. The Tribunal has completed six modules

that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

15:07:06

15:07:19

89 1 2

CHAIRMAN:

No. No, I just want to make that clear. The work we are doing now

3

was work we were going to do in any event, it might have been in a slightly

4

different order, but so far as your clients are concerned, the net effect would

5

be the same.

6 7

All right, well we'll do the best we can to expedite a ruling. We are sitting

8

tomorrow at -- that effectively concludes --

9 15:07:30 10

MS. DILLON:

Yes, there is about ten minutes left for one very short witness

11

whom, subject to agreement we hope to slot in this week, but the balance of

12

this week will be taken up with the resumption of the Walls/Kinseally Module

13

which it hopes to conclude by Friday.

14 15:07:47 15

16

CHAIRMAN:

But with the exception of the short witness that effectively

concludes the Cherrywood.

17 18

MS. DILLON:

Monarch Module.

19 15:08:01 20

CHAIRMAN:

The Monarch Module. All right, half ten tomorrow.

21 22

MS. DILLON:

May it please your Lordship.

23 24 15:08:25 25

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY WEDNESDAY 26TH JULY 2006 AT 10.30 AM.

26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 670

09:46:29

10:37:41

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON WEDNESDAY,

2

26TH JULY, 2006, AT 10.30 A.M.:

3 4

MR. QUINN: Good morning, Sir.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

Good morning, Mr. Quinn.

7 8

MR. QUINN: Today, tomorrow and possibly Friday it is intended to complete a

9

Module known as the Walls Module, Kinsealy.

10:37:50 10

11

Now, it had been hoped to have Mr. Dunlop today.

12

available and will only be available tomorrow.

13

Councillor Gilbride and Mr. Walls' evidence will have to be taken after Mr.

14

Dunlop's evidence tomorrow, so today it's proposed to call the evidence of

10:38:09 15

So if we could have Sinead Collins, please.

18 19

As a result of which Mr --

Ms. Sinead Collins, in relation to the planning and Mr. Tim Rowe.

16 17

But unfortunately he's not

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

10:38:17 20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:38:17

10:38:51

2 1

MS. SINEAD COLLINS, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS,

2

BY MR. QUINN:

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Good morning, Ms. Collins.

5 6

Q. 1

MR. QUINN: Good morning, Ms. Collins

7

Ms. Collins you have provided I think two statements which are relevant to this

8

Module.

9 10:38:59 10

The first deals with lands in Kinsealy and the second with lands at the

11

Malahide estuary.

I propose to take you through the first of those statements

12

which is to be found at pages 1 to 8 of the brief and that is your evidence in

13

relation to the lands in Kinsealy.

14 10:39:15 15

And I think at page 1 you set out, as you have done in previous statements, the

16

fact that you were in fact an administrative officer in the planning department

17

of Dublin County Council between 1982 and 1993.

18

with the Development Plan and the making of the plan.

19

don't propose to open that evidence once again.

And then you go on to deal Unless you insist, I

10:39:38 20

21

At page 2 and 3 you deal with the special meeting of the Council held on the

22

8th of June 1990.

23

meeting map 7 and 8 were considered.

24

No. 7 and the lands in question I think at Kinsealy were described in the 1983

10:39:59 25

And I think you have advised the Tribunal that at that And I think we're dealing here with map

plan as -- and zoned B, namely the development of agriculture.

And I think on

26

the 8th of June 1990 a map was presented to the Council together with written

27

statements and it was proposed that the lands would retain that zoning, that B

28

zoning.

29

Councillors Dunne, Owen, Wright, Malone, Maher, Riney and MJ Cosgrave

10:40:24 30

And I think that map was noted following discussions to which

contributed. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:40:26

10:40:38

3 1 2

And I think the 1990 draft plan for Kinsealy you go on to say provided, we see

3

that at page 26 of the brief, to protect and provide for the development of

4

agriculture.

5 6

And then I think it was the case that in early 1991 there was a series of

7

meetings where there were to be wrap up motions so to speak in relation to the

8

matter before the 1991 draft plan went on display.

9

were no motions in relation to the lands in question.

In this case I think there

10:40:57 10

11

And the lands did go on display in the 1991 draft plan, zoned B, namely, for

12

the development of agriculture.

Is that correct?

13

A.

That's correct.

14

Q. 2

And then I think the display period was from September to December 1991.

10:41:13 15

And

parties were invited to make representations during that period.

And I think

16

on the 2nd of December 1991, if we could have page 33, please.

Representation

17

000363 was received from Glenellen Homes in relation to the lands in question.

18

And I think accompanying that submission were two submissions were from, one

19

from Grainne Mallon, town planner.

10:41:43 20

architects.

And the other from Pilgrim & Associates

Is that correct.

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 3

And I think we see those, Pilgrim submission at page 47 of the brief.

And

23

Grainne Mallon's submission is at page 34 of the brief and I think in effect

24

both submissions sought the rezoning of these lands from B to A, low density

10:42:01 25

and one house to the hectare; is that correct?

26

A.

Correct.

27

Q. 4

And I think following on the receipt of those submissions, the company

28

Glenellen Homes Limited, who are the owners of the lands, were given an

29

opportunity to provide an oral statement.

10:42:17 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:42:17

10:42:36

4 1

And at page 62 we see that this oral hearing was heard on the 11th February

2

1992 and at that oral hearing Glenellen Homes presented a further letter to

3

Mr. Smith, principal officer, dated the 10th of February 1992, which is at page

4

63.

5 6

And I think thereafter the Council received a series of motions in relation to

7

the various maps.

8

page 87, we see a motion dated the 9th of February 1993, which is given the

9

reference number 000363, it's signed by councillor Gilbride on 18th of March

10:43:03 10

And in relation to this particular piece of property, at

1993 and has been received by Dublin County Council on the 18th of March 1993.

11

And the motion was to the effect that Dublin County Council resolves that the

12

lands in Kinsealy Lane outlined in red on the accompanying map comprising

13

approximately 54 acres and signed for identification purposes by the proposer

14

be zoned for low density residential, with the specific objective to provide

10:43:20 15

for residential development on piped sewage facilities to a density not

16

exceeding one house per hectare.

17 18

At page 88 we see an accompanying map, again signed by Councillor Gilbride.

19 10:43:33 20

And I think that that motion was due on for hearing before a special meeting of

21

the Council held on the 4th May 1993 at page 89 we see that meeting.

22 23

And I think the matter was dealt with at page 99.

24

under heading C/338/93 agricultural lands south of domain.

10:43:54 25

And we see the matters The first one

there was representation No. 363, P Walls, back road Kinsealy; is that correct?

26

A.

Correct.

27

Q. 5

And I think that as was usual in those cases the manager presented a report

28

which had in fact been circulated in advance. And we see that report at pages

29

100 through to 101.

10:44:16 30

And it usually dealt with the synopsis of the

representation which see on page 100 including representation 363. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

Then there

10:44:20

10:44:34

5 1

is a site history, which includes the planning applications and the Development

2

Plan existing zoning which, was the 1983 zoning and draft plan review B, to

3

protect and provide for the development of agriculture.

4 5

There was also I think the Planning Officer's report.

6

draft written statement in relation to rural areas, which effectively was to

7

restrict the spread of one off housing.

8

35 NNI contour.

9

Kinsealy sewer having been constructed to serve existing development not

10:45:02 10

And he referred to the

He also made reference at 102, to the

And he referred in relation to drainage, the Feltrum and

intended to serve any further development and no capacity in the Malahide

11

treatment works or in the design of the upgrade works to cater for any new

12

development.

13

change in the zoning.

And the Manager's recommendation was that there would be no

14 10:45:15 15

And I think as we see there at page 102.

16

That the motion we saw a moment ago,

signed by Councillor Gilbride, was not moved; isn't that correct?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q. 6

And I think thereafter the amendments to the 1991 plan, that is to say the 1993

19

amendments to the 1991 draft plan went on display showing these lands with the

10:45:38 20

continued zoning of B, agriculture; isn't that correct?

21

A.

Correct.

22

Q. 7

And I think the matter came back before the Council and there was no change in

23

relation to these lands.

24

at page 116 these lands continued to be zoned for agricultural purposes.

10:45:56 25

And at the confirmation on the 10th of December 1993

we see that, 1993 Development Plan, at page 134.

26 27

Am I correct in ...?

28

A.

Correct.

29

Q. 8

I think your statement is more or less along those lines.

10:46:13 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

And

10:46:13

10:46:35

6 1

Now, I think in relation to the second set of lands, these are lands which are

2

to be found at the head of the Malahide estuary.

3

statement which is at pages 936 to pages 945.

4

pages are taken up with the background and the review of the Development Plan.

You have provided a

And I think the first number of

5 6

Again in, relation to these lands, which were the subject matter of the review.

7

You say at page 937 that the lands comprised 16.5 acres located at Seatown West

8

Swords, County Dublin.

9

Limited lands which were zoned objective G, to provide and improve high amenity

10:46:57 10

Hereinafter referred to as the Walls Hydraulic Plant

areas in the 1983 Development Plan.

11 12

And then you say in relation to the written statement.

13

4.2.10 of the written statement under the heading area of scientific interest.

14

It stated that it was an objective of the council to protect areas of

10:47:11 15

scientific interest as set out in table 4.1.

That at paragraphs

You say that included amongst

16

the areas listed as being of scientific interest were the subject lads which

17

inclusion was as a result of the survey conducted by Foras Forbartha.

18

the lands were included in an area known as the Swords Malahide estuary, which

19

was deemed an interest of interest under the ornithological and wild flower

10:47:35 20

wintering areas.

21

And you say that the lands are to be found in map No. 5.

Is that correct?

22

A.

Correct.

23

Q. 9

And then you go on to deal with the review of the Development Plan.

24 10:47:51 25

You say

I think

map No. 5 came up for discussion before the Council on the 19th of January 1990.

26 27

If we could have page 962, please.

28

for the town of Swords was considered.

29

are map No. 6.

10:48:08 30

I said map No. 5.

You said at that map No. 6 and statement Sorry.

The lands in question I think

I think I should have said map No. 6.

And also at that meeting I think a 1990 map was noted. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

As were the draft

10:48:14

10:48:32

7 1

written statement for the town of Swords.

And I think in relation to the

2

special amenity area at paragraph 2.8.9.

3

one, the draft statement provided that it was the policy of the Council to

4

examine in detail the areas designated as high amenity area such as the

5

Malahide estuary or other areas with a view to making orders for all or part of

6

them.

7

in Dublin City.

8

closest co-operation with other local authorities in this work.

Page 967, please.

Roman numeral

A number of these will have but the similar areas in adjoining counties And it is the intention of the the Council to seek the

9 10:48:48 10

I think you also relate and refer to a further paragraph in the draft written

11

statement, which is at paragraph 2.8.3 roman numeral 2, which reads as follows.

12

It is the policy of the Council to identify those views and prospects and where

13

possible to provide for protection or improvement of the viewing potential by

14

seeking the removal or lowering of Walls hedging or other structures and by

10:49:13 15

establishing viewing points or car parks in scale with the area.

16 17

And you refer to a copy of the special meeting of the 19th of January 1990.

18 19

And again I think in early 1991 there was a wrap up agenda before the

10:49:29 20

publication of the draft plan; isn't that right?

21

A.

Correct.

22

Q. 10

And I think that this area and these maps were considered on the 7th and 21st

23

of March 1991 and again I think you've advised the Tribunal that there were no

24

relevant motions effecting the subject lands.

10:49:43 25

And then I think again the

draft plan was put on display, you say at paragraph 9 at page 939.

26

2nd of September to the 3rd of December 1991.

27

objections and representations.

28

display from the 2nd to 3rd of December a series of objections and

29

representations were received and a number seeking oral hearings.

From the

And then in relation to the

You say that during the period of the public

10:50:03 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:50:03

10:50:22

8 1

And you refer in particular to three representations you received.

2

28th of November 1991.

3

Council.

4

refer to a further receipt on 29th of November 1991 from The Workers Party.

5

Page 972.

6

of December '91 Hydraulic Plant Limited, which is of course a subsidiary of the

7

Walls Company, entered a submission given reference No.442 by the Council.

8

And you said that that representation argued that the area of the

9

representation was not of scientific interest whether or not a motorway was

10:50:46 10

One on the

At page 971 of the brief from the Swords Community

And that was given representation No. 575 by the Council.

That was given No. 268 by the Council.

proposed.

You

Finally I think on the 2nd

You say that it was argued that a similar comment was relevant in

11

relation to the view and prospect objective the only achievement of which it

12

argued would be the apparent lowering or removing of dangerous hedge rows.

13

Having noted the Council Parks Departments and drawn up plans to include the

14

area as part of the linear park development, it argued that it was not the

10:51:03 15

16

purpose of the Development Plan to further the objective of individual departments by stealth.

17 18

And you referred to those and -- exhibit those various submissions.

19

think as a follow-up there were two oral submissions.

10:51:16 20

And I

One on 19th February

1992 At page 989 of the brief by Mr. Tim O'Brien of The Workers Party in

21

relation to his submission.

And a further on 21st of February 1992, by

22

Mr. Paul Walls, in relation to the hydraulic submission.

23

of the brief.

That's at page 991

24 10:51:32 25

And then I think those objections and representations were circulated to the

26

relevant members.

27

received.

And you referred to a number of motions which were

28 29 10:51:46 30

You say that on the 15th of March 1993.

If be can have 1017, please.

the

Council received two motions and maps signed by councillor Gilbride in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:51:47

10:51:58

9 1

following terms.

2 3

And you set out the first of those motions which was to the effect it that the

4

Council resolve that the lands at Seatown West, Swords, County Dublin

5

comprising approximately 4.5 acres and which had been signed for

6

identifications purposes by the proposer be excluded from the area known as

7

area of scientific interest, as proposed in the draft County Development Plan

8

1991 map No. 6.

9 10:52:11 10

And that motion I think was given reference 1522, roman numeral one.

11 12

The second motion at 1022.

13

Seatown West, Swords, County Dublin, to the west of the proposed motorway line

14

and outlined in red on the accompanying map comprising 12 acres and which had

10:52:31 15

Dublin County Council resolved that the Lands at

been signed for identification purposes by the proposer having the objective to

16

preserve views and prospects deleted also deleted both of which had been shown

17

as proposed objectives as the draft Dublin County Development Plan 1991 map No.

18

6.

19 10:52:47 20

I think that motion was given reference No. 1522 roman numeral 2.

21 22

And then I think you referred to two further motions.

23

councillor Kelleher and Farrell.

24

the second again dated the 18th of March 1993.

10:53:09 25

One signed by

At 1024 dated the 18th of March 1993.

And

And this time signed by

councillor Tipping.

26 27

At which is found at page 1025.

28

were taken as a group of motions with the first two motions signed by

29

Councillor Gilbride; isn't that correct?

10:53:24 30

A.

And these also related to the same area and

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:53:25

10:53:41

10 1

Q. 11

2

And I think that these motions all came on for hearing before the Council on the 26th of May 1993.

3 4

If I could have page 1019, please. We see the meeting on the 26th of May 1993.

5 6

And at 1020.

We see the motions.

The first of those motions that is to say

7

the motion signed by Councillor Gilbride and the second motion which this time

8

is noted as having been seconded by councillor Larkin.

9

1021, please.

And if we go to page

10:54:03 10

11

We see that following discussions to which councillors Gilbride, Kelleher,

12

Tipping,Higgins and Owen contributed. The manager replied to queries raised by

13

the members.

14

wished to withdraw motions 1522 1 and roman numeral 2.

10:54:23 15

It provides that Councillor Gilbride advised the meeting that he And this was agreed.

Correct?

16

A.

Correct.

17

Q. 12

And I think that that having occurred, there was no amendment relevant to those

18

motions contained in the 1993 amendments to the draft 1991 plan.

19

lands continued to contain their 1983 zoning.

10:54:44 20

the council on the 24th of September 1993.

And the matter came back before And again then on the 10th of

21

December 1993 the plan was confirmed with that zoning.

22

at page 1043.

23

correct?

24 10:55:01 25

Correct.

Q. 13

Thank you very much, Ms. Collins.

26

28 29 10:55:10 30

CHAIRMAN: A.

And we see that plan

Where the lands continued to retain the same zoning; isn't that

A.

27

And the

Thank you very much.

Thank you. JUDGE FAHERTY:

Thank you.

THE WITNESS THEN WITHDREW. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:55:12

10:55:46

11 1

MR. MURPHY:

Chairman.

Mr. Rowe, please.

2

MR. TIM ROWE, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED FOLLOWS,

3

BY MR MURPHY:

4 5 6 7

CHAIRMAN: A.

Good morning, Mr. Rowe.

Good morning.

8 9

MR. MURPHY:

Good morning, Mr. Rowe.

10:55:51 10

11 12

Q. 14

Mr. Rowe, you provided the Tribunal with a statement by your letter dated 12th of April 2006.

It's at page No. 1137.

If I could have that, please.

13 14

And if we can just go through that.

10:56:06 15

16

You say re. Walls lands at Kinsealy County Dublin, you say, Dear Sirs, further

17

to your letter dated 31st of March and 3rd of April 2006 and my letter dated

18

5th of April 2006 regarding the matter, I have outlined below requested

19

narrative statement.

10:56:21 20

21

1.

My recollection of the specific dates is somewhat vague.

However, I am

22

quite sure that this narrative is accurate regarding the sequence of events

23

that took place and regarding my involvement.

24 10:56:32 25

26

Paragraph 2.

I worked for Pilgrim architects and I was director and

shareholder of that firm.

27 28

I wonder if just for a moment that I could pause there, Mr. Rowe please. In

29

relation to working for Pilgrim architects.

10:56:46 30

That was a firm you established

with Mr. Collins? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:56:47

10:56:54

12 1

A.

That's correct, yeah.

2

Q. 15

And the two of you were directors.

3

And you'd two other directors Mr. Burnett

and Mr. Moore who was another architect?

4

A.

That's correct.

5

Q. 16

The firm, was it principally yourself and Mr. Collins who started it up and

6 7

then the other two joined you or was it the four of you together? A.

No, no, it was myself and Denis Moore and myself worked at another

8

architectural practice before, so we knew each other.

9

Tim Collins and his colleague Mr. Burnett.

10:57:17 10

And I'd known.

I met

Q. 17

Yes.

11

A.

During some work on St. James's Hospital.

12

Q. 18

Yes.

13

A.

So effectively it was, it was the three of us I would say that decided to set

14 10:57:28 15

the company up. Q. 19

16

All right.

Now, just if I could ask you, Mr. Collins at that time was a

flooring contractor I think?

17

A.

He was, I was in the marketing side of that, yeah.

18

Q. 20

Yes.

19

A.

Absolutely, yeah.

Q. 21

And you became friendly?

21

A.

Yeah.

22

Q. 22

What was he going to -- why were two architects setting up a firm with somebody

10:57:41 20

23 24

And I think that was how you met him?

who was a flooring contractor? A.

10:57:55 25

Well I think to use the term flooring contractor I think is -- Mr. Collins was -- he was at the marketing end of that.

26

Q. 23

Yes.

27

A.

So he didn't dot flooring work himself.

28

Q. 24

Right.

29

A.

He didn't do the accounting of the company.

10:58:05 30

What he did was he went out and

looked for business to bring into that company. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

And he knew consequently he

10:58:12

10:58:27

13 1

knew, he knew developers, he worked on flooring on sort of supermarkets for

2

developers and things like that.

3

the building and development industry.

So he had a broad range of contacts within

4

Q. 25

All right.

5

A.

Well it was for his marketing skills, yeah.

6

Q. 26

Marketing skills, yes.

7

A.

Correct.

8

Q. 27

I think he was only there a short while?

9

A.

Yeah, what he did was he set up the sort of accounting procedures and all of

10:58:44 10

So it was largely for his contacts?

And Mr. Burnnet I think; is that right?

that sort of stuff, that was his strength if you like.

11

Q. 28

He was replaced by Mr. Richardson, is that right?

12

A.

He was, yeah.

13 14

I'm not sure whether he was replaced by Mr. Richardson or

whether Mr. Richardson was in at the same time, I'm not sure. Q. 29

And Mr. Richardson didn't take an active role?

A.

He did not, no.

16

Q. 30

Why was he there?

17

A.

Mr. Richardson had a company called Work Force.

18

Q. 31

Yeah.

19

A.

Which was a staff agent, that specialised in architectural and engineering

10:59:02 15

10:59:13 20

personnel.

And what effectively what that gave the company the opportunity of

21

doing was if architectural business, there's quite a long lead in time.

22

you might be designing for maybe six months or something like that before you

23

get any money coming in.

24

on Mr. Richardson's Work Force.

10:59:39 25

26

payment. Q. 32

27 28

And if we needed some additional staff we could call And effectively we could offset or delay the

So it was very beneficial in terms of our cashflow.

Mr. Collins told the Tribunal I think more or less that he approached Mr. Richardson because the firm Pilgrim needed a financial investment?

A.

29 10:59:58 30

So

I don't know whether Mr. Richardson actually put any money into the company. I don't think he did.

Q. 33

Right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

10:59:59

11:00:19

14 1

A.

But what he did do was, he was a -- he was a Work Force was a substantial

2

company.

And I think he had a good track record with banks and financial

3

institutions, that sort of thing.

4

and knowledge that perhaps we didn't have.

So it gave the, a stability if you like,

5

Q. 34

Were you consulted about bringing Mr. Richardson on board?

6

A.

It was certainly discussed, yes, yes.

7

Q. 35

Yes.

8

A.

It would have been a collective decision.

9

Q. 36

Yes.

11:00:41 10

Who would have made that decision?

And as you were conducting your business the four of you, Mr. Rowe,

would anybody in particular be calling the shots? Were you the person really

11

in charge or was it Mr. Collins or Mr. Moore or Mr. Richardson or did

12

everything come back to a group discussion and a decision to be made?

13

A.

14

It was -- oh, no.

I mean, we effectively worked from a very small office.

Everyone was basically -- and you mentioned four people.

11:01:06 15

Which four are you

talking about there?

16

Q. 37

I was talking about are Mr. Richardson, yourself, Mr. Moore and Mr. Collins.

17

A.

Right.

Mr. Richardson wasn't there sort of ever, you know.

I mean, he might

18

have popped in to have a cup of tea or something like that, but that would have

19

been the limit.

11:01:22 20

21

Q. 38

Yes.

A.

Myself, Tim Collins and Denis Moore.

22

clients.

23

of things.

24

time.

11:01:38 25

Q. 39

26

Yes.

Basically, Tim would be on, looking for

I would tend to be the first port of call from the architectural end And Denis would stay, would be in the office nearly all of the

But I mean you'd all meet from time to time and discuss the work and how

it was going?

27

A.

No, we met all of the time.

28

Q. 40

Yeah.

29

A.

We were working from the same room.

Q. 41

Yeah.

11:01:51 30

Was there any question that perhaps one person, as I say, was calling Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:01:55

11:02:04

15 1 2

the shots, or were the three people running the business? A.

3

No, no, there's -- was three people involved absolutely all of the time and discussing things.

4

Q. 42

And the decision making?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 43

All right.

Now, I think Mr. Rowe, largely due to -- I think perhaps a bad

7

debt which arose and something has come up in another Module.

8

right?

9

A.

Yes.

Q. 44

Pilgrim ran into some financial difficulty?

11

A.

We did, yeah.

12

Q. 45

And as a result of that I think Pilgrim was dissolved.

11:02:16 10

13 14 11:02:38 15

Isn't that

In any event, you and

Mr. Collins went to work for Ambrose Kelly, isn't that correct? A.

Correct, yeah.

Q. 46

And you in your statement say -- sorry.

16

That brings me on.

If I can just go

back to the screen.

17 18

Go to paragraph 3 where you say "in early 1992 Pilgrim Associates, Pilgrim

19

Architects disbanded and Tim Collins and myself were offered employment with

11:02:45 20

Ambrose Kelly Group, architects.

21

Project Architects.

This company was subsequently re named

You say early 1992.

22 23 24

Mr. Collins was of the view that it was late 1992 early 1993 A.

I think it was nearer late 1992.

Q. 47

Nearer late 1992?

26

A.

Yeah.

27

Q. 48

Yes.

28

A.

I couldn't be certain, to be honest.

29

Q. 49

No.

A.

I didn't, no.

11:03:01 25

11:03:15 30

In fact I think it was October/November I think of '92.

Did you know Mr. Ambrose Kelly before this? Now, I'd come across his name.

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:03:19

11:03:34

16 1

Q. 50

Yeah.

2

A.

On the Robert White project, which has been the subject of another Module.

3

Q. 51

Yes.

4

A.

And he was actually acting for or one of the people in his company were acting

5

for the Duffs.

6

Q. 52

Yes.

7

A.

On adjoining lands.

8

Q. 53

All right.

9

A.

I'd never met him, no.

Q. 54

And what about Mr. Collins? Were you aware that Mr. Collins knew Mr. Ambrose

11:03:41 10

11

Kelly?

12

A.

I'm not sure whether he -- I don't know whether he knew him to be honest.

13

Q. 55

All right.?

14

A.

He certainly wasn't part of any discussion or anything, anything like that.

Q. 56

All right.

A.

Tim Collins actually mentioned that we'd been offered, that he'd met with

11:03:58 15

16

And how did this employment by Ambrose Kelly come about?

17

Ambrose Kelly.

18

Duff Module had been successful, in that there was a material contravention and

19

that it had been with the support of the management of Fingal or Dublin County

11:04:32 20

Council.

I think Ambrose Kelly was he'd -- I think the project in the

And from what I can gather, I don't know whether Ambrose Kelly made

21

an approach to Mr. Collins, or which way, but I think it was that, that

22

actually brought us to his attention.

23

Q. 57

24 11:04:57 25

Yes.

And between Mr. Collins and Mr. Kelly, they brought about your

employment from then? A.

Correct.

26

Q. 58

Your employment and Mr. Collins' employment.

27

A.

28

Q. 59

All right.

29

A.

I was, yeah.

Q. 60

And were you paid a salary.

11:05:23 30

Correct. Were you actually employed by Ambrose Kelly, by the firm?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:05:24

11:05:31

17 1

A.

I was, yeah.

2

Q. 61

And was that paid to you directly?

3

A.

It was.

4

Q. 62

You weren't asked to set up a company for the purpose of ...?

5

A.

No, there was quite a different -- that, Mr. Kelly's company sort of seemed to

6

me to be in a continuous state of flux.

7

But, I mean, I know my salary cheque didn't come from sort of Ambrose Kelly or

8

Ambrose Kelly Group.

9

how that organisation was set up.

11:06:01 10

be.

And I think, I can't even remember.

It was some other company.

So I have no knowledge of

But certainly, you know, there seemed to

I think we'd only been there, myself and Tim had only been there and we

11

weren't even in the same area of the company, you know.

12

there about three months, four months, something of that ilk. And it seemed as

13

though there was a clear out of people in, you know, upstairs, you know, we

14

were in a small little down floor office at the time.

11:06:30 15

One of the reasons was

that I don't think Ambrose Kelly had any, any residential experience in that he

16

did primarily shopping centres and this sort of thing.

17

develop his residential schemes.

18

there was for Ballymore Homes, out at Lucan.

19

scheme.

11:06:58 20

21

26

In fact, he got, my first work that I did in So I did a big residential

So it was almost like a separate little branch, almost, y'know?

Yes.

A.

And then we gradually became, you know, but it was just.

It seemed to be a

constant state of flux in the organisation. Q. 64

24 11:07:12 25

And he was trying to

Q. 63

22 23

And I think we'd been

In any event, Mr. Rowe, wherever your cheque actually came from, it came to Tim Rowe?

A.

It, did, yeah.

Q. 65

I don't know whether you heard, Mr. Collins gave evidence that he was required

27

to set up a company?

28

A.

Yeah, I don't know whether he was -- yeah, I saw Collins Consultancy, yeah.

29

Q. 66

Did you know anything about that?

A.

No.

11:07:24 30

I didn't.

I mean, I became aware of it but I didn't know how the

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:07:31

11:07:47

18 1 2

machinations happened. Q. 67

3 4

And were you aware of any of the other members of the Ambrose Kelly staff who were required to set up companies like that for the purposes of being paid?

A.

I don't know.

As I say, there was a state of flux.

5

came in.

6

from Dublin who was previously with Dublin Corporation came in.

7

just don't know.

8

yeah.

I think Michael O'Neill had a little company as well.

Right.

Do you think was that for the purpose of Ambrose Kelly or somebody on

9

Q. 68

11:08:17 10

11

A.

I didn't know.

There's a chap It was -- I

Sorry, there was one chap,

Yes.

I mean, it wasn't like a separate, as far as I as I can see, it wasn't a

separate company that operated independently. Q. 69

14 11:08:42 15

No, sorry.

I don't know.

his behalf paying that gentleman a salary?

12 13

There was a Michael Kenny came in.

There was somebody else

And did Mr. Collins continue to do for Ambrose Kelly, for the Ambrose Kelly firm what he had been doing for Kelly?

A.

Oh yes very much so, What sort of happened was that although Tim and I sort of

16

remained friends.

17

if you like, with Pilgrim sort of separated a bit because, you know, Tim would

18

be, Tim would be out of the office and I would be in the office.

19

workload would come from sort of a different source.

11:09:07 20

Q. 70

I see.

And what happened to the work that was Pilgrim work after you joined

Ambrose Kelly? A.

11:09:39 25

In -- basically what happened was that any work that might have been sort of, I don't know whether there was even anything on-site.

26 Q. 71

Uh-huh.

28

A.

And we didn't invoice.

11:09:59 30

But I sort of.

I kept

that going.

27

29

There was an architect

work around the Ambrose Kelly office.

23 24

And my

in there called David somebody or other, who sort of tended to distribute the

21 22

I suppose what had been an intimate working relationship,

Really we were just providing that service to the

client.

Now, I think the Lissenhall lands, that sort of went into Ambrose

Kelly.

But nothing came of it and when I subsequently set up my own practice Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:10:04

11:10:22

19 1

when I left Ambrose Kelly, I actually acted for the client on that.

2

that sort of with me, you know.

3

Q. 72

I see.

I brought

Mr. Rowe, if we go back to paragraph 4 of your statement. Where you

4

say "it is my recollection that our relationship with Mr. Paul Walls our client

5

emanated and continued from the successful sale of the lands known as the

6

Lissenhall lands to a client of pilgrims.

7

with them have been investigated in a previous Module.

8

Mr. Walls continued with Pilgrim being asked to consider designing a

9

development proposal for the Walls lands at Kinsealy.

These lands and our involvement The relationship with

11:10:39 10

11

I think what you're referring to there is the fact that Paul Walls, through one

12

of his companies, owned lands at Lissenhall.

13

A.

That's right.

14

Q. 73

And Mr. Collins matched Mr. Walls, those Lissenhall lands and Rayband?

A.

That's correct.

16

Q. 74

Isn't that right?

17

A.

That's absolutely correct, yeah.

18

Q. 75

And at some point in fact, it appears that Mr. Walls actually purchased the

11:10:53 15

19

Kinsealy Lands without the involvement of Mr. Collins or without the

11:11:10 20

involvement of Pilgrim?

21

A.

That's, yeah, yeah, absolutely.

22

Q. 76

That appears to be the case; isn't that right?

23

A.

I have no knowledge of how, when or how or when Mr. Walls purchased those

24 11:11:22 25

lands, yeah. Q. 77

And so the position is then that at some point the Lissenhall lands had been

26

sold from Mr. Walls to Rayband.

Mr. Walls has bought the Kinsealy Lands.

27

And at some point then Mr. Walls is -- gets in contact with Pilgrim...

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 78

With a view to how to develop the lands; isn't that right?

A.

Yes.

11:11:45 30

I think it may have happened like that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

It could have also happened.

11:11:50

11:12:08

20 1

You see, Tim Collins would have effectively his list of, a list of potential

2

clients and he would have a regime that he might telephone some of them once a

3

week, he might telephone some of them twice a week or once a month or something

4

like that.

5

Q. 79

I see.

6

A.

So it's possible that he just happened to phone wall Paul Walls at the time

7

when Paul was looking to develop these lands.

8

from Mr. Walls or from Mr. Collins.

9

Q. 80

11:12:32 10

So I'm not sure whether it was

According to Mr. Walls, according to his statement.Sorry.

According to

Mr. Collins, he knew Mr. Walls for some considerable number of years before

11

this?

12

A.

I think he might have known his father actually, I'm not sure.

13

Q. 81

Did you know Mr. Walls?

14

A.

I became.

Q. 82

Prior to this?

16

A.

Prior to? Prior to?

17

Q. 83

Prior to whenever you got involved with the Kinsealy Lands?

18

A.

I'd met him, if I'm not mistaken, at some stage on the Lissenhall lands.

19

Q. 84

Yes.

A.

Yeah, but ...

21

Q. 85

All right.

22

A.

I sort of didn't know him, you know.

23

Q. 86

I think the position is that Mr. Walls himself in his statement is not exactly

11:12:43 15

11:12:56 20

24

I got to know him.

clear as to whether he got in contact with Pilgrim in relation to Kinsealy.

11:13:23 25

Through you or through Mr. Collins.

26

A.

I don't think it was through me.

27

Q. 87

Yes.

28

A.

I'm fairly certain of that.

29

Q. 88

Right. And I think Mr. Collins may also have thought that he wasn't sure

11:13:44 30

whether Mr. Walls came to Pilgrim to see you or to see Mr. Collins? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:13:45

11:13:56

21 1

A.

Yeah, I don't know.

2

Q. 89

But you're fairly certain?

3

A.

I'm fairly certain that contact would have initially been through Tim.

4

Q. 90

Yes.

5

A.

But, as I say, I don't know whether it was his phone call that stimulated that

6 7

or a phone call direct from Mr. Walls. Q. 91

8

Yes.

Now, if I can go back to paragraphs five, six and seven of your

statement, please, Mr. Rowe.

9 11:14:19 10

Q. 92

"Dennis Moore and I looked at the lands and we felt that a residential

11

development of exclusive houses would be financially extremely successful.

12

was aware that there was a huge demand in the Malahide Kinsealy area for

13

individual one off housing. This type of development was fiercely resisted by

14

the planning authority because it resulted in ribbon development of a haphazard

11:14:39 15

nature.

I

Invariably a one off house in this part of the county would only be

16

granted planning permission by a Section 4 motion.

Effectively this is where

17

the elected members instruct the manager to grant planning permission.

18 19 11:14:55 20

Paragraph 6.

Councillors often feel that they are compelled to vote in favour

of a Section 4 motion because the planning officials offer no hope for

21

individual houses in the country and resist all such planning applications.

22

The planning authority had (and still have not) made any attempt to provide for

23

such dwellings.

24

would build up on the elected representatives from their constituents and the

11:15:15 25

As a huge demand existed.

It was inevitable that pressure

councillors would feel compelled to assist them.

26 27

Paragraph 7.

28

planned and design solution to satisfy this demand for one off houses on

29

individual sites.

11:15:30 30

The proposal for the Kinsealy Lands was designed to provide a

And therefore provided the planners and the councillors

with an excuse for not granting individual permissions via Section 4 motions. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:15:34

11:15:52

22 1

The current situation that the time was that there were no individual houses on

2

acre sites that formed part of a development.

3

our proposal and other similar ones could provide a properly designed and

4

planned solution through the demand for individual houses and thereby assist in

5

eliminating the scourge of ribbon development".

It seemed to us at Pilgrim that

6 7

So they were your thoughts in relation to the best way to go forward in

8

relation to the Kinsealy Lands; isn't that right?

9 11:16:02 10

A.

Yeah.

Q. 93

And I presume, and we'll be coming on then to the application that you made on

11

the 3rd of December 1991.

12

would have been as a result of a considerable amount of work and discussion

13

between yourself and Mr. Moore and Mr. Walls, presumably?

14

A.

11:16:32 15

I presume that all of that decision, strategy,

Yes, I was -- I was sort of looking through different transcripts and I can't remember whether it was -- whether the principle of the one off housing in a

16

structured form, as I've described, came from Paul Walls or Grainne Mallon or

17

ourselves.

18

Q. 94

Uh-huh.

19

A.

But it was -- I know myself and Denis had always felt that, and it's still the

11:16:54 20

case, that most planning authorities in the country don't have a real provision

21

and there is a huge demand and I mean, it's still in the newspapers, if you

22

like, you know, living in the country local people getting houses and this sort

23

of thing.

24 11:17:10 25

And I think we designed up effectively a series of houses that were, had common

26

elements to them.

27

of, I think there's 20 houses on that particular proposal.

28

having 20 separate entrances and driveways off a public road it was limited to

29

one or two, you know.

11:17:40 30

So it gave a consistency of design.

But in fact instead And instead of

It still seems to me to be a valid approach for that

type of housing. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:17:42

11:17:52

23 1 2

Q. 95

3 4

in December 1991 I think; isn't that right? A.

5 6

All of this culminated in the application that you made to the County Council

Yeah, it was sort of phrased as an objection.

I think the Draft Development

Plan had been put on public display therefore we objected. Q. 96

7

Yes, okay.

But do you know roughly when you first started working on this

when Mr. Walls first came to you in relation to the Kinsealy Lands?

8

A.

I don't.

9

Q. 97

Was it a good while previously?

A.

There was -- I've -- I sort of looked at the drawings.

11:18:10 10

I could recall as soon

11

as I saw the shape of the site when the Tribunal sort of sent me a map of the

12

particular site, as soon as I saw that I could visualise what we had actually

13

produced, because I know we put a lot of work into it.

14

there was quite an amount of work.

11:18:40 15

You know, so, yes,

Whether it was, it would have been more

than sort of four weeks work, if you like.

16

Q. 98

I see.

17

A.

You know, whether it was four months work I wouldn't like to say.

18

Q. 99

Okay.

Walls Properties Limited.

19 11:18:53 20

If I could just have page 51, please.

21

Made a presentation to Irish

Intercontinental Bank, in September 1990.

Sorry.

Page No. 407, please.

22 23

That's just the front page of it.

24 11:19:17 25

And at page 409 the development team is listed down at the bottom and you see

26

architects Pilgrim Associates, Mr. Tim Rowe and Mr. Denis Moore.

27

mean that you had been involved in Kinsealy since back that time, do you know?

28 29 11:19:42 30

A.

Does that

Well it would -- yeah it's possible that there was an initial discussion about the project and then quite frequently thing was go dead and nothing would seem to happen and -- so, yes, I mean, I would take that as read, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

What was

11:19:48

11:20:09

24 1

the date on that?

2

Q. 100

The 27th of September 1990.

3

A.

I'm surprised at that.

4

Q. 101

All right.

5

A.

Sorry.

And if we can go back to your statement, please, at page --

I can confirm that that is the case.

6

Mr. Frank Kearns.

7

discuss this.

8

actually.

9

recognise that name.

11:20:32 10

Q. 102

Uh-huh.

But yes, quite possible.

I just see a name there,

And I just now I recall meeting a Mr. Frank Kearns to

Now, I don't know what's happened with him since and I don't

I don't recall a whole series of meetings.

All right.

But certainly I

Thank you.

11 12

Page 1138, please.

13 14 11:20:43 15

And at paragraph 8 you say "I do not recall preparing the report that was sent to Mr. Al Smyth, the principal officer of the Dublin County Council planning

16

department 3rd of December 1991, however, I recognise the arguments that are

17

made in the report and I can confirm that these are my own.

18

preparing the design of the site layout and the houses with Denis Moore of

19

Pilgrim and at various times discussing these designs with Mr. Paul Walls.

11:21:06 20

21

I do recall

I

cannot provide a specific date by which our involvement began nor can I recall the date at which our involvement ceased.

22 23

Now, and if I can turn, please, to page 449.

24

of December 1991 to the principal officer, planning department, Dublin County

11:21:31 25

Council.

Which is your letter of the 3rd

Representation to the rezoning of lands at Kinsealy, County Dublin.

26 27

Dear Mr. Smith.

28

to make formal representations to have the above-mentioned lands in their

29

ownership considered for rezoning in accordance with part 3 Section 21, 2 B of

11:21:48 30

I have been instructed by my client, Glenellen Homes Limited,

the local government planning and development Acts 1963 to 1991. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

During the

11:21:51

11:22:01

25 1

current view of the Dublin County Development Plan. I attach a copy of my

2

report which has been prepared in connection with this request.

3

sincerely Tim Rowe.

4

A.

It is.

5

Q. 103

It is.

6

All right.

Is that your signature

This is your application to the County Council in

relation to the rezoning of the Kinsealy Lands?

7

A.

That's correct, that's the cover letter.

8

Q. 104

The cover letter.

9 11:22:17 10

Your

And there is a report with it as you say is entitled an

objection. A.

11

Yeah.

And I think there was maps and some drawings, yeah, we did size

drawings, yeah. Just going back to the intercontinental bank.

12

Q. 105

Yes.

13

A.

Was that an application for funds I wonder to buy the lands, I don't know?

14

Q. 106

I don't think so in September.

11:22:43 15

Not to buy them because I think they were

bought in 1989.

16

A.

Oh, right, okay.

17

Q. 107

Yes.

Now Mr. Rowe, this representation to the County Council in relation to

18

the Kinsealy Lands, this is the first or an early step in the whole process

19

which would you would expect would culminate in a motion to go before a meeting

11:23:13 20

of the County Council and there would be a motion as to whether it should be

21

rezoned or not.

Is that right?

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q. 108

And does that represent, is that the end of the work you did in relation to the

24 11:23:37 25

Kinsealy Lands, on behalf of Mr. Walls? A.

Yes, I think there might have been a subsequent telephone discussion with a

26

representative from Walls Properties.

27

there, I'm not sure what date that was.

28 29

Q. 109

I think I saw a little note on the file

Now, could we go back to page 1183, please, for the final paragraph of your statement.

11:24:00 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:24:00

11:24:17

26 1

Paragraph 9.

"I have no recollection of an involvement with, or meeting any

2

councillors or planning officials prior to or during the making of the

3

Development Plan.

4

zoned in the Development Plan.

5

if you require further information please do not hesitate to contact me".

I have no idea as to whether the lands were or were not I trust the above is satisfactory.

However

6 7

Mr. Rowe, you may or may not know at this stage, that what happened was that a

8

motion was signed by Mr. Sean Gilbride.

9 11:24:36 10

A.

I saw that.

Q. 110

But it was then withdrawn at the meeting -- that was signed on the 18th of

11

March 1993.

12

change.

Withdrawn in the meeting in May 1993.

So the zoning did not

13

A.

I saw that running through the bits and pieces you sent me, you know.

14

Q. 111

You didn't know that at the time?

A.

I didn't, no.

16

Q. 112

And later on that year the lands were sold again.

17

A.

I wasn't aware of that, no.

18

Q. 113

Right.

11:24:43 15

19

Okay.

Now, just I'd like to ask you about -- I mean, after 1991.

When you put in that representation to the County Council.

11:25:02 20

Obviously what was

very important to you and to Pilgrim when that went in was the achievement of

21

the rezoning, from the point of view of the client and then from the point of

22

view of your business, so that you could, you would be asked presumably to do

23

the work.

24

A.

11:25:33 25

Yeah, we sort of didn't -- we didn't have -- I would say we didn't have an awareness, if you like.

Obviously if land is zoned agriculture and then

26

changes to residential zoning there's a significant difference in the potential

27

value of the land.

28

looking for was the architectural work that would emanate out of...

29 11:25:51 30

And we weren't really aware of that.

Q. 114

Yes.

A.

You know, that sort of situation.

What we were

But I think in this particular case, what

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:25:59

11:26:09

27 1

was -- what I particularly liked about this was the whole sort of concept that

2

was behind this development.

3

forward.

And, you know, I felt that was actually a way

4

Q. 115

Uh-huh.

5

A.

You know, so I had a particular sort of design, interest in the philosophy, if

6 7

you like, of the design on this, so ... Q. 116

8 9

I understand that, Mr. Rowe.

But you can't give fruition to that unless in

the first instance the rezoning is achieved? A.

Absolutely.

Q. 117

So the rezoning is vital.

11

A.

Oh, yes, absolutely.

12

Q. 118

And that comes down to the persuasion of councillors, numbers at the meeting.

13

A.

It does, yeah.

14

Q. 119

And how that, how that might be gone about?

A.

Yes.

16

Q. 120

By the developer or whoever on his behalf; isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes, correct.

18

Q. 121

Now, you'd a particular interest.

11:26:27 10

11:26:39 15

19

scheme coming up like this for rezoning particularly as you just expressed,

11:26:52 20

this one.

21 22

You had an interest presumably in any

So presumably you didn't just go out of the picture in relation to

the kinsealy lands in December 1991. A.

No, I disagree that's not the case.

Because Paul Walls actually, he took that

23

whole -- I think he had more experience of sort of the zoning procedures or

24

appeared to, than I, than we did.

11:27:18 25

26

Q. 122

All right.

A.

And he took that whole thing very much under his arm and ran with that ball.

27

And we certainly didn't receive instructions to go, you know, normally we would

28

only talk to councillors if we were asked to make a presentation, or something

29

like that.

11:27:36 30

Q. 123

No.

And certainly we weren't instructed to do that.

And you yourself had nothing to with individual councillors in this Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:27:42

11:27:52

28 1

particular case?

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 124

All right.

What I'm really trying to -- I mean would have been interested as

4

to how the matter progress with the County Council as to whether there was the

5

motion to rezone would happen and as to what would happen with the meeting and

6

so on.

7

architectural work that you were interested in?

8

A.

9 11:28:08 10

11

Q. 125

Of course.

A.

If there wasn't an instruction.

I would act on instructions from the client, you

And I don't think, I could be wrong, but I

don't recall ever having picked up the telephone to talk to Paul Walls. Q. 126

14 11:28:26 15

I would have been delighted. know.

12 13

It would come back on your desk so that you could do some of this

No.

But what about Mr. Collins? You'd have talked to him and maybe he was

talking to Mr. Walls? A.

16

Oh, he would probably.

And, but, you know, we were -- we were just out of

that picture completely.

17

Q. 127

Yeah.

18

A.

I mean, Tim would, he'd phone all of his clients on a regular bar basis, you

19 11:28:42 20

know. Q. 128

Yes.

21

A.

Whether there was something sort of mixing in a pot or not, you you know.

22

Q. 129

And in 1993 at this time at least -- sorry.

23 24

Could I just.

At some point I

think it was early 1993 Mr. Dunlop enters the picture. A.

Yeah, I was no knowledge of that.

Q. 130

Were you not aware of that at all at the time?

26

A.

No.

27

Q. 131

So you didn't ask Mr. Walls to contact Mr. Dunlop or ask Mr. Dunlop to contact

11:28:58 25

28 29 11:29:10 30

Mr. Walls? A.

No.

Q. 132

All right.

Mr. Walls will be giving evidence tomorrow... Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:29:23

11:29:38

29 1

A.

Oh sorry, actually.

2

Q. 133

Yes.

3

A.

That I referred to.

4

Q. 134

Yes.

5

A.

And that's sort of why I, I can recall having a meeting with him.

6

Q. 135

Yes.

7

A.

With Paul Walls.

8 9

You saw the name Frank Kearns.

He was actually public relations at that time.

And so at some stage, I don't know what happened.

But

there must have been a swap to Mr. Dunlop. Q. 136

11:29:52 10

Okay.

And Mr. Dunlop only came in in 1993.

But Mr. Walls in his private

interview said it was either Mr. Collins or Mr. Rowe who introduced him to

11

Mr. Dunlop.

12

A.

Well it wasn't me.

13

Q. 137

It wasn't you?

14

A.

No.

Q. 138

And Mr. Collins himself when he gave evidence, or in a statement said it was

11:29:59 15

16

either you or someone else in Pilgrim who recommended that Mr. Walls contact

17

Mr. Dunlop.

18

side that it was he himself.

19

in his statement ...

11:30:19 20

He then went on and I think he was probably coming down on the But there was a vagueness there.

And certainly

A.

Well I never recommended Frank Dunlop to any client.

21

Q. 139

All right.

22

A.

Or vice versa.

23

Q. 140

And I think what you're telling the Tribunal now is that if we could just take

24

1993.

11:30:34 25

In '93 you were not aware of the involvement of Mr. Dunlop; is that

what you're saying?

26

A.

I wasn't, no.

27

Q. 141

Now, you did tell us earlier, Mr. Rowe, that decisions were taken collectively

28 29 11:30:43 30

when you were in Pilgrim? A.

Yes.

Q. 142

Now, I appreciate you're now in Ambrose Kelly. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

But it's Mr. Collins and

11:30:49

11:30:59

30 1

Mr. Rowe who are in Ambrose Kelly.

2

project?

And this presumably is still a Pilgrim

3

A.

I think it had just gone out, as Pilgrim...

4

Q. 143

Yes.

5

A.

Sort of demised, if you like, it just went out of the equation.

And to be

6

quite honest, I was busy enough at that stage in Ambrose Kelly doing the work I

7

was to do for Ambrose Kelly, you know.

8

Q. 144

9 11:31:13 10

All right.

So you didn't have anything to do with the introduction of Mr.

Dunlop? A.

No.

11

Q. 145

So and you don't know who had?

12

A.

I don't.

13

Q. 146

Would you think, I mean it look see as if it must have been Mr. Collins.

14 11:31:24 15

Would you think that likely? A.

16

I don't know.

Because I don't know whether -- I don't know whether Mr. Walls

had knowledge of Mr. Dunlop at the time, you know, himself.

17

Q. 147

All right.

18

A.

He obviously saw a value in having somebody in public relations because he'd

19

had Frank Kearns appointed at that very early stage, you know.

11:31:43 20

So whether, I

just have a notion that Frank Kearns might have become ill, or something like

21

that, you know so if that had happened perhaps he felt he had to go and change

22

to somebody else.

23

Q. 148

24 11:32:01 25

Had you been aware of Mr. Dunlop's involvement in any other matter connected with Pilgrim?

A.

I was aware of Mr. Dunlop's involvement in the Duff lands.

26

Q. 149

Right.

27

A.

And I actually attended a meeting in Swords Main Street, which I've given

28 29 11:32:17 30

evidence about. Q. 150

Yes, yes.

And who introduced Mr. Dunlop in that case?

A.

I understand it was Mr. Collins. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:32:20

11:32:33

31 1

Q. 151

All right.

2

A.

Well.

3

Q. 152

Lobbying councillors?

4

A.

As public relations or maybe putting out press statements etc, yeah.

5

Q. 153

At that time, you were in Pilgrim and you were all working together?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 154

And as you said, in close community...

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 155

And everything was discussed and decision making and so on?

A.

Yeah.

11

Q. 156

Were you consulted about the introduction of Mr. Dunlop in that case?

12

A.

I would have.

11:32:43 10

And was that with a view to talking to councillors?

I wouldn't have had a knowledge.

So if somebody with more

13

knowledge, if you like, of who is a public representative or in public

14

relations, had sort of suggested listen it's a good idea and I said yeah.

11:33:02 15

Q. 157

16 17

idea to bring Mr. Dunlop in here and you'd have gone along with it? A.

18 19

Well would it just have happened that Mr. Collins would have said it's a good

I think I would have but I don't think Mr. Dunlop ever came into our office it was to introduce to a client, or something like that.

Q. 158

11:33:21 20

Yes but, no, no, what I mean is this was Mr. Collins on behalf of you, on behalf of Pilgrim, making the decision to suggest to in- the Duff case...

21

A.

Yes, it would.

22

Q. 159

That Mr. Dunlop be introduced?

23

A.

Yes, it would.

24

Q. 160

And 2 would be a case of Mr. Collins saying, it's a good idea and you going

11:33:33 25

26

along with it; is that right? A.

27 28

In the same way if I sort of said I think it's a good idea to get 50

houses on this site Mr. Collins would say fine, okay if that's what you say. Q. 161

29 11:33:52 30

Yes.

You wouldn't have inquired from Mr. Collins as to why, why the need for Mr. Dunlop?

A.

No, I don't think so, no. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

11:33:53

11:34:06

32 1

Q. 162

And in this particular case, in the Kinsealy case, you weren't aware at all.

2

Mr. Dunlop didn't consult you, if he was the person who introduced -- sorry.

3

If Mr. Collins was the person who introduced Mr. Dunlop.

4

A.

No.

5

Q. 163

Mr. Dunlop didn't consult you?

6

A.

No.

As I've said from that sort of submission, I don't think I had -- apart

7

from possibly one telephone discussion with somebody from Paul Walls' office, I

8

didn't have an involvement at all.

9

Q. 164

Thank you, Mr. Rowe.

11:34:29 10

11 12

CHAIRMAN: A.

Thank you very much, Mr. Rowe.

Thank you.

13 14

MR. QUINN: Those are the available witnesses for today, Sir.

11:34:34 15

16

Would you say ten o'clock tomorrow morning?

17 18

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

Ten o'clock.

19 11:34:39 20

Thank you.

21 22 23 24 11:35:06 25

26

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,

27

THURSDAY, 27TH JULY, 2006, AT 10: 00 A.M.:

28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 671

09:34:20

10:08:05

1 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS ON

2

THURSDAY 27TH JULY 2006 AT 10 AM:

3 4

MR. QUINN: Morning sir. Mr. Frank Dunlop please.

5 6 7

Frank Dunlop, previously sworn, examined by Mr. Quinn. Q. 1

8 9 10:08:34 10

Mr. Dunlop on the last occasion we had been dealing with your relationship with Mr. Paul Walls and the circumstances under which you had come to work for him?

A.

Yes.

Q. 2

In relation to lands in Kinsealy and possibly lands in the Malahide Estuary in

11

1993 and I think you advised the Tribunal that you were retained at a meeting

12

on the 7th January 1993 and you referred the Tribunal to the entry in your

13

diary on that date for a meeting with Mr. Walls and possibly Mr. Collins, if I

14

could have 553 please? And I think you have advised the Tribunal that at that

10:09:10 15

meeting, a meeting you say attended by both Mr. Walls and Mr. Collins, you

16

became aware of Mr. Walls project in Kinsealy, isn't that right?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 3

Now in the interim Mr. Collins has given evidence and he has denied being

19 10:09:25 20

21

present at that meeting? A.

I see.

Q. 4

Is it still your evidence and your recollection that Mr. Collins was present at

22

the meeting?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 5

And I think following on that meeting, if we could have 558 and you have dealt

10:09:36 25

with this already, on the 13th January 1993 you wrote to Mr. Walls and you set

26

out the terms under which you would be prepared to undertake the task involved,

27

isn't that right?

28

A.

That's correct.

29

Q. 6

You will see on the document on screen, which has been discovered to the

10:09:53 30

Tribunal by Mr. Walls, that he has a manuscript note of a series of telephone Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:09:59

10:10:18

2 1

conversations with you in relation to the engagement and in particular one on

2

which you will see on the right-hand side which appears to have been made on

3

22nd January 1993 where it appears you revised your success fee to a sum of

4

6,000 pounds rather than the sum of 10,000 plus VAT is that correct?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 7

Is it your evidence that you so revised your success fee?

7

A.

As I said to you in April, I think, when we last discussed this matter

8

Mr. Quinn, I have no recollection of such a conversation with Paul Walls, but

9

the fact that Paul Walls has made those amendments in his own handwriting on my

10:10:41 10

11

invoice would lead me to believe that such a discussion did take place. Q. 8

Yes. Now I think that on the 26th of February 1993, if we can have 1123

12

please? An invoice may have issued to Walls Properties Limited, Mr. Paul

13

Walls, in the sum of 2,500 pounds together with VAT at 21 per cent in respect

14

of what is described as public relations consultancy services?

10:11:10 15

16

A.

Correct.

Q. 9

Was that the term used by you, Mr. Dunlop, in relation to this type of work,

17 18

namely the lobbying of councillors? A.

19 10:11:28 20

Not exclusively, we have used other terminology as you know Mr. Quinn, but yes in the context of this particular client that was the phrase that was used.

Q. 10

And I think on the 1st of March if we could have page 600 please, a cheque made

21

payable to Frank Dunlop and Associates from Wall Properties Limited, in the sum

22

of 3,025 pounds issued, isn't that right?

23

A.

Correct.

24

Q. 11

And I think that cheque was recorded in your books and records and if we have

10:11:54 25

page 604 please, we see a lodgement on the same day and from the coding it

26

would appear to be an in-branch lodgement of 3,025 pounds to the account of

27

Frank Dunlop Esq, sorry Frank Dunlop & Associates Limited current account?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 12

Is that the lodgement of the monies which you say you received from Mr. Walls

10:12:17 30

on that date? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:12:17

10:12:32

3 1

A.

2

Yes and for ease Mr. Quinn, the reference to paid on the 1st of the 3rd of '93 is in handwriting of the accounting officer.

3

Q. 13

That is the accounting officer within --

4

A.

Within my company.

5

Q. 14

If we can have 1123 who is the accountant within your company?

6

A.

Phillip Connolly.

7

Q. 15

When you say accounting officer was he the accountant within Dunlop and

8 9

Associates? A.

10:12:50 10

person in the office who looked after the issuing of invoices and recording of

11 12

payments. Q. 16

13 14

No, he wasn't an accountant. He was a PR consultant, but he was the relevant

So would Mr. Connolly have been responsible for entering the phrase to public relations consultancy services in the invoice?

A.

10:13:09 15

No, he wouldn't have been responsible for that. But he would be responsible and that is his handwriting on the bottom, paid with thanks, underneath that,

16

that is his handwriting.

17

Q. 17

Can I ask you Mr. Dunlop you see the invoices assigned in number 800.

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 18

What was the system within Dunlop and Associates in respect of the issue of

10:13:23 20

21

invoices such as this? A.

By and large, from the foundation of the company you went forward, you issued

22

invoices, I can't absolutely categorically say to you we started with number 1

23

and we continued on seriatim, but certainly Phillip in the office would issue

24

the invoices and he would give each invoice a number.

10:13:45 25

Q. 19

26

Would you give a direction to Mr. Connolly that an invoice in a particular amount was to issue?

27

A.

Oh, yes, absolutely.

28

Q. 20

In other words you didn't issue the invoice, you issued a direction that an

29 10:13:56 30

invoice issued? A.

I said to Mr. Connolly, we need an invoice to go to Paul Walls of Walls Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:14:01

10:14:16

4 1

Properties in the amount of, plus VAT, and issue it whatever the date was and

2

he would look after that.

3

Q. 21

4 5

Would you further direct him that the invoice should say that the services were public relations consultancy services?

A.

Yes and that would be a norm with the vast majority of clients except in those

6

instances which I have already alluded to both in April and earlier on a few

7

moments ago, that in certain circumstances different phraseology was used.

8

Q. 22

9 10:14:41 10

11

Yes, we saw in the immediate last Module there were different phrases used on different invoices and that's what you are referring to there?

A.

Correct, yes.

Q. 23

Would it be fair to say therefore that since a lot of your works at this time

12

were concerned with the public relations lobbying type services that the

13

majority of the invoices would contain the phrase to public relation

14

consultancy services?

10:14:57 15

16

A.

Yes, I would say that's a fair comment.

Q. 24

Yes. And presumably there was some filing system within the offers where

17

correspondence would be retained, and if we can revert to 558 we see the

18

original or a copy of the original letter as sent by you to Mr. Walls on the

19

13th January '93?

10:15:15 20

A.

Yes.

21

Q. 25

Would it be usual to retain a copy of that letter?

22

A.

Yes, it would have been yes.

23

Q. 26

So, therefore if we were looking at the PJ Wall Dublin Limited file within

24

Frank Dunlop & Associates we would find that letter, a copy of that letter of

10:15:28 25

the 13th January '93 and presumably a copy of the invoice at 1123, invoice

26

number 800?

27

A.

In normal circumstances, yes, you would so find.

28

Q. 27

Now neither the letter and the invoice -- well, in particular the letter I

29 10:15:55 30

think of the 13th January, I don't think you discovered a copy of that letter to the Tribunal? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:15:56

10:16:03

5 1

A.

2

No, that was discovered, the letter that you have in your possession was discovered by Mr. Walls.

3

Q. 28

Yes. You don't have a copy of that letter?

4

A.

No, I don't.

5

Q. 29

But I think you did discover the invoice?

6

A.

Invoice, yes.

7

Q. 30

So therefore there was some selective culling of the file within Dunlop and

8

Associates at some stage, to the extent that the letter was take from the file

9

but the copy invoice was left on the file, would that be fair to say?

10:16:23 10

A.

No, I wouldn't accept that Mr. Quinn, just for ease of your inquiry, the

11

invoices would be kept in a particular file, what we refer to as pinks, they

12

were what normally referred to a photocopies. They would be a copy of the

13

invoice and they would just happen to be on pink paper, a job lot of pink paper

14

we got somewhere and that was what was used for copies of the invoices. So

10:16:52 15

invoices would be, the invoice file would be a completely different file to

16

anything else. Correspondence would normally be kept under a correspondence,

17

if there was a file for PJ Walls Limited or Paul Walls, that file would contain

18

correspondence from, in both ways, from me to Mr. Walls, from Mr. Walls to me.

19

And any other documentation that might be relevant.

10:17:18 20

Q. 31

Other than the pinks?

21

A.

Other than the invoice. The invoices would be retained in a specific folder.

22

Q. 32

And I think this particular invoice of the, was furnished to your solicitors

23

and possibly from your solicitor to the tribunal on the 30th March of this

24

year, isn't that right?

10:17:34 25

A.

I don't --

26

Q. 33

I am just looking at the top fax reference contained in the document on screen?

27

A.

Yes, yes I see that, yes.

28

Q. 34

Have all of these pinks been discovered to the Tribunal Mr. Dunlop or do you

29 10:17:52 30

still have the original of a file of pinks? A.

We have an original of file of pinks relating to all clients. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:17:57

10:18:06

6 1

Q. 35

Yes?

2

A.

Don't ask me where they are currently because --

3

Q. 36

But they are --

4

A.

They are in existence, they are extant, yes.

5

Q. 37

Now just in relation, just for completeness Mr. Dunlop, in relation to that

6

payment, if we can have page 170, you did originally tell the Tribunal I think,

7

that to the best of your recollection and belief you had obtained the sum of

8

five thousand pounds from Mr. Walls, isn't that right?

9 10:18:27 10

A.

Correct.

Q. 38

You hadn't mentioned this development, I think, in the private interviews but

11 12

you had mention it had in your statement? A.

Yes. I had not mentioned it here in the box in April/May of 2000, I had not

13

mentioned it in the private sessions but I did mention it in my statement in

14

October of 2000.

10:18:44 15

Q. 39

16

When you did mention it in your statement in October of 2000, you mentioned it in the context of a sum of 5,000 pounds having been received from Mr. Walls?

17

A.

To the best of my recollection at the time.

18

Q. 40

But at that time you would have had available to you, if you had made the

19

decision to check it, the file of pinks which would have shown the invoices

10:19:02 20

issued?

21

A.

Correct.

22

Q. 41

The fact that you had a recollection that it was five thousand pounds at that

23

time, could that have stemmed from a belief at that time that you hadn't raised

24

the normal invoice that we have seen on screen and that you in fact had been

10:19:19 25

26

paid outside the invoice system, so to speak? A.

Well -- I don't think so Mr. Quinn. What I was doing in October of 2000 was to

27

the very best of my ability at that time to say one, with whom I had dealings

28

in relation to the Development Plan, what it entailed and what to the best of

29

my recollection I was paid.

10:19:42 30

Q. 42

Can I ask you what staff did Frank Dunlop & Associates have in October 2000? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:19:47

10:20:07

7 1

A.

In October 2000 I think we had a secretary and two assistants.

2

Q. 43

So, there were three people other than yourself who could have assisted you in

3 4

determining how much you had received from any individual developer? A.

Yes, well I think at that particular stage, if I may say so, one of those had

5

left and that was Mr. Connolly, I think he left relatively quickly after the

6

Tribunal began.

7

Q. 44

Yes. But you still had assistants available to you?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 45

You would have had, had you decided look at it, a folder of pink slips which

10:20:22 10

should have, if an invoice had been raised, should have disclosed?

11

A.

Correct.

12

Q. 46

The correct receipt from Mr. Walls?

13

A.

Absolutely.

14

Q. 47

What I am putting to you Mr. Dunlop is the fact that you didn't decide to go to

10:20:34 15

that folder and check those slips is that indicative of a belief at that time

16

by you that in fact you had received five thousand pounds outside the invoice

17

system so to speak?

18

A.

No I don't think so.

19

Q. 48

Okay. Can you proffer any explanation to the Tribunal as to why when preparing

10:20:49 20

this statement for the Tribunal in October 2000 you had not checked out the

21

financial records of your company to establish the precise amount you had

22

received from the developer in question?

23

A.

24

Well in the context of, again in the context of preparing that narrative statement and I think as I have said to you already as well, if I had a PJ

10:21:11 25

Walls file or Paul Walls file I would have had the copy of the correspondence,

26

I wouldn't obviously have available to me Mr. Walls notations on my copy of the

27

invoice that I sent, and that might have been of some assistance as well, but I

28

did not have that. The answer is yes I did have the pink files, I obviously

29

didn't check them.

10:21:30 30

Q. 49

But can you give any explanation to the Tribunal why you hadn't gone to the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:21:34

10:21:49

8 1

pink files in relation to the Walls Module or the Walls project?

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 50

Did you go to the pink file in relation to any of the projects that are

4

referred to in your statement?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 51

In October 2000?

7

A.

In October 2000, that I cannot say to you, but as we have proceeded in relation

8

to various Modules and additional narrative statements, we have gone to the

9

pink files and we have supplied the relevant invoice.

10:22:06 10

11

Q. 52

Can you --

A.

As well, sorry, I should say I beg your pardon Mr. Quinn, as well as I should

12

say, that at that time there was no audit done on the income and expenditure in

13

relation to Frank Dunlop and Associates, vis-a-vis monies received from

14

developers and builders in relation to the Development Plan. As time moved

10:22:30 15

forward and as Modules moved forward and we were asked for extra narrative

16 17

statements, we comprehensively reviewed what we had available. Q. 53

Yes. That was the position I think or your belief in October 2000 and then I

18

think you came to give evidence in February of 2003 and you were asked to

19

compile a further list?

10:22:52 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 54

If we can have 210 please? In that list at item number 14, you identified

22

Walls/North side, five thousand pounds do you see that?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 55

First of all can you confirm that that is the same Walls that we have been

10:23:11 25

speaking about?

26

A.

Yes it is but -- can I ask you Mr. Quinn what date is that.

27

Q. 56

That was the 4th February 2003, I think?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 57

It was a list prepared by you during the course of your cross-examination by

10:23:23 30

Mr. O'Tuathail I don't know if you can recall that or not? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:23:25

10:23:40

9 1

A.

I recall it now yes.

2

Q. 58

So in February of 2003 you were still of the belief that it was five thousand?

3

A.

Correct.

4

Q. 59

Did you receive a sum of five thousand from Mr. Walls in addition to the three

5 6

thousand or the two and a half plus VAT that we have seen Mr. Dunlop? A.

7 8

to in the invoice and the cheque. Q. 60

9 10:23:57 10

11

No, the only monies I received from Mr. Walls are the money that are referred

So, were you were mistaken in your recollection in 2000 and again in February 2003?

A.

Yes.

Q. 61

And your recollection in February 2003 of course was given under oath, isn't

12

that right?

13

A.

That's correct yes.

14

Q. 62

Now there was a lodgement, I think, of five thousand to your accounts?

A.

Yes.

16

Q. 63

In March, isn't that correct?

17

A.

To the Nationwide Building Society.

18

Q. 64

If we can have 609, and you have given evidence I think in the Fox and Mahony

10:24:12 15

19

Module in relation to some of the lodgements at this time to this account,

10:24:25 20

isn't that right?

21

A.

Yes, that's correct.

22

Q. 65

And we see there on the 3rd March a cash lodgement of five thousand, isn't that

23 24 10:24:34 25

right? A.

Yes.

Q. 66

And if we can have 610, this is a, the documentation I think from the Irish

26

Nationwide surrounding that lodgement, isn't that right?

27

A.

That's correct yes.

28

Q. 67

And we see it's a sum of five thousand and it appears to be notes, isn't that

29 10:24:48 30

right? A.

Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:24:48

10:25:00

10 1

Q. 68

2

Lodged on the 3rd March, did you fill out the lodgement docket in relation to that Mr. Dunlop?

3

A.

Yes, that is my handwriting, yes.

4

Q. 69

I think you were asked to assist the Tribunal in providing the source of that

5

lodgement, if we can have 613 please, I think whilst you provided the source of

6

some of the other lodgements at that time and in evidence I think you have

7

identified the source as some of some of the balance of those lodgements, I

8

think it is fair to say that to date you haven't provided to the Tribunal the

9

source of that lodgement?

10:25:19 10

A.

No and to date we have been unable to source that, other than again for ease

11

Mr. Quinn, to say to you that if you look at the reverse of the lodgement slip

12

you will see that there is an Irish Nationwide typewritten note to the fact

13

that it was cash.

14

Q. 70

10:25:46 15

Yes. If we could have 611 please. This is the document I think that you are referring to.

16

A.

Validation Slip, yes.

17

Q. 71

And we see the letters CAS and we presume that's cash on the right, isn't that

18 19 10:26:01 20

right? A.

Yes.

Q. 72

I think you have also given evidence in the Fox and Mahony Module Mr. Dunlop

21

that in the case of lodgements such as this, that it wasn't necessarily your

22

practice to lodge all of the cash you might have received, isn't that right?

23

A.

Correct.

24

Q. 73

And in fact a cash lodgement as we see here, of five thousand pounds could in

10:26:21 25

fact represent the receipt by you of a larger amount of cash?

26

A.

Yes.

27

Q. 74

Five thousand only of which was lodged?

28

A.

Correct.

29

Q. 75

What would assist you Mr. Dunlop in identifying the source of that lodgement?

A.

Well, the only thing that I can think of that would assist me is a statement

10:26:35 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:26:39

10:26:54

11 1

from Irish Nationwide, if one such existed, but I cannot give an explanation

2

for it otherwise.

3

Q. 76

4

No but the, we have the statement on screen, if we can have 609 please and it shows the lodgement?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 77

When you were asked Mr. Dunlop, to identify the source of those lodgements,

7

what documentation did you check or peruse in order to reach the conclusion

8

that you were unable to identify the source of the lodgement?

9

A.

10:27:16 10

Well some of these, some of these lodgements Mr. Quinn, we were assisted by the Irish Nationwide. For example if there was a lodgement by cheque we were able

11

to trace the source of the cheque and identify the source. In relation to the

12

cash lodgements, obviously they provided a difficulty and some of them

13

continued to provide difficulties.

14

Q. 78

10:27:42 15

I accept that, but you made some effort to try and identify the source of those cash lodgements?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 79

I am just wondering what records you checked to --

18

A.

Sorry, I beg your pardon.

19

Q. 80

In that endeavour?

A.

Well, first of all the date, the timing, the date, what was happening at that

10:27:50 20

21

particular time, for whom I was acting at that particular time and that

22

assisted as a sort of aid memoir or memory jog in relation to whether or not I

23

had received money or not in whatever format from that particular client.

24 10:28:19 25

26

Q. 81

So, at that particular time I think you had been acting for Mr. Mahony?

A.

That's right.

Q. 82

And as we see there is a lodgement on 26 of March 1993 of 3,500 pounds and I

27

think you have given evidence to the Tribunal that that was part of the 10,000

28

payment you received, isn't that correct?

29 10:28:28 30

A.

That's right.

Q. 83

So, your activities at that time you felt were highly relevant in determining Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:28:32

10:28:42

12 1 2

the source of those lodgements? A.

3

Yes the date, for whom I was acting and the particular circumstances surrounding each particular client.

4

Q. 84

Did you check your diary for that date?

5

A.

For the --

6

Q. 85

For those dates?

7

A.

For which one now.

8

Q. 86

For any of the dates?

9

A.

I probably did, yes.

Q. 87

Because that presumably would identify the individuals with whom you were

10:28:48 10

11

meeting at that time? And if you were lodging cash, obviously it was something

12

physical and had to be given to you, isn't that right.

13

A.

Correct.

14

Q. 88

And is it still your evidence Mr. Dunlop that that five thousand pound

10:29:05 15

lodgement was not received by you from Mr. Walls?

16

A.

Mr. Walls never gave me five thousand pounds in cash.

17

Q. 89

He never gave you cash?

18

A.

Never gave me cash, no.

19

Q. 90

It's mere coincidence that there is a five thousand pound lodgement on the 3rd

10:29:22 20

March and on two previous occasions you advised the Tribunal that you received

21

five thousand pounds from Mr. Walls?

22

A.

Correct yes, it is coincidence.

23

Q. 91

Just reverting back just for a moment in relation to the invoice which was

24

raised and which we had on screen in relation to the payment, could I just ask

10:29:44 25

you and if we can have 1123 again on screen please? The activities that you

26

were involved in Mr. Dunlop, at this time, related to public relations

27

consultancy services as we see here, isn't that right?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 92

And I think you have said that that would represent the majority of the

10:30:06 30

invoices that issued from you? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:30:08

10:30:24

13 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 93

Were you involved in other vatable activity at that time other than public

3

relations consultancy services. Now I know we have seen invoices and we saw

4

one in the last Module where you, your invoice referred to the provision of

5

educational facilities which is VAT exempt or zero rated?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 94

But the majority of the work that you were involved in, did that attract a VAT

8 9 10:30:39 10

rate of 21 per cent? A.

Oh, yes it did.

Q. 95

But I think you also involved yourself in other vatable activity at different

11

rates. If we could have 605, this seems to be a document Mr. Dunlop which is

12

provided to the Tribunal by Coyle & Coyle, it's included in the brief, you will

13

have seen it as part of the circulated documents, it appears to be a

14

calculation done for your income, your vatable income for the period 31st of

10:31:05 15

December 93, or 31st October 93 and it deals with the period November 92 to the

16

end of October 93?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 96

And we see there where an effort has been made to deal with receipts for the

19

two month period November, December 92, January and February 93, March, April

10:31:25 20

93 and May, June 93, isn't that right?

21

A.

Sorry Mr. Quinn this is a document, what's the provenance of the document.

22

Q. 97

It's Coyle & Coyle have given it to the Tribunal?

23

A.

Oh right.

24

Q. 98

And I presume that they have to prepare this document for perhaps end of year

10:31:43 25

26

VAT returns, I am not quite sure? A.

Well, it says client Frank Dunlop and Associates. So if the provenance is

27

Coyle & Coyle they were acting for Frank Dunlop and Associates in the tax

28

return.

29 10:32:01 30

Q. 99

I think the period first of November 92 to 31st October 93 I have done a quick calculation adding the 315,104.35 pounds gross income for November, December 92 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:32:08

10:32:29

14 1

to May June 93 period to the invoices for July to October period in the sum of

2

96,179.82 pounds making a gross, I think, income turnover of that, of the order

3

of 411,000 in that period, would that be a fair representation of your

4

recollection of what your activities turned?

5

A.

Well, I wouldn't say it's a fair representation of my recollection but it is a

6

fair representation of the document, information that you put forward. Yes I

7

certainly wouldn't have any recollection of the detail that is outlined unless

8

you show it to me.

9

Q. 100

10:32:47 10

But not included in that case presumably would be, for example, the 10,000 from Fox and Mahony that was lodged or the three and a half thousand pounds of which

11

was lodged to the Irish Nationwide account that wouldn't be included?

12

A.

No.

13

Q. 101

Yes. Or other cash receipts in that period?

14

A.

No.

Q. 102

Would not be included in that?

16

A.

No.

17

Q. 103

Yes. But you were, as appears from that document, carrying on a vatable

10:33:01 15

18

activity which attracted 10 per cent, certainly 12 and a half per cent and 16

19

per cent VAT rates, isn't that right?

10:33:19 20

A.

Yes and I know your next question Mr. Quinn, I don't know what they are.

21

Q. 104

Okay. But the zero rated activity which accounted for almost 60,000?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 105

And in a period November to June '93 and a further 17 thousand in the July to

24

October '93 making in excess of 70,000 of the 400,000, were those invoices or

10:33:40 25

did that relate to invoices which claim to be in respect of the provision of

26 27

educational services? A.

28 29 10:33:52 30

Well, it's listed, the only answer that I can give you today, you are dealing with the receipts period here are you.

Q. 106

Yes?

A.

Well they are receipts, therefore they are vatable receipts at various levels Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:33:58

10:34:18

15 1

by the company, the information of which was given to Coyle and Coyle for an

2

audit in relation to what was owed in tax.

3

Q. 107

I mean for example if we look at the January, February period '93 of the

4

123,945 pounds gross in that period, I think a sum of 45,000 had been invoiced

5

out at a zero rate, isn't that right?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 108

What I am really inquiring after Mr. Dunlop is that zero rate at 45,000?

8

A.

Oh, I see where you are going.

9

Q. 109

That related to provision of educational services?

A.

I beg your pardon Mr. Quinn I see where you are coming from. Sitting here I

10:34:30 10

11

can't say that and the possibility is yes, if an invoice issued from Frank

12

Dunlop and Associates in relation to a client with that terminology used in the

13

text of the invoice which drew, attracted a zero rate VAT, therefore that would

14

be included in that because it went through the books.

10:34:55 15

16

Q. 110

And you would have directed that that invoice should contain that?

A.

That phraseology, yes I would have indicated that to the person drawing up the

17 18

invoice. Q. 111

19 10:35:11 20

But you, Frank Dunlop and Associates didn't engage in that type of activity is what I am asking?

A.

Sorry in relation to what type of activity?

21

Q. 112

Which would attract a zero rate of tax or provision of educational services?

22

A.

No, unless you are going to give a broad interpretation, I am not going to get

23

into a semantic argument about what educational facilities is or educational

24

training is.

10:35:28 25

Q. 113

26

The last time we have seen an invoice where that terminology was used it was in the context of a straight payment of 15,000?

27

A.

That's correct.

28

Q. 114

And I am just wondering would it be fair to say that for example in that

29 10:35:46 30

period January, February 93, the invoices which contained a zero rate at 45,000 were in respect of similar type activity? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:35:48

10:36:07

16 1

A.

2 3

They could well have been, but subject to checking as I sit here now I can't say that's definitely the case but it is quite possible.

Q. 115

Can I just ask you Mr. Dunlop, in the context of the developers that you had in

4

that period, in '93, how did Mr. Wall fit in and where did he come in priority,

5

would he have been one of the major developers or would he have been just yet

6

another developer?

7

A.

Well, without being offensive or derogatory, I mean there was a very late

8

approach. The Development Plan was to all intents and purposes almost

9

complete, it was completed by the end of 1993. Mr. Walls was introduced to me

10:36:37 10

by another person and he had a project and we sat down and we discussed and we

11 12

agreed a fee. Q. 116

13 14

Yes. I think Mr. Walls came to you in January, the motion I think was submitted in March?

A.

In March.

Q. 117

And the 4th of May was the --

16

A.

It was withdrawn, yes.

17

Q. 118

So, we are looking at that time frame effectively?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 119

Just I think I made the point the last day and I think you agreed it Mr. Dunlop

10:36:51 15

10:37:05 20

before I move off this, your revised statement where you now say you only

21

received the 3025 pounds, that statement was compiled after you had received

22

this brief and after you had seen these documents?

23

A.

Yes. And the submission by me of the pink invoice.

24

Q. 120

Yes. Now I think in your statement Mr. Dunlop, you said if I could just revert

10:37:29 25

to it for a moment, at 170 and in this portion of the statement I don't believe

26

changes, you say of the sum which to the best of my recollection and belief I

27

received from Mr. Walls, I paid a sum of 1,000 pounds to Mr. Gilbride, is that

28

still your evidence?

29 10:37:46 30

A.

Yes it is.

Q. 121

Can I just draw your attention to something, Mr. Dunlop, in that statement on Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:37:50

10:38:11

17 1

screen, you used the expression to the best of my recollection and belief three

2

times, the first time you use it you say in the third paragraph "To the best of

3

my recollection and belief I obtained the sum of five thousand from Mr. Walls".

4

The second time you use it "To the best of my recollection and belief all my

5

contact with Mr. Walls concerning this matter were conducted over the phone" I

6

think you have said, I think, and accepted that you had at least one

7

face-to-face meeting and possibly two?

8

A.

Well I, certainly had one, the initial meeting.

9

Q. 122

Yes. And then the third time and just to go back on that for a moment, the

10:38:26 10

first time we see there to the best of my recollection and belief I obtained

11

sum of five thousand from Mr. Walls. You now revised your evidence in relation

12

to that.

13

A.

14 10:38:46 15

Well I have given the copy of the invoice slip and we now, I have now had sight of my letter to Mr. Walls of January 1993.

Q. 123

So in relation to, and the final reference to the same expression or statement

16

is "To the best of my recollection and belief I paid a sum of one thousand to

17

Mr. Gilbride" do you see that?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 124

Now it's one thousand to Mr. Gilbride, out of the monies which you said you

10:39:05 20

received from Mr. Walls?

21

A.

Correct, yes.

22

Q. 125

So of the three statements made there Mr. Dunlop, you have revised two of them?

23

A.

Mm-hmm.

24

Q. 126

Isn't that correct?

A.

Yes.

Q. 127

And you make the third in the context of paying Mr. Gilbride a thousand pounds

10:39:16 25

26 27

out of a sum of five that you received from Mr. Walls?

28

A.

That's in the statement, yes.

29

Q. 128

I am dealing with your statement?

A.

Yes, correct.

10:39:29 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:39:32

10:39:47

18 1

Q. 129

2

So 20 per cent of what you had received from Mr. Walls you say you gave to Mr. Gilbride?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 130

If what you now say is correct it means that Mr. Gilbride got a a substantially

5

higher proportion of the monies you received from Mr. Walls, isn't that right?

6

A.

Yes, correct.

7

Q. 131

Could you be mistaken in your recollection and indeed in your belief that you

8 9 10:40:00 10

paid Mr. Walls, Mr. Gilbride a sum of 1,000 pounds? A.

No.

Q. 132

I think you have advised the Tribunal that you cannot recollect when and where

11 12

you paid Mr. Gilbride, isn't that right? A.

13 14

What I said was it was either at the time of signature or shortly thereafter, to the best of my recollection and belief that's what I said Mr. Quinn.

Q. 133

10:40:17 15

Well it would always be at the time of signature or shortly thereafter Mr. Dunlop?

16

A.

Sorry, I shouldn't have said that, that was bold.

17

Q. 134

No, it's your evidence Mr. Dunlop.

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 135

So you can't say when you paid Mr. Gilbride other than it was probably at the

10:40:30 20

time of signature or shortly thereafter?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 136

And you can't say where you paid Mr. Gilbride?

23

A.

Again, what I have said in the statement in the environs of Dublin County

24 10:40:42 25

Council or at a local hotel, subject to correction. Q. 137

In fact, just for completeness, if we go back to 1118, this is from your more

26

recent statement Mr. Dunlop and if we just look at the third paragraph towards

27

the end of the third paragraph dealing with the payment to Mr. Gilbride you say

28

"I cannot recall when precisely this payment was made or where but I could

29

recall a discussion on the matter with Councillor Gilbride during which he said

10:41:09 30

that it was probably not a runner but he would do his best to get the support Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:41:14

10:41:28

19 1

of other councillors for the vote.

It is likely that I paid Councillor

2

Gilbride one thousand at the time he signed the motion or shortly thereafter.

3

The likely venue was either the immediate environs of Dublin County Council or

4

a local hotel. I paid Councillor Gilbride for monies available to me at the

5

time" isn't that right. Indeed we know that the 2,500 and VAT was lodged to

6

your account?

7

A.

Correct.

8

Q. 138

So, are you saying that you had a thousand pounds cash available to you at this

9

time which would be in or about March 1993 and that from that, sorry and that

10:41:44 10

11

you gave that one thousand to Mr. Gilbride? A.

Well, as I have already given evidence previously and again this morning, we

12

have opened it again, that is I lodged five thousand pounds in cash in the

13

Irish Nationwide Building Society on the 3rd March 1993, so that is an

14

indication of monies available to me at the time.

10:42:02 15

Q. 139

Yes. If we can have 609. Your lodgements at this time, just taking it I

16

suppose from the 3rd March were five thousand on the 3rd March, 12 thousand on

17

the 15th March, 3500 on the 26th March?

18

A.

Yes. Yes that's 20 and a half thousand.

19

Q. 140

And that's cash. The withdrawal I think of 4600 is a cheque withdrawal on the

10:42:30 20

30th April, isn't that right which would be after the period?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 141

Because I think the motion is signed on the 18th March?

23

A.

On the 18th yes.

24

Q. 142

And the previous cash withdrawal, based on that account was on the 29th January

10:42:43 25

of 2800?

26

A.

Sorry Mr. Quinn --

27

Q. 143

The 19th February 1993?

28

A.

Yes, sorry, I beg your pardon.

29

Q. 144

Sorry. The?

A.

29th January.

10:42:51 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:42:52

10:43:05

20 1

Q. 145

2

29th January, 2,800, isn't that correct. That would have been too early for this payment?

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 146

Can you give any more detail to the Tribunal in relation to your conversation

5 6

with Councillor Gilbride in relation to this motion, Mr. Dunlop? A.

7 8

Well I think what I have already said when we opened this Module in April, and in my statement I had a conversation with Sean Gilbride about it.

Q. 147

9

You first met with Mr. Walls I think on the 7th January and you had written that letter on the 13th January and I think you had a telephone conversation

10:43:30 10

with him on the 14th January?

11

A.

Correct.

12

Q. 148

So when in the context of all that do you think you spoke with --

13

A.

I would say very shortly after the conversation that I had with Mr. Walls and

14 10:43:46 15

16

the issuing of the letter. Q. 149

So, it would have been in mid January?

A.

Yes, I would say so, because from my purposes it would be first of all to

17

establish the possibilities in relation to this particular proposal, whether or

18

not it was a runner or not, and I think, sorry I don't think, I know that I

19

have given evidence to the effect that while people weren't overly enthusiastic

10:44:10 20

about it, they certainly weren't totally negative either, and it would be

21

disingenuous of me not to say that I have read the evidence given by certain

22

elected representatives in relation to their attitude to the particular

23

development that we are talking about at the time.

24

Q. 150

Do you say that in that first or second conversation you had with Mr. Gilbride,

10:44:32 25

that is to say the conversation in January '93, that it was during the course

26

of those conversations that Mr. Gilbride agreed to sign this motion and you

27

agreed to pay him for his signatures?

28

A.

Yes, it would be early, it would be obviously prior to the 18th March 1993.

29

Q. 151

Obviously?

A.

So we are obviously dealing with a period from 14th January 1993 to 18 March

10:44:48 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:44:53

10:45:03

21 1 2

1993. Q. 152

I accept that, but I am just trying to work-out from your evidence Mr. Dunlop

3

when you say the agreement was reached between yourself and Mr. Gilbride in

4

relation to his signature on this motion?

5

A.

6

It was in one of the discussions that I had with Sean in relation to this proposal.

7

Q. 153

Well, was it at the first discussion or second discussion?

8

A.

That I cannot say.

9

Q. 154

Why is it not something that would have arisen on the first discussion?

A.

That I don't know.

Q. 155

After all you knew and Councillor Gilbride and Mr. Collins knew and I am sure

10:45:17 10

11 12

Mr. Walls knew that to get this matter on the agenda a motion was required?

13

A.

Oh, yes we knew at that.

14

Q. 156

Yes. And therefore you would have been speaking to councillors I suspect in

10:45:32 15

the context of a motion being signed?

16

A.

Yes, that was the undertaking that I agreed with Mr. Walls.

17

Q. 157

Yes. So therefore when you first spoke with Mr. Gilbride this is something

18

that would have been to the fore in your mind, isn't that right, that you would

19

require a motion signed?

10:45:48 20

A.

Exactly.

21

Q. 158

Presumably a motion signed by local councillors?

22

A.

Preferably.

23

Q. 159

Mr. Gilbride fitted that?

24

A.

Well, he didn't actually that particular description. He fitted the

10:46:00 25

description of local councillor because he was on the north side, but in the

26

context of the location of the lands.

27

Q. 160

Yes?

28

A.

He wasn't particularly a local councillor. He was in Skerries.

29

Q. 161

Who amongst the councillors you say would have been more local than Councillor

10:46:16 30

Gilbride? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:46:16

10:46:42

22 1

A.

Well, the immediate ones because it's in the Malahide ward, the Malahide area

2

would have been GV Wright or that time Nora Owen, there was a number of, I

3

think at least one Labour representative there and there was another Fianna

4

Fail representative and they would have been the local councillors.

5

Q. 162

6

Now Mr. Walls I understand will tell the Tribunal that you had indicated to him --

7

A.

And Ann Devitt.

8

Q. 163

That you have approached Councillor Owen?

9

A.

Sorry.

Q. 164

I think Mr. Walls will tell the Tribunal that you had indicated to him that you

10:46:54 10

11

wouldn't approach Councillor Owen?

12

A.

Correct, that's right.

13

Q. 165

So, you were certainly not going to ask her to sign the motion?

14

A.

No.

Q. 166

But you, if we can have 623 please, you did have a conversation with Mr. Walls

10:47:04 15

16

on the 4th March '93 as appears from these typed notes made by Mr. Walls of

17

that conversation and I think on that date you indicated to Mr. Walls that you

18

had just had a private meeting with Mr. Smith, isn't that right?

19 10:47:23 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 167

Mr. Smith I think was with the Dublin County Council?

A.

Al Smith he was the, I'm not sure if I am giving him the right title but I

22 23

think chief planning officer. Q. 168

24

He was certainly the person within the council who was responsible for, from an administrative point of view, for the holding of the various special meetings

10:47:47 25

of the council dealing with it?

26

A.

Correct.

27

Q. 169

And I think was it in that context you with met with Mr. Smith?

28

A.

Yes, well I think I met with Mr. Smith -- this is a specific reference or this

29 10:47:59 30

reference to Mr. Smith is in relation to a specific item, but during the conversation as I obviously explained to Paul Walls and he made a note of it, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:48:05

10:48:21

23 1

that we are talking about the diarying of the special meetings in relation to

2

when the plan is going to be finished.

3

Q. 170

Did you have a rapport with Mr. Smith?

4

A.

I met Mr. Smith, I would say during the course of the Development Plan at

5

maximum probably half a dozen times, sometimes alone and sometimes in the

6

presence of others.

7

Q. 171

Yes. Well this appears to have been a private meeting?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 172

And presumably at your request?

A.

Yes.

Q. 173

And you were anxious or I'm not saying it was the agenda for your meeting with

10:48:34 10

11 12

Mr. Smith but certainly as a result of the meeting you were able to tell

13

Mr. Walls that Mr. Smith was about to send out maps for the area in question?

14

A.

10:48:55 15

Yes. Well can I just re assure you that the meeting, the purpose of the meeting had nothing whatsoever to do with Mr. Walls or his lands.

16

Q. 174

Yes?

17

A.

The information that I garnered from Mr. Smith during the course of the meeting

18 19

on another subject is what I transmitted to Mr. Walls. Q. 175

10:49:11 20

Just in relation to the timing of the meeting, on the 1st of March you had received the cheque for three thousand, for the two and a half and VAT is that

21

right?

22

A.

Yes, that's correct.

23

Q. 176

And on the 3rd March you had made a lodgement I think of five thousand cash?

24

A.

Correct.

Q. 177

And then on the, you then had the meeting with Mr. Smith and then you had the

10:49:22 25

26

telephone conversation with Mr. Walls and you advised Mr. Walls in relation to

27

the up coming motions and I think you went on to advise Mr. Walls that the

28

first objective was to get a motion signed, isn't that right?

29 10:49:39 30

A.

Yes, correct.

Q. 178

And you undertook that that would be within your gambit to get the motion Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:49:43

10:49:51

24 1

signed as appears there?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 179

You identified people you would approach, namely Councillors Devitt and GV

4

Wright?

5

A.

Yes, obviously those are names --

6

Q. 180

Local councillors?

7

A.

Yes and names alluded to during the conversation.

8

Q. 181

And you said and a few others, isn't that right?

9

A.

Yes.

Q. 182

You don't identify Councillor Gilbride by name there, isn't that right?

11

A.

No, that's correct.

12

Q. 183

Can the Tribunal take that it was only after Councillors Devitt and Wright

10:50:00 10

13 14

refused to sign the motion that you went to Councillor Gilbride? A.

10:50:18 15

I want to be absolutely clear about this. I do not have a recollection of actually asking either Ann Devitt or GV Wright to sign the motion.

16

Q. 184

Very.

17

A.

It would be, as far as I am concerned, inconceivable, totally unbelievable, if

18

I did not discuss the matter with both Ann Devitt and GV Wright, I don't have a

19

recollection in relation to, I cannot absolutely say that I asked them to sign

10:50:43 20

the motion though both of them had signed motions previously, but it was in the

21 22

absence of anyone else signing the motion that I approached Sean Gilbride. Q. 185

23 24

And of course you had, you say discussed the matter with Councillor Gilbride prior to that?

A.

10:51:05 25

Yes, well I had a relationship with Councillor Gilbride I met him very frequently. He contacted me quite frequently, we discussed in the main, 99 per

26

cent of our conversations related to what was happening in Dublin County

27

Council in relation to the Development Plan.

28 29 10:51:30 30

Q. 186

If we can have 1053, this is a document compiled by the Tribunal from the telephone records and diary, it would appear to show contact between Councillor Gilbride and you or your office from this period and would you agree with me Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:51:35

10:51:46

25 1

that it seems to show fairly regular contact?

2

A.

Which is which Mr. Quinn, I don't understand.

3

Q. 187

The document on screen?

4

A.

What's the column, the first column after the dates.

5

Q. 188

I think the first column are the diary meetings?

6

A.

Yes, sorry.

7

Q. 189

And the second column are telephone attendances?

8

A.

Telephone calls.

9

Q. 190

He was a regular?

A.

Yes.

11

Q. 191

He was in regular communication with you or your office, isn't that right?

12

A.

Correct.

13

Q. 192

Throughout this period?

14

A.

Correct.

Q. 193

Was he involved with other projects with you at this time?

16

A.

Yes he was.

17

Q. 194

And you say that in the course of some of those telephone conversations you

10:51:56 10

10:52:02 15

18 19 10:52:16 20

21

would have discussed this particular project? A.

Yes and I also, with Mr. Gilbride.

Q. 195

Yes?

A.

Yes, I also said the fact in ease of Mr. Gilbride that Mr. Gilbride did, his

22

reaction was that he didn't think it was a runner.

23

Q. 196

Yes?

24

A.

But nonetheless he undertook to sign it.

Q. 197

Yes?

A.

Now notwithstanding the fact which I now know which did I not then know, that

10:52:37 25

26 27

Mr. Walls and Mr. Gilbride either knew one another or had been in contact with

28

one another.

29 10:52:46 30

Q. 198

Yes. We see the motion at page 87 I think and it appears to have been signed by Mr. Gilbride on the 18th March '93 which I think was the date by which Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:52:52

10:53:02

26 1

motions had to be lodged, isn't that right?

2

A.

Yes that's the date, the end date, that motions had to be lodged.

3

Q. 199

Did you lodge the motion Mr. Dunlop?

4

A.

Yes, that I cannot say to you.

5

Q. 200

It was your practice to lodge motions?

6

A.

On occasion yes I have lodged motions in the planning office or in the

7

administration office in relation to motions for meetings or the Development

8

Plan. I cannot absolutely say to you that I lodged this one.

9

Q. 201

10:53:21 10

Yes. Presumably it would have been very embarrassing from your points of view if Councillor Gilbride had refused to sign the motion and you had, and the due

11

date had passed and no motion signed?

12

A.

Yes, it would.

13

Q. 202

So he was in a strong negotiating position by the 18th March in relation to the

14 10:53:36 15

matter? A.

Yes, he was.

16

Q. 203

If what you say is correct?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 204

And do you recall paying him for the motion when he signed the motion or can

19 10:53:47 20

you help the Tribunal in anyway at all? A.

No, I cannot absolutely recollect when I gave him the money, it was either on

21

signature or shortly thereafter and that is what I have said and in fairness

22

that is the only, that's the only thing I can say because I cannot give you a

23

date, time and location.

24

Q. 205

10:54:11 25

If we revert to 623 I think Mr. Walls was able to tell you that he fact had the motion already typed up?

26

A.

Correct, that's right.

27

Q. 206

And you were to meet him on that coming week which was the week of the 7th of

28 29 10:54:28 30

or the 8th March, isn't that right? A.

Just again in ease of everybody's position Mr. Quinn, the motions is addressed in a peculiar way in this particular instance, I think I have again I should Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:54:33

10:54:46

27 1

say, I have given evidence to the effect that I would never issue a motion in

2

relation to the Development Plan addressed to the planning officer, it was just

3

a straightforward motion that was necessary to be submitted to the planning

4

office.

5

Q. 207

Now Mr. Gilbride who is due to give evidence this morning Mr. Dunlop, I

6

understand will tell the Tribunal, if we can have page 1142 that to the best of

7

his recollection he received a phone call from Mr. Walls on the 18th March

8

asking him to meet with you at Dublin County Council offices to sign the

9

motion.

10:55:12 10

11

A.

Mm-hmm.

Q. 208

And he I understand, it will be his evidence, that he signed these motions at

12

the request of Mr. Walls, someone who had been known to him since, I think,

13

1973 he says, are you saying he is incorrect in his recollection?

14 10:55:29 15

A.

That is not my recollection of events.

Q. 209

Yes. As I understand your evidence Mr. Dunlop, you contacted and had discussed

16

the matter with Mr. Gilbride, you undertook with Mr. Walls per this memo of the

17

4th March, to sign the motions, you undertook to meet with Mr. Walls in that

18

week commencing the 8th March. He had a motion typed up, you must have

19

received that motion at that meeting from him and you brought it and gave it,

10:56:00 20

and had Mr. Gilbride sign it only after you had agreed to pay him a thousand

21

pounds, is that correct?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 210

And you say it's coincidental, do you, that Mr. Gilbride signed two other

24 10:56:16 25

motions for the same developer three days previously? A.

Well, I have no knowledge whatsoever in relation to Mr. Gilbride's signature of

26

other motions and in relation to Mr. Walls and there was a company title used,

27

it doesn't come to me immediately now.

28

Q. 211

Hydraulic?

29

A.

Yes, that doesn't ring a bell with me at all.

Q. 212

In fact Mr. Walls says you discussed with him the prospect of supporting those

10:56:34 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:56:38

10:56:55

28 1 2

motions also provided he could get two councillors to sign the motions? A.

Well, I have no recollection of such a discussion. As I said to you way back

3

in April, the name Hydraulics Limited or company or whatever it happens to be,

4

doesn't ring a bell with me at all, I have no recollection of such a discussion

5

with Paul Walls.

6

Q. 213

7

Can I ask you Mr. Dunlop, you have said that you had one meeting with Mr. Walls?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 214

Do you say that you had one and only one meeting with Mr. Walls?

A.

No. I had a meeting with Mr. Walls in early, in January of 1993, there is a

10:57:05 10

11

reference in my diary to Mr. Walls ringing in relation to a meeting and then

12

there is a reference to Mr. Walls in my diary.

13

Q. 215

If we can have 628?

14

A.

Again with a question mark, I am not absolutely certain.

Q. 216

This is a copy of your diary for the 8th and 9th March, Mr. Dunlop. It's dates

10:57:27 15

16

that have arisen recently in the context of another Module?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 217

But on the 8th I think you have a note Paul Walls re meeting, do you see that,

19 10:57:45 20

tomorrow. A.

Yes.

21

Q. 218

And then on the 9th March the second entry, Paul Walls today?

22

A.

Correct.

23

Q. 219

And if we could have 629 please, this is a telephone attendance and you see

24

just about a third of the way down, Paul Walls 11 o'clock meeting here

10:58:03 25

tomorrow, do you see that?

26

A.

Yes I see it, correct.

27

Q. 220

Can I ask you Mr. Dunlop, did you meet with Mr. Walls on the 9th of March 1993?

28

A.

I obviously must have, he is in my diary and telephone records indicate that he

29 10:58:23 30

called and that my secretary put that note into the telephone records. Q. 221

And it is agreed by Mr. Gilbride and it would appear to be your case and I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

10:58:28

10:58:49

29 1

presume Mr. Walls case, that you provided the motion to Mr. Gilbride for

2

signature, Mr. Gilbride says he signed it having spoken with Mr. Walls and

3

having agreed and being directed by Mr. Walls to meet with you at the council?

4

A.

5

Yes. I think if you take this seriatim on the mechanics of it, I refer back to the notes of the telephone conversation that Mr. Walls kept with me.

6

Q. 222

623 please?

7

A.

In which it was said that he would make available, I had motions already typed

8

up and I would give them to him at our forthcoming meeting. And as I have also

9

said the format in which the motion is laid out is not a format that I ever

10:59:14 10

used, so Q E D, Mr. Walls did provide me with the motion and I got Councillor

11

Gilbride to sign it. Now what I, in relation to a question that you asked me

12

two minutes ago in relation to other signatures by Sean Gilbride on other

13

motions, I have no recollection of ever receiving any motions from Mr. Walls in

14

relation to those matters for signatures by Sean Gilbride.

10:59:40 15

Q. 223

16 17

motion signed by Mr. Gilbride? A.

18 19

Did you tell Mr. Walls that in fact you had been successful and having the

I presume -- I can't say yes or no to that, I had many discussions with Mr. Walls mostly by telephone and the likelihood is, yes, that I did.

Q. 224

11:00:04 20

Can the Tribunal take it therefore that from the 9th March forward the motion was in your possession?

21

A.

Yes, that is a strong likelihood, yes.

22

Q. 225

And again at that meeting on the 4th March that telephone conversation on the

23

4th March, Mr. Walls goes on to say in relation to the up coming meeting with

24

you which we now would seem to suggest took place on the 9th March, will

11:00:22 25

discuss the text and what colour maps etcetera he requires for the background?

26

A.

Yes, I don't know what he means by the text but the maps certainly.

27

Q. 226

Yes. You were going to discuss that on the 9th March, isn't that right?

28

A.

Yes, according to his report.

29

Q. 227

And he was giving you the motion and you were going to discuss the maps

11:00:41 30

required, so there would have to be yet a further meeting with you to furnish Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:00:46

11:01:07

30 1

you with a draft or a map so that Mr. Gilbride or whatever councillor was going

2

to sign the motion could have it available to him for signature, is that right?

3

A.

4

Well, the only way that I can deal with this Mr. Quinn is to deal well it on the basis of the insertion in my diary of meetings with Mr. Walls.

5

Q. 228

Yes?

6

A.

And of telephone calls with him in relation to possible meetings and in

7

relation to actual discussions with him over the telephone about what was to

8

take place.

9

Q. 229

11:01:24 10

And it was obvious I think by the 15th March again if we look at the document on screen, that Mr. Walls was aware that the motions had to be in by Thursday

11

18th March, isn't that right, if you look at the manuscript and he appears to

12

attribute you?

13

A.

14 11:01:40 15

Sorry, I beg your pardon yes. Motions to be submitted by Thursday 8th March, yes, yes.

Q. 230

16

That appears to have been a conversation with FD on 15th March which I suggest was a conversation with you Mr. Dunlop?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q. 231

So you would have advised him on the 15th March that the motion had to be in by

19 11:01:53 20

the 18 March? A.

I would certainly have advised him what the end date was in relation to the

21

submission of the motion, I would be deficient in my duty if I had not told him

22

that.

23

Q. 232

24

So can the Tribunal take therefore Mr. Dunlop from the 9th March you were in possession of a motion if not a map, on the 15th March you were telling

11:02:11 25

Mr. Walls the motion had to be in by the 18th and on the 18th March Mr.

26

Gilbride signed the motion and the map?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 233

And you say it's pure coincidence that Mr. Gilbride signed two further motions

29 11:02:29 30

for the same developer some three days previously? A.

I don't say it's pure coincidence, what I say Mr. Quinn is I have no knowledge Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:02:34

11:02:47

31 1

of having received any such motions from Mr. Walls for signature by Mr.

2

Gilbride and I have no recollection whatever of seeing those motions and so

3

providing them to Mr. Gilbride.

4

Q. 234

He never told that you he had been on to Councillor Gilbride?

5

A.

No.

6

Q. 235

Or that he had Councillor Gilbride sign other motions?

7

A.

No.

8

Q. 236

And you say that Mr. Gilbride is incorrect in his recollection that he was

9

asked by Mr. Walls to have you sign the motion or sorry to meet with you for

11:03:01 10

11

the purpose of signing the motion? A.

Well my recollection of it is that as per, as you have outlined heretofore the

12

provision to me in the, in an unusual format of the motion, the signature of

13

the motion by Mr. Gilbride at my request.

14

Q. 237

11:03:24 15

Now I think that you have advised the Tribunal that after the motion was signed and submitted that you had further contact with Councillor Gilbride in the lead

16

up to the meeting of the 4th March?

17

A.

Yes, 4th May.

18

Q. 238

4th of May I should say. And that effectively it had been agreed that had --

19 11:03:44 20

there wasn't sufficient support for the project? A.

Correct.

21

Q. 239

Had you spoken with other councillors in that intervening period?

22

A.

Yes again to say what I said to you some moments ago, it would be

23

inconceivable and unbelievable had I not discussed this matter with other

24

councillors and I did say that the attitude was while not totally negative,

11:04:04 25

26

people weren't overly enthusiastic. Q. 240

And did you know that Mr. Walls was writing, if we can have 1162, to almost all

27

of the councillors, on the 28th April, 1993, seeking support for the, for his

28

proposals?

29 11:04:25 30

A.

I cannot say absolutely that I did, I would not discount however that there was, there is a possibility that Mr. Walls and I did discuss the fact that he Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:04:30

11:04:52

32 1

ought do that, but I have no recollection of it, it is, it would be part and

2

parcel of the general modus operandi that I operated at the time.

3

Q. 241

If we can have 720 this is a record again Mr. Dunlop of your telephone

4

attendances or telephone messages for 28 April 1993. If we look at 721 at 3.05

5

there is a note of a conversation from or communication from Mr. Paul Walls?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 242

Asking that he would like your comments before this evening re letter faxed

8 9

over? A.

Correct.

Q. 243

Do you see that?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 244

If we look at 1162, Mr. Walls discovered to the Tribunal a draft of a letter

11:05:03 10

13

dated 28 of April 1993 which it was intended I think to send to all of the

14

councillors, if we look at 1164, 1165 and 1166 we see the names and addresses

11:05:27 15

of a series of councillors. Were you asked by Mr. Walls to check the wording

16

of that letter?

17

A.

I think --

18

Q. 245

Asked for your comments on that letter?

19

A.

I think the likelihood is yes, as I said it would have been part of my modus

11:05:45 20

operandi.

21

Q. 246

Yes parts of the service you were providing?

22

A.

It would have been part of the advice I would be giving to a client that it was

23 24

necessary so that the councillors be aware. Q. 247

11:06:00 25

And then I think on the 4th May 1993 at 727 there was a special meeting of the council where the motion was listed for hearing, isn't that right?

26

A.

That's correct.

27

Q. 248

Can I ask you were you in attendance at that meeting?

28

A.

That I cannot absolutely say to you.

29

Q. 249

We know at 740 that Mr. Gilbride's motion was not moved, isn't that right?

A.

That's correct yes.

11:06:17 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:06:19

11:06:36

33 1

Q. 250

2 3

Was the decision taken in advance of that meeting or was the decision taken at the meeting that the motion wouldn't be proceeded with?

A.

Well I think as per the evidence that I have given or the statement I have

4

given is that there was a discussion between Mr. Gilbride and myself in

5

relation to the possibility of the motion being successful and it was agreed on

6

the advice provided by Mr. Gilbride that it wasn't a runner and that I so

7

advised Mr. Walls and it was agreed that it would be withdrawn because it would

8

be comprehensively defeated.

9

Q. 251

11:07:08 10

Yes. If we can have 1119 please, this is your statement in March of this year, I think you told the or advised the Tribunal that to the best of my

11

recollection Councillor Gilbride advised me that it would be preferable to

12

withdraw the motion rather than have it defeated. His view was that the motion

13

would not succeed and the likelihood was that it would be defeated

14

comprehensively. Following a discussion with Mr. Walls on the matter it was

11:07:34 15

16

agreed that the motion be withdrawn. A.

And in reference to your questions to me Mr. Quinn was I present at the

17

meeting, in my diary of the 4th, Tuesday 4th May of 1993 for 2.30 it says

18

Development Plan.

19 11:07:49 20

Q. 252

Which is a reference, which would suggest that you were at the meeting?

A.

Well it suggests two things. It suggests that I had that note in my diary as

21

an aid memoir to the fact that a matter in relation to the Development Plan,

22

that I had an interest in was coming up, or that and that the pocket was that I

23

was present.

24

Q. 253

11:08:11 25

Just going back to your conversation with Mr. Gilbride in relation to the signing of the motion, would you have advised Mr. Gilbride of the amount you

26

had received from the developer in relation to the project?

27

A.

No.

28

Q. 254

Would he have inquired?

29

A.

No, no he would not have inquired.

Q. 255

By March 1993 would you have a good working relationship with Mr. Gilbride to

11:08:30 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:08:42

11:09:05

34 1 2

the extent you could discuss the payment of money for the signing of a motion? A.

3 4

I had a very good relationship with Mr. Gilbride, going back to late 1990, early 1991.

Q. 256

So from late 1991 throughout 19 -- sorry early 1991, throughout 1992 and into

5

early 1993 Mr. Gilbride was someone that would you not be embarrassed to have a

6

conversation with concerning the payment of money?

7

A.

Oh definitely not.

8

Q. 257

For signing motions. Did he ask for one thousand or did he ask for more or was

9 11:09:25 10

there any discussion on the amount that would be paid? A.

Well I think again as I recollect matters, Sean had a phrase which was I think

11

has been used before by me in defining how, in describing how people asked for

12

money and Sean from time to time would say it's going to cost you and obviously

13

from that point on, there was a discussion and I agreed to give him a thousand.

14

Q. 258

11:09:57 15

motion can you advise the Tribunal as best you can what was actually said by

16 17

That's truncating a discussion Mr. Dunlop, in relation to this particular

you and by Mr. Gilbride? A.

Well, again not to replicate everything that has been said, I had a discussion

18

with Sean, I did not know that Sean had a relationship with Mr. Walls and I

19

don't mean that in any offensive way, I did not know that Mr. Walls and Mr.

11:10:15 20

Gilbride had been talking or that they knew one another, neither party had

21

indicated that to me, I was in a position where I was going to Sean where it

22

was obvious at this stage that this matter was not going to receive

23

overwhelming support, indeed it was obvious that it mightn't get very much

24

support at all, and that the local councillors in particular were evincing a

11:10:38 25

negative attitude, one in particular. And in that context I spoke to Sean, as

26

I have said he said to me that he didn't think it was a runner but that he

27

would sign it anyway. In that context he used the phrase I'm not saying he

28

used the exact phrase, but in the context of the discussion a phrase along the

29

lines it will cost you, we had a discussion and as a result of that discussion

11:11:08 30

I agreed a thousand pounds. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:11:13

11:11:30

35 1

Q. 259

I think we saw a moment ago Mr. Dunlop, for the period 1st of November 92 to

2

31st October 93 that you had a declared gross turnover of in excess of 400,000

3

pounds?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 260

Your turnover here would have been a sum of 2,500 pounds less 1,000 pounds?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 261

It was a very small project, profit wise for Frank Dunlop and Associates?

8

A.

So that one, I don't appear to be inherently contradicting myself as we

9

proceed, when you ask me was it a big project, yes it was a big project in the

11:11:54 10

context of the acreage and location, 54 acres in Malahide.

11

Q. 262

A very big project from Mr. Walls point of view I suspect?

12

A.

Sorry.

13

Q. 263

I suspect a big project from Mr. Walls point of view?

14

A.

Undoubtedly, without question. In the context of the dating and the timing it

11:12:10 15

was towards the end of the plan and I think all parties believed, excluding

16

Mr. Walls, but I think all councillors including Sean Gilbride and myself on

17

advice by the councillors was that this wasn't going to be a great runner.

18

Q. 264

19 11:12:35 20

21

But you had very little left over having paid Mr. Walls, having paid your VAT Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right?

A.

Correct, yes.

Q. 265

And yet you were approving Mr. Walls submissions to the councillors and you

22

were canvassing and lobbying councillors for their support?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 266

Could you be mistaken Mr. Dunlop in your recollection that you did not receive

11:12:54 25

26

five thousand pounds in addition to the invoiced sum from Mr. Walls? A.

27 28

Mr. Walls by cash or by any other means, directly or indirectly. Q. 267

29 11:13:25 30

No I have already said Mr. Quinn, I did not receive five thousand pounds from

Just to confirm Mr. Dunlop, my understanding of what you are saying, you say you paid Mr. Gilbride in cash?

A.

Oh, yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:13:27

11:13:31

36 1

Q. 268

It wasn't a cheque?

2

A.

Oh no.

3

Q. 269

Thank you very much Mr. Dunlop.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

All right. Mr. Collins do you wish to?

6 7

Mr. Collins: I don't Chairman thank you very much.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

11:13:52 10

Mr. Gilbride you don't wish to cross examine? Sorry Mr. Redmond do

you want to ask your client any questions.

11 12

MR. REDMOND: Just one or two housekeeping errors I want to clarify.

13 14

FRANK DUNLOP WAS EXAMINED AS FOLLOWS BY MR REDMOND:

11:13:58 15

16

Q. 270

Mr. Dunlop when you came to prepare your statement in October 2000 this was

17

after the private sessions and effectively everything has changed, business is

18

not going to be the way it was, there are going to be consequences for the

19

route that you have chosen, is that not the case?

11:14:12 20

21

A.

Correct.

Q. 271

In the course of preparing that statement did you make a decision that you were

22

not going to involve your remaining staff in your investigations and preparing

23

a statement in relation to things which might cause embarrassment?

24

A.

11:14:30 25

of what I was going to be asked I was going to do to the best of my ability I

26 27

was going to answer it. Q. 272

28 29 11:14:43 30

I didn't make any such conscious decision, I just decided that in the context

Yes but did you decide to prepare the statement on your own without the assistance of your remaining staff?

A.

Yes, I prepared the statement on my own.

Q. 273

That was a conscious decision on your part it was going to be your own exercise Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:14:47

11:14:59

37 1

and not rely on other members of staff in your premises?

2

A.

Correct.

3

Q. 274

Just one other thing by way of context, by the time you were meeting

4

Mr. Gilbride in relation to this development there were quite a number of

5

developments and projects which were coming to fruition?

6

A.

Correct.

7

Q. 275

And is it the case that when you were meeting with councillors with whom you

8

had dealings that your meetings would effectively have been generic, you would

9

rarely meet them in relation to just one thing or indeed if you met them it

11:15:15 10

would normally be the case that there would be many topics of conversation?

11

A.

The answer to that is yes.

12

Q. 276

Right so in that circumstance it wouldn't be unusual then in meeting Mr

13

Gilbride if on what we would have referred to euphemistically as the first

14

meeting in relation to this development that you didn't particularly raise the

11:15:31 15

issue of a motion because you knew you would have ongoing meetings, ongoing

16

dealings and there were many things to discuss?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q. 277

Thank you.

19 11:15:40 20

CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Dunlop, back in April when you were giving evidence initially

21

in relation to this project, I think you told the Tribunal that in your view

22

Mr. Walls knew that councillors were going to have to be paid?

23

A.

Yes.

24 11:16:01 25

CHAIRMAN:

Although there was nothing specifically said on the subject, but

26

this was a feeling that you had. You then went on to agree a fee of 2500. At

27

that time were you aware or did you know yourself how many councillors were

28

likely to have to be paid?

29 11:16:26 30

A.

No, I wasn't so aware. However just for ease of your question, I was aware however that it would be, I would have to approach in the first instance the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:16:31

11:16:41

38 1

local councillors and that that would dictate what occurred afterwards.

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

4

councillors?

5

A.

But for all you knew, you might have to pay three or four or five

That is correct.

6 7

CHAIRMAN:

8

opinion councillors would have to be paid why wasn't there a discussion then as

9

to the likely requirement for additional funds?

11:17:08 10

A.

And was there, if Mr. Walls was aware at that meeting that in your

Well first of all the, in answer to that I had never met Mr. Walls before. I

11

did not know Mr. Walls, he was introduced to me by a person that I did know who

12

had come to me on previous occasions in relation to other matters in relation

13

to the Development Plan. And Chairman, as I think I have given evidence in

14

another Module, I think it was the Ballycullen Module, I said that it is with

11:17:32 15

trepidation that one entered into this field with somebody that you did not

16

know unless the matter was raised directly with you, with me in other words,

17

which it wasn't and there was no such discussion.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

11:17:52 20

21

But to what, when you say that you were satisfied yourself that

they knew, was that a, a strong view that you held at the time and if so why? A.

22

Well, yes, it was a strong view that I held at the time and the reason why is both the context, the people present and the demeanour.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

11:18:18 25

26

Well why not then, there would have been no embarrassment then in

raising it in some shape or form? A.

Well I certainly wasn't going raise it. It would be a different story,

27

Chairman, I suggest to you, that if Mr. Walls had raised it with me and had

28

said something to the effect, which I hasten to add he did not, I know that you

29

are going to have to pay councillor X and councillor Y so much money or I have

11:18:38 30

already had discussions with councillor X and you will have to, I will pay you Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:18:41

11:18:56

39 1

and you will have to give money, there was no such discussion and I certainly

2

was not going to raise the issue with somebody that I never met. However, in

3

this particular instance as I have pointed out, this individual was introduced

4

to me by a person that I already had dealings with.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

But in the event at any rate, you paid a thousand pounds you say to

7

one councillor and why didn't you go back and seek to recover that, because it

8

was, it was nearly 50 per cent of the -- if you were aware or if you believed

9

strongly believed yourself that Mr. Walls was aware that you were going to have

11:19:24 10

to pay a councillor or more than one councillor, what was the, what was the,

11

what stopped you going back and saying "I have incurred an outlay of 1,000

12

pounds or whatever"?

13

A.

14

Well, in the context of the arrangement that I'd arrived at with Mr. Walls there was a success fee which was, I had suggested was ten which Mr. Walls and

11:19:49 15

I accept as I said to --

16 17 18

CHAIRMAN: A.

But that would depend?

On success, exactly yes.

19 11:19:55 20

CHAIRMAN:

21 22

But this was an outlay that you were incurring which was nearly 50

per cent of your fee? A.

Yes.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

11:20:06 25

26

You say that you were satisfied in your own mind that Mr. Walls

knew that this sort of outlay would be incurred? A.

Well I think what I said Chairman -- sorry.

27 28

CHAIRMAN:

29

back to him and say "I have incurred a thousand pounds?"

11:20:22 30

A.

Yes. Why not go back to him, if you were so satisfied, why not go

Well, I might well have considered going back and saying I incur a thousand Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:20:28

11:20:42

40 1

pounds and used some sort of shibboleth or subterfuge to describe it but I

2

certainly wouldn't have gone back and said to Mr. Walls listen I have incurred

3

a thousand pounds because I have to give Sean a thousand.

4 5

CHAIRMAN:

6

the dirty words so to speak, but why not go back and say I incurred expenses of

7

a thousand pounds if you believed you all knew what you were talking about?

8

A.

9

Absolutely, and I can understand why you mightn't want to mention

I accept the logic of your question but I did not do that and I hope Mr. Walls would attest to that, that I never discussed payments to anybody or had any

11:21:05 10

other discussions with him other than the discussions in relation to the fee

11

and the negotiated success fee.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

14

Mr. Walls didn't know anything about the practice that you intended to engage

11:21:25 15

16

But would that not make it look likely to an observer that well

in? A.

17

Well, again I think I used the word context about a minute ago, this is in early January of 1993, the Development Plan is nearly finished.

18 19

CHAIRMAN:

11:21:39 20

for the moment about the initial meeting, the fact that you didn't go back to

21 22

No, but the fact that you didn't, I am talking about really, forget

him? A.

Yes, sorry.

23 24

CHAIRMAN:

11:21:52 25

26 27

Might be suggested to many, that there was no reason why he would

have expected to you go back looking for additional sums that you had to pay? A.

Well, the only answer I can give you there Chairman is I can't account for what other people might or might not.

28 29 11:22:09 30

CHAIRMAN:

But if he believed, if Mr. Walls understood you were going to pay

him money, equally he would expect you to come back and seek to recover sums Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:22:14

11:22:23

41 1

that you would have to pay, particularly if they took a substantial percentage

2

out of your fee?

3

A.

Yes, I accept the logic of that, yes.

4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY:

6

that despite you saying in your October 2000 statement that it was the best of

7

your recollection and belief that Mr. Walls had paid you five thousand pounds

8

and that I think you repeat that had in Carrick 1 Module under

9

cross-examination?

11:22:47 10

A.

Just to ask you Mr. Dunlop, we have already heard from you

Yes.

11 12

JUDGE FAHERTY:

13

and a half plus VAT?

14

A.

You have said today that's not the case and that you got two

Plus VAT, yes.

11:22:56 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

know to you giving Mr. Gilbride a thousand pounds?

18

A.

In the same statement in October 2000 you make reference as we

Yes.

19 11:23:05 20

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Given that you have revised your statement or your, you have

21

now been telling us that you in fact only ever get two and a half plus VAT from

22

Mr. Walls, in light of that, that you have changed if you like your evidence,

23

certainly on one occasion it was otherwise by way of list you said it was five

24

thousand pounds isn't that correct?

11:23:32 25

A.

Correct.

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY:

28

was Mr. Gilbride that you paid as you allege, or that you gave him a thousand

29

pounds, given that you have revised the sums vis-a-vis Mr. Walls?

11:23:50 30

A.

Just in that context then, how can you be so sure that A it

Yes. Well, in answer the only thing I can say judge in answer to Mr. Quinn I Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:23:55

11:24:02

42 1

said Mr. Gilbride was the person I dealt with in the context of the signature.

2 3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

We know he signed the motion?

Yes.

5 6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

But how can you be sure that you paid him a thousand pounds?

I did. I am.

8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11:24:14 10

11

Now just on that point then, this was a fairly small piece of

work within a definite time period? A.

Mm-hmm.

12 13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

We are talking about January to May?

Correct yes.

11:24:20 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY:

17

that Mr. Gilbride signs was withdrawn on the 4th May, so it can't be, you have

18

given us evidence in other Module that on occasions persons you allege you

19

bribed or paid were paid either at the time of the signing of the motion or

11:24:42 20

sometimes after the motion was moved or be it lost or won as the case may be,

21 22

Isn't that right? So it's four months. We know the motion

well obviously that didn't happen in this case? A.

Correct.

23 24

JUDGE FAHERTY:

11:24:59 25

allege you paid Mr. Gilbride, it would appear that it's a shorter time frame,

26 27

So given that it would appear that you say you paid, well you

how come you can't be more definite? A.

More definite about what?

28 29 11:25:15 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Well about the circumstances in which you met Mr. Gilbride and

where exactly you paid him, as you allege? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:25:18

11:25:39

43 1

A.

Well, what I have said and again in answer to Mr. Quinn in relation to the list

2

he put up of the number of meetings that I had and the number of telephone

3

calls that took place with Mr. Gilbride, I had regular contact with Mr.

4

Gilbride, and the only thing that I can say is without being categorically

5

specific, is that either, it was either on the signature of the -- on the

6

motion, signing of the motion or shortly there afterwards in a location that I

7

normally met Sean Gilbride, I normally met him in the environs of the Dublin

8

County Council or at a local hotel. I did meet him in his home on at least one

9

occasion on which I paid him money, but on this occasion I cannot be that

11:26:04 10

specific. And the reason I can be specific about the first one in his home at

11

the time, in 1991 is because it was for such a large amount.

12 13

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14

now that you were in receipt of funds from Mr. Walls, Walls Properties, by

11:26:27 15

16

But in this context you say, we know I think from the records

early March? A.

Yes.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

cheque, isn't that correct?

11:26:33 20

A.

That would have been in your mind, you would have gotten the

Got the cheque on the 1st March, yes.

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY:

23

if, as you say, you were disposed to paying Mr. Gilbride, given that you would

24

have known back in 1993 the amount of money that you had billed for, did you

11:26:55 25

So you knew you were in funds if you like from Mr. Walls and

not, the chairman already said to you that in fact almost half of what you

26

billed for effectively, excluding the VAT, was actually going to be part, you

27

were parting with on your evidence?

28 29 11:27:20 30

A.

Yes. JUDGE FAHERTY: And in the context that you say you had, you received this money, and you say you must have spoken to Mr. Gilbride at some point in the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:27:25

11:27:34

44 1 2

lead up to the motion? A.

I did, I did speak to him, yes.

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

will say to sign the motion.

6

A.

We know that. I think Mr. Gilbride will confirm you met, he

To sign the motion, yes.

7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY:

That you can't recollect ever, the context of any conversation

9

you might have had regarding money, because you would have been in receipt of

11:27:47 10

funds. And the Chairman already put to you that it would seem an extraordinary

11

amount of money, in proportion to the actual amount that you were receiving, on

12

your evidence, from Mr. Walls?

13

A.

Yes.

14 11:28:01 15

16

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

That you can't put, you can't be any more definite about it?

Other than to say to you that I did have a conversation with Mr. Gilbride.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

wondering what is the context of the negotiation. As I understand it you have

11:28:17 20

21

You said there was negotiation as I understand. I am

already said you had a relationship with Mr. Gilbride? A.

Correct.

22 23

JUDGE FAHERTY:

24

that that can only mean as to amount, because you are saying that Mr. Gilbride

11:28:32 25

had a, you haven't used these words, but he had a modus or would say a certain

26 27

Therefore in the context of negotiation I am surmising here

thing and you would know what he meant? A.

Yes.

28 29 11:28:43 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

So therefore there would be no negotiation as to what he meant

because you would know what he meant? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:28:45

11:28:55

45 1

A.

Yes.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

4

negotiation then, it could only really be about amount?

5

A.

So what I am asking you Mr. Dunlop is if you say there is

Money.

6 7

JUDGE FAHERTY:

8

were in funds on the beginning of March you say and you had to, you had your

9

brief from Mr. Walls, and you are meeting Mr. Gilbride, how you can't be able

11:29:09 10

I am just saying, if this had to happen between the time you

to, you aren't able to assist the Tribunal in the context of what that

11

negotiation entailed, given that it could only be about the amount of money,

12

not the fact that you would give money on your evidence obviously, Mr. Gilbride

13

denies that he ever received such monies from you, on any occasion as I

14

understand it. But I am just asking you why you can't be specific about the

11:29:33 15

essence of the negotiations that can only be about amount, if your evidence is

16 17

correct? A.

Well again I don't wish to just repeat ad nauseum what I said to Mr. Quinn, but

18

there was a discussion with Sean Gilbride, obviously he became a crucial

19

ingredient in the whole affair because he was going to be the signatory. He

11:29:54 20

had he and I had a modus operandi, he used a phrase and I am not suggesting he

21

used it all the time, there were variations of it, but the essence and the nub

22

it have was in the context "this is going cost you", arising from that then

23

there was a discussion. I have given evidence previously, judge, and doubtless

24

will give evidence again in other modules in relation to paying councillors. I

11:30:23 25

would say any payment to a councillor, either for a signature or support for a

26

particular motion that was less than a thousand pounds would be in the minimum,

27

would be in the lower end of the scale. Most motions, and I have given

28

evidence to the effect that there was, while not official, if I can use that

29

word in it's broadest sense, a rate for signature and support and that it

11:30:50 30

ranged from a thousand pounds upwards. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:30:54

11:30:58

46 1 2

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Very well. Thank you.

3 4

CHAIRMAN: All right thank you, Mr. Dunlop.

5

We might just take a break for ten minutes.

6 7

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR A SHORT BREAK

8

AND RESUMED AGAIN AS FOLLOWS

9 11:31:46 10

11 12

MR. MURPHY:

Chairman, Mr. Gilbride please.

13 SEAN GILBRIDE, HAVING BEEN SWORN WAS EXAMINED.

14 11:55:04 15

AS FOLLOWS BY MR. MURPHY:

16 17 18

CHAIRMAN: Q. 278

19

Good morning Mr. Gilbride.

Morning Mr. Gilbride. Mr. Gilbride, Mr. Dunlop has given evidence and has just finished just a few minutes ago, I think you have been sitting in the back of

11:55:39 20

the room is that right?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 279

You have heard his evidence?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 280

One of the central matters in this entire Kinsealy lands Module is what

11:55:52 25

Mr. Dunlop has been saying this morning, namely his allegation that on the 18th

26

March 1993 or shortly thereafter, he paid you a thousand pounds. He has said

27

this consistently since October 2000 and he says that he paid it to you in

28

cash. He can't be more precise about when than what I have just outlined to

29

you and he can't be specific about where but it would have been in the environs

11:56:23 30

of the County Council or a local hotel. Could I just ask you what you say to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:56:28

11:56:43

47 1 2

all of that please? A.

3

That didn't happen. I didn't get any money for signing that motion from Mr. Dunlop or anyone else.

4

Q. 281

Are you absolutely certain about that Mr. Gilbride?

5

A.

I am. I am absolutely certain about it.

6

Q. 282

What makes you so certain?

7

A.

Because, on that particular motion and my recollection is fairly good about it,

8

I took a phone call from Paul Walls office, from Paul, asking me to meet

9

Mr. Dunlop in the council that evening, it was the last day for motions to go

11:57:06 10

in and I think it was about 5 o'clock that Mr. Dunlop came in with the motion

11

and the maps, I signed them and brought them up and handed them myself to

12

Sinead Collins who would have been the administrative officer, that was it. As

13

far as I remember I didn't have any discussions with Mr. Dunlop about that

14

motion beforehand, it was a phone call from Mr. Walls asking me would I sign

11:57:28 15

16

them. Q. 283

17

All right. Your evidence anyway Mr. Gilbride is clearly that you received no money in relation to this, this particular motion?

18

A.

That's right yes.

19

Q. 284

Either for signing the motion or for anything else?

A.

No.

Q. 285

Now Mr. Gilbride, you have furnished three statements to the Tribunal, they

11:57:45 20

21 22

are short and I think the most expeditious way of dealing with it might be if I

23

go through them with you and just confirm that they are your statements and

24

what you say.

11:58:10 25

26

If I could have page 253 please? This is a letter dated 19th February 2001

27

from the Tribunal to you and if you just go down to where it says the letter A,

28

if I read the paragraph before "The Tribunal is investigating the following

29

information which has come to it's attention in respect of which it is the

11:58:38 30

intention of the sole member to hear sworn testimony at a public hearing of the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

11:58:41

11:59:07

48 1

Tribunal. A, that between 1990 and 1994 you received money directly or

2

indirectly on a number of occasions from Frank Dunlop in connection with" and

3

if we go over to page 254 please and at Roman numeral 8 you see there "Your

4

support for the proposed rezoning of lands at Kinsealy lane (Paul Wall lands)"

5

that's what you are being asked by the Tribunal at that time Mr. Gilbride,

6

isn't that right?

7

A.

I can't see that -- 8 you say --

8

Q. 286

Sorry if we are on --

9

A.

Yes, the top of the page, sorry. Yes.

Q. 287

We are on 254, you see that?

11

A.

Yes I do, yes.

12

Q. 288

If we can turn to page 256 please? You say there "in reply to your letter of

11:59:26 10

13

the 19 February I wish to make the following points A 1 Frank Dunlop gave me a

14

donation of 2,000 before the local election in 1991. It did not have anything

11:59:51 15

to do with my support for Quarryvale or any other rezoning." Now the next bit

16

is what, this is your answer "As regards to the other rezonings I supported

17

them all as I also supported other rezonings not mentioned here. My reason for

18

supporting the other rezonings are" then if you go down a little bit to Roman

19

numeral 8 you will see "Lobbied by developer Paul Wall?"

12:00:15 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 289

So that's what you have said to the Tribunal in that, that's your first

22

statement?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 290

That you were lobbied by Paul Wall, isn't that right?

A.

That's right yes.

Q. 291

Thank you. Now if we could go to page 259 please? And this is your second

12:00:21 25

26 27

statement and it's dated the 30th September 2003 and it says "Dear Ms. Gribbin

28

solicitor to the Tribunal, I received no payments from Frank Dunlop, Frank

29

Dunlop and Associates or Shefran Limited in cash or otherwise in 1993" is that

12:00:56 30

right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:00:57

12:01:10

49 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 292

And then it goes on to say "I have no great recollection of any meetings with

3

Frank Dunlop, I would have met him at the County Council offices in O'Connell

4

Street on the odd occasion. I remember having lunch with Mr. Dunlop once

5

during the summer but I cannot, but I am not sure if that was 1993" is that

6

right?

7

A.

That's right, yes.

8

Q. 293

That's your second statement?

9

A.

That's right.

Q. 294

Thank you. And your final statement which is the 8th April 2006, if we can

12:01:18 10

11

have page 1143 please and that letter, your letter is dated, your letter is

12

dated 8th April 2006 and refers to lands at Kinsealy and lands at Seatown,

13

that's just above, if we can just move up to above "Dear Mr. King lands at

14

Kinsealy, land at Seatown, "Dear Mr. King, I have known Paul Walls since 1973

12:01:56 15

when we were both members of the Fianna Fail Cumann in" is that Skerries?

16

A.

Skerries yes.

17

Q. 295

"Mr. Walls contacted me in 1993 regarding his lands at Seatown and Kinsealy. I

18

advised him to get the local councillors to sign a motion for these lands. He

19

contacted me later on and asked me if I would sign the motion as time was

12:02:16 20

running out for them. I agreed do this but told him that he would have to get

21

the backing of the local councillors if it was to go any further" is that

22

correct?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 296

"To the best of my recollection I received a phone call from Mr. Walls on the

12:02:31 25

18th March 1993 asking me to meet Mr. Dunlop at Dublin County Council offers to

26

sign the motion. I have no great recollection of the motion regarding Seatown

27

but I know I did sign it at the request of Mr. Walls.

28 29 12:02:52 30

I received no political contribution or payments from anyone connected with these lands apart from a donation of 2,000 which I received from Mr. Dunlop at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:02:57

12:03:07

50 1

the time of the 1991 local elections" is that right Mr. Gilbride?

2

A.

That's correct.

3

Q. 297

All right I am going to separate two things for a second. I am going to

4

separate the lands at Kinsealy and the lands at Seatown, the land at Seatown

5

will be very brief and I will do those afterwards. Just in relation to the

6

Kinsealy lands, Mr. Gilbride, the position is if we go back to 1993 that you

7

had known Mr. Walls for a long time?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 298

Is that right?

A.

Yes.

11

Q. 299

Back to the 70s?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 300

You were both members of the Fianna Fail Cumann, is that right?

14

A.

That's right.

Q. 301

All right. And I think you did not know Mr. Dunlop until 1993, is that right?

16

A.

About 1991.

17

Q. 302

Sorry 1991, I beg your pardon, sorry, yes of course. Now Mr. Gilbride, can you

12:03:22 10

12:03:30 15

18

help us in relation to what the first contact with you was in relation to these

19

lands and the question of signing the motion?

12:04:07 20

A.

The lands at Kinsealy now.

21

Q. 303

Kinsealy?

22

A.

Yes. I had talked to Mr. Walls about the lands at Seatown, now I can't

23

remember if at the time I talked to him about Seatown that I signed for him, if

24

he mentioned the lands at Kinsealy, presumably he did. And as I said earlier,

12:04:32 25

on the 18th March some time in the afternoon I received a phone call from

26

Mr. Walls asking would I meet Mr. Dunlop to sign the motion for the lands at

27

Kinsealy, I met him about 5 o'clock I think in the council offices, signed the

28

motion and brought it up and gave it to Sinead Collins.

29 12:05:00 30

Q. 304

Yes. Sorry I have to trespass, you had discussed Seatown briefly with Mr. Walls? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:05:01

12:05:10

51 1

A.

Seatown, yes.

2

Q. 305

Yes. All right. You are not sure if you discussed Kinsealy at that time?

3

A.

I am not sure, no.

4

Q. 306

All right. You have told us about this phone call on the 18th March?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q. 307

All right. And when you say in your first statement that your reason for being

7

in favour of the rezoning of Kinsealy was that you were lobbied by Mr. Walls?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 308

What did you mean by that?

A.

That he had contacted me, and asked me to support it.

11

Q. 309

That he had contacted you?

12

A.

He had contacted me.

13

Q. 310

Yes. Can you remember what he said, was it --

14

A.

Not offhand, I mean he was asking for my support in fact signing the motion.

Q. 311

Yes, yes. Now Mr. Dunlop, you will have heard him give evidence this morning,

12:05:31 10

12:05:50 15

16

saying that he had a number of discussions with you before the 18th March?

17

A.

Not, not on Kinsealy no.

18

Q. 312

Not in relation to Kinsealy?

19

A.

No.

Q. 313

You did have a considerable amount of contact with Mr. Dunlop, isn't that

12:06:08 20

21

right?

22

A.

Yes did I.

23

Q. 314

He said you had a very good relationship going back to 1991?

24

A.

Yes.

Q. 315

So around this time March 1993 you were having a fair bit of contact with

12:06:18 25

26

Mr. Dunlop?

27

A.

Yes.

28

Q. 316

Is it your evidence to the Tribunal that at no point was, did he discuss

29 12:06:31 30

Kinsealy? A.

No, sorry -- my recollection is that on this particular one, Kinsealy lands, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:06:38

12:06:59

52 1

that Mr. Paul Walls phoned me and asked me to meet Mr. Dunlop and to sign the

2

motion, I had no discussion with Mr. Dunlop about it at all.

3

Q. 317

Yes. Now I understand what you are say about your phone call on the 18th March

4

from Mr. Walls, but could I just ask you for a moment, are you absolutely clear

5

in your evidence that there was no discussion, you had no discussion about this

6

matter with Mr. Dunlop prior to the 18th March or could you be uncertain about

7

it or could you be mistaken?

8

A.

9

Mr. Dunlop, my discussion would have been with Mr. Walls and the reason I

12:07:22 10

remember that probably so well is it was the last possible day to get the

11 12

motion in and it was a sense of urgency about it. Q. 318

13 14

I won't say absolutely certain, but very certain that I had no discussion with

Yes. Mr. Dunlop says that he was retained to lobby councillors in relation to this motion, isn't that right?

A.

Yes.

Q. 319

You are not disputing that I take it?

16

A.

I am not disputing that, I don't know anything about it.

17

Q. 320

He was so retained in many other, in relation to many other Modules?

18

A.

Mm-hmm.

19

Q. 321

You assisted he would have lobbied in many other lands, motions.

12:07:51 20

Q. 322

Isn't that right?

21

A.

That's right yes.

22

Q. 323

Would it not be unusual for him to leave you out in relation to this one Mr.

12:07:37 15

23 24

Gilbride? A.

12:08:03 25

I don't know. I don't want to repeat myself ad nauseum but on this particular one.

26

Q. 324

Yes?

27

A.

It was Mr. Walls who asked me.

28

Q. 325

All right. Mr. Walls asked you and Mr. Dunlop did not?

29

A.

Yes.

Q. 326

Can you think of any reason why Mr. Dunlop mightn't have approached you,

12:08:10 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:08:15

12:08:37

53 1 2

mightn't have lobbied you about Kinsealy? A.

Well no particular reason, I presume he was, would have been gone to the locals

3

first. I got the phone call, it was the last evening, that's why I remember

4

it. To get them signed, they hadn't been signed, I signed it.

5

Q. 327

Yes. So sorry for labouring this a little bit Mr. Gilbride, but just again

6

before the 18th March, if I can put to you, Mr. Dunlop's evidence, that on some

7

occasion before the 18th March he met you, and discussed this motion with you

8

and in the course of that you would have said to him "It's going to cost you"

9

or words to that effect, or something similar, I think you probably understand

12:09:06 10

the meaning of what I am saying?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 328

And did that conversation take place?

13

A.

No that conversation --

14

Q. 329

Before the 18th?

A.

No or on the 18th of March either.

16

Q. 330

Or after?

17

A.

Or after.

18

Q. 331

All right. So it follows from that that Mr. Dunlop is at least mistaken in

12:09:15 15

19 12:09:33 20

21

giving that evidence, as far as you are concerned, is that right? A.

Yes, that's right.

Q. 332

Can you think of any reason Mr. Gilbride why he would pick out in this way, why

22

he would identify you as a person with whom he had this conversation and to

23

whom he, on the 18th March or shortly afterwards, paid a sum of a thousand

24

pounds?

12:09:49 25

26

A.

I have no idea.

Q. 333

So if he is doing it, sorry if you are correct and you weren't paid that money

27

and therefore Mr. Dunlop is not correct in saying, not telling the truth when

28

he says he paid you a thousand, you can't think of any reason why he might do

29

that?

12:10:08 30

A.

I can't think of any reason. I could think of a lot of reasons but it's not my Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:10:13

12:10:37

54 1

job to give a reason. I was friendly with Mr. Dunlop, to my regret, as far as

2

I am concerned now, I don't know why he is saying he gave me that money or any

3

other money either.

4

Q. 334

Yes. But if it's false what he is saying, that he ever, if it's wrong when he

5

says he paid you on different occasions and in particular on this, you can't

6

think of any particular reason, he has no particular grudge against you that

7

you were aware of or anything like that?

8

A.

9 12:11:08 10

No not that I am aware of, no, not that I am aware of. I was quite friendly with Mr. Dunlop at the time.

Q. 335

In relation, Mr. Gilbride, then to the signing of the motion on the 18th March?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 336

Page 177 please? When you met Mr. Dunlop?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 337

On, did you say about 5 o'clock on the 18th March?

A.

Yes, I think it was 5 o'clock yes.

16

Q. 338

This had to be in by 5 o'clock, is that right?

17

A.

6 I'd say.

18

Q. 339

Six, all right. And Mr. Walls had phoned you and asked you would you turn up

12:11:36 15

19 12:11:49 20

and sign the motion? A.

21 22

a phone call in Dublin County Council. Q. 340

23 24 12:12:18 25

26

A.

I had contact with Mr. Walls previously regarding Seatown.

Q. 341

Yes?

A.

And -- I can't recollect whether Seatown or Kinsealy was mentioned at the time or Seatown, I just can't recollect.

Q. 342

29 12:12:32 30

All right. Was that phone call more or less out of the blue then, as far as you were concerned?

27 28

Yes, I was at a meeting in Dublin County Council that particular day and I got

Yes. We'll come to Seatown in a moment, you signed those motions three days earlier?

A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:12:33

12:12:40

55 1

Q. 343

But when you were phoned in the council on that particular day?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q. 344

Very much at the last minute?

4

A.

It was at the last minute yes.

5

Q. 345

That's why you recall it or one of the reasons?

6

A.

Yes.

7

Q. 346

Do you recall if it was out of the blue, were you surprised to be getting this

8 9

phone call at the last minute like this? A.

12:12:56 10

I was surprised that it was going in so late, but whether I was surprised at getting a phone call or not, I don't know.

11

Q. 347

All right. And did Mr. Dunlop -- where did you meet him?

12

A.

I met him in the Fianna Fail rooms in the County Council offices.

13

Q. 348

All right. So you knew you were to meet him and presumably you knew he would

14 12:13:13 15

be expecting you is that right? A.

I didn't that's right.

16

Q. 349

And did he just present you with the Notice of Motion?

17

A.

Notice of Motion and the map.

18

Q. 350

All right. Just looking at 177 there the Notice of Motion, what is your

19 12:13:29 20

21

contribution to that, is it just your signatures? A.

My signature, yes.

Q. 351

Yes. Mr. Dunlop, I think, said in his statement that he thought the date was

22

not his writing, is it your writing?

23

A.

It's my writing.

24

Q. 352

All right so you signed it and you wrote the date?

A.

Yes.

Q. 353

All right. And if we go over to 178 please? Is that your signature on the

12:13:41 25

26 27

map?

28

A.

It is yes.

29

Q. 354

Now Mr. Dunlop thinks he wrote the date here?

A.

Yeah, it doesn't look like mine.

12:14:04 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:14:06

12:14:14

56 1

Q. 355

It doesn't look like yours?

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 356

All right. So that was at the very -- sorry then you delivered it, is that

4

right?

5

A.

Yes as far as -- I delivered it to Sinead Collins.

6

Q. 357

All right. And so at the very last moment that's that. The motion is signed

7

by you, that's the important thing?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 358

And you met Mr. Dunlop in the Fianna Fail room?

A.

That's right.

11

Q. 359

And did that meeting just take a matter of moments to sign?

12

A.

Moments. And I left and went up and handed in the motion and the maps.

13

Q. 360

All right. All right. Did you have any discussion about the chances, with

12:14:26 10

14 12:14:43 15

Mr. Dunlop about the chances? A.

16 17

think so. There wasn't any time. Q. 361

18 19 12:14:58 20

Not at the time no. Not at the time, I may have said something but I don't

Yes. And was there, did Mr. Dunlop hand you a thousand pounds in cash on that day?

A.

Did he not.

Q. 362

No. Mr. Gilbride, what happened subsequently then, between that and the 4th

21

May, did you first of all did you meet Mr. Dunlop on any occasion after --

22

A.

I may have.

23

Q. 363

You may have?

24

A.

Probably did. He came to the County Council a lot. As far as I remember I

12:15:25 25

think I would have talked to my Fianna Fail colleagues in Malahide, Portmarnock

26

area and asked them what they thought and they weren't in favour.

27

Q. 364

Yes, are they the local people?

28

A.

Yes, they are the local.

29

Q. 365

Who are they?

A.

Michael Kennedy and GV Wright.

12:15:38 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:15:41

12:15:48

57 1

Q. 366

Yes. They weren't in favour?

2

A.

No.

3

Q. 367

And did you say to Mr. Dunlop or did you say to someone that you thought it

4 5

wasn't a runner? A.

6 7

it was great, I did it as a favour to Mr. Walls. Q. 368

8 9

A.

then and people would have seen it and would have talked about it then. Q. 369

13

12:16:27 15

16

I didn't know it already but we'll say when the motions would have been sent out from the County Council offices to the councillors it would have arisen

11

14

Yes. How quickly did you think did you discover all of that or did you know it already?

12:16:09 10

12

Yes, I mean when they hadn't drew local support at the beginning I didn't think

Yes. Did you go and specifically discuss it with the two councillors Mr. Kennedy and who did you say, Mr. GV Wright?

A.

Yeah.

Q. 370

Do you remember --

A.

I would say I met them in the council and would have said what do you think and

17

they said no, that would have been it.

18

Q. 371

Would that be it?

19

A.

That would be it, yes.

Q. 372

Now, did you report that back to Mr. Walls?

A.

I can't remember reporting it back to Mr. Walls I must say, you know. I may

12:16:36 20

21 22

have, but I can't remember that, I probably did.

23

Q. 373

Do you remember reporting it back to Mr. Dunlop?

24

A.

Yes more than likely, yes. I don't remember reporting it back, but I'd say

12:16:58 25

26

more than likely I did, yes. Q. 374

27

In relation to Mr. Dunlop, the first time you met him about Kinsealy, sorry the first time you met him about Kinsealy was the 18th March?

28

A.

That's right yes.

29

Q. 375

Would you have discussed Kinsealy with Mr. Dunlop between 18th March and 4th

12:17:14 30

May? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:17:14

12:17:32

58 1

A.

2 3

Probably yes, I probably would have told him that the local councillors weren't in favour.

Q. 376

4

Yes. And how did the decision not to move the motion come about, was that a decision that was taken on the 4th May or before?

5

A.

I'd say probably before it actually.

6

Q. 377

And can you assist the Tribunal as to how that decision, was it a question of

7

you talking to Mr. Walls or Mr. Dunlop or -- I mean presumably Mr. Walls would

8

have taken the decision?

9

A.

12:18:01 10

11

any sense in going ahead with it. Q. 378

12 13

Right. Would somebody, did somebody come back to you and say look don't move the motion?

A.

14 12:18:27 15

I would have said I don't think this is going to make any progress, I don't see

I can't remember that. My only feeling about it would have been that I would have been reluctant to move it if it wasn't going to get local support.

Q. 379

Yes. But do you not recall somebody saying to you Mr. Gilbride, presumably --

16

A.

I might have said it myself.

17

Q. 380

Oh I see?

18

A.

You know.

19

Q. 381

You might have said you won't move it?

A.

Yes.

21

Q. 382

Okay. And --

22

A.

I'm not sure now on that particular thing, but my advice would have been not to

12:18:40 20

23 24

move it. Q. 383

12:19:06 25

Is your recollection, with whom do you recall dealing in respect of the Kinsealy lands Mr. Gilbride, was it Mr. Dunlop or was it Mr. Walls?

26

A.

Up to the signing of it, it was Mr. Walls.

27

Q. 384

Right. And then on the 18th March we know what happened?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 385

And after?

A.

After I may have discussed it with Mr. Dunlop, presumably I did, he had given

12:19:18 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:19:25

12:19:40

59 1

me the maps and things, but I wouldn't have any great recollection of it, you

2

know.

3

Q. 386

Well, I mean if you recall so well the 18th March when you signed it ...

4

A.

I do actually, I recall that well.

5

Q. 387

When you signed it at the last moment, surely it follows you remember what

6 7

happened particularly when it was a motion you ended up not moving? A.

8 9

Not really. The reason I recall so well the 18th March is that it was at the last minute, that's why I recall that.

Q. 388

Did you often withdraw motions?

A.

Yes I did yes. Withdrew a few.

11

Q. 389

How often?

12

A.

I remember withdrawing one on Skerries, I remember --

13

Q. 390

Were they few and far between?

14

A.

Sorry.

Q. 391

They were few?

16

A.

Oh, yes few.

17

Q. 392

Would you not remember the circumstances when that happened, you would sign a

12:19:57 10

12:20:14 15

18 19

motion and then you wouldn't move it, surely you would remember a bit more? A.

12:20:28 20

21

It wouldn't have been -- the reason for withdrawing it and not moving it would be that you'd know or guess that it wasn't going to get great support.

Q. 393

Yes. I follow that. Mr. Gilbride, Mr. Dunlop in his statement and probably in

22

evidence at some stage, not today, said that he didn't, that there was a system

23

in operation in the County Council in relation to certain councillors

24

requesting payment to sign a motion or to support a motion and he says that it

12:21:05 25

is a system that he didn't invent, that it predated him, are you aware of that?

26

A.

No, I am not.

27

Q. 394

Even in a general way?

28

A.

No, no.

29

Q. 395

You were on the council since 1985 I think?

A.

That's right, yes.

12:21:20 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:21:20

12:21:55

60 1

Q. 396

2

Were you ever aware of a councillor requesting or receiving money in return for a signature or a vote?

3

A.

No, I was not.

4

Q. 397

No. Now page 1017 please? I just want to refer you Mr. Gilbride to the other

5

two motions that you signed, this is the first one of them and I think this

6

relates to the lands on which Mr. Walls home was?

7

A.

That's right yes.

8

Q. 398

Do you recognise that Notice of Motion?

9

A.

Yes, I recognise my signature.

Q. 399

Is it your dates?

11

A.

It is yes.

12

Q. 400

All right. And could we go on then to page 1018 please? Is that your

12:22:10 10

13 14

signature? A.

It is yes.

Q. 401

And 1022?

16

A.

Yes, signature and date.

17

Q. 402

Is that your signature and your date?

18

A.

Yes, it is yes.

19

Q. 403

And then page 1023 your signature again?

A.

Yes.

Q. 404

Now, just in relation to that dealing with Seatown now for a second Mr.

12:22:25 15

12:22:45 20

21 22

Gilbride, because I think what you are saying is that you didn't really discuss

23

Kinsealy with Mr. Gilbride until he phoned you, with Mr. Walls until he phoned

24

you on the 18th March, but yet I think a moment ago I asked you in relation to

12:23:08 25

who you were dealing with and you said before the 18th March it was Mr. Walls?

26

A.

That's right.

27

Q. 405

But if we just deal with Seatown for a second?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 406

What's your recollection of Seatown and Mr. Walls coming to you about Seatown?

A.

My recollection is that he called up to my house and had the maps and the

12:23:19 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:23:30

12:23:45

61 1

motions and he asked me would I sign them and I did, that's my best

2

recollection of that.

3

Q. 407

How well, by March 93 -- were you friends?

4

A.

With Mr. Walls.

5

Q. 408

Walls?

6

A.

Oh, yes, we would have met on and off, I would have been quite friendly with

7 8

him, yes. Q. 409

9 12:23:58 10

he came to your house? A.

11 12

I'd say so yes. Swords would have been, it would have been plenty of time because the way the maps were going, Swords would have been after Malahide.

Q. 410

13 14

Well surely, sorry you signed this on the 15th March is that the date on which

Yes. And I mean surely Mr. Gilbride he didn't just turn up at your house with the motions and the maps?

A.

No, he would have phoned me beforehand.

Q. 411

Well, can you tell me did he phone you beforehand?

16

A.

I presume he did.

17

Q. 412

You don't recall?

18

A.

I don't recall but I presume he did because I wouldn't always be in the house.

19

Q. 413

Yes. But do you actually recall the occasion on which he called to the house

12:24:17 15

12:24:33 20

and you signed twice and you put the date twice?

21

A.

Yes I do, yes.

22

Q. 414

You do recall that?

23

A.

I recall that yes.

24

Q. 415

What?

A.

Yes I do recall that, yes.

26

Q. 416

Yes. You think that was on the 15th March?

27

A.

It was signed on the 15th March so I am assuming it was, yes.

28

Q. 417

Would there have been much discussion, would he have told you much, would he

12:24:40 25

29 12:24:57 30

have explained it to you or would there be much chat about it? A.

There wouldn't have been much chat, probably would have chatted generally, but Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:25:02

12:25:22

62 1

I would have known what he was coming for you know, and probably would have

2

told him as well that he would need local support on it.

3

Q. 418

Yeah. So and I take it those motions had to be in by the 18th March?

4

A.

No.

5

Q. 419

Were they later?

6

A.

I think they were later actually yes.

7

Q. 420

That's fine actually yes?

8

A.

I think they were.

9

Q. 421

But what you are saying on the 15th March he calls to your home?

A.

Yes.

11

Q. 422

You remember signing the two motions?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 423

And I mean why didn't he give you the other motion?

14

A.

I don't know.

Q. 424

I mean it was getting very urgent for the other one?

16

A.

Yes it was actually, yeah.

17

Q. 425

And obviously he had no signatory?

18

A.

No. Now he may have mentioned it to you to me at the time and I can't remember

12:25:30 10

12:25:39 15

19

it, he may have mentioned to me, my advice would all the time be to get the

12:25:55 20

locals to sign it, you know and probably, if he did mention it I would have

21

advised him that.

22

Q. 426

Yes, now but the locals to sign it would be Mr. GV Wright and Mr. Kennedy?

23

A.

That's right yes.

24

Q. 427

You knew almost immediately after the day the 18th March that it wasn't a

12:26:12 25

runner.

26

A.

Yes, after.

27

Q. 428

You went to Mr. GV Wright and he said no, isn't that right?

28

A.

I wouldn't know how long after the 18th March.

29

Q. 429

No of course?

A.

Before the 4th May.

12:26:23 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:26:28

12:26:49

63 1

Q. 430

Yes, but we know Mr. Walls had been working on this for a while and we know

2

from the evidence you didn't know this at this time, that he had retained

3

Mr. Dunlop?

4

A.

No, not when he came out to me with the Seatown one.

5

Q. 431

But you probably would have known on the 15th March that Mr. G V Wright and

6

Mr. Kennedy wouldn't sign this?

7

A.

Wouldn't sign.

8

Q. 432

Wouldn't sign this motion?

9

A.

Which one now are we talking about.

Q. 433

Kinsealy one, sorry, I beg your pardon?

11

A.

No, I didn't know that no.

12

Q. 434

Would you have known before you went to Mr. GV Wright asking what his view

12:27:00 10

13

would be on it, would you have realised he wasn't going to be in favour of the

14

Kinsealy rezoning?

12:27:14 15

16

A.

I would say the fact that he hadn't signed it would be an indication, you know.

Q. 435

Yes.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

relation to the Seatown Lands?

12:27:25 20

A.

Mr. Gilbride just before Mr. Murphy goes, can I ask you in

Yes.

21 22 23

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

Were they lands in your ward, were you a local councillor?

No they were not my ward no.

24 12:27:34 25

26

JUDGE FAHERTY: A.

I see, but you signed those.

I did, yes.

27 28

JUDGE FAHERTY:

29

see if you were there, you didn't tell him to go and look for a local

12:27:48 30

And when Mr. Walls came to you, probably after a telephone, to

councillor? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:27:48

12:27:59

64 1

A.

I may have. I may have.

2 3

JUDGE FAHERTY:

4

and they were already drawn up and they are dated the 15th now I am just saying

5

that in relation to Mr. Murphy asked you, put it to you that it seemed unusual

6

that Mr. Walls wouldn't have asked you to sign the Kinsealy motion on the 15th,

7

given that that was the most urgent one because the last date or entry for that

8

one was the 18th, and you said perhaps he did and you might have advised him to

9

go to local County Councillors. Obviously you think that's what you might have

12:28:27 10

11

Well, you say you think he came on the 15th with the motions

done but you can't say? A.

I think that's, more than likely that's what I would have done.

12 13

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14

your ward either, so you wouldn't be a local councillor for Seatown Lands?

12:28:39 15

A.

16

I am just asking you the Seatown Lands wouldn't have been in

Well at the time, I had already stood for the Dail a couple of times I knew the Swords area and Malahide.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

19

question, I accept being from the north side you would have known those areas

12:28:52 20

Absolutely, I don't doubt. That's not the purpose of my

very well, but I am saying you didn't give Mr. Walls, if you had given the

21

response you might you might have given him about the Kinsealy lands you didn't

22

give the same response, you signed the motions?

23

A.

24

About Seatown. I'm not too sure maybe he had asked some of the local Swords councillors to sign it and they hadn't.

12:29:13 25

26 27

JUDGE FAHERTY: Q. 436

I see. Sorry Mr. Murphy.

Mr. Gilbride, difficult to understand how Mr. Walls meeting you on the 15th

28

March asking to sign these two motions which had no urgency, wouldn't at least

29

mention the, just one second I'm sorry, the Kinsealy motion to you and the

12:29:35 30

trouble presumably he was having in getting a signatory? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:29:37

12:29:45

65 1

A.

He may have.

2

Q. 437

You couldn't forget that Mr. Gilbride?

3

A.

You'd be surprised what you can forget.

4

Q. 438

This is a very good friend of yours?

5

A.

Yes, he is a friend of mine.

6

Q. 439

And you are talking about signing motions in relation to his home and adjoining

7

lands and the other Kinsealy lands and time is running out?

8

A.

He may have mentioned.

9

Q. 440

He may have mentioned?

A.

I can't swear he did or I can't swear he didn't.

Q. 441

Well, can you tell us if he asked to you sign the Kinsealy motion on the 15th

12:29:56 10

11 12

March.

13

A.

I don't think so.

14

Q. 442

You don't think so?

A.

No. If he had I mean I would have signed it.

16

Q. 443

Just in relation to, you say you met him at home?

17

A.

Mm-hmm.

18

Q. 444

What time of the day or evening did you meet him do you know?

19

A.

Presumably in the evening.

Q. 445

Yes. If I could have 636 please? Mr. Dunlop's, if you go down to 3.30 Mr.

12:30:06 15

12:30:25 20

21

Gilbride, Mr. Dunlop's telephone messages record that you phoned him and the

22

message is until five o'clock?

23

A.

Mm-hmm.

24

Q. 446

You phoned Mr. Dunlop on the 15th March, that evening you signed two motions

12:31:00 25

for Mr. Walls and on the 18th you signed the Kinsealy motion?

26

A.

That's right.

27

Q. 447

Would there be any connection do you think?

28

A.

No.

29

Q. 448

So what do you think you were phoning Mr. Dunlop about on the 15th March?

A.

I don't really know.

12:31:16 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:31:20

12:31:33

66 1

Q. 449

Except that you know it had nothing to do with Kinsealy or Seatown?

2

A.

No, it hadn't anything to do with Seatown or Kinsealy, I am sure of that.

3

Q. 450

You are sure of that?

4

A.

I am, yes.

5

Q. 451

I can perfectly understand you not remembering what the purpose of a telephone

6

communication was that long ago, but equally how can you be sure it didn't

7

relate to something that in fact was happening around then, namely signing

8

motion that night and three days later, how can you be sure of that?

9

A.

12:31:56 10

Well, the reason I can be sure of that is as far as the one on Kinsealy was concerned that you are repeating for the third time, my clear recollection is

11

receiving the phone call from Paul Walls asking me to meet Mr. Dunlop on the

12

18th and the other two, the Seatown ones, that was a dealing I had with

13

Mr. Walls, nothing to do with Mr. Dunlop.

14

Q. 452

12:32:39 15

16

The Seatown, the two motions the Seatown motions Mr. Gilbride, what happened to those?

A.

17

As far as I remember, I think I may have moved them and then withdrew them, to the best of my recollection.

18

Q. 453

Right. Do you remember anything about that, why they were withdrawn?

19

A.

Again the local Fianna Fail councillor wouldn't support them, that was it.

Q. 454

All right. Thank you Mr. Gilbride.

12:33:04 20

21 22

CHAIRMAN:

23

you said a little while ago that you did it as a favour for Mr. Walls, this was

24

in relation to the Kinsealy motion?

12:33:20 25

A.

Do you wish to ask? Mr. Gilbride could I just ask you one thing,

That's right yeah.

26 27 28 29

CHAIRMAN: A.

But you didn't think it was a great idea, or a great project.

In the fact that there wasn't local support, I am not saying that the project itself wasn't good, in the fact that local support wasn't there for it.

12:33:39 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:33:39

12:33:57

67 1

CHAIRMAN:

2

stranger had come to you with this project you would have said no because it

3

wasn't a good idea, but because it was Mr. Walls you felt under some more

4

obligation?

5

A.

6

But are you saying that if you hadn't known Mr. Walls, if a

Strangers did come to me and Mr. Walls as well, and I usually did, was receptive to any development.

7 8 9

CHAIRMAN: A.

Even though you mightn't have had huge faith in the project itself?

Well that would be decided by the councillors afterwards.

12:34:12 10

11

CHAIRMAN:

All right.

12 13

JUDGE KEYS:

14

second statement you indicate to Mr. Murphy that you received no payments in

12:34:27 15

16

Mr. Gilbride can I just ask you one question, I think in your

1993, is that correct? A.

Yes.

17 18

JUDGE KEYS:

19

Tribunal before and my recollection of your evidence is you never kept any

12:34:37 20

21

Correct me if I am wrong but you have appeared before the

record at all of your payments, is that correct? A.

Sorry?

22 23

JUDGE KEYS:

24

of any description, you never kept a record of them for the purpose of

12:34:49 25

26

You never kept records of any payments? Political contributions

acknowledging them to -A.

Yes, that's right, yeah.

27 28

JUDGE KEYS:

29

you single out the year 1993 as one year in which you received no monies at

12:35:01 30

Well, for somebody who didn't keep any records at all, how can

all. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:35:01

12:35:10

68 1

A.

There was no election on.

2 3

JUDGE KEYS:

4

you would have expenses either way, running a constituency office and so forth,

5

you'd still have electoral expenses running your post as councillor, isn't that

6

correct? And would it not be unusual in those circumstances that you may,

7

would receive contributions despite that there are no elections?

8

A.

But other councillors, but that doesn't necessarily mean, surely

I received very little contributions.

9 12:35:34 10

JUDGE KEYS:

That may be so, but for somebody who hasn't kept any records at

11

all I am somewhat puzzled how you can be so definite that in 1993 you received

12

no contributions whatsoever?

13

A.

Well in that particular context I am presume you are referring to Mr. Dunlop.

14 12:35:51 15

JUDGE KEYS:

Well, Mr. Dunlop or any other payment, you may have received from

16

some other person who wanted to assist you in helping you meet your outgoings

17

as a councillor. You just, you are adamant that you received no monies in

18

1993?

19

A.

To the best of my recollection.

12:36:14 20

21 22

JUDGE KEYS: A.

The best of your recollection?

Yes.

23 24 12:36:20 25

JUDGE KEYS: A.

That's purely on recollection and not on any records whatsoever?

No.

26 27

JUDGE KEYS:

Thank you.

28 29 12:36:28 30

JUDGE FAHERTY:

There was one matter Mr. Gilbride, really sort of what the

Chairman was asking you, when you signed the two Seatown motions on the 15th Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:36:31

12:36:50

69 1

and indeed the Kinsealy one on the 18th March, obviously you signed them so

2

therefore they were going to go on the agenda, isn't that right?

3

A.

Yes that's correct yeah.

4 5

JUDGE FAHERTY:

6

not there should be such motions even put on the agenda? What did you know

7

about the arguments for and against what Mr. Walls was looking for or indeed

8

the hydraulic company, in relation to the Seatown Lands?

9

A.

12:37:15 10

What consideration did you give to the merits of whether or

On any motions my attitude would have been I would have been in favour of we'll say most development and once they were on the agenda it was something that was

11

going to be decided by the councillors on the council.

12 13

JUDGE FAHERTY:

14

them is that Mr. Walls, or the company, was seeking to have certain omissions

12:37:37 15

Well, in relation to the Seatown ones, my understanding of

made from the Draft Development Plan, i.e. that they wouldn't be declared an

16

area of scientific interest and I think the second motion was the reference to,

17

I can't remember what it was, I think yes, that there be deletions made from

18

the objectives or whatever regarding the, being a special amenity area, that

19

wasn't development as such?

12:38:13 20

A.

Well I won't say --

21 22

JUDGE FAHERTY:

23

might happen, but I am just asking you, you seemed to sign them, where, I mean

24

did you give consideration in any shape or form to what might be down the road

12:38:30 25

Obviously it may raise the bar if you like in terms of what

for those lands, those lands were special amenity lands, they were I think

26

according to the Council and the planners were very much set I think that they

27

would retain their status as being areas for wild life and all other

28

archaeological and fauna reasons, but I am just asking you, where did you think

29

the action you took, obvious it would depend on the vote and that's another

12:38:58 30

matter, where it was all going on the day you signed the motions, in relation Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:39:03

12:39:20

70 1

to these lands, particularly the Seatown Lands because it was a long way from

2

development and you say you were pro development, but I am just wondering what

3

your thought process was?

4

A.

My thought process at the time when I was talking to Mr. Walls was that, the

5

objective that the council had in mind would never have been any hope of

6

development, whereas if they were deleted there would have been at some stage.

7 8

JUDGE FAHERTY:

9

and indeed all over Ireland, there are certain places that no matter how much

12:39:39 10

the wish of the landowner, can never be developed because they have

11 12

Yes, but you would agree that in certain places in the county

archaeological interest or they have protection of wild life, you understand? A.

It would be decided by the council in the end.

13 14

JUDGE FAHERTY:

12:39:55 15

16

But I am just asking you, when you signed them what was your

state of knowledge about what might be down the line? A.

Probably not as good as it should have been.

17 18

JUDGE FAHERTY:

Fair enough. All right thanks.

19 12:40:04 20

CHAIRMAN:

All right, thank you.

21 22

MR. QUINN: Mr. Paul Walls please.

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:40:23

12:40:40

71 1 2

PAUL WALLS, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS EXAMINED BY MR. QUINN:

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Good afternoon Mr. Walls?

5

A.

Afternoon Mr. Chairman.

6

Q. 455

Thank you Mr. Walls. Mr. Walls, if we could have page 1128 I think you reside

7

at Seatown in Malahide, isn't that right or Swords?

8

A.

Swords.

9

Q. 456

Yes. There is a map on the screen Mr. Walls and I think on the top right hand

12:40:57 10

corner there are two properties identified, one Walls Seatown, which is

11

coloured orange, and underneath that is one Walls Hydraulic, isn't that right,

12

is that the site of your --

13

A.

14 12:41:20 15

Yes, with the exception that the issues involving Seatown only relate to about 90 per cent of the site.

Q. 457

Yes. We have heard evidence this morning in relation to motions signed by

16

Councillor Gilbride on the 15th March 1993 and they relate to those two sites I

17

think, isn't that right?

18

A.

That's correct.

19

Q. 458

One of the sites was an infill site on which you build your home and the other

12:41:38 20

was an adjoining site, isn't that correct?

21

A.

That's correct.

22

Q. 459

The adjoined site was owned by Hydraulic Limited, isn't that correct?

23

A.

It was held in trust by them.

24

Q. 460

Held in trust. Just at the outset it may be wise having regard to all the

12:41:52 25

various companies if Mr. Walls you would assist the Tribunal in identifying the

26

various companies within the wall group so to speak. I think the first company

27

is a company Walls Properties Limited and if we can have 375 please, this is a

28

private limited company which appears to have been incorporated in December

29

1974?

12:42:10 30

A.

Correct. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:42:13

12:42:29

72 1

Q. 461

Were you and are you the managing director of that company?

2

A.

I was.

3

Q. 462

You were. And I think that company had as a subsidiary Glenellen Homes

4

Limited. If we can have 380 please, and I think that company was incorporated

5

in 1989, is that correct?

6

A.

Well, it says it's a subsidiary yes.

7

Q. 463

That's a subsidiary of Walls Property Limited?

8

A.

Correct.

9

Q. 464

That's the company that acquired the lands in Kinsealy, is that correct?

A.

Yes.

Q. 465

And then if we can just finally get to the company, Hydraulic Plant Limited.

12:42:41 10

11 12

That's at 383 and I think that company was incorporated in 1963, is it?

13

A.

Well, whatever date it was incorporated.

14

Q. 466

Is that again, did that become or is it again a subsidiary of Wall Property?

A.

No, no, connection whatsoever.

Q. 467

No connection. Okay. I understand. So the parent company is Walls Property

12:43:01 15

16 17

Limited, it's subsidiary is Glenellen Homes Limited and the other related

18

company is Hydraulic Plant Limited and you are a director of all?

19

A.

Related in the sense the lands were held in trust by it.

Q. 468

For you or for the Walls Property Limited?

21

A.

No, nothing do with Walls Properties at the time.

22

Q. 469

Nothing to do with you or Walls property?

23

A.

They were held in trust for my father at the time.

24

Q. 470

Yes, but you were active in relation, you put in submissions in relation to

12:43:23 20

12:43:46 25

Hydraulic Plant Limited, is that correct?

26

A.

That's correct.

27

Q. 471

So you were really looking after your father's lands rather than your own

28 29 12:43:51 30

lands? A.

Well, it's quite complicated but ...

Q. 472

Perhaps as best you can Mr. Walls and as quickly as you can if you would tell Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:43:55

12:44:08

73 1 2

the Tribunal the various connections? A.

3

Well, at the moment the lands are owned by me and it was always that was the, what was the intention.

4

Q. 473

But going back to 1993?

5

A.

The lands would have been held by Hydraulic Plant Trust, in trust for my dad.

6 7

I'd have to check the dates, I don't know what dates it was transferred over. Q. 474

8 9

Yes. Okay. And the other lands, the adjoining lands on which your house was situated that was your own property?

A.

Yes.

Q. 475

Now there is, if we can have 362 there is also PJ Walls Civil Limited?

11

A.

No connection to anything here.

12

Q. 476

No connection anything here. PJ Walls Construction Limited was dissolved at

12:44:30 10

13 14 12:44:47 15

364? A.

No connection what so ever.

Q. 477

So we are dealing with Walls Property Limited, Glenellen Homes Limited, and

16

insofar as it was relevant, Hydraulic Plant Limited?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q. 478

Yes. Now you provided a statement to the Tribunal on the 21st February 2002

19

and that's found at pages 290 to 294 of the brief and just to deal in a general

12:45:12 20

sort of way, you acquired these lands in Kinsealy I think in May, was it '89 or

21

'90?

22

A.

Whatever date I put in.

23

Q. 479

Yes. If we have 408 please at 407 we have a presentation from Walls Property

24

Limited to Irish Intercontinental Bank dated 27 of September 1990 and at 408 we

12:45:35 25

see the site acquisition and you refer to the acquisition of the land in May

26

last year which would seem to imply that it was May '89?

27

A.

That's correct.

28

Q. 480

And I think in that presentation were you seeking some financial assistance

29 12:45:52 30

from Irish Intercontinental Bank at that stage? A.

Some funding yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:45:53

12:46:07

74 1

Q. 481

At 409 you were advising the bank under the heading 'development team' that a

2

design concept had been prepared and presented informally to planners and

3

County Councillors in the area, that's in relation to the 54 acres?

4

A.

That's what there, yes.

5

Q. 482

You say we believe our representations, as well as the existence of the new

6

sewer, has helped current thoughts on planning policy for the area is that

7

correct?

8

A.

That's what it says, yes.

9

Q. 483

So is it fair to say as far back as September 1990 you were presenting

12:46:20 10

proposals in an informal basis to both councillors and planners in relation to

11 12

these lands in Kinsealy? A.

Not quite. Certainly we had, through Pilgrim we had prepared a schematic

13

scheme that had some representations of which I'm not too sure, who they were

14

presented to but I was of the belief at that stage that there was some

12:46:45 15

16

enthusiasm or not necessarily negative views towards them. Q. 484

You are advising the bank there, I think, of a development team to include

17

architects, consultant engineers, estate agents, solicitors and public

18

relations; isn't that right?

19 12:46:58 20

A.

Correct, yes.

Q. 485

Would you agree with me what you have advised them there is that you had

21

presented informally to planners your design concept?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 486

And you had presented informally to councillors the same design concept?

24

A.

That's what it says, yes.

Q. 487

And is that a correct statement of what had happened at that time?

A.

Obviously, I wouldn't have put it in there if there wasn't some validity to it,

12:47:12 25

26 27

no.

28

Q. 488

And your architects at that stage were Pilgrim Associates?

29

A.

Correct.

Q. 489

You identified Mr. Rowe and Mr. Moore is that right?

12:47:24 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:47:27

12:47:45

75 1

A.

Correct.

2

Q. 490

Can you tell the Tribunal how you came to become associated with Pilgrim

3 4

Associates? A.

5

In '89 we sold some land in Swords and Pilgrim represented the new owners and had made some contact with us and it was following from that.

6

Q. 491

Now, who did you know within Pilgrim in 1989 and how did you come to know them?

7

A.

As I said to you I am not too sure, but what I can tell you now with the

8 9

benefit of hindsight, that I knew Tim Rowe, Denis Moore and Tim Collins. Q. 492

How did you come to know Mr. Rowe and Mr. Collins?

A.

I can't recall.

11

Q. 493

How long did you know Mr. Collins?

12

A.

It was certainly from, I am guessing the mid 70s.

13

Q. 494

So would it be fair to say?

14

A.

Or late 70s.

Q. 495

Mr. Collins was well known to you by 1990?

16

A.

Well, I knew him.

17

Q. 496

Yes. Mr. Rowe?

18

A.

Knew Tim Rowe very well, yes.

19

Q. 497

Did Mr. Rowe or Mr. Collins approach you in relation to the lands which you had

12:48:07 10

12:48:21 15

12:48:36 20

in Lissenhall?

21

A.

Just on knowing Tim Rowe I would have known him from the '90s.

22

Q. 498

You would have known Mr. Rowe from the 1990s but you would have known

23 24

Mr. Collins from the 70S? A.

12:48:53 25

26

Correct. Did they approach me on Lissenhall? No. Tim Rowe contacted me on behalf of the new owners about some boundary issues.

Q. 499

27

That was after the sale but prior to the sale were they involved in introducing you to Mr. Moran or Rybrand?

28

A.

No.

29

Q. 500

They had no involvement in that?

A.

Certainly Tim Rowe.

12:49:05 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:49:07

12:49:19

76 1

Q. 501

I am not talking about Mr. Rowe or Mr. Moore, I am talking about Mr. Collins?

2

A.

I don't honestly think so but I don't know.

3

Q. 502

Is it that you can't recall?

4

A.

I just can't recall. I am not too sure where the agent of or what was the

5

details of the sale, but certainly I am aware now and later that Tim Collins

6

was connected or had some involvement with the new owner.

7

Q. 503

8 9

Mr. Moran and Mr. Collins have all given evidence? A.

12:49:39 10

11

Q. 504

Was it as a result of the Lissenhall sale that you retained the services of Pilgrim & Associates?

A.

14 12:50:01 15

Well, it wouldn't have been that, I would have known per se talking to Tim Rowe after the sale and Tim Collins that they would have been involved.

12 13

Yes. That's because that Module has been dealt with here and the owner,

Well, it wouldn't have anything to do with the sale but it would have been subsequent discussions and I knew Tim at the time, Tim Rowe.

Q. 505

Tim Rowe.

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 506

Did you know Mr. Rowe more than you knew Mr. Collins?

18

A.

No I knew Mr. Collins from back in the 70s, late 70s. But my, you know I would

19 12:50:19 20

have known Tim Rowe as an architect. Q. 507

Yes. Now I think that Mr, you wrote to the planning officer on the 21st

21

January 91 in relation to the Kinsealy Lands, isn't that right. At 413 we see

22

your letter signed by Mr. Greene, I think you told the Tribunal in the past?

23

A.

Correct.

24

Q. 508

That you composed and wrote that letter although Mr. Greene signed it, is that

12:50:40 25

right?

26

A.

That's correct.

27

Q. 509

And then I think after the first public display you wrote and put in

28

submissions in relation to the Kinsealy Lane lands, isn't that right? By this

29

stage you had retained services of not just of Pilgrim but Grainne Mallon, is

12:50:57 30

that right. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:50:58

12:51:09

77 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 510

How did you get to know Ms. Mallon?

3

A.

I knew Mrs. Mallon previously, she was a planner in the Dublin County Council.

4

Q. 511

And had you dealings with her in her capacity as a planner with Dublin County

5

Council?

6

A.

I did, in relation to my house, yes.

7

Q. 512

This is your house at Seatown?

8

A.

Correct.

9

Q. 513

And you got to know her over a period, is that correct?

A.

I would have, yes.

Q. 514

At some stage I think perhaps April 91 she went out on her own and took leaf of

12:51:16 10

11 12

absence from the council?

13

A.

So I read that in the files, yes.

14

Q. 515

Had you ever spoken to her in relation to your plans in respect of the Kinsealy

12:51:31 15

lands?

16

A.

Sorry, can you explain that.

17

Q. 516

If we can have 409 again? You will recall Mr. Walls a moment ago I was talking

18

to you about what you had told the Irish Intercontinental Bank in September

19

1990?

12:51:45 20

21

A.

Yes.

Q. 517

In fact that you had shown them your design, shown planners informally your

22

design concepts for the Kinsealy Lands, had you ever shown those design

23

concepts to Ms. Mallon?

24 12:51:59 25

26

A.

I can't answer that, I don't know.

Q. 518

What planners do you believe you showed those design concepts to?

A.

I am at a loss of an answer on this one, I would not have been personally

27

involved I would be talking on secondhand knowledge I would have had so I

28

cannot say.

29 12:52:16 30

Q. 519

Who would be directly involved in that on your behalf?

A.

Pilgrim. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:52:17

12:52:32

78 1

Q. 520

Pilgrim, that would be Mr. Rowe?

2

A.

Yes, that's my belief of it. And this is based on the assumption that I

3

wouldn't have put in a letter, something that hadn't got some validity to

4

start with, I would presume that they would talk to the future planners.

5

Q. 521

And as I think you agreed, if we can have 449, in December 1991 you put in

6

submissions and you included with those submissions the report from Pilgrim and

7

from Grainne Mallon; isn't that right?

8

A.

Correct.

9

Q. 522

I think in February 1992, 465, having asked for an oral hearing you attended

12:52:51 10

and you presented your case orally to representatives of the planners; isn't

11

that right?

12

A.

I did. I have got to admit that --

13

Q. 523

And I think we also see your own recollection of the address given by you of

14 12:53:10 15

that oral hearing at 466. It's included in the brief; isn't that right? A.

16 17

It is. I just feel the note from Dublin County Council putting Hydraulic Plant in there is out of context and incorrect.

Q. 524

Yes. You had I think addressed the council on the 22nd or 21st February 92 in

18

relation to Hydraulic Plant, we see that at 991, they are the Seatown Lands,

19

isn't that right?

12:53:35 20

21

A.

I can't see a date on that.

Q. 525

It's the first, it says the hearing of the statement on behalf of the above

22

named person who made an objection, do you see that, took place on 21st

23

February 92? I don't think a lot turns on this Mr. Wall but there were two

24

oral presentations made by you, one in relation to the Seatown Lands on 21st

12:53:55 25

February '92 and one in relation to the Kinsealy Lands on the 11th February

26

'92, isn't that right.

27

A.

Correct.

28

Q. 526

Just in relation to the Seatown Lands, if we have 466, you have provided the

29 12:54:11 30

Tribunal with your typed up notes of that address by you to the planners at that time, isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:54:12

12:54:21

79 1

A.

Correct, yes.

2

Q. 527

And I think again you refer there to --

3 4

JUDGE FAHERTY:

5

you said in relation to the Seatown Lands 466 --

6

Q. 528

Sorry Mr. Quinn am I mistaken, is that not the Kinsealy lands

466 is the Kinsealy lands.

7 8 9

JUDGE FAHERTY: Q. 529

12:54:39 10

Yes, so it is the Kinsealy lands not the Seatown Lands.

No, Seatown Lands were on the 466. Sorry I caused confusion for the transcript. That's your recollection of the oral hearing in relation to the

11

Kinsealy lands?

12

A.

It is yes.

13

Q. 530

I think you said that in 1990 we prepared a scheme for the site containing 19

14

number houses, 16 hole par three golf course together with car parking and

12:54:54 15

provision for future clubhouse, that's the scheme we were referring to earlier

16

and reflected in the document to the Irish Intercontinental bank is; that

17

correct?

18

A.

Correct.

19

Q. 531

I think you were encouraging a change of zoning in relation to the lands from

12:55:08 20

high amenity or amenity to residential of one house to the hectare?

21

A.

I was certainly seeking that, yes.

22

Q. 532

Yes. Now if we can have 1151. I think you had a note to file then of a

23 24 12:55:28 25

conversation you had with Mr. Rowe in May of 1991; isn't that right? A.

Correct.

Q. 533

This would now have been prior to your first written submission in December

26

'91 and I think you were being advised about the options concerning rezoning,

27

is that correct?

28

A.

I am not great on dates but --

29

Q. 534

I'm slightly out of sequence?

A.

But I agree with what you say.

12:55:43 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:55:46

12:55:59

80 1

Q. 535

There is a reference to Keith Simpsons' view that he had originally sought a

2

green belt but accepts that this is not on. Is that somebody, is that a

3

planner?

4

A.

5 6

I think Keith was in the future planners, he was certainly in Fingal or Dublin County Council at the time, yes.

Q. 536

But certainly after your submission, your written submissions in December 91

7

and your oral submissions at the beginning of 1992, a period developed where

8

you could put in motions and have your lands considered for rezoning, isn't

9

that right?

12:56:15 10

11

A.

Correct.

Q. 537

Yes. And if we can have 1152. I think your lands at this stage in Kinsealy

12

were being taken by a Mr. Foley who lived in the vicinity, and who had other

13

lands in the vicinity, isn't that right, he was using the lands for tillage

14

purposes; isn't that right?

12:56:34 15

A.

Correct.

16

Q. 538

He was paying you a rent or license fee for that; isn't that right?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q. 539

Was he also interested at that time in having his lands or his adjoining lands

19 12:56:45 20

redeveloped? A.

21

I can't recall that but certainly I would have spoke to him about, as mentioning those oral hearings

22

Q. 540

Yes?

23

A.

That I had two planning submissions or appraisals done and each of them

24 12:57:04 25

suggested a larger area than just the 54 acres. Q. 541

26

That was a strategy that a larger area might be included in the rezoning strategy; isn't that right?

27

A.

For proper planning.

28

Q. 542

Yes?

29

A.

Grainne Mallon considered, may be extending the nuclei of Kinsealy village

12:57:18 30

while Pilgrims spoke about the whole area from Malahide Road as far as the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:57:23

12:57:38

81 1 2

railway line. Q. 543

That letter on screen where you acknowledge receipt of the nine months, three

3

thousand pound payment for the tillage rights, you say that, in the second

4

paragraph you conclude "We would note however that our lowering of required

5

rent for last year in recognition of the joint efforts we were both putting in

6

to having a good case build up for rezoning of the area should not be expected

7

to be repeated again this year". I suggest to you that that seems to imply

8

there was a joint effort put forward by yourself and your neighbour Mr. Foley

9

in relation to the rezoning at that time?

12:57:56 10

A.

It may seem that way but that wasn't the case, no.

11

Q. 544

Now I think in early 1993 you came to meet Mr. Dunlop; isn't that right?

12

A.

Now was it 93, okay.

13

Q. 545

If we can have 553, Mr. Dunlop has an entry in his diary for a 10.30 meeting

14 12:58:27 15

with Tim Collins and Paul Walls, do you see that there on screen? A.

Do I yes.

16

Q. 546

Do you accept you met Mr. Dunlop on 7 January 1993?

17

A.

Absolutely.

18

Q. 547

Did you meet him at his office?

19

A.

Absolutely.

Q. 548

Would you tell the Tribunal the circumstances in which you came to visit

12:58:33 20

21 22

Mr. Dunlop at his offices on that date? A.

The background to this was what we were suggesting about Kinsealy I should say

23

was perhaps something new in the area at the time and to my mind it was

24

sensitive in the sense that you were looking for, in those days in the terms of

12:58:57 25

exclusive housing, which would be for elitist people, the houses were big,

26

small by nowadays standards but close on three thousand square feet on some

27

lands and therefore wouldn't per se receive favourable reception by certain

28

parties and therefore needed some PR to actually overcome it, and we employed a

29

PR company to help us with our presentation.

12:59:31 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

12:59:31

12:59:55

82 1

For whatever reasons it never got what I was looking for and somebody later on

2

suggested the name Frank Dunlop.

3

Q. 549

If we go back again Mr. Walls to the 27th September 1990 and that presentation

4

to the Irish Intercontinental Bank and we look at page 409. There appears

5

there under the heading 'development team', a firm of public relations

6

consultants and a Mr. Frank Cairns; is that correct?

7

A.

Correct.

8

Q. 550

Had Mr. Cairns and his firm been retained by you at that time?

9

A.

They were yes.

Q. 551

When did Mr. Cairns and his firm cease to be retained by you?

A.

I have feeling they were only retained by us up to the presentation of that

13:00:13 10

11 12 13

architectural surmise that was at the back of my presentation. Q. 552

14

When you say the architectural surmise at the back of your presentation, was that in February 92, is that the oral presentation we were speaking about to

13:00:36 15

the planners in February '92?

16

A.

It would be, yes.

17

Q. 553

Yes.

18

A.

Sorry that was the oral hearing subsequent to it, to the submission, the

19

written submission went in September '91 and the oral submission was February

13:00:54 20

21

'92. December '91, at the back of that there is one page. Q. 554

22

So in the period sometime after May 89 to December 91 you had retained the services of Mr. Cairns as public relations consultants?

23

A.

Until when.

24

Q. 555

Until December 91?

A.

I couldn't tell you what date it started and finished.

Q. 556

Okay. But certainly if it were up to the date of the representations made on

13:01:10 25

26 27 28 29

foot of the 1991 draft plan, then those representations -A.

Well, then they were probably employed by then it was almost an in and out situation.

13:01:33 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

13:01:33

13:01:39

83 1

CHAIRMAN:

2

o'clock.

All right Mr. Quinn, it's gone one o'clock, we'll sit again at two

3 4

MR. QUINN: I understand there is a judgement at two.

5 6

CHAIRMAN:

We have to give a couple of rulings at two o'clock, so Mr. Walls

7

probably won't be required until about ten past two. All right?

8 9

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH.

13:02:07 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

13:02:07

14:05:17

84 1

THE TRIBUNAL RESUMED AS FOLLOWS AT 2 PM:

2 3

CHAIRMAN:

I am now going to read two rulings of the Tribunal, the first one,

4

the second one concerns or arises as a result of Mr. O'Tuathail's submissions a

5

couple of days ago.

6 7

The first one is a procedural ruling in relation to the cross-examination of

8

witnesses as to credibility and this ruling will be posted on the Tribunal's

9

website and a copy of the ruling will be posted over the next couple of days to

14:05:36 10

11

all interested parties or their solicitors where they are represented by a solicitor.

12 13

In adopting the procedure involved, which involved the taking of evidence in

14

individual Modules, the Tribunal sought to focus its public hearings on

14:05:54 15

16

specific matters which had been identified in the Tribunal's preliminary investigations in private as meriting public hearing.

17 18

The Tribunal in applying this modular approach to it's public hearings sought

19

to limit the evidence to be adduced at such hearings to those factual matters

14:06:13 20

under inquiry while at the same time permitting witnesses who wished to

21

challenge the version of events being given by other witnesses the opportunity

22

of doing so.

23 24

The Tribunal sought to confine cross-examination of witnesses to the subject

14:06:27 25

matter of their evidence in the particular Module. As part of this process the

26

Tribunal limited the circulation of prior statements made by witnesses to

27

statements dealing with the subject matter of the particular Module at hearing.

28

As a consequence of the implementation of this procedure, prior statements made

29

by persons who were to be witnesses at public hearings dealing with matters

14:06:49 30

which were not to be the subject of the public examination at that time were Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:06:59

14:07:12

85 1

not circulated to those parties who sought to challenge their credibility.

2

This policy was successfully challenged in judicial review proceedings

3

commenced by Mr. Owen O'Callaghan against the Tribunal and which has been the

4

subject of a Supreme Court judgement of the 9th March 2005 and the direction of

5

the High Court in its judgement of the 29th July 2005.

6 7

Following upon those decisions the Tribunal adopted its present procedure.

8

This procedure involves the circulation not only of witness statements

9

concerning the matter to be dealt with at the public hearing of the Module, but

14:07:30 10

also involves making available to affected parties all prior statements of

11

witnesses to the Tribunal, including those relating to matters that are not to

12

be the subject of public hearing.

13 14 14:07:46 15

The parties who wish to challenge the credibility of any witness in a given Module may do so based upon the prior statements of that witness.

16 17

Following upon the courts' decisions, the Tribunal wrote to witnesses heard in

18

previous Modules and which have yet to be reported on, informing them of the

19

courts decision and of their entitlement to receive all such prior statements

14:08:06 20

21

and their entitlement, if so they so wish, to carry out any further cross-examination.

22 23

Prior to the superior's court's decision in O'Callaghan versus the Tribunal,

24

the Tribunal gave a ruling during the Carrickmines Module stating "The Tribunal

14:08:22 25

will only make determinations in relation to issues or to individuals where it

26

has heard all the evidence relating to such issues or individuals and

27

particularly relating to the issue of credibility of the witnesses. No

28

determinations on credibility will be made until the entire of the evidence has

29

been heard and assessed and until the relevant parties have been afforded an

14:08:45 30

opportunity to make submissions based on the whole of the evidence". Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:08:49

14:09:07

86 1 2

This ruling of the 20th November 2002 was given in circumstances and at a time

3

when the Tribunal was of the view that it was entitled to conduct public

4

hearings in discreet Modules and that issues of credit raised in each Module

5

could be confined to matters relevant to those public hearings. It's Ruling

6

was designed to safe guard the rights of all witnesses before the Tribunal in

7

those circumstances. Having regard to the decisions of the superior courts and

8

the Tribunal's amended procedures, the ruling no longer carries the same

9

significance as issues of credibility are now equally open to challenge in all

14:09:30 10

Modules.

11 12

The Tribunal is satisfied that its amended procedures adequately safe guard

13

witness' rights when viewed in the light of the Tribunal's amended Terms of

14

Reference.

14:09:42 15

16

The Tribunal's Terms of Reference were amended by the Oireachtas following upon

17

the Tribunal's requests contained in the 4th interim report of the Tribunal.

18

Clauses J1, J2 and J3 of the amended Terms of Reference identify the subject

19

matters of the Tribunal's future inquiries.

14:10:01 20

21

Clause J6 of the amended Terms of Reference confers upon the Tribunal the power

22

in its sole discretion not to initiate a public hearing in relation to any such

23

matter, notwithstanding that it false within the Tribunal's Terms of Reference

24

and furthermore the power to discontinue or otherwise terminate its

14:10:20 25

26

investigation notwithstanding that the matter falls within the Tribunal's Terms of Reference.

27 28

The Tribunal wishes to remind parties of its amended procedures and of their

29

opportunity to cross examine witnesses based upon the prior statements of those

14:10:34 30

witnesses. The Tribunal wishes to advise parties that they should avail of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:10:39

14:10:49

87 1

this opportunity in Modules in which they have appeared with or without

2

representation.

3 4

In the event that a fresh matter relevant to the credibility of a witness and

5

affecting the party wishing to cross examine arises in a subsequent Module

6

witnesses can apply to the Tribunal for an opportunity to further cross examine

7

that witness.

8 9 14:11:04 10

The Tribunal is conscious of the fact that witnesses who were in receipt of prior statements may have decided to defer their cross-examination to a future

11

Module in which they believe they will be involved. Having regard to the

12

Tribunal's amended Terms of Reference, the Tribunal invites any witnesses in

13

that category to contact the Tribunal if they wish to cross examine with a view

14

to fixing an appropriate date for such examination.

14:11:25 15

16

The Tribunal requests that any such requests be in writing and should be

17

received by the Tribunal on or before the 25th September of 2006.

18 19

That concludes that ruling.

14:11:40 20

21

The second ruling relates to submissions made on behalf of Senator Don Lydon on

22

the 25th July.

23 24 14:11:52 25

In a written submission provided to the Tribunal and in subsequent oral submissions made to the Tribunal on Tuesday 25th July, 2006, counsel for

26

Senator Don Lydon has sought a ruling or statement from the Tribunal relating

27

to the admissibility or status of certain evidence given by Mr. Bill O'Herlihy

28

to the Tribunal on the 7th June 2006.

29 14:12:13 30

The evidence in question centred upon the conversation which is said to have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:12:17

14:12:39

88 1

taken place between Mr. Richard Lynn and Mr. Bill O'Herlihy at a Dublin hotel.

2

Mr. O'Herlihy has alleged that in the course of a conversation Mr. Richard Lynn

3

implicated councillors in improper or corrupt activities in relation to

4

rezoning matters and in that context named Senator Lydon. Evidence of this

5

alleged conversation was given by Mr. O'Herlihy under oath at the public

6

hearing.

7 8

Mr. O'Herlihy did so with some reluctance and as he himself stated "Under

9

protest". In giving his evidence, Mr. O'Herlihy specifically drew the

14:12:54 10

Tribunal's attention to the fact that he was not making any assertions as to

11

the truth of the allegation concerning Senator Lydon. He was merely repeating

12

what he said had been told to him by Mr. Lynn. In common parlance this is

13

hearsay. If admitted in order to prove the truth of its content the statement

14

would be hearsay evidence in a court of law, a Tribunal of Inquiry may consider

14:13:18 15

the admission of hearsay evidence. The Tribunal is satisfied that it has acted

16

appropriately in admitting the evidence of Mr. O'Herlihy and in requiring him

17

to name the individual allegedly identified to him by Mr. Lynn, namely Senator

18

Lydon.

19 14:13:36 20

Evidence from Mr. O'Herlihy as to what was said to him by Mr. Lynn relating to

21

the payment of monies to a councillor is evidence which is properly and

22

necessarily admissible by the Tribunal. To have admitted this evidence while

23

at the same time concealing the name or identity of Senator Lydon would have

24

rendered the evidence useless and would have made it impossible for Senator

14:13:59 25

Lydon or Mr. Lynn to challenge that evidence as they have forcefully done.

26 27

Mr. Lynn has given evidence denying that any such conversation with

28

Mr. O'Herlihy ever took place. Senator Lydon has given evidence totally

29

rejecting the substance of the alleged allegation, insofar as it implicates him

14:14:18 30

in wrongdoing. Both witnesses have been given the opportunity to fully and to Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:14:23

14:14:41

89 1

comprehensively challenge the evidence of the alleged making of the statement

2

by Mr. Lynn to Mr. O'Herlihy and to deny the allegations contained or implied

3

there in. Both have exercised their rights to do so. Both by conducting

4

cross-examination through their counsel of Mr. O'Herlihy and by giving their

5

own sworn testimony.

6 7

The Tribunal will in due course consider all of the evidence in the Cherrywood

8

Module in advance of preparing its report. Senator Lydon and all other

9

witnesses will be afforded the opportunity to furnish written and oral

14:14:55 10

submissions.

11 12

Senator Lydon's submission at that time may, if he so wishes, address in detail

13

the evidence of Mr. O'Herlihy in relation to his alleged conversation with

14

Mr. Lynn, the weight if any to be attached to such evidence by the Tribunal,

14:15:11 15

and the extent to which Mr. O'Herlihy's said evidence ought to be rejected in

16

the light of the contradictory evidence given by Mr. Lynn and Senator Lydon.

17 18

The Tribunal is always conscious of the fact that the reporting of such

19

evidence in the media may cause damage to the reputation of individuals. The

14:15:29 20

Tribunal endeavours on an ongoing basis to ensure that evidence is presented in

21

a fair and balanced fashion and that those individuals against whom allegations

22

of wrongdoing are made expressedly or by implication, have the opportunity of

23

challenging such evidence and giving their own direct evidence.

24 14:15:48 25

26

The Tribunal is satisfied that in relation to Senator Lydon the Tribunal has afforded him his legitimate entitlements in this regard.

27 28

That concludes the ruling.

29 14:16:02 30

MR. QUINN: Mr. Walls please. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:16:05

14:16:14

90 1 2

PAUL WALLS RETURNS TO THE WITNESS BOX AND CONTINUES TO BE.

3

EXAMINED BY MR. QUINN:

4 5 6

Q. 557

Good afternoon Mr. Walls, before lunch Mr. Walls we were dealing with the

7

public relations firm retained by you in 1990 and referred to in your report or

8

submission to Irish Intercontinental Bank on 27th September 1990. If we can

9

have 409 please and I think you advised the Tribunal that at that time and for

14:16:46 10

the reasons given, that you had retained the services of a Mr. Frank Cairns?

11

A.

Correct.

12

Q. 558

To advise and assist you; isn't that right?

13

A.

Well to advise me on specifically doing a presentation or getting a

14 14:17:03 15

presentation as to how to go forward with our scheme, yes. Q. 559

16

A presentation for the councillors, a presentation for the planners or a presentation for the public?

17

A.

It wouldn't be for the planners no, it would be for the councillors.

18

Q. 560

For the councillors. Did you put together a presentation which was given to

19 14:17:18 20

the councillors? A.

It was a back page on the submission I put in.

21

Q. 561

Yes. But that back page on the submission which you put in in December 1991?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 562

Was that given to the councillors?

24

A.

No.

Q. 563

It was given to the planners?

26

A.

It was put in that oral hearing, sorry the submissions.

27

Q. 564

Written submissions which was in December '91?

28

A.

Yes, I'm not too sure offhand, but it was included in whatever went out to

14:17:31 25

29 14:17:46 30

councillors, I think the jist of it was, yes. Q. 565

Yes. And that concluded your written submission in December '91 and we have Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:17:50

14:18:04

91 1

dealt with your oral submissions on the 11th February '92 in relation to the

2

Kinsealy lands. And then nothing appears to happen until early January '93,

3

you meet with Mr. Dunlop?

4

A.

Correct.

5

Q. 566

Now what I want you to tell the Tribunal Mr. Walls is how you came to retain

6 7

the services of Mr. Dunlop? A.

8 9 14:18:26 10

11

I'm not specifically sure, but it is certainly a reflection that somebody suggested his name.

Q. 567

Well, now who suggested his name?

A.

I don't know.

Q. 568

Well, who were you dealing with, first of all did you have Mr. Cairns retained

12

in 1993?

13

A.

No.

14

Q. 569

You only ever had Mr. Cairns retained in 1991; is that right?

A.

But I can't be too specific, but it wasn't for very long.

16

Q. 570

1990/91. Did you have Pilgrim retained in 1993?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 571

Did you have Mr. Collins and Mr. Rowe retained in December, in January 1993?

19

A.

Well I had Pilgrim.

Q. 572

Pilgrim. Were you meeting with Mr. Rowe and Mr. Collins?

21

A.

I would have been, my meeting would generally be with Mr. Rowe.

22

Q. 573

With Mr. Rowe. Did you meet with Mr. Collins outside of Pilgrim at this time?

23

A.

Pardon.

24

Q. 574

Were you meeting with Mr. Collins outside of Pilgrim at this time?

A.

I more than likely did, yes.

Q. 575

Well do you think that Mr. Collins or Mr. Rowe suggested that you meet with

14:18:37 15

14:18:54 20

14:19:11 25

26 27

Mr. Dunlop?

28

A.

That is a possibility.

29

Q. 576

Well, you were the person Mr. Walls that met with Mr. Dunlop, why can't you

14:19:27 30

tell the Tribunal who advised you to meet Mr. Dunlop? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:19:29

14:19:41

92 1

A.

Because I don't have the answer.

2

Q. 577

Why not?

3

A.

Because I can't recall.

4

Q. 578

You say you can't recall who advised you to meet Mr. Dunlop?

5

A.

Correct.

6

Q. 579

You have no recollection?

7

A.

None.

8

Q. 580

Never had a recollection?

9

A.

Well I don't have one now.

Q. 581

Well, who other than Mr. Rowe or Mr. Collins might have recommended Mr. Dunlop?

11

A.

I have no idea.

12

Q. 582

How did you come to meet Mr. Dunlop?

13

A.

It certainly appears that maybe the --

14

Q. 583

No, no, I don't want you to tell me something that has been reconstructed, I

14:19:53 10

14:20:14 15

want you, from your own recollection Mr. Walls, to tell the Tribunal how you

16 17

came to meet Mr. Dunlop? A.

18 19

don't have an answer to that. I can only tell you what I believe. Q. 584

14:20:31 20

21

You seem to have difficulty when I am answering about who introduced me, I

You can't remember who suggested that you retain Mr. Dunlop, and you can't tell the Tribunal who introduced you to Mr. Dunlop?

A.

No, but what I am led and I believe is, I've been trying to come up with the

22

answer to this one. It certainly appears in looking at Frank Dunlop's

23

telephone records that I didn't make a phone call to Frank Dunlop to set up a

24

meeting and it would appear it was more likely Tim Collins arranged the

14:20:52 25

meeting.

26

Q. 585

Why do you say it's more likely Mr. Collins arranged the meeting?

27

A.

Because there is no record of me ringing Frank Dunlop. Frank Dunlop has on his

28 29 14:21:14 30

telephone or his diary, Paul Walls and Tim Collins. Q. 586

Do you recall telling me at private interview, if I could have page 1076 that you presume that you may well, that you may have met Mr. Dunlop through the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:21:18

14:21:29

93 1

influence of either Tim, that is either Tim Collins or Tim Rowe?

2

A.

Correct.

3

Q. 587

Is that still your evidence?

4

A.

It would be.

5

Q. 588

You didn't have Mr. Dunlop's diary when you advised that you met Mr. Dunlop

6

either, through the influence of either Mr. Rowe or Mr. Collins sure you

7

didn't?

8

A.

That's correct.

9

Q. 589

Can the Tribunal take it, Mr. Walls, that it is your recollection that you were

14:21:42 10

11

introduced to Mr. Dunlop by Mr. Collins? A.

12 13

No, you can take it that it is my belief that Tim Collins arranged a meeting with Frank Dunlop.

Q. 590

14

No. I am talking about your decision to retain the services of Mr. Dunlop and to meet with Mr. Dunlop. If we can have page 553. You see before you saw

14:22:04 15

Mr. Dunlop's diary entry for a meeting between yourself, himself and

16

Mr. Collins, you were able to tell the Tribunal in your meeting with the legal

17

team, that the meeting was as a result of either Mr. Rowe or Mr. Collins; isn't

18

that right?

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 591

So you had narrowed it to either Mr. Rowe or Mr. Collins?

21

A.

More than likely and I am still of that opinion.

22

Q. 592

Yes. Can you recall meeting Mr. Rowe and/or Mr. Collins in the lead up to the

14:22:23 20

23 24 14:22:41 25

7th January 1993? A.

Sorry, I'm not too clear on what you are asking me.

Q. 593

I am asking you to recall if you can for the Tribunal, your meetings with

26

Mr. Rowe and/or Mr. Collins in the lead up to the period 7th January 1993 where

27

you were discussing the Kinsealy lands and discussing your strategy for those

28

lands?

29 14:23:01 30

A.

Any of those meetings would generally be between myself and Tim Rowe.

Q. 594

Did you ever discuss the Kinsealy lands with Mr. Collins? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:23:04

14:23:18

94 1

A.

I would presume somehow.

2

Q. 595

Sorry?

3

A.

I would presume somehow yes but not, sorry but not -- the meetings we would

4

have with Tim Rowe were to do with architectural and the planning. Tim Collins

5

wouldn't have any input into that.

6

Q. 596

Yes. So would it be fire say that any meetings you had with Mr. Rowe or

7

Mr. Collins or any discussions you had with Mr. Collins in relation to the

8

Kinsealy lands would have been discussions you would have had outside your

9

normal meetings with Pilgrim?

14:23:35 10

A.

11 12

the place and may come in to some meeting and may not, I don't know. Q. 597

13 14 14:24:10 15

I can't answer that with any certainty because Tim would generally be around

Is there any explanation Mr. Walls for your lack of recollection in relation to the circumstances under which you came to select Mr. Dunlop in early 1993?

A.

I have a bad memory. And believe it or not my wife will attest to that.

Q. 598

Now you, when you met Mr. Dunlop on the 7th January you met him in his offices;

16

isn't that right?

17

A.

That's right.

18

Q. 599

Was Mr. Collins present?

19

A.

I do not believe so, no.

Q. 600

Why do you say you don't believe he was present?

21

A.

For maybe a variety of reasons, one of which --

22

Q. 601

Well do you recall him being present?

23

A.

No, but if I may answer that question, that generally speaking I don't like

14:24:20 20

24

meetings and I only bring to a meeting those who have relevance to it. The

14:24:42 25

fewer at the meeting the quicker they are going to be. I don't see any

26

relevance Tim would have had once he set up the meeting, would be the purpose

27

of his --

28

Q. 602

Why was it necessary for Mr. Tim Collins to set up the meeting with Mr. Dunlop?

29

A.

I'm presuming that he knew.

Q. 603

No no, I don't want to you presume Mr. Walls?

14:24:57 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:25:01

14:25:10

95 1

A.

Then I can't answer your question.

2

Q. 604

You can't answer the question?

3

A.

No.

4

Q. 605

You can't answer a question which asks you why Mr. Collins was necessary in

5 6

order to affect a meeting between you and Mr. Dunlop? A.

7 8

have to give a direct answer I don't have answers for it. Q. 606

9 14:25:26 10

11

This sounds, it's not meant to be evasive, but if you ask me a question and I

Do you have any recollection of the meeting with Mr. Dunlop, that first meeting with Mr Dunlop, any recollection?

A.

Sort of and I have the letter and my notes on it.

Q. 607

Leaving aside the letter and your notes for a moment, can you tell the Tribunal

12

your recollection of the meeting?

13

A.

No.

14

Q. 608

Now Mr. Dunlop has given evidence that Mr. Collins was in fact at that meeting,

14:25:42 15

Mr. Collins has given evidence that he was not at the meeting, I have to put

16

that to you, but Mr. Dunlop has a recollection of Mr. Collins being present at

17

the meeting. You say that Mr. Dunlop is wrong in that regard?

18

A.

I believe so, yes.

19

Q. 609

Had you ever met Mr. Dunlop prior to that meeting?

A.

No.

21

Q. 610

Can you tell the Tribunal what transpired at the meeting on the 7th?

22

A.

The result of the meeting on the 7th was a letter came to me, setting out fees.

23

Q. 611

This is the letter of the 13th January at 558, that's what happened as a result

14:26:01 20

24

of the meeting, but I want you to tell the Tribunal what was discussed at the

14:26:26 25

meeting?

26

A.

Again I am only presuming.

27

Q. 612

No no, I don't want you to presume?

28

A.

I am only trying to recollect, I can't -- I cannot tell you specifically what

29 14:26:43 30

was said. Q. 613

In what context were you meeting with Mr. Dunlop at this time? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:26:43

14:26:49

96 1

A.

To see would he do the public relations.

2

Q. 614

What public relations were you referring to?

3

A.

To present the case for the rezoning of the lands at Kinsealy.

4

Q. 615

To whom?

5

A.

To the councillors.

6

Q. 616

You had already presented a case to councillors in the past; isn't that right,

7

we saw that in the reference to the September 1990 memo; isn't that right?

8

A.

Yes.

9

Q. 617

You, I think you yourself had an association with politicians and you knew

14:27:08 10

politicians, you were involved in politics at a local level?

11

A.

I knew a few of them, yes.

12

Q. 618

Yes. Why, what was Mr. Dunlop bringing to the table in relation to the

13 14

project? A.

14:27:30 15

Two things. The one you referred to was material contravention of which was specific, knew what he was talking about and presented that. I have no

16

difficulties with that. Kinsealy was entirely different and this is why Frank

17

Cairns was involved. We were trying to put something that to my mind would be

18

sensitive to certain political parties and certain viewpoints and had to be

19

presented in it's maximum way to try and get it.

14:27:49 20

Q. 619

21

But you had already tried and approached councillors in relation to the Kinsealy land; isn't that right?

22

A.

That's correct.

23

Q. 620

What extra could Mr. Dunlop do for you or what extra did you believe he do for

24 14:28:00 25

you? A.

He could lobby councillors.

26

Q. 621

Okay. Did he identify for you the councillors that he would lobby?

27

A.

At that stage no but later on he said he wouldn't talk to Nora Owens.

28

Q. 622

Yes, that's a councillor he wasn't going to lobby; isn't that right?

29

A.

Correct.

Q. 623

But you had already lobbied a considerable number of councillors if not all of

14:28:13 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:28:17

14:28:35

97 1

the councillors, you knew a number of councillors yourself and you were

2

retaining Mr. Dunlop as opposed to any other public relations consultant to

3

present a case to councillors for you, is that right?

4

A.

5 6

I felt my lobbying would be done subsequent to meeting with Frank, I stand to be corrected on that.

Q. 624

Now if we look at 558 and we look at the document on screen, Mr. Dunlop, I

7

think advised you that he believed that your proposal regarding the totality of

8

the land would be difficult though not impossible to implement via the Draft

9

Development Plan, did you understand what he meant by that phrase?

14:28:56 10

A.

I did and this is where I have to revise some of my previous meeting with you.

11

On reflection it looks as though the largest site, at the time I mentioned to

12

you I didn't know what we were talking about it or Frank brought it in as

13

something else, but it's clear both from Frank's letter and from my

14

presentation at the oral hearing that it was us that was talking about a larger

14:29:18 15

site concept and on this thing Frank was talking about a larger site may not be

16 17

a runner, as I understand back. Q. 625

18 19 14:29:33 20

And he set out there the terms under which he was prepared to get involved in the task; isn't that right?

A.

Yes.

Q. 626

A sum of 2,500 pounds plus VAT payable and an up front fee. Did you agree that

21

with Mr. Dunlop?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q. 627

A week after --

24

A.

Sorry let me rephrase that, I accepted it when the letter came, I didn't argue

14:29:44 25

26

with it. Q. 628

27

Did either you or him, did either you or Mr. Dunlop mention figures at that first meeting on the 7th January?

28

A.

It doesn't appear so, no.

29

Q. 629

This was the first mention of figures by Mr. Dunlop to you, this letter of the

14:30:00 30

13th? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:30:00

14:30:08

98 1

A.

From the two things, yes.

2

Q. 630

And I think he sought payment of all agreed legitimate disbursements; isn't

3

that right?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 631

What were the agreed legitimate disbursements?

6

A.

There was none, there was nothing by you.

7

Q. 632

What was understood by you, by the phrase legitimate disbursements?

8

A.

I have no idea.

9

Q. 633

Did you not query it with Mr. Dunlop?

A.

Not according to this, no.

11

Q. 634

And then he sought a success fee of 10,000 plus VAT; isn't that right?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 635

And I think in a telephone conversation on 22nd January 93 you say he agreed a

14:30:20 10

14 14:30:35 15

reduced fee of six thousand plus VAT, is that right? A.

16

Well that is slightly different. It would be 10,000 plus VAT if the whole area was included and rezoned.

17

Q. 636

When you say the whole area is that the whole area in Kinsealy.

18

A.

Either one of two. It was either -- there is a difference between areas,

19 14:30:57 20

between Grainne Mallon and Pilgrim. Q. 637

We are talking about, I think the Kinsealy lands are 54 acres?

21

A.

Yes.

22

Q. 638

Are we still talking about those 54 acres?

23

A.

No, at this level we are talking about maybe up to 200 acres I think if you

24 14:31:18 25

look on the oral hearing, it brings it back into specifics. Q. 639

26

So you are talking about other lands other than the lands that you or Glenellen Homes owned?

27

A.

Included, with Glenellen Homes lands, yes.

28

Q. 640

So you are talking about other adjoining landowners?

29

A.

Correct.

Q. 641

Maybe Mr. Foley's lands for example?

14:31:23 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:31:26

14:31:43

99 1

A.

That would be one possibility yes.

2

Q. 642

So your proposals in the Development Plan submissions related to a much larger

3 4

area than the area of land owned by Glenellen Homes? A.

Our proposal in that I specified -- I pointed out that the two planning

5

submissions I had varied on what they were proposing and I would leave it to

6

the planners to decide what was the right option, my interest was the 54 acres

7

obviously.

8

Q. 643

9 14:32:02 10

11

on the basis that he would act in respect of 200 acres? A.

No. On respect he would act on 54 acres and it could be much larger.

Q. 644

Right. But his success fee was payable on -- ten grand on the basis of the 200

12 13

acres, but a reduced success fee if only 54 acres? A.

14 14:32:31 15

So are you saying that you approached Mr. Dunlop initially in early January 93

Depending -- not necessarily 200 acres. I don't know the area. Going by the Grainne Mallon suggestion it would be less than 200 acres, a lot less.

Q. 645

16

If Mr. Dunlop, if 54 acres, that is to say the Glenellen Home lands were successfully rezoned?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 646

How much was Mr. Dunlop to be paid by way of success fee?

19

A.

Six thousand.

Q. 647

You say that was agreed with Mr. Dunlop on the 22nd January 93?

21

A.

So it appears, yes.

22

Q. 648

Now you have other entries on that letter isn't that right?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q. 649

Are they as a result of other phone calls you had with Mr. Dunlop in or about

14:32:42 20

14:32:56 25

26

that time? A.

No I have a feeling in this again, contrary slightly to what I said in the

27

private meeting the one at the bottom, after the two question marks, where

28

Frank says "it's payable however in circumstances where compromise is entered

29

into by the planners and elected members", my comment on the bottom says and

14:33:14 30

this is a note to myself, "note we are only interested in 54 acres". And Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:33:19

14:33:39

100 1

underneath that I think at the private meeting I said I think the word was not,

2

but when I look now it says "note", possibly only 54 acres item, position re:

3

fee then. I was protecting against the possibly that if we were gone for

4

whatever it might be, it could have, conceive to go for a hundred acres and if

5

46 of those acres were rezoned and our 54 weren't rezoned, I certainly didn't

6

want to be paying a success fee for that.

7

Q. 650

8 9

lands rezoned? A.

14:33:58 10

hadn't decided which planning we were going for. Q. 651

13 14

I haven't even discussed with them, in general, apart from Lar Foley and I think one of whom my notes sets that out, we were keeping that quiet because we

11 12

Had you got the permission of the adjoining landowners to seek to have their

Now, I think you also had an earlier meeting on the 14th January isn't that right, we see that on the left-hand side, again in relation to fees is it?

A.

I wouldn't have thought it was a meeting, I would suggest.

Q. 652

A telephone call?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q. 653

It says pro rata, is that right?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 654

What does it go on to say?

A.

To fax revised fees re 53 acres.

Q. 655

So this is back, you had queried his success fee and you had asked him to give

14:34:18 15

14:34:25 20

21 22

you a revised fee, if it were only 53 acres. That was your initial reaction to

23

this letter?

24 14:34:44 25

A.

Yes that's 53, should have read 54.

Q. 656

Appreciate that. Then underneath that there is further writing I think your

26 27

writing I wonder would you tell the Tribunal what it is? A.

28 29 14:35:07 30

Won't talk N O, which is Nora Owen, will talk A D, which is Ann Devitt etcetera. His function to "Whip" at meetings.

Q. 657

That was Mr. Dunlop's function was to whip at the meeting, what did you understand him to mean by that? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:35:08

14:35:19

101 1

A.

Getting sufficient numbers in to vote.

2

Q. 658

That's what he was to do?

3

A.

That would be part of his function yes.

4

Q. 659

He wouldn't talk to Nora Owen but he would talk to Ann Devitt?

5

A.

That's what he says.

6

Q. 660

Did he tell why you he wouldn't speak to Ms. Owen?

7

A.

I think perhaps I raised the question that Nora Owen was let's say I have to

8

put this back to you, in hindsight, to try and get my bearings on this, I

9

looked up the internet and surfed Nora Owen Kinsealy Lane, and I came up with

14:35:43 10

the minutes of the Oireachtas special meeting or something on a vote of no

11

confidence on the 18th of October '83 in which Nora Owen sets out what she

12

called her famous pipe and her opposition to it for three years previously, so

13

obviously the question of Nora Owen, vis-a-vis this pipe was known at this

14

stage.

14:36:06 15

Q. 661

Were you relying on that pipe as part of your submissions?

16

A.

Absolutely.

17

Q. 662

As a pipe that might service your lands?

18

A.

Absolutely. It runs along side.

19

Q. 663

Ms. Owen had a stated opposition to that pipe and you were relying on it as a

14:36:19 20

pipe that might possibly service your lands?

21

A.

No I think Mrs. Owen had some concern about that pipe.

22

Q. 664

Yes?

23

A.

And it would appear that this would be the pipe that we would be proposing to

24 14:36:32 25

tap into, yes. Q. 665

26

Now if I revert again to the right-hand side of the letter, there is a further note dated 27th January '93 isn't that right?

27

A.

Correct.

28

Q. 666

What does that say?

29

A.

Me awaiting GM, that would be Grainne Mallon, feedback/GV, which would be GV

14:36:49 30

Wright, plus representations number of 54 acres. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:36:53

14:37:08

102 1

Q. 667

2 3

I think there was a difficulty in relation to the number attributed to your representations?

A.

Not a difficulty but two different representation numbers. And I am not too

4

sure whether that was to do with the 200 acres or 54 acres or whatever but we

5

had two representation numbers.

6

Q. 668

And what did you mean by that note as we see it there?

7

A.

Well, on the number we wanted to make sure we put the correct number in,

8 9 14:37:22 10

11

because if the wrong number was in it's too late to do anything about it. Q. 669

How were you going to determine what was the correct number?

A.

I presume that Grainne Mallon was looking for feedback from GV on it.

Q. 670

Does that note mean that Ms. Mallon was on to Mr. GV Wright concerning the

12 13

correct representation number? A.

14 14:37:42 15

I don't think that actually follows but I certainly hope that she would be on to him.

Q. 671

Did you ask her to get on to him?

16

A.

I couldn't recall.

17

Q. 672

But was it a problem?

18

A.

Pardon.

19

Q. 673

A problem for you or a concern for you?

A.

In which way.

21

Q. 674

The correct representation number?

22

A.

Oh we'd have to have the correct number.

23

Q. 675

On any motion?

24

A.

Well, my concern would be if the wrong number went on.

Q. 676

Yes, but who had the responsibility for advising you on the correct

14:37:50 20

14:38:01 25

26

representation number?

27

A.

Nobody had, I had a responsibility to myself to make sure it was the right one.

28

Q. 677

Yes, but how did you discover?

29

A.

I can't recall that.

Q. 678

You agree with me that that implies that Grainne Mallon was going to contact

14:38:13 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:38:18

14:38:29

103 1 2

Mr. GV Wright and ascertain the correct representation number? A.

3 4

that's as far as I go. Q. 679

5 6

That's what's implied by that, isn't that right? That's a reasonable interpretation of what's said there?

A.

7 8

What I would say, it looks as though that's what I was expecting at this stage,

I would, I think so. I think that's what it seems I would be expecting feedback, yes.

Q. 680

9

Now, if I can have 1154. I think these are further notes discovered by you to the Tribunal, they are in your hand, they appear to have been made on the 21st

14:38:44 10

January 93; isn't that right?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 681

Can you decipher those notes for the Tribunal?

13

A.

Well, the first thing I would say is that these appear to be to do with

14

Hydraulic Plant and my own land because up in the top is the two reference

14:39:00 15

numbers. I get a feeling in general that was the theme of these. And my own

16

two phone numbers there. In case I had forgotten when I was asked by phone

17

number, one is my home and one is the business at that stage. And the first

18

one is Ann Devitt. I was to ring her tomorrow and I have her phone number

19

there.

14:39:17 20

Q. 682

Did you contact Ms. Devitt?

21

A.

I couldn't tell you.

22

Q. 683

How did you come to select Ms. Devitt for this note?

23

A.

Well Ann Devitt would be the local TD.

24

Q. 684

Yes?

A.

In the area. Vis-a-vis these two motions.

Q. 685

I think we had seen in the earlier document that Mr. Dunlop had indicated to

14:39:28 25

26 27

you that whilst he wouldn't contact Ms. Owen he would talk to Ms. Devitt?

28

A.

But that was to do with Kinsealy if I'm correct.

29

Q. 686

You say this document relates to Hydraulic and Seatown?

A.

Yes.

14:39:45 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:39:46

14:40:02

104 1

Q. 687

2 3

relation to Seatown? A.

4 5

Q. 688

I think his involvement in Seatown was on the basis if you could get a motion signed by two councillors he would then get involved; is that right?

A.

8 9

Well, whether I was or not, Frank Dunlop was only involved in Seatown if certain things happened, that was covered in the first meeting.

6 7

So you were going to contact Ms. Devitt independently or Mr. Dunlop but in

Looking at my note I think if I got two councillors for Hydraulic Plant but I don't think it was necessarily to do with my own lands.

Q. 689

14:40:21 10

Okay if you get in relation to the Hydraulic plants submissions if you get a motion signed by two councillors Mr. Dunlop would then get involved?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q. 690

And was there a success fee or an up front fee payable in relation to that?

13

A.

No, just thrown in at the end of the discussions.

14

Q. 691

That was thrown in?

A.

Yes.

Q. 692

Did you ever ask Mr. Dunlop to get involved in either the Hydraulic Plant or

14:40:33 15

16 17

Seatown Lands?

18

A.

No.

19

Q. 693

Are you saying that the contact on this page with Ms. Devitt and the others,

14:40:46 20

that is the late Cyril Gallagher, Sean Ryan and Mr. Kelleher, were in relation

21 22

to the Seatown? A.

Well, I think I have to have a look at it again -- I see there with Tom

23

Kelleher that he is to, I have left Ann Devitt, "leave for moment in reserve

24

for Kinsealy if needed".

14:41:18 25

26

Q. 694

What do you mean by that Mr. Walls?

A.

What I mean by that is I knew Ann Devitt and I was looking, self preservation

27

if something came up and was needed I could then present her on that. Maybe to

28

explain this, certainly my own house, highly sensitive to do with birds and so

29

on else at the time was fought against all the odds, and the local position was

14:41:50 30

there was a bird sanctuary because there was a bird sanctuary sign on the Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:41:56

14:42:22

105 1

lands. When I investigated it never had been a bird sanctuary and they had no

2

intention in the wild life department to make it a bird sanctuary. The result

3

of that was I got planning permission and filled in four and a half acre site.

4

Then it was classified as an area of scientific interest and in 1977 which is

5

going back a bit, and the reason I remember this is I have a note and I looked

6

it up last week, that I called into an Foras Forbaithe, a Ms. Looby in

7

September '77 I think it was, because it didn't make sense to have my house,

8

lands zoned accordingly, and looked at master plans in there and it was quite

9

apparent to me that the master plan for the area designated by -- when Foras

14:42:49 10

Forbaithe stopped at the old Seatown Road, not up on my lands, but the council

11

carried that forward and since then I have been on to them to relook at it

12

because it doesn't make sense, good, bad or indifferent to a layman or anybody

13

else, how a site so far away removed, house and gardens and filled land could

14

be scientific interest.

14:43:13 15

16

And it was quite a localised area. Sorry, it was local issue. Now, I was

17

quite aware to get anybody to look at this and this would mainly be the

18

planners, who are putting this designation in the first instance that I have to

19

get some of the local councillors of what we call the none main line parties, I

14:43:36 20

am thinking of Labour Party, Green Party, people like that, who would be into

21

environmentals in a big way, for them to look at this rationally and say to

22

planners look there is something wrong here, will you have a look at this one.

23

That's how it came, therefore I didn't feel there was any much need to involve

24

somebody like Ann Devitt or parties such as that, although I have Cyril

14:43:56 25

Gallagher's name there, in such an issue. I don't know if that's -- I am

26

rambling a bit but it's an issue that needed certain people to look at, and

27

talk to planners and I don't believe it should have been an issue.

28

Q. 695

29 14:44:24 30

If I can have 1159 this is a further document in your hand Mr. Walls and again it refers to Meath-Ann Devitt-HPL, is that Hydraulic Plant limited?

A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:44:25

14:44:39

106 1

Q. 696

What else does it say?

2

A.

Plus own, that would be my own site. And under that (? Feeling on Kinsealy).

3

Q. 697

You were ringing her to find out what her feelings were in relation to

4 5

Kinsealy, is that right? A.

6

No, that doesn't necessarily follow. I don't know is the answer to the question.

7

Q. 698

How did you come to create this document?

8

A.

One I don't have a date, it could have been comments I was thinking at the time

9

and obviously the intention would be at that stage that I should ring Ann

14:44:52 10

Devitt. Now whether I did or not I can't comment or when it was I don't know.

11

Q. 699

It says me-map/PD, who is PD?

12

A.

Paddy Dunne and a question mark.

13

Q. 700

Mr. Dunne was another councillor?

14

A.

He would be.

Q. 701

Was he known to you?

16

A.

He certainly was.

17

Q. 702

Me-

18

A.

I think there is a question mark whether I should or not.

19

Q. 703

Me-GV, no question mark there?

A.

No.

21

Q. 704

Did you contact Mr. Wright in relation to the lands?

22

A.

I wrote to all the councillors.

23

Q. 705

We will come to that in a moment, but did you contact him?

24

A.

I don't know.

Q. 706

This would seem to imply that you had taken out a series of councillors that

14:45:04 15

14:45:14 20

14:45:22 25

26

you were going to deal with directly other than writing to?

27

A.

These are thoughts at the time, yes.

28

Q. 707

Yes. I think you identified Ms. Malone, that's a double question mark and

29 14:45:41 30

Mr. Sargent? A.

Yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:45:41

14:45:50

107 1

Q. 708

And then?

2

A.

Trevor Sargent, I mentioned HPL plus Kinsealy.

3

Q. 709

Then me-Lar Foley --plus, what does that ...

4

A.

Arguments.

5

Q. 710

What did that refer to?

6

A.

I don't know whether it was an argument with Lar Foley or whether it was

7

argument that if we were jointly proceeding what way we should go about it, I

8

just don't know.

9

Q. 711

14:46:04 10

If I can just go back for a moment to the meeting on 7 January with Mr. Dunlop, I have indicated to you that Mr. Dunlop has said Mr. Collins was present at

11

that meeting?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 712

He has also told the Tribunal that whilst it wasn't specifically referred to

14

that there was no doubt on the part of anybody at the meeting, but that money

14:46:18 15

would have to be paid to councillors, what do you say to that?

16

A.

I certainly, nothing to do with me, I wasn't involved in any such thing.

17

Q. 713

You have no recollection of the meeting unfortunately?

18

A.

That's true. But -- let me follow on that one because I don't believe a bad

19

memory should necessarily be bad thing. I am being truthful here, I am on

14:46:47 20

oath. But nobody ever suggested me paying money to councillors that much I do

21

know because that's something I would not forget.

22

Q. 714

Well, certainly that was Mr. Dunlop's recollection of the meeting?

23

A.

I accept that.

24

Q. 715

Was there any, did you fall out with Mr. Dunlop?

A.

Never have, no.

26

Q. 716

Do you know of any reason why Mr. Dunlop would say such a thing?

27

A.

That's something you have to ask Mr. Dunlop that.

28

Q. 717

But you never had any falling out with Mr. Dunlop?

29

A.

No, but more importantly there was never, ever any discussion.

Q. 718

Now Mr. Dunlop I think furnished you with an invoice on the 26th March and you

14:47:03 25

14:47:19 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:47:23

14:47:43

108 1

paid that invoice or at least Walls Properties Limited paid the invoice, if we

2

can have page 300 please at a sum of 3025, was that the entire of the monies

3

paid by you to Mr. Dunlop?

4

A.

Absolutely, yes.

5

Q. 719

Now on the 3rd March I think you sent a memo to Mr. Green at 620. This is a

6

memo in relation to the project at hand, isn't that right?

7

A.

No this is -- well yes.

8

Q. 720

Maybe you would describe what it was, if not a memo on the project?

9

A.

It was a submission, a draft submission that Sean was to draw up to show to the

14:48:11 10

bank. I had an initial draft to see how it should go.

11

Q. 721

This was to go to the bank when it was put into the final submission?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q. 722

Now?

14

A.

To the bank and Building Society.

Q. 723

Yes, now just two matters I want to bring your attention to. If I can have 622

14:48:21 15

16

please, this is the third page of this submission and this is a crucial period

17

now, because we are into February, we are into March, early March, you have

18

paid Mr. Dunlop I think over three thousand pounds for his services?

19

A.

Sorry what date was this memo.

Q. 724

The draft that we are looking at is dated the 3rd March 93?

21

A.

Okay.

22

Q. 725

And I just want to deal with the heading, under the heading valuation, just to

14:48:41 20

23

see what's actually at stake. You see there it says "should our motion be

24

successful it would crystalise a potential valuation in excess of one million,

14:49:00 25

we would expect to realise 7/8 hundred plus from such a sale. Do I understand

26

that to mean that the rezoning of Kinsealy lands at this time would have

27

benefited Glenellen by the sum of 7/8 hundred thousand pounds?

28

A.

No, that says that we'd expect to realise that amount.

29

Q. 726

Yes, but you had expected to realise in excess of one million, but I think you

14:49:25 30

had, the site had cost you 2/300,000 and the balance would be 7/8 hundred? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:49:32

14:49:44

109 1

A.

My mistake, you are right.

2

Q. 727

Am I absolutely correct in what I said a moment ago?

3

A.

Well, you may be.

4

Q. 728

It's your document Mr. Walls. I don't want to be unfair to you and Glenellen

5 6

Homes? A.

7

But you are in a sense if you ask me, I have a bad memory. You ask me to ask what it meant exactly by that. I can only give you roughly what it means.

8

Q. 729

What did you understand this to mean when you created it?

9

A.

Well, it says that a potential value of one million. It also says to realise 7

14:50:06 10

or 8 hundres thousand, that could either mean a net or gross, that you know

11

from the bank's point of view because the land is worth a million it doesn't

12

necessarily mean if it was put on the market tomorrow it would realise that.

13

Q. 730

14

Look at the first paragraph. The outcome of the Development Plan deliberations has a large impact on potential valuations. We would expect sell it if our

14:50:26 15

rezoning motion was debated and lost at a value close to our purchase price

16

range 200/300 K. A sale with the Development Plan deliberations postponed

17

would likely realise a price at the upper end of this range. Should our motion

18

be successful it would crystalise a potential valuation in excess of one

19

million, (21/22 sites at 50,000 plus per site). We would expect to realise

14:50:53 20

700/800 plus from such a sale?

21

A.

I agree, my mistake, I agree entirely.

22

Q. 731

So that is what is at issue, when you retained the services of Mr. Dunlop and

23

you pay him his 2,500 plus VAT, what's at stake is the sum of 7/8 hundred

24

thousand for Glenellen homes?

14:51:09 25

A.

26

You have two different things. One is valuation, we are retaining Mr. Dunlop to help get the planning through.

27

Q. 732

You had retained Mr. Dunlop to help you get planning through?

28

A.

Sorry rezoning.

29

Q. 733

I thought you rezoning Mr. Dunlop in relation to rezoning, we are talking about

14:51:26 30

valuation in the context of rezoning; isn't that right? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:51:28

14:51:38

110 1

A.

Yes.

2

Q. 734

If Mr. Dunlop's efforts were successful it would have meant an up take for

3

Glenellen of between 7 and 8 hundred thousand pounds; isn't that right?

4

A.

That would be the presumption at the time yes.

5

Q. 735

That's what's at issue. You write that on the 3rd March and on the 4th March,

6

if we look at page 623 please, you have a telephone conversation with

7

Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right?

8

A.

9

My difficulty is this, the idea of getting a site rezoned has to increase it's value, obviously if it was getting a decreased value there would be no sense in

14:52:03 10

doing it, I don't see as you say an issue, that was a planning situation.

11

Sorry what's the point about the 8th March.

12

Q. 736

This is the 4th March, the day after you?

13

A.

Sorry yes.

14

Q. 737

After you told someone that the rezoning potential uplift is between 7 and 8

14:52:22 15

hundred thousand pounds, you are speaking on the phone to Mr. Dunlop and he

16

tells you or advises you that he had a private meeting with Mr. Smith, isn't

17

that right?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q. 738

And there was an expectation that maps would go out around the 12th March;

14:52:35 20

isn't that right?

21

A.

Well the fact that he had private meeting with Smith had nothing to do with us.

22

Q. 739

He has given that evidence this morning that's right. But as a result of that

23

he came into possession of knowledge which was of assistance to you; isn't that

24

right. And he said that and it was agreed between you that the first objective

14:52:53 25

was to get a motion signed; isn't that right?

26

A.

That's obvious. It won't go any further unless the motions are signed.

27

Q. 740

Now you had a motion I think, in fact you had two motions at this stage but not

28 29 14:53:04 30

signed; isn't that right? A.

Correct.

Q. 741

If we could have 1115 please? And I am now, unless I say otherwise Mr. Walls, Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:53:11

14:53:19

111 1

I am talking about the Kinsealy lands, do you understand?

2

A.

Yes I understand.

3

Q. 742

This is a motion, dated 9th February 1993?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q. 743

And it has a reference number 452 isn't that right?

6

A.

Correct.

7

Q. 744

I wonder if we can have document number 586 put side by side with this document

8 9 14:53:44 10

11

please? Now this is the motion which was actually signed, isn't that right? A.

Yes.

Q. 745

Now can I ask you Mr. Walls how you came to have those motions typed?

A.

First and foremost, the one on the right I do not believe we had it typed, the

12 13

one on the left, I got my secretary to type it. Q. 746

14 14:54:04 15

Okay, who provided the motion on the right, which was the one ultimately signed?

A.

No idea.

16

Q. 747

Was that ever in your possession before it was signed?

17

A.

Not that I am aware of no.

18

Q. 748

You never came into possession of that motion?

19

A.

I don't think so, although you know it sounds maybe I did, subsequent, I don't

14:54:19 20

honestly know.

21

Q. 749

When did you first see that motion on the right?

22

A.

I'll tell you the only time I really studied it was last week.

23

Q. 750

I see. Now I think Mr. Dunlop, if we go back to 623, sorry just before we

24

leave that, I think that there is a difference in the wording in both motions;

14:54:39 25

isn't that right?

26

A.

There is, there is.

27

Q. 751

You are aware of that, not alone is there a difference in the reference

28

numbers, in fact the reference number that we go forward on is reference number

29

363 and reference number 452 isn't proceeded with, isn't that right?

14:54:56 30

A.

Well, there is also a similar record on the one on the left, there is a similar Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:55:01

14:55:08

112 1

motion with reference number 000363.

2

Q. 752

Okay.

3

A.

Which isn't shown here.

4

Q. 753

Okay.

5

A.

And certainly in my files I have a copy of those two in the files.

6

Q. 754

Yes, we can add them to the brief. But you say you had nothing to do with the

7

creation of the 363 as we see it on screen?

8

A.

It certainly wasn't typed by my office.

9

Q. 755

Or dictated by you or at your behest?

A.

I only saw it during the week.

Q. 756

So if we go back to 623 then and we see a reference in your note to the first

14:55:24 10

11 12

objective is to get a, to get motion signed, Frank undertook that this would be

13

within his gambit to get these motions signed. And then he says he will

14

approach Ann Devitt GV and a few others?

14:55:46 15

16

A.

Correct.

Q. 757

I informed him I already had motions typed up and I would give them to him at

17

our forthcoming meeting and we heard this morning of a possible meeting on 9th

18

March, Tuesday 9th March, do you believe you met Mr. Dunlop on that date?

19

A.

I don't think so.

Q. 758

You don't believe you met him then?

21

A.

I don't think so, no.

22

Q. 759

Okay, did you get the typed motions that you had to Mr. Dunlop?

23

A.

Again, I don't know but certainly I heard Frank's evidence that he has never, I

14:56:01 20

24

know the one on the right wasn't typed in our office. There are differences in

14:56:19 25

26

it. Q. 760

27 28 29 14:56:35 30

I think he felt he hadn't typed them because they were addressed to Mr. Smith and he never addressed motions in that fashion previously?

A.

The reason I am looking at it, it strikes me however not only Mr. Smith but also the same date 9th February. It's as though somebody got it and re typed with those extra words on a different type. The reason I say that if I look at Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:56:41

14:57:00

113 1

the motions on Seatown and Hydraulic Plant, I know you asked me not to go back

2

to it, if I compare them together there is a part below, there is two things

3

here, the part below for the councillor sign and the date sign actually tie up.

4

The four motions the two for Kinsealy in my file and the two motions for

5

Hydraulic Plant myself. The other issue here and I think it's crucial is that

6

when I signed up motions there was a requirement of two councillors to be

7

signed and this is why I mentioned in the meeting with Frank and the same with

8

Kinsealy there was to be two councillors signed at that stage. Some time

9

subsequently to that I heard that it was changed to one councillor but it

14:57:23 10

never, I never changed mine to Seatown. I don't know whether it was after the

11

15th or 18th or whatever but there was a change in protocol to only have one

12

signature from one councillor.

13

Q. 761

If we can have 1017 I think, if this is reference number 752 for example?

14

A.

Yes.

Q. 762

And you are making the point that you have made provision here for two

14:57:42 15

16

councillors and two dates, is that right, and that's similar to the one we had

17

on screen at 1155 which is the one unsigned?

18

A.

19 14:57:59 20

Yes. And I have no record of ever having done a motion with only one councillor on it.

Q. 763

Okay, if you didn't type that motion who do you think typed it?

21

A.

I can't say.

22

Q. 764

Who prepared if?

23

A.

I can't answer that.

24

Q. 765

Okay. You don't believe you gave it to Mr. Dunlop in any event?

A.

I have a feeling, like when seeing the Al Smith and seeing the date, if you go

14:58:12 25

26

back to the, if you go back to the one, the one that was actually signed by

27

Sean Gilbride with one signature on it is also dated 9th February.

28

Q. 766

That's correct?

29

A.

Certainly I didn't type them and therefore it seems somebody who typed it

14:58:31 30

probably had my draft in front of them and changed the wording on it, that's Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

14:58:36

14:58:43

114 1

surmising.

2

Q. 767

You think they typed up your draft and added the extra wording?

3

A.

That's the only explanation I have because you have the Al Smith and the date

4

the same as mine.

5

Q. 768

Yes.

6

A.

But certainly when compared in against the window they are two different types

7 8

and two different -Q. 769

9 14:59:03 10

If we go back to 623 you say that I informed him that I had already typed motions, sorry that I had motions already typed up, are those the motions?

A.

11

Well, all I do know is that was typed on the 8th and I see my motions are dated the 9th.

12

Q. 770

Yes?

13

A.

So --

14

Q. 771

No, they are the 9th February?

A.

Oh sorry.

16

Q. 772

If we can have 1155?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q. 773

When you say you put the motions in the plural there?

19

A.

Yes.

Q. 774

Do you see that, you are not saying that I informed him I had a motion?

21

A.

No, because there was two.

22

Q. 775

Go back to 623 please.

23

A.

No, because there are two reference numbers and we hadn't clarified that.

24

Q. 776

Okay so when you refer to the motion there, you are referring to the motions in

14:59:13 15

14:59:22 20

14:59:36 25

Kinsealy lands under two different reference numbers but they are the motions

26

similar to the one at 1155; is that correct?

27

A.

Sorry, I haven't seen 1155.

28

Q. 777

So I have 1155 please.

29

A.

I think you have the two from the file.

Q. 778

So the motions that you had typed up were two similar type motions one

14:59:57 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:00:04

15:00:16

115 1 2

reference number 452 and one reference number 335 I think? A.

3 4

Yes and typed and set out they tie in with the other two motions to do with my own place.

Q. 779

5

If we go back to 623 please. I think you told me at private interview that Grainne Mallon gave you the wording for the motions, is that right?

6

A.

If I did I did and it could well have been the case I'm not sure.

7

Q. 780

You think it may, in fact what you said was that it may have been Grainne

8 9 15:00:30 10

Mallon? A.

Right.

Q. 781

Yes. Now at 623 you say that he told you that he would approach Ann Devitt, GV

11

and few others that was for the purpose of getting the motion signed is that

12

correct?

13

A.

Correct.

14

Q. 782

The Kinsealy motion signed?

A.

Correct.

16

Q. 783

Did he mention Mr. Gilbride?

17

A.

No.

18

Q. 784

Mr. Dunlop told the Tribunal that he never knew and that neither you nor Mr.

15:00:41 15

19 15:00:54 20

21

Gilbride informed him that you were friends and you knew each other? A.

That's probably true, yes.

Q. 785

Is there any reason why you wouldn't have told Mr. Dunlop that you knew Mr.

22

Gilbride?

23

A.

I don't see any reason why I should. Not trying to be smart.

24

Q. 786

Yes. How well did you know Mr. Gilbride?

A.

When we got married we first moved to Skerries in 73 and one of the local

15:01:09 25

26

people that introduced me to politics, and Sean was, I think he was the

27

secretary of the Cumann and so I met him on and off.

28

Q. 787

29 15:01:39 30

Can I ask you what other councillors you would have known as a result of your involvement in politics, from the 70s?

A.

I suppose I could answer that more widely. The councillors might have known Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:01:48

15:02:03

116 1

subsequent, those would have been Ann Devitt, Cyril Gallagher, Paddy Dunne,

2

Sean Gilbride obviously, I don't know.

3

Q. 788

GV Wright?

4

A.

No, no.

5

Q. 789

And you would have known those quite well?

6

A.

Well, I could talk to them.

7

Q. 790

Yes, you would have met them at Cumann meetings?

8

A.

No, no. Only Sean. He wasn't a councillor at the time.

9

Q. 791

Yes. And --

A.

I'd have nothing to do with politics locally.

11

Q. 792

Okay. What about Mr Collins did you know him through your political contacts?

12

A.

As I said I don't know where I met him first but it wouldn't have been through

15:02:16 10

13

political contacts it may have been through an introduction but I knew Tim off

14

and on.

15:02:32 15

Q. 793

But did you know him in the context?

16

A.

I can't recall, he was involved but I can't remember back.

17

Q. 794

I am not going back to the very beginning, I am taking it from the beginning.

18

That is to say in the 70S right through to the 90s, how you would have met him

19

and how often you would have met him and how well you would have known him and

15:02:46 20

in what context?

21

A.

It would have nothing to do with politics. Tim was there.

22

Q. 795

Now I think you wrote to councillors, if we look at for example 647, letter

23

dated 16th March 1993, is that a letter or a standard typed letter that you

24

would have sent out at that time to councillors seeking support for your

15:03:25 25

26

motions? A.

27

You mean a standard type letter, would that be a letter sent out to councillors.

28

Q. 796

Yes, as would appear to be the case?

29

A.

Is that the one with the list of councillors at the back of it.

Q. 797

No that's a later letter in April but it is a letter dated 16 of March 93, it

15:03:37 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:03:42

15:03:56

117 1

is headed 'Kinsealy - Rezoning' and it is addressed 'Dear councillor' and it

2

was discovered by you?

3

A.

Is that the one I followed up a few days ...

4

Q. 798

No that's the one in April, you followed up on the 3rd May which is on the eve

5

of the vote?

6

A.

It must be, it must be sent to councillors yes.

7

Q. 799

If we look at the letter, at 648 the final paragraph of the letter, doesn't

8

that give the text of the actual motion that was signed, in that it says that

9

Dublin County Council resolves that the lands on Kinsealy lane and outlined in

15:04:13 10

red on the accompanying map comprising 54 acres and which has been signed for

11

identification purposes by the proposer be zoned low density residential with

12

the specific objective to provide for residential development on pipe sewerage

13

facilities to a density not exceeding one house per hectare" isn't that right?

14 15:04:33 15

A.

It is.

Q. 800

That differs from the motion on 1155, from the motion you had typed on the 9th

16

February 1993?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q. 801

So by the 16th March, which is two days prior to the signing of the actual

19

motion you had the text of the motion that was going to be signed; isn't that

15:04:49 20

right?

21

A.

So it certainly appears yes.

22

Q. 802

Yet you say you can't, don't know who or how the motion came into existence,

23 24 15:05:12 25

but you do know that you were responsible for typing the one on screen? A.

I have no difficulty about that, I am only telling you where I come from.

Q. 803

I accept that. Now we can have 1017 please and if it could be put side by side

26

by 1022. These are the two motions in relation to Seatown, I am not going to

27

differentiate between your property and Hydraulic Property, we'll just call it

28

Seatown for the moment, there were two motions in relation to Seatown isn't

29

that right?

15:05:29 30

A.

There were yes. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:05:31

15:05:43

118 1

Q. 804

2

Mr. Dunlop's involvement was only to take place after you had got a proposer and seconder for a motion for Seatown?

3

A.

In the end he never had any involvement.

4

Q. 805

Because you didn't get the proposer and seconder he didn't have an involvement

5

isn't that right?

6

A.

No it was that it I never went back to him on it.

7

Q. 806

You never went back to him in relation to these?

8

A.

No.

9

Q. 807

You but did go to Mr. Gilbride?

A.

I did yes.

Q. 808

Now can you tell the Tribunal first of all who gave you the text of these

15:05:51 10

11 12

motions?

13

A.

Again, I don't know, could well have been Grainne Mallon.

14

Q. 809

Can you tell the Tribunal how you got Mr. Gilbride to sign the motions?

A.

I met him at his house.

16

Q. 810

Do you recall meeting him?

17

A.

I recall looking for his house because he lived close to where I used to live

15:06:03 15

18 19

but had never been down there before. Q. 811

Yes, was that by prior appointment?

A.

I can't recall.

21

Q. 812

Was it in the morning or afternoon?

22

A.

I cannot recall.

23

Q. 813

It was on the 15th March?

24

A.

That's the day it was signed, yes.

Q. 814

Had you mentioned the possibility of him signing motions prior to going to his

15:06:15 20

15:06:23 25

26

house?

27

A.

I can't recall that.

28

Q. 815

What discussion did you have with him in relation to the signing of the

29 15:06:34 30

motions? A.

I can't tell you that. Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:06:35

15:06:45

119 1

Q. 816

Did he ask you for money for his signature for the motions?

2

A.

Definitely not, no.

3

Q. 817

Did you give him any briefing documentation in relation to the motions?

4

A.

I don't believe so.

5

Q. 818

Why didn't you ask him to sign the other motion in relation to the Kinsealy

6

lands?

7

A.

Because that was being handled by Frank Dunlop.

8

Q. 819

So, whoever created the motion in relation to Kinsealy and possibly Mr. Dunlop,

9 15:07:01 10

although you had the wording of it, you were leaving that to Mr. Dunlop? A.

Sorry.

11

Q. 820

The Kinsealy motion you were leaving to Mr. Dunlop?

12

A.

I am not too sure how it ties in with the wording of the motion but yes

13 14

Kinsealy was being handled by Dunlop. Q. 821

15:07:17 15

16

What was so special about Kinsealy as opposed to Seatown that required Mr. Dunlop's input?

A.

I have obviously failed to express myself clearly on that. That you were back

17

then proposing select housing, which is certainly done, I don't want to say

18

controversial but anti some of the views of certain of the local parties and

19

this had to be needed to be handled sensitively. On my own house it was very

15:07:46 20

simple that I needed somebody like the green, the opposite, the Green Party or

21

Labour Party to go and talk to the planners, or the people who did this and ask

22

them is this an area of scientific interest or not, black and white. You don't

23

need PR for that, I never used PR beforehand, that's a black and white issue

24

which obviously was never discussed or had no result, two distinct.

15:08:12 25

Q. 822

26

But I know we are using the phrase PR in relation to Mr. Dunlop, but I think we are all agreed Mr. Dunlop was retained to lobby councillors isn't that right?

27

A.

That's part of it.

28

Q. 823

What else was he retained for?

29

A.

Well he lobbies councillors by PR.

Q. 824

Well you better elaborate on that Mr. Walls?

15:08:27 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:08:34

15:08:57

120 1

A.

Well, I suppose if you were proposing a hostel development to some councillors

2

you could say this is for single workers and there is a need to provide them

3

with homes, to other councillors you may be inclined to say 'hey, this is an up

4

market development for young professionals, so you can put, don't ask me how

5

the political scene works, but you can put two different emphasis on what you

6

are proposing according to who you are talking to.

7

Q. 825

I don't fully understand that Mr. Walls. You were writing to the councillors

8

and in a moment we will come to your letters in relation to the Kinsealy lands,

9

isn't that right?

15:09:18 10

11

A.

Yes.

Q. 826

You had written in March and I think you wrote again in April and again in

12

early May, isn't that right?

13

A.

Yes.

14

Q. 827

You had retained Mr. Dunlop and you knew a lot of the councillors and had

15:09:29 15

approached them directly yourself; isn't that right?

16

A.

I knew a few.

17

Q. 828

You approached them directly yourself?

18

A.

I certainly wrote to them.

19

Q. 829

I am just wondering what it was Mr. Dunlop was bringing to the table, if not

15:09:47 20

pure lobbying of councillors?

21

A.

Well One was to make sure people actually attend the meeting.

22

Q. 830

How would a PR consultant ensure people attended the meeting?

23

A.

Nobody knows politics better than Frank Dunlop, that would be my submission at

24 15:09:55 25

the time. Q. 831

26 27

connections? A.

28 29 15:10:08 30

Can the Tribunal take it that you retained Mr. Dunlop for his political

No, because his knowledge of politics which include political connections obviously.

Q. 832

What was your knowledge of Mr. Dunlop's knowledge of politics if I can put it that way in January 1993? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:10:10

15:10:34

121 1

A.

I think my involvement would be more basic, I perceived whenever it was 90 or

2

19 whenever we bought the site a need to get PR because of what we were

3

proposing and we edge employed one firm of PRs to sell this idea, I use the

4

word PR that's how we described so on in the documentation, we didn't, never

5

came to the answer I was looking for. It was coming near the time of zoning,

6

after the oral hearing I was still concerned and somehow somebody mentioned

7

Frank Dunlop and he seemed to fit to my mind to fit the bill somebody who had

8

some pedigree in politics who was a PR guy and probably knew how people and the

9

system works.

15:10:54 10

Q. 833

When you say somebody mentioned Mr. Dunlop, I think we have narrowed it to

11

either Mr. Rowe or Mr. Collins and Mr. Collins evidence is that it was almost

12

certainly him?

13

A.

That could well be the case.

14

Q. 834

Yes. Just in relation to those motions, I think you did advise me that the

15:11:11 15

type on the motion that was lodged was similar to your typing; isn't that

16

right?

17

A.

No.

18

Q. 835

You say that it's not your typing?

19

A.

No.

Q. 836

I see?

21

A.

Check them against.

22

Q. 837

Sorry?

23

A.

I was just checking them last week.

24

Q. 838

But if we can have 1095 when you were at interview with me didn't you say that

15:11:20 20

15:11:31 25

the typing, you see question 375 "First of all can I just ask you is that the

26

typed motion that you made reference to earlier. Answer: That certainly looks

27

like our typing yes?"

28 29 15:11:57 30

A.

Yes, had you asked me that two weeks ago I would have said the same thing to you, last week I looked in detail, I took them out of the file, it seemed to me, including the comments made, the Notice of Motion in the four are raised or Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:12:07

15:12:24

122 1

all the same length and distance and the ones here they weren't, the fact there

2

was two councillors in all of my motions and only one on this.

3

Q. 839

If we can 1017 again please, when you were speaking with Mr. Gilbride on the

4

15th March did you mention to him that you had a further motion in relation to

5

Kinsealy?

6

A.

I can't answer that, I don't know.

7

Q. 840

Had you sought his support for the Kinsealy project?

8

A.

I can't recall.

9

Q. 841

Isn't it almost inconceivable that you wouldn't have sought his support for

15:12:34 10

your Kinsealy project particularly since he was the councillor that you knew

11 12

and you had been promoting that project since you purchased the lands in 89? A.

13 14

Unless I was leaving all the work to Frank Dunlop, the answer is I don't know. Normally it would be, but I am not too sure if that actually happened.

Q. 842

15:12:54 15

Is there any reason why you wouldn't have mentioned the Kinsealy lands when you were speaking with Mr. Gilbride, Councillor Gilbride on the 15th March?

16

A.

Perhaps not.

17

Q. 843

So you don't believe you mentioned there?

18

A.

I haven't said I don't mention them, I just can't recall.

19

Q. 844

Did you ever mention the Kinsealy land to Councillor Gilbride?

A.

Offhand I can't but that doesn't mean I didn't.

Q. 845

Okay. Now if we can have 586 please? Did Mr. Dunlop tell you at some stage he

15:13:13 20

21 22

had managed to get a signature on the motion?

23

A.

I can't recall.

24

Q. 846

You can't recall?

A.

No.

26

Q. 847

When did you discover that Councillor Gilbride hadn't signed the motion?

27

A.

Again I can't recall.

28

Q. 848

No recollection?

29

A.

I can't recall.

Q. 849

You heard Councillor Gilbride's evidence this morning that he signed this

15:13:25 25

15:13:41 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:13:46

15:13:54

123 1

motion as a result of a phone call from you, is that correct?

2

A.

I heard his evidence.

3

Q. 850

I know you heard his evidence but is it correct?

4

A.

I can't recall. I can't tell you.

5

Q. 851

That's the type of thing you would remember, isn't it Mr. Walls?

6

A.

It wouldn't be, no.

7

Q. 852

You have an 800 thousand pounds project which is likely to be unsuccessful, not

8

even get off the starting blocks unless a motion is signed, it's running up to

9

five o'clock on the last day for such a motion, and are you telling the

15:14:13 10

Tribunal that you have absolutely no recollection or that you would have no

11 12

recollection of contacting someone to sign the motion? A.

Well I am telling you that, but I think the background to it is we bought a

13

site -- No, I think to give you, you raise this big development, but it wasn't

14

that. It was a site was purchased, on the cheap, it was within the gambit of

15:14:38 15

the Development Plan coming up, review coming up. We looked at this, had some

16

talk with councillors I say we loosely, as I said through other people, and it

17

looked as though it may have a chance but it was against the odds. At that

18

level Frank Dunlop was we had the oral hearing and so what else, Frank Dunlop

19

was trying to assist in a numbers game pure and simple. It's not a big deal to

15:15:05 20

21

my mind as the emphasis you are putting on it. Q. 853

How could it not be Mr. Walls, you had bought these lands, you would have had

22

to have sold them for what you bought them for three years later, you had

23

already retained and incurred the expense of architect, consultant engineer,

24

public relations consultant by two included Mr. Dunlop, estate agent and

15:15:26 25

solicitors it was worth 7/8 hundred thousand, if you could get it rezoned and

26

you are running up to the guillotine for putting in a motion and you say if it

27

were the case that no motion had been signed that you would have no

28

recollection of getting on to Councillor Gilbride whom you knew in the council,

29

getting on to Mr. Dunlop, arranging a meeting and getting the motion in?

15:15:48 30

A.

What I can tell you is a fact, it may not have been the same issue, but I see Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:15:54

15:16:07

124 1

some guy called Larkin seconded it, John Gilbride's motion.

2

Q. 854

That's in relation to Seatown?

3

A.

Yes. It's only in reading these files the first time I ever heard of Larkin or

4

knew anything about him.

5

Q. 855

Presumably Councillor Gilbride organised that?

6

A.

Presumably. I am just saying that's the first I knew about it. On this one I

7

may or may not have known, I would have been ringing him all right, but I may

8

not have known he had known to sign it or hadn't up to the certain date, and

9

what Sean Gilbride said could well be the truth only I can't recall it.

15:16:29 10

Q. 856

But if it were the truth it is something you would remember, would you agree

11

with me, it's the type of things you would remember, certainly something

12

Councillor Gilbride who had no interest in the lands remembered?

13

A.

What I can tell you is that under oath that I don't remember.

14

Q. 857

Would you agree with me that if it had occurred it is the type of thing you

15:16:48 15

would remember?

16

A.

I can agree I forget an awful lot.

17

Q. 858

That's not something you forget, you have a perfect recollection of driving out

18 19

to Councillor Gilbride's home to sign the other two motions; isn't that right? A.

No I do not.

Q. 859

Did you not say that you?

21

A.

No I said --

22

Q. 860

You recalled going to his home?

23

A.

I have a perfect recollection being in Green Hills looking for his house that's

15:16:58 20

24 15:17:09 25

all not driving out or anything else. Q. 861

26 27

evidence of this morning? A.

28 29 15:17:27 30

You say you have absolutely no recollection of what Councillor Gilbride gave

I can't be specific at all, no, that's not wanting to be unhelpful that's factual.

Q. 862

You were constantly on to Mr. Dunlop, isn't that right, throughout this period on 28 of April, if we can have 720 you had been on at 9.15 that morning and Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:17:33

15:17:54

125 1

again at 3.05 at 721 you rang him and said that you would you like his comments

2

before this evening re letter faxed over and if we can have 1162 please, there

3

is a letter or a draft of a letter of the 28th April 93 which you have provided

4

to the Tribunal a letter which it would appear you proposed sending, if we look

5

at 1164 and 1165 to a series of councillors presumably all of the councillors

6

in Dublin County Council; is that right?

7

A.

I think there is two things, obviously my calls to Dunlop are well documented

8

and they come in spasms in different situations, there is no doubt about that.

9

As regards the notes on that file, it meant the chances are it's two phone

15:18:15 10

calls from me that day. One was would you ring Frank if I recall, sorry not

11

recall, looking at the notes, you don't get him, the secretary just makes notes

12

and he rings you back, so I am obviously just betting anxious the second time

13

but it appears that it was on that letter that I was looking for his comments

14

on, yes.

15:18:33 15

Q. 863

The documents in relation to his attendances on phone calls are just evidence

16

to the fact that you had been onto the office, isn't that right, you wouldn't

17

dispute that?

18

A.

I am only making the point, it doesn't mean I actually spoke to him or not.

19

Q. 864

Yes. You don't believe you spoke to him on the 9th March. I think you said

15:18:52 20

that to the Tribunal; is that right?

21

A.

Sorry.

22

Q. 865

Going back to the 9th March for a moment, you don't believe you met with

23

Mr. Dunlop on the 9th March, if we can have 628 please, this is an extract from

24

Mr. Dunlop's diary for 8th and 9th March 1993?

15:19:07 25

26

A.

Okay.

Q. 866

You see there on the 8th he has Paul Walls re meeting tomorrow, do you see

27

that?

28

A.

Yes.

29

Q. 867

If you go to the 9th you see 11 o'clock appointment Paul Walls?

A.

Yes.

15:19:17 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:19:18

15:19:30

126 1

Q. 868

2

If I can have 629 please this is a telephone message of Monday 8th March sometime that morning, Paul Walls-11 o'clock meeting here tomorrow.

3

A.

Yes.

4

Q. 869

Now you don't believe you ever kept that appointment?

5

A.

I can't recall, it could well be that I didn't.

6

Q. 870

Yes.

7

A.

Could be I did, I have no idea.

8

Q. 871

Yes. And there are records I think, and they are included in the brief of you

9

phoning Mr. Dunlop's office on the 19th March, 22nd March, 25th March, 30th

15:19:50 10

March, 2nd April, 6th April, 8th April, 14th April, 20th April, 21st April,

11

27th April, 28th April and we have that one on screen now. Isn't that right?

12

A.

That's right.

13

Q. 872

And I suggest to you that that would probably have been only records of

14 15:20:16 15

circumstances where you failed to make contact with Mr. Dunlop? A.

I'm not with you.

16

Q. 873

In other words that --

17

A.

I presume if it was one or two or three a day it means I was looking for him

18 19

and failed to make contact with him. Q. 874

15:20:30 20

Anyway you wrote to all the councillors on 28 of April 1993 we have the document on screen and I think you wrote again on the 3rd May 1993; isn't that

21

right, at 1167?

22

A.

I think so.

23

Q. 875

When did you discover that your motion had been signed by Councillor Gilbride?

24

A.

I can't answer that, presumably on that day or the day after.

Q. 876

That's on the day of the meeting itself is it?

A.

Well, I don't know if that's a Friday or whatever, but I certainly, if I didn't

15:20:48 25

26 27

find out that day I would certainly check the next day, whether it's Monday or

28

the next day to make sure, find out whether it was signed or not.

29 15:21:07 30

Q. 877

Yes. But did you know by the 4th May '93 that Councillor Gilbride had signed the motion in relation to the Kinsealy lands, the 4th May now is the date of Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:21:11

15:21:27

127 1

the meeting, if we can have 727?

2

A.

I presume they only went out after the motion was put to the Council, yes.

3

Q. 878

Yes. But did you know on the 4th May that a motion in relation to your lands

4 5

had been signed by Councillor Gilbride? A.

6 7

I presume I wouldn't have written unless there was a motion in front of councillors.

Q. 879

Okay maybe I should put it this way, did you know that the Kinsealy lands were

8

the, were likely to be discussed at a special meeting of the council on the 4th

9

May '93 and that they were likely to be discussed because there was a motion

15:21:46 10

before the council signed by Councillor Gilbride on that date?

11

A.

It would be a guess, I presume so.

12

Q. 880

Now the motion was withdrawn, isn't that right, it wasn't moved?

13

A.

So it appears, yes.

14

Q. 881

Did you have any discussion with Mr. Dunlop in relation to the motion not being

15:22:04 15

moved?

16

A.

I have seen evidence, I presume so.

17

Q. 882

Well do you not recall?

18

A.

No.

19

Q. 883

You have no recollection of the motion being withdrawn and not moved?

A.

Again with any specific answer, I can't answer you that.

Q. 884

Did you have any discussion with Councillor Gilbride in relation to the motion

15:22:23 20

21 22

after it was signed and before the 4th May?

23

A.

I don't, but I generally think I would be dealing with Frank.

24

Q. 885

As far as you were concerned this motion was being dealt with by Mr. Dunlop on

15:22:47 25

your behalf and any contact you had with anyone in relation to it was with

26

Mr. Dunlop, he had responsibility for having it signed?

27

A.

No no.

28

Q. 886

And any contact you would have had with it would have been with Mr. Dunlop?

29

A.

No, I would have had no contact with anybody.

Q. 887

Sorry?

15:23:04 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:23:04

15:23:20

128 1

A.

I would have had no contact with anybody with Mr. Dunlop.

2

Q. 888

No contact with anybody other than Mr. Dunlop?

3

A.

No, no contact with anybody with Mr. Dunlop.

4

Q. 889

Yes I think we are at cross purposes. Mr. Dunlop I take it had responsibility

5 6

for having the motion signed, Mr. Dunlop -A.

7

I am not too sure looking at files whether he got the motion signed or not, that's the question you asked me, I don't have an answer for that.

8

Q. 890

Yes, because you have no record to show one way or the other?

9

A.

Well, we have one, Frank Dunlop says I did, Sean Gilbride says no, Frank Dunlop

15:23:39 10

11

says he did and Sean Gilbride says I did, I don't know. Q. 891

12

Even though you were the person on whose behalf the motion was signed your memory won't allow you to you tell us one way or the other?

13

A.

It's not it won't allow me, it doesn't.

14

Q. 892

Now the payment to Mr. Dunlop, how was that treated in the books and records of

15:24:01 15

16

Glenellen? A.

17 18

the accountants and I think they wrote to you on that. Q. 893

19 15:24:11 20

A.

Q. 894

I think ultimately the lands were sold because they hadn't been rezoned isn't that right, we see?

A.

15:24:28 25

26

Yes, yes. The reason being Glenellen didn't have a bank account or cheque book.

23 24

I think the cheque was made payable by Walls Property Limited which was the parent company; is that right?

21 22

Again I don't know, I think the answer, I gave you some answer at the time from

The lands were sold, whether it was because they hadn't been rezoned or not would be a separate issue.

Q. 895

Yes, I think when you were making up that programme for the bank back in March,

27

the 3rd March '93 it was anticipated that they would be sold if they weren't

28

rezoned; isn't that right?

29 15:24:44 30

A.

Yes, that was certainly what was said to the bank yes.

Q. 896

Isn't that correct? Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:24:44

15:24:58

129 1

A.

That was what was said to the bank, yes.

2

Q. 897

If we have 1148. I think the property was sold on the 20 October 1993 for

3

275,000 pounds and it was bought in trust by Mr. Liam Moran solicitor; isn't

4

that right?

5

A.

Correct.

6

Q. 898

And that was, I think did not represent a great increase in the original

7

purchase price for the property?

8

A.

No that's true.

9

Q. 899

Now, the, we see the reference then in the books and records of the financial

15:25:14 10

statement for Glenellen Homes Limited on the 31st March 93, that's at 920 and

11

if we look at 934 we see an opening ...

12

A.

What was 920 sorry.

13

Q. 900

Sorry the financial statement of Glenellen Homes for the year ended 31 December

14

'93 which would be the year in which the property was sold. If we go to 934,

15:25:38 15

we see the stock held and the opening stock there is 264,932, is that the cost

16

of the stock, what was paid for the lands?

17

A.

I think the accountants may have answered that for you.

18

Q. 901

And the development costs capitalised was a sum of 1,000 pounds, isn't that

19 15:25:58 20

right? A.

That's what it says there.

21

Q. 902

Not two and a half thousand?

22

A.

That's actually, yes.

23

Q. 903

Not the 2,500 pounds that you had paid to Mr. Dunlop?

24

A.

No.

Q. 904

Now in March 199 --

26

A.

Sorry, what year did we retain Mr. Dunlop.

27

Q. 905

You retained Mr. Dunlop in March 93, January you met him and March?

28

A.

The thousand pounds there is 1992.

29

Q. 906

So nothing occurred in 93?

A.

I don't know but it certainly can't be the year beforehand.

15:26:10 25

15:26:25 30

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:26:28

15:26:55

130 1

Q. 907

2

Yes. Had you sought funding of a hundred thousand pounds on these lands in March 93?

3

A.

If it's, if it puts it there, yes, whatever.

4

Q. 908

What was that in connection with?

5

A.

I'd have to see the document.

6

Q. 909

Okay if you bear with me I will just see if -- if we can have 1160 please?

7

This is a letter of the 23rd March 93 to the Educational Building Society

8

funding submission, and it's an application for a funding package made up of A

9

short-term interest only loan of 100,000 pounds relating to land at Kinsealy,

15:27:41 10

does that help you Mr. Walls?

11

A.

That's what it says there yes.

12

Q. 910

Yes. Did that 100,000 have anything to do with your efforts to have the land

13 14 15:28:04 15

rezoned in 1993? A.

I don't know certainly there would be no cost anywhere near that.

Q. 911

In time I think the motions in relation to Kinsealy, or sorry in relation to

16

Seatown, if we can have 1020 were withdrawn, isn't that right, at the meeting

17

on the 26 of May 93?

18

A.

That's it.

19

Q. 912

And I think we see there the reference to the second or the first of the two

15:28:22 20

motions where it was proposed by Councillor Gilbride seconded by councillor J

21

Larkin, you say you never knew that Councillor Larkin had seconded any of the

22

motions in relation to your land?

23

A.

It was only, I never known it until I seen the file.

24

Q. 913

Were you at any of the special meeting of the council at which the motions were

15:28:40 25

discussed.

26

A.

I wouldn't have thought so, no.

27

Q. 914

Yes. Thank you very much Mr. Walls?

28

A.

Thank you.

29 15:28:55 30

CHAIRMAN:

Sorry Mr. Collins do you want to ask any questions?

Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672

15:28:58

15:29:03

131 1 2

Mr. Collins: No questions, Chairman thank you.

3 4

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much.

5 6

MR. QUINN: I think that for the moment concludes this Module. I think it's

7

anticipated the Tribunal will sit again in, I think the 19th September.

8 9

CHAIRMAN:

We'll sit on the 19th September to start Cargobridge.

15:29:15 10

11

MR. QUINN: That's correct.

12 13

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much.

14 15:29:29 15

THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED TO TUESDAY, 19TH SEPTEMBER 2006.

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited www.pcr.ie Day 672